CNN: ‘Judge Asks if a President Can Order SEAL Team 6 To Assassinate a Rival. Hear Trump’s Lawyer Respond’

CNN: Judge asks if a president can order SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a rival. Hear Donald Trump's lawyer respondSource:CNN– Donald Trump is the reason why we have president’s and not king’s.

Source:The New Democrat

“Former President Donald Trump is in Washington, DC, for a US Circuit Court of Appeals hearing after a lower-court ruling rejected his claims of immunity in special counsel Jack Smith’s 2020 election subversion case. Trump is seeking to have the federal charges against him dismissed.”

From CNN

“Trump attorney D. John Sauer argued that presidential immunity means that a president cannot be prosecuted for any actions that fall under his presidential duties — unless the House first votes to impeach him and the Senate then convicts him.

Judge Florence Y. Pan, an appointee of President Biden, asked Sauer if a president could be criminally prosecuted if he ordered SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival. Such a scenario — ordering the military to do something — would fall under presidential duties. But having a rival murdered would also be a clear violation of the law.

Sauer said the Justice Department could only charge the president for giving such an order if the Senate votes to convict him first. Pan also asked him whether a president could sell pardons or nuclear secrets without being prosecuted. Sauer responded similarly.”

From The Washington Post

“I think it is paradoxical to say his constitutional duty to take care that laws are faithfully executed allows him to violate criminal law,” said another judge, Karen Henderson, who was appointed by former President George H.W. Bush.

Sauer argued that allowing prosecutions without impeachment would have raised the risk of former President George W. Bush being charged for giving false information to Congress leading to the war in Iraq, and Barack Obama being charged for authorizing drone strikes that killed US citizens abroad.

“To authorize the prosecution of a president on official actions would open a Pandora’s box in which this nation would never recover,” Sauer said.”

From Bloomberg Law

Temidayo Aganga-Williams talking about Donald Trump’s lawyer John Sauer: “I think he’s really making the argument for Jack Smith. This is exactly what Jack Smith has been worrying about: are we a country of president’s, or a country of king’s? And I think what Trump’s lawyer effectively argued is that we are a country of king’s.That the President can act as he wants, as he chooses, that we can have violence. You know, we had violence on January 6, he’s saying that the President could take it a lot further. Himself could direct that violence openly using official government sources and that’s fine. He establishes how dangerous this presidential immunity argument is.”

I think pretty much everyone whose not in the MAGA movement in America, (which is about 70% of the country) has predicted that Donald Trump would not lose his presidential immunity claim at the appeals court.

I think the only question here is how big of a loss would it be. Would it be 2-1, with perhaps Judge Karen Henderson voting no and expressing a strong dissent to the decision. Would she vote no, but without giving an official dissent to the decision. Or would it be a strong 3-0 decision against the former President, with a strong, unified opinion against the former President’s immunity claim, giving the Supreme Court some cover here and raising the possibility that they wouldn’t even take Donald Trump’s appeal here, because no new ground had been raised here and they know he would definitely lose. But perhaps the Trump’s Justices don’t want to make that official decision against him.

Based on Judge Henderson’s questioning of Donald Trump’s lawyer John Sauer, I think we’re looking at a strong 3-0 decision against the former President (not former King) and they’ll have a strong, unified opinion against the former President’s presidential immunity claim. But as I keep saying, I’m not a lawyer.

Just to correct the record on something that John Sauer said: his client Donald J. Trump, is not being prosecuted for official acts that he did when he was President. He’s being prosecuted for criminal acts that Special Counsel Jack Smith believed he committed when he was President. As well as criminal acts that Jack Smith believes he committed since leaving the presidency.

Posted in CNN, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Michael Popok & Ben Meiselas: ‘Donald Trump’s LETS IT SLIP, Biggest FEAR About The Supreme Court’

Meidas Touch: Donald Trump’s LETS IT SLIP, Biggest FEAR about the Supreme CourtSource:Meidas Touch– left to right: U.S. Justice Brett Kavanaugh & Defendant Don.

Source:The New Democrat

“On the Legal AF podcast, trial lawyers Ben Meiselas and Michael Popok discuss and debate whether Justice Brett Kavanaugh, directly threatened by Trump’s attorneys, will end up being the swing vote in the next 60 days to keep Trump off the ballot as disqualified under the Constitution’s 14th Amendment or not.”

From the Meidas Touch

“It should be a slam dunk in the Supreme Court. I have faith in them. People like Kavanaugh, who the president fought for, who the president went through hell to get into place, he’ll step up,” Habba said. “Those people will step up not because they’re pro-Trump, but because they’re pro-law, because they’re pro-fairness, and the law on this is very clear.”

From Newsweek

In case you missed what I said about Donald Trump’s lawyers on Friday:

“Look, I believe that Donald Trump’s team are simply out of legal plays here. They know they lost and what I think they’re doing here is simply trying to convince their boss Donald J. Trump, that they’re still with him and he’s still their man. And they still want to profit off his back.

They filed their presidential immunity claim more than a month ago and haven’t even tried to defend, or backup that position for how former, or current President’s have presidential immunity from criminal prosecution. They’re prepared to lose, but they don’t want to lose their paychecks.”

From The New Democrat 

And to talk about what Alina Habba said: if you are familiar with any good Italian Mafia film or documentary, that gets into not just the arrests at all the end that brings the criminal organization down, but then gets into the criminal trials of these mobsters, you know what these defense lawyers try to do and when they’re know that their clients are guilty and that they simply can’t get their clients off in a legal way. And I thinking of the HBO film about New York Italian Godfather John Gotti, simply called Gotti from 1996, or any good documentary about John Gotti’s and his career as an Italian mobster in New York, during the 1970s and 1980s.

So what Alina Habba is essentially doing here, is to not just pressure, but try to make it clear to U.S. Justice Kavanaugh that it’s in his best interest to “rule the right way”, which is in favor of her client Donald Trump. Otherwise his life could get pretty difficult for him. Which is what Italian mobsters and other mobsters and their lawyers, as well as other ethnic criminal organizations do in America, when their boss is in serious trouble and obviously guilty and looking at a long stint in prison.

Posted in Meidas Touch, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Poppy Harlow & Phil Mattingly: ABC News Reveals New Evidence About Donald Trump’s Inaction On Jan. 6

CNN: ABC News Reveals New Evidence About Donald Trump's Inaction On Jan. 6Source:CNN– I believe Defendant Don recently campaigning in Iowa.

Source:The New Democrat

“ABC News reports that special counsel Jack Smith has obtained new evidence about Trump’s inaction on Jan. 6. Former Trump White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham discusses the reporting.”

From CNN

“Special counsel Jack Smith’s team has uncovered previously undisclosed details about former President Donald Trump’s refusal to help stop the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol three years ago as he sat watching TV inside the White House, according to sources familiar with what Smith’s team has learned during its Jan. 6 probe.

Many of the exclusive details come from the questioning of Trump’s former deputy chief of staff, Dan Scavino, who first started working for Trump as a teenager three decades ago and is now a paid senior adviser to Trump’s reelection campaign. Scavino wouldn’t speak with the House select committee that conducted its own probe related to Jan. 6, but — after a judge overruled claims of executive privilege last year — he did speak with Smith’s team, and key portions of what he said were described to ABC News.

New details also come from the Smith team’s interviews with other White House advisers and top lawyers who — despite being deposed in the congressional probe — previously declined to answer questions about Trump’s own statements and demeanor on Jan. 6, 2021, according to publicly released transcripts of their interviews in that probe.”

From ABC News

So again, if you want to look at Donald Trump’s presidency and compare it Richard Nixon’s and look at in in Nixonian terms and look at Donald Trump’s 2020-21 campaign to overturn American democracy and just automatically declare Donald Trump the winner of the 2020 presidential election, just because he’s Donald Trump and compare that scandal with Watergate and the other scandals that plagued the Nixon Administration in the early 1970s, (even Donald Trump is not even qualified to tie Richard Nixon’s shoes) this is how Richard Nixon went down as well.

President Nixon’s own people delivered the goods against him and gave the prosecutors, as well as Congress, the information that they needed to force Richard Nixon out of office. Or in Donald Trump’s case, the evidence that prosecutors will need to convict the former President in court.

Posted in CNN, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Michael Popok & Karen F. Agnifilo: ‘Donald Trump’s FINAL BRIEF To Appeals Courts IS DOOMED For Instant Failure’

Meidas Touch: Donald Trump’s FINAL BRIEF to Appeals Courts IS DOOMED for Instant FailureSource:Meidas Touch– left to right: Defendant Don & one of his Washington lawyers John Lauro.

Source:The New Democrat

“On an episode of Legal AF podcast, Defense lawyer Michael Popok and former prosecutor Karen Friedman Agnifilo debate the final briefing by the Special Counsel’s office and Trump leading into next week’s appeal hearing as to whether Trump’s criminal indictment should be dismissed, as the Court wonders out loud whether it even has jurisdiction to hear the case.”

From the Meidas Touch

“Lawyers for former President Donald J. Trump on Tuesday made their final written request to a federal appeals court to grant Mr. Trump immunity to charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election, arguing the indictment should be tossed out because it arose from actions he took while in the White House.

The 41-page filing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was the final step before the defense and prosecution debate the issue in front of a three-judge panel next Tuesday.

The dispute over immunity is the single most important aspect of the election interference case, touching not only on new questions of law but also on consequential issues of timing. The case is scheduled to go to trial in Federal District Court in Washington in early March, but has been put on hold until Mr. Trump’s efforts to have the charges tossed on immunity grounds are resolved.

In their filing to the appeals court, Mr. Trump’s lawyers repeated some of the arguments they had made in earlier submissions. They claimed, for instance, that a long history of presidents not being charged with crimes suggested that they all enjoyed immunity. They also said that prosecuting Mr. Trump now could unleash a chain reaction of other presidents being indicted.”

From The New York Times

In case anyone is waiting for my latest episode of “Alina Habba: I Want To Be a TV Lawyer”, even I can get tired for writing about Alina Habba’s irresponsibility, incompetence and unprofessionalism. And perhaps even Ben Meiselas can get tired of talking about her. But you would have to ask him, especially since I’ve never even met the man. So today, we go back to Washington and talk about his lawyer/MAGA cult followers there.

Look, I believe that Donald Trump’s team are simply out of legal plays here. They know they lost and what I think they’re doing here is simply trying to convince their boss Donald J. Trump, that they’re still with him and he’s still their man. And they still want to profit off his back.

They filed their presidential immunity claim more than a month ago and haven’t even tried to defend, or backup that position for how former, or current President’s have presidential immunity from criminal prosecution. They’re prepared to lose, but they don’t want to lose their paychecks.

Posted in Meidas Touch, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

CNN: Iowa Townhall With Erin Burnett: ‘Nikki Haley Reflects On Criticism of Her Comments About The Civil War’

CNN: Nikki Haley Reflects On Criticism of Her Comments About The Civil WarSource:CNN– Former U.N Ambassador and Governor of South Carolina and now Republican presidential candidate, Nikki Haley.

Source:The New Democrat

“CNN’s Erin Burnett speaks with former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley about the controversial comments the 2024 presidential hopeful made about slavery and the Civil War.”

From CNN

“Republican presidential candidate Chris Christie said Wednesday that fellow candidate Nikki Haley “knew exactly what she was doing” when she failed to mention slavery as a cause of the Civil War at a town hall last week — in a moment that prompted broad criticism from Democrats, as well as her GOP primary opponents.

In an interview on “The View,” Christie said he was confident Haley, the former South Carolina governor, was “not a racist” but suggested she was “trying to be something [she’s] not.”

From The Hill

Nikki Haley responding to CNN anchor Erin Burnett’s question about her response to the Civil War and slavery from last week: “Chris Christie is from New Jersey. I should’ve said slavery right off the bat.”

“Responding to a question by an Iowa caucus voter during a CNN hosted town hall last night, former South Carolina Governor Haley acknowledged she should have brought up slavery in her initial response and invoked her own experience growing up in the south in an Indian family.

‘I should have said slavery right off the bat,’ she began. ‘If you grow up in South Carolina, literally in second and third grade, you learn about slavery. You grow up and you have, you know, I had black friends growing up,’ she told host Erin Burnett.

‘It is a very talked about thing. We have a big history in South Carolina, when it comes to, you know, slavery, when it comes to all the things that happened with the Civil War, all of that,’ Haley said during the town hall.”

From The Daily Mail

Along with Nikki Haley saying that she had “Black friends growing up in South Carolina”, the other thing that I take away from Nikki Haley’s response here, is her responding to what Chris Christie said and just trying to put him off that he’s from New Jersey and of course it’s easy as a Republican to politically be against slavery and acknowledge that of course the Civil War was about slavery, when you are from New Jersey or some other big, blue state. But he should try walking in her political shoes as a South Carolina Republican. She’s basically saying that she’s from South Carolina and you can’t afford to be politically tough on the Confederacy and Confederates, when you are a South Carolina Republican. I think that’s what she’s saying politically here, if I were to try to translate her response politically.

Yes, she cleaned up her response and had a more intelligent and stronger answer. But when a drunk driver gets into an accident, the easy thing to do is to come to the realization that you shouldn’t driven drunk in the first place. The point is that you shouldn’t have made that colossal mistake in the first place. A strong, honest, and, moral, political leader, who wants to be President of the United States, doesn’t shoot her foot off, when asked a basic question like what was the American Civil War about.

This is what I said about Nikki Haley back in October and I still stand by it:

“Also, between Joe Biden and Nikki Haley, would Trump voters turn out and vote for her? They tend not to turn out and vote in big numbers, when they’re cult leader (sometimes you have to be frank) isn’t on the ballot. And would they vote for someone whose not just a woman, but a Never-Trumper, whose also not from their race, ethnicity, generation, culture, etc?

And if she goes out-of-her-way for their vote and just tries to appeal to those voters, would that turn Independents off for her and also turn out more Democrats against her?”

From The New Democrat 

This is what I said about Nikki Haley last week and I still stand by this as well:

“There are times in every successful leader’s career where they are tested and you know right there how strong of a person and leader that they are and how good their character is. The old expression you: “You never have a 2nd chance to make a 1st impression”, is how I look at Nikki Haley right now.

I wasn’t going to vote for her anyway, if it was a choice between her and Joe Biden. But she just reenforced not just to Democrats, but Independents, as well as Conservative Republicans, (you know, normal Republicans) who are suffocating in Trumpland right now, hoping for hope that there’s any shot in hell, that they’ll be able to vote for anyone other than Donald Trump or Joe Biden for President in 2024, that she’s still a late night TV host, looking for a prime time spot, but simply isn’t ready big leagues yet.

Does Nikki Haley really think that even in her home state of South Carolina, that the far-right, is going to vote for a South Asian, as well as East Indian-American woman, a gen-xer, a daughter of immigrants, for President of the United States? Of course not. So why does she feel the need to try to get those folks who live in Fantasy Land ideologically and culturally?

I agree with Shermichael Singleton that this disqualifies her as a serious presidential candidate now. Maybe Nikki and Ron DeSantis can run for President together as a duo now.”

From The New Democrat 

Posted in CNN, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Ben Meiselas: ‘Donald Trump’s Lawyer Makes STUNNING ADMISSION On Live TV’

Ben Meiselas: Donald Trump’s Lawyer Makes STUNNING ADMISSION on Live TVSource:Meidas Touch– Donald Trump propagandist & perhaps Trump University graduate, Alina Habba.

Source:The New Democrat

“MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on the shocking statement made by Donald Trump’s lawyer Alina Habba on live TV.”

From the Meidas Touch

“New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman said former President Trump is worried the Supreme Court may rule against him on recent decisions in Colorado and Maine that booted him from the 2024 ballot in those states.

Haberman said during an appearance on CNN last week that while Trump largely believes the Supreme Court will rule in his favor, he is also worried that it may not. If the Supreme Court holds up the Colorado ruling, it could lead to other states removing Trump from the ballot under the Constitution’s insurrection clause.”

From The Hill

“Former President Trump’s attorney Alina Habba on Wednesday said the former president is concerned the U.S. Supreme Court justices may “shy away from being pro-Trump,” and rule against him in regard to the recent decisions in Colorado and Maine that kicked him off the states’ 2024 primary ballots.

Responding to New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman’s recent comments about Trump’s concerns, Habba during an interview on Fox News said, “That’s a concern he’s voiced to me, he’s voiced.”

From The Hill

Again I’m not a lawyer, but there is where Donald Trump’s lawyer Alina Habba might be in further trouble with the American Bar Association: “Attorney-client privilege protects confidential communications between a lawyer and their client that relate to the client’s seeking of legal advice or services. This protection extends to any information exchanged during these privileged communications, encompassing not only verbal discussions but also written correspondence, emails, text messages, and other forms of communication.”

From the Legal Information Institute

As I said in November about Alina Habba on The New Democrat :

“Alina Habba is not really a trial lawyer. She can barely afford to do whatever she does as a lawyer right now. She’s more of a public relations lawyer, if anything at all, who makes her living trying her client’s cases on TV and on social media. But she’s officially Donald Trump’s civil lawyer right now because she’s about the best of what’s left to try to defend him, because of his own financial situation and all the evidence that’s against him right now, in multiple cases.

Perhaps one of the reasons right now that Alina Habba owes millions of dollars, is because her own client is not paying her. But she’s trying to work for him anyway, perhaps banking on the fact that defending a former President of the United States, would lead to clients who can and would pay her very well for her legal advice and actions in the future. But that career strategy is obviously not working out for her right now.”

As I wrote back in December on The New Democrat :

“So to put all of this in English: (or perhaps broken American English) Donald Trump lost his civil immunity case in the E. Jeanne Carrol case, because his own damn lawyer Alina Habba, didn’t file her motion in time to win that appeal and give her client civil immunity here.

My post about DJT’s lawyer Alina Habba from back in November still stands here. She’s not up to the task, doesn’t have the experience, the knowledge, the professionalism, to defend a client at the level of Donald Trump, when you are talking about a former President of the United States and now serial criminal defendant.

DJT needs much better legal representation. But Alina Habba might be the best of what’s left to even consider representing a man who not only commits felonies on a regular basis, but who leaves incriminating evidence against him all over the place, either thinking he’ll never get caught, or convicted, or he’s simply above the law and has some constitutional right that no other American citizen has.”

As I wrote back in December on The New Democrat :

“So what what Ben Meiselas is talking about here (and I will get to the point faster) is that Donald Trump’s New York County lawyer, Alina Habba, is arguing to the appeals court, that her client Donald Trump has absolute immunity, period. And she referenced Nxon V Fitzgerald, a case that that US Air Force officer Arthur Ernest Fitzgerald made against President Richard Nixon in the early 1970s. ”

As I wrote on The New Democrat :

“OK, to try to explain Alina Habba and what she’s up too or why she does and says the things that she does, especially on national TV, where she’ll never be able to run away from her garbage statements, or in court, where again everything piece of trash that she tried to present in court on behalf of her client Donald J. Trump, I can only come up with a few possibilities for why she does this and puts herself through, as someone whose never even met her.

I guess one possibility is that she’s a total moron. But then how the hell she get out of high school, let alone through college and then law school, and then pass the bar exam. So I don’t think just labeling her as a total moron makes much sense here.

I guess another possibility is that Alina Habba is a pathological liar who simply can’t help herself and perhaps she’s corrupt as well, which would along with her being a compulsive liar, would explain all of her garbage statements as a freakin lawyer, whose supposed to be a member of the American Bar Association. Along with being a pathological liar, she also just happens to be President of the Compulsive Liars of America, (not saying such organization exists) which seems to be a position unlike being a civil defense attorney, that she would be well-qualified for.

Another possibility and I think one that has real possibility, just based on her statements and behavior, she got her law degree from Trump University, which would explain horrible statements and positions as a lawyer…

I think crook and pathological liar, are the best possibilities for why Alina Habba does the things that she does and says the things that she does. But you are welcome to weigh in on this as well and tell me what you think about this and her.”

As I wrote last week on The New Democrat :

“Nothing has changed here, other than the fact I guess, if Alina Habba got paid to make a fool of herself on national TV, Oprah Winfrey could go to Alina for loans. I mean Alina Habba would be the richest woman and perhaps person in the entire world, (not just MAGA World, which isn’t much bigger than Pluto, in American terms) if her simple job in life was to make a fool for herself, not just on national TV, but in civil court as well. ”

As I wrote yesterday on The New Democrat :

“To go back to back to what Christina Bobb said: They’re no longer even trying to argue whether or not their client Donald J Trump is actually innocent at this point. That train left the station back in August when Special Counsel Jack Smith laid out his indictment. What they’re doing now, is simply trying to get their client off with all these bogus (to be really kind) arguments that their client is immune from prosecution and lawsuits, simply because he’s Donald J. Trump. Because I think they even know that there’s no such thing as presidential immunity from prosecution and civil liability, simply because you are the President, or we’re the President of the United States. I don’t think you need a degree from Trump University to understand that.”

Donald Trump’s lawyer Christina Bobb: “The presidential immunity, I think they should rule in favor of Donald Trump. Presidential immunity has been in play for the vast majority of our history. Well established that the acts that were alleged in this indictment were in the furtherance of his office in accordance with his office. He’s immune from prosecution. Clearly as President of the United States, he believes that there was fraud in the presidential election and he has a constitutional obligation to secure the election and to figure out what was going on. So this is a very clear case that he should be cleared because of presidential immunity.”

Again, notice how Christina Bobb doesn’t even try to back up her claim that Donald Trump either has presidential immunity from either criminal prosecution, or has any authority whatsoever to try to interfere as President of the United States, with a state’s presidential election. But if she was a good, intelligent, responsible, moral, lawyer, she wouldn’t be working for Donald Trump. Also notice how she sounds like she’s trying to think about what she says, before she says it. Which means she’s either just flat lying, or hasn’t put any thought whatsoever in her statement, before she went on national TV. But I’m not a psychologist either.

I guess the old saying that criminals always need the best attorneys. Well, I don’t know who actually said that, but if someone did say that, that is completely true in Donald Trump’s case. The problem that he has is that the good, honest, successful lawyers, don’t want anything to do for him. Other than perhaps getting the money that he owes from, from the time that they did work for him.

Posted in Meidas Touch, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Michael Smerconish: Fox News On Jeffrey Epstein & Bill Clinton

Michael Smerconish: The Little Black Book That Held The Names of Epstein's Associates Jeffrey Epstein Redacted ReleaseSource:Michael Smerconish talking about Jeffrey Epstein’s little black book.

Source:The New Democrat

“The Little Black Book that held the names of Epstein’s associates Jeffrey Epstein redacted release”

From Michael Smerconish

“Bill Clinton’s name in Epstein docs makes their relationship look ‘even cozier’: Dave Marcus
Columnist Dave Marcus joins ‘Fox & Friends’ to discuss what can come from the unsealed Jeffrey Epstein court documents.”

From FOX News

“Dozens of court documents related to the convicted sex felon Jeffrey Epstein and unsealed Wednesday include the names of several prominent figures. Among them: former President Bill Clinton and former President Donald Trump.

Neither Clinton nor Trump have been accused of any wrongdoing related to Epstein, who killed himself in a Manhattan jail while awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges.

The documents — which total nearly 1,000 pages — were part of a 2015 defamation lawsuit brought against Epstein and his former girlfriend and convicted accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, by Virginia Giuffre, one of their accusers.

In the documents, Giuffre alleged that many of sexual encounters occurred under the guise of massages that Maxwell, a British socialite, procured for Epstein and others.

Giuffre claimed that while she was a teenager, Epstein and Maxwell pressured her into sexual encounters with powerful men, including Prince Andrew. Giuffre reached an out-of-court settlement with Andrew, who denied her allegations.

U.S. District Judge Loretta A. Preska ordered the unsealing of the documents in mid-December, saying that most of the information and names in them were already public.

The newly unsealed documents include the transcript of a 2016 deposition in which a second accuser, identified as Johanna Sjoberg, testified that Epstein “said one time that Clinton likes them young, referring to girls.” She did not elaborate.

Sjoberg testified that Epstein told her he would take her to Trump’s Atlantic City casino but did not allege any wrongdoing. She also said in a deposition that Prince Andrew had inappropriately touched her at Epstein’s mansion in New York.

In all, Clinton’s name appears 73 times in the documents unsealed Wednesday; Trump’s name appears four times.”

From Yahoo News

Seeing and hearing about Fox News’s coverage of Jeffrey Epstein’s little black book suggests to me that their audience might be getting smaller. Because they’re only going after people in America who simply hate Democrats, especially Bill Clinton and his allies because of what they represent in America, which is the new America, the free America, the diverse America, etc, everything that the Far-Right in America (which is now Donald Trump’s MAGA movement) hates about America. Fox News concentrates on people for their audience who are more likely to believe that Bill Clinton ordered the hit on Vince Foster back in the early 1990s, then that Donald Trump ever lost a popular vote for anything in his entire life.

I say all of this because Bill Clinton hasn’t been President of the United States for 23 years now. He’s never run for another public office, or will he ever run for public office again. He’s never done anything illegal in his life, never been charged with doing anything illegal in his life. Being under investigation for potential bad behavior has never been the same as even being charged for illegal behavior.

And yet with all the other associates and social acquaintances that Jeffrey Epstein had in his life, both with Democrats and Republicans, mainly wealthy Democrats and Republicans, including Bill Clinton, but Donald Trump as well, as well as the foreign government officials like Prince Andrew of the United Kingdom, Fox News only concentrates on Bill Clinton’s alleged relationships, as well as the bogus (to be real kind) rumors without even trying to back them up, or even find the source for them, that Bill Clinton likes young women like some type of pervert or something.

Posted in Michael Smerconish, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ben Meiselas: ‘Donald Trump Lawyers Accidentally EXPOSE How WEAK Defense Is on LIVE TV’

Ben Meiselas: Donald Trump Lawyers Accidentally EXPOSE how WEAK Defense Is on LIVE TVSource:Meidas Touch– Donald Trump propagandist & perhaps Trump University graduate, Alina Habba.

Source:The New Democrat

“MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on Donald Trump’s lawyers recent television appearances where their defense of Donald Trump is so weak it seems as if they are almost admissions. ”

From the Meidas Touch

As I wrote about Alina Habba back in November on The New Democrat :

“Alina Habba is not really a trial lawyer. She can barely afford to do whatever she does as a lawyer right now. She’s more of a public relations lawyer, if anything at all, who makes her living trying her client’s cases on TV and on social media. But she’s officially Donald Trump’s civil lawyer right now because she’s about the best of what’s left to try to defend him, because of his own financial situation and all the evidence that’s against him right now, in multiple cases.

Perhaps one of the reasons right now that Alina Habba owes millions of dollars, is because her own client is not paying her. But she’s trying to work for him anyway, perhaps banking on the fact that defending a former President of the United States, would lead to clients who can and would pay her very well for her legal advice and actions in the future. But that career strategy is obviously not working out for her right now.”

As I wrote on The New Democrat  back in December:

“So to put all of this in English: (or perhaps broken American English) Donald Trump lost his civil immunity case in the E. Jeanne Carrol case, because his own damn lawyer Alina Habba, didn’t file her motion in time to win that appeal and give her client civil immunity here.

My post about DJT’s lawyer Alina Habba from back in November still stands here. She’s not up to the task, doesn’t have the experience, the knowledge, the professionalism, to defend a client at the level of Donald Trump, when you are talking about a former President of the United States and now serial criminal defendant.

DJT needs much better legal representation. But Alina Habba might be the best of what’s left to even consider representing a man who not only commits felonies on a regular basis, but who leaves incriminating evidence against him all over the place, either thinking he’ll never get caught, or convicted, or he’s simply above the law and has some constitutional right that no other American citizen has.”

As I wrote on The New Democrat  back in December:

“So what what Ben Meiselas is talking about here (and I will get to the point faster) is that Donald Trump’s New York County lawyer, Alina Habba, is arguing to the appeals court, that her client Donald Trump has absolute immunity, period. And she referenced Nxon V Fitzgerald, a case that that US Air Force officer Arthur Ernest Fitzgerald made against President Richard Nixon in the early 1970s. ”

As I wrote on The New Democrat  back in December:

“OK, to try to explain Alina Habba and what she’s up too or why she does and says the things that she does, especially on national TV, where she’ll never be able to run away from her garbage statements, or in court, where again everything piece of trash that she tried to present in court on behalf of her client Donald J. Trump, I can only come up with a few possibilities for why she does this and puts herself through, as someone whose never even met her.

I guess one possibility is that she’s a total moron. But then how the hell she get out of high school, let alone through college and then law school, and then pass the bar exam. So I don’t think just labeling her as a total moron makes much sense here.

I guess another possibility is that Alina Habba is a pathological liar who simply can’t help herself and perhaps she’s corrupt as well, which would along with her being a compulsive liar, would explain all of her garbage statements as a freakin lawyer, whose supposed to be a member of the American Bar Association. Along with being a pathological liar, she also just happens to be President of the Compulsive Liars of America, (not saying such organization exists) which seems to be a position unlike being a civil defense attorney, that she would be well-qualified for.

Another possibility and I think one that has real possibility, just based on her statements and behavior, she got her law degree from Trump University, which would explain horrible statements and positions as a lawyer…

I think crook and pathological liar, are the best possibilities for why Alina Habba does the things that she does and says the things that she does. But you are welcome to weigh in on this as well and tell me what you think about this and her.”

As I wrote on The New Democrat  last week:

“Nothing has changed here, other than the fact I guess, if Alina Habba got paid to make a fool of herself on national TV, Oprah Winfrey could go to Alina for loans. I mean Alina Habba would be the richest woman and perhaps person in the entire world, (not just MAGA World, which isn’t much bigger than Pluto, in American terms) if her simple job in life was to make a fool for herself, not just on national TV, but in civil court as well. ”

Donald Trump’s lawyer Christina Bobb essentially trying to argue that democracy matters more than the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law. But perhaps only as it relates to Donald J. Trump, who just happens to her client:

“The President is elected by the nation. It should be the entire nation that gets to decide who they want for President, whether they’re guilty of insurrection or not. It’s up to the people.”

Maybe I’m just old now because I’m in my late 40s (which I guess would be old, at least according to Millennials) but I actually do remember a time when all Republicans, not just Conservative Republicans, but even far-right Republicans, not just believed in the rule of law, but argued that America was a constitutional republic, not a democracy.

Donald Trump’s Manhattan, New York lawyer Alina Habba:

“Some of us understand what the Constitution says, the amendments, due process, that are still enabled by the Constitution, that we have to abide by. And I think the Supreme Court will do the right thing here, they’ll give is some clarity on this. But I can tell you that these people are so crazy: the Jack Smith’s the AG’s, they’ve become so deranged, so obsess with taking down Trump, that the law doesn’t make sense to them because they don’t care about it.

People like me, we take it one step at a time, we look at case law, things that are precedent for this country, we look at the Constitution. And we’ll raise all those things at the Supreme Court because we have too…” Alina Habba goes on to talk about these prosecutors saying that they’re not making a good name for themselves. Well, she would know if you look at how she embarrasses herself every time she goes on national TV, to try to speak for her client.

To go back to back to what Christina Bobb said: They’re no longer even trying to argue whether or not their client Donald J Trump is actually innocent at this point. That train left the station back in August when Special Counsel Jack Smith laid out his indictment. What they’re doing now, is simply trying to get their client off with all these bogus (to be really kind) arguments that their client is immune from prosecution and lawsuits, simply because he’s Donald J. Trump. Because I think they even know that there’s no such thing as presidential immunity from prosecution and civil liability, simply because you are the President, or we’re the President of the United States. I don’t think you need a degree from Trump University to understand that.

My comment about Alina Habba from back in November still stands here:

“If you followed Donald Trump’s presidency, I have some therapy that I could recommend that could help you get through that experience. Actually, that’s just a joke, since no such therapy has been invented yet. But if you survived the experience of the Donald Trump presidency and so far his post-presidency, you are getting an excellent legal education of the differences between being President and Ex-President, when it comes to your own lawyers.

When you are the President of the United States, regardless of the POTUS, you have access to be the best of legal profession in this country. Any lawyer just about would be honored to either work in your White House, or work as your personal attorney to address any personal legal issues that you might have when you are President. At least access to the best lawyers in your own party.

But when you leave The White House, especially in disgrace, when you’ve just lost reelection and only managed 46% of the popular vote and 232 out of 574 electoral votes, in a two-way race, you’ve been impeached twice in just 4 years, you have all the legal issues that are now in front of you because of your illegal conduct as President of the United States, you are very unpopular, at least outside of your own party, you have mounting financial debt in front of you because of all the money that you lost when you were President, you have access to whatever is left. “

Posted in Meidas Touch, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

CNN: ‘Senator Bob Menendez Charged With Receiving Gifts From Qatar in New Allegations in Corruption Scheme’

CNN: Senator Bob Menendez Hit With New allegations in corruption case connected to QatarSource:CNN– U.S. Senator Robert Menendez (Democrat, New Jersey) could be drowning in political hot water very soon. I think Bought Off Bob, or Paid For Bob,  have real rings to them.

“Federal prosecutors allege Sen. Bob Menendez accepted race car tickets and other gifts from Qatar as part of a yearslong corruption scheme, with the Gulf nation joining Egypt as another foreign country the New Jersey Democrat is accused of helping while in office.

Prosecutors allege in the superseding indictment that Menendez’s bribery and extortion scheme continued into 2023, a year longer than initially alleged. The new indictment, made public Tuesday, amends and replaces the original indictment, listing the formal charges against a defendant.

Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) stands in an elevator after leaving his office in the Hart Senate Office Building on September 28, 2023 in Washington, DC. Menendez will address Senate Democrats in a caucus meeting later today, a day after being arraigned on federal bribery charges in New York City.
READ: Superseding indictment in Menendez corruption case
Among the new allegations, according to the indictment, is that Menendez accepted payments from one of his co-conspirators, New Jersey real estate developer Fred Daibes, in exchange for using his influence to help Daibes obtain millions of dollars from an investment fund tied to Qatar. The senator, prosecutors allege, additionally took steps to help Qatar.

Menendez, his wife Nadine Menendez, Daibes and two other New Jersey businessmen were indicted as part of a bribery scheme last year. All have pleaded not guilty to the charges.

In addition to the bribery charges, Menendez is accused of acting as a foreign agent for the government of Egypt by allegedly taking steps to help the country in exchange for one of the defendants obtaining a monopoly on a Halal export business. Menendez has vigorously denied any wrongdoing.

Menendez’s attorney said in a statement Tuesday that “the government does not have the proof to back up any of the old or new allegations” but instead “a string of baseless assumptions and bizarre conjectures based on routine, lawful contacts between a Senator and his constituents or foreign officials.”

“At all times, Senator Menendez acted entirely appropriately with respect to Qatar, Egypt, and the many other countries he routinely interacts with,” Attorney Adam Fee said in the statement. “Those interactions were always based on his professional judgment as to the best interests of the United States because he is, and always has been, a patriot. This latest Indictment only exposes the lengths to which these hostile prosecutors will go to poison the public before a trial even begins. But these new allegations don’t change a thing, and their theories won’t survive the scrutiny of the court or a jury.”

The latest indictment alleges Menendez introduced Daibes, who was seeking an investment, to a member of the Qatari royal family and principal of the Qatari Investment Company. While the Qatari investment fund was weighing an investment, Menendez made multiple public statements supporting the government of Qatar, according to the indictment.

“Menendez provided Daibes with these statements so that Daibes could share them with the Qatari Investor and a Qatari government officials associated with the Qatari Investment Company,” prosecutors allege.

In August 2021, the senator sent a press release in which he praised the Qatari government to Daibes, texting him, “You might want to send to them. I am just about to release,” the indictment alleges. The following month, after attending a private event hosted by the Qatari government in Manhattan, Daibes texted Menendez photographs of luxury watches valued as much as $23,990, asking, “How about one of these?” Two days later, Menendez texted Daibes a link to a website tracking a Senate resolution supporting Qatar.

Months later in January 2022, Menendez texted the Qatari investor ahead of his meeting with Daibes in London to discuss the potential investment, writing, “I understand my friend is going to visit with you on the 15th of the month. I hope that this will result in the favorable and mutually beneficial agreement that you have been both engaged in discussing,” according to the indictment.

In May, at the senator’s request, the Qatari official provided tickets to the 2022 Formula One Grand Prix to a close relative of Nadine Menendez.

That same month, following a meeting between the senator, Daibes, and the two Qatari officials, the Qatari investment fund signed a letter of intent to enter into a joint venture with Daibes’ company. After, Daibes provided Menendez with a gold bar, according to the indictment.

Prosecutors also allege after Menendez’s home was searched by the FBI in early 2022, the senator took steps to try to cover up the alleged bribes by paying back the mortgage and car payments to the New Jersey businessmen and disguising them as loans.

Last year, the Qatari Investment Company made it official and invested tens of millions of dollars with Daibes. Menendez continued to receive benefits from the Qataris, including four tickets to that year’s Formula One Grand Prix race, the indictment alleges.

Prosecutors say Menendez did not note on his financial disclosure forms the gifts from Qatar and Daibes, including the gold bars and race tickets.”

From CNN

“Federal prosecutors allege Sen. Bob Menendez accepted race car tickets and other gifts from Qatar as part of a yearslong corruption scheme, with the Gulf nation joining Egypt as another foreign country the New Jersey Democrat is accused of helping while in office.”

From CNN

As I wrote about Senator Menendez back in September:

“Once again, I’m not a lawyer and I don’t think I can say that enough. But I doubt he’s still a U.S. Senator by the start of next year. A few things could I believe will happen here:

We’re just starting to see the evidence and the case that the DOJ Southern District of New York has on Senator Menendez. Next could be the documents, phone calls, text’s, email, banking records, that link his co-defendants with Senator Menendez.

Next, he’ll probably have multiple primary challengers for his seat in the Democratic primary next year. and they could either all be well-funded, especially if they’re coming from the U.S. House, with New Jersey House Democrats who want his Senate seat.

3rd, even if Senator Menendez perhaps survives his primary challenge, with all the evidence, along with the additional evidence that will come out against him, New Jersey voters are going to have a real hard question that they’re going to have to deal with. Not hard in the sense that the answer is not obvious, but hard in the sense of do you really want to have to answer this question…

From The New Democrat 

As I wrote about Senator Menendez back in October:

“Harry Litman and Jennifer Rodgers aren’t MAGA, partisan, political activists. They’re both Democrats and former U.S. Attorney’s. Senator Menendez can’t claim political bias here from them, or the Democratic appointed U.S. Attorney in New York City and New Jersey. They now have text messages from Senator Menendez, to Egyptian officials, to what information these Egyptians could get, in exchange for Egyptians financially compensating Senator Menendez and his wife. And as Jennifer Rodgers said, this looks like a clear case of bribery.”

From The New Democrat 

CNN political analyst Democratic Maria Cardona on Senator Menendez back in September:

“That’s right. But I think if he stays here now under all of this, you know, shadow of the charges, it’s going to make it worse.

And look, that doesn’t mean that he doesn’t have the right with every fiber of his being to go out and fight this in the courts. Absolutely, senator, go do it. Clear your name. If you’re innocent, by all means, go do it and show us, right? Show the public, show his voters that these charges are absolutely wrong.

And he should absolutely be able to do it with 100% of his energy and his focus. He won’t be able to do that if he continues to want to keep his Senate seat just for the sake of saying, look, they’re wrong. I’m going to be right. That’s not serving the voters that he so lifts up and is so proud of the service that he has given them. That’s doing them a disservice if he stays.”

From CNN

CNN Democratic political analyst Christine Quinn on Senator Menendez:

“He’s a very arrogant guy whose gotten away with it. And when you’ve gotten away with it, you think you are going to get away with it again. And if he had any concern for himself, his wife, and the United States Senate, he would step down today.” She also called him a criminal, but the way.

Christine Quinn is a New York City, left-wing Democrat. Not exactly a Billy Bob, redneck, MAGA Republican, from Mississippi or some place. (Excuse my language) But someone whose about as blue as people can get politically.

Just in case anyone is wondering whether or not The New Democrat is so partisan, that we just attack Republicans, especially MAGA Republicans, especially Donald Trump and his allies: we don’t attack anyone, including MAGA members. We point about serious, negative facts, about people, when they screw up, act irresponsibly, especially when they act like they’re above the law, regardless of what political party or political philosophy they’re part of. It just so happens that Donald Trump because of his legal issues, has dominated the news for really six months now and that’s just going to continue, regardless of what happens to Senator Menendez.

I predicted back in September that Senator Menendez would resign from Congress by the end of 2023. That obviously didn’t happen since he’s still there. But I also predicted that the legal case against him would just get stronger and be a lot worst for him. That has come true. And if cares about anyone other than what’s left of his Congressional career now in it’s 32nd year in Congress, he would resign immediately and concentrate on his legal case full-time.

You can also see this post on Blogger.

Posted in CNN, Originals | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Ben Meiselas: ‘Appeals Court Issues URGENT DIRECTIVE to Donald Trump in Criminal Case’

Ben Meiselas: Appeals Court Issues URGENT DIRECTIVE to Donald Trump in Criminal CaseSource:Meidas Touch– Defendant Don.

Source:The New Democrat

“MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals Order that Donald Trump and Jack Smith must be prepared to address the arguments raised in the amicus briefs filed with the court which could lead to Trump losing the appeal on separate and independent grounds including on jurisdiction.”

From the Meidas Touch

“JUSTICE SCALIA delivered the opinion of the Court.
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e)(2) prohibits public disclosure by Government attorneys of “matters occurring before the grand jury” except in certain specified circumstances. This case presents the question whether a district court order denying a criminal defendant’s motion to dismiss an indictment for an alleged violation of Rule 6(e) is immediately appealable.

On January 23, 1987, a federal grand jury in the Western District of New York returned an indictment against petitioners Midland Asphalt Corporation, a business engaged in the sale of liquid bituminous material used to resurface roads, and Albert C. Litteer, Midland’s president and part owner. The indictment alleged that they had violated § 1 of the Sherman Act, 26 Stat. 209, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 1, by conspiring with other unindicted persons to allocate contracts and to submit collusive bids to the State of New York and certain counties in western New York. On July 21, 1987, petitioners moved to dismiss the indictment on grounds which included an alleged violation by federal prosecutors of Rule 6(e)(2).
Petitioners’ Rule 6(e) allegations arose from the following facts: when the grand jury that ultimately returned the Sherman Act indictment was sitting, Midland and another company under investigation brought suit seeking to have the Government pay for the cost of compliance with grand jury subpoenas. In re Grand Jury Subpoenas to Midland Asphalt Corp. and Krantz Asphalt Co., Civ. No. 85-633E (WDNY, Feb. 12, 1985) (In re Grand Jury Subpoenas)…

From Supreme Justia

As my colleague Fred Schneider wrote on The New Democrat  earlier today:

“When I first heard about this, I was thinking as a non-lawyer that this would just add to the delay of the Trump trial in Washington Federal Circuit Court, because I’m thinking now the appeals court would not only have to deal with Donald Trump’s claim of presidential immunity, but have to deal with this amicus brief first.

But you listen to Harry Litman, he says that the appeals court would take this first and then rule on that and if American Oversight wins, the case goes back to Judge Tanya Chutkan’s circuit court in Washington and that trial gets back on track. And of course if Donald Trump loses on this as well, his lawyers would of course appeal that to the appeals court, but as they’re doing that, Judge Chutkan’s case would continue to move forward and the stay would end at that point.

And then Trump would have to win on the amicus brief appeal, before the stay would come back. But American Oversight apparently has the case and precedent that you need to win their case.

So Donald Trump’s game of delay, stonewall, and obstruct, could be ending this month, with his case Washington case getting back on course and perhaps that trial starting in late March.”

So to try to sum this all up as a non-lawyer: The Washington appeals court will take this argument next week, first and then Donald Trump’s lawyers could lose that, before they are heard on whether their client Donald J. Trump, has presidential immunity or not.

If DJT and company lose the American Oversight amicus brief, they won’t even get to make their presidential immunity appeal, until if and when their client is convicted. And this case will go back to Judge Tanya Chutkan and her trial will be back on course.

Posted in Meidas Touch, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment