Donald Trump Announces 2016 White House Bid

[spaminator]

Trump valet Walt Nauta pleads not guilty in classified documents case
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Adriana Gomez Licon And Eric Tucker
Published Jul 06, 2023 • 2 minute read

MIAMI — Donald Trump’s valet, Walt Nauta, pleaded not guilty Thursday to charges that he helped the former president hide classified documents from federal authorities, appearing with a new Florida-based lawyer to represent him as the case moves forward.


Nauta was charged alongside Trump in June in a 38-count indictment alleging the mishandling of classified documents. His arraignment was to have happened twice before, but he had struggled to retain a lawyer licensed in Florida and one appearance was postponed because of his travel troubles.


Ahead of his arraignment, Nauta hired Sasha Dadan, a criminal defense attorney and former public defender whose main law office is in Fort Pierce, where the judge who would be handling the trial is based. She appeared in court with Nauta, alongside his Washington lawyer, Stanley Woodward, who entered the not guilty plea on his behalf.

Nauta answered, “Yes, Your Honor,” when he was asked whether he had reviewed the indictment during the brief court appearance. He and his lawyers exited the courthouse after the arraignment and entered a Black Mercedes-Benz sedan without answering questions from reporters.


Trump pleaded not guilty during his June 13 arraignment to charges including willful retention of national defense information. But Nauta’s arraignment was postponed that day because of the lawyer situation and then was pushed back again last week when a flight from New Jersey he was to have taken was canceled.

The indictment filed by special counsel Jack Smith and his team of prosecutors accuses Nauta of conspiring with Trump to conceal records that the former president had taken with him from the White House after his term ended in January 2021.

Prosecutors allege that Nauta, at the former president’s direction, moved boxes of documents bearing classification markings so they would not be found by a Trump lawyer who was tasked with searching the home for classified records to be returned to the government.


That, prosecutors said, resulted in a false claim to the Justice Department that a “diligent search” for classified documents had been done and that all documents responsive to a subpoena had been returned.

The relocation of the boxes was captured on surveillance camera footage that the Justice Department had subpoenaed, and agents and prosecutors cited those actions as a basis for probable cause that a crime had been committed in their August warrant application to search Mar-a-Lago, according to newly unsealed information from the application.

Prosecutors say Nauta also misled the FBI during an interview with agents last year when he said he was unaware of boxes of documents having been brought to Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago.

Nauta is a Navy veteran who fetched Trump’s Diet Cokes as his valet at the White House before joining him as a personal aide at Mar-a-Lago. He is regularly by Trump’s side, including traveling in Trump’s motorcade to the Miami courthouse for their appearance earlier this month and accompanying him afterward to a stop at the city’s famed Cuban restaurant Versailles, where he helped usher supporters eager to take selfies with the former president.

Trump valet Walt Nauta pleads not guilty in classified documents case

Donald Trump's valet, Walt Nauta, pleaded not guilty to charges that he helped former president hide classified documents from authorities

torontosun.com

 

[pgs]

... JFC...

A breath of fresh air .

 

[spaminator]

Rudy Giuliani should be disbarred for pursuing Trump’s false election claims: Review panel
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Nomaan Merchant
Published Jul 07, 2023 • 3 minute read

WASHINGTON — Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani could be disbarred in Washington after a review panel on Friday condemned how he pursued the false claims that then-President Donald Trump made about his 2020 presidential election loss.


Giuliani “claimed massive election fraud but had no evidence,” wrote the three-member panel in a report that details the errors and unsupported claims the former mayor made in a Pennsylvania lawsuit seeking to overturn the Republican president’s loss to Democrat Joe Biden.


Between Election Day and the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol, Giuliani and other Trump lawyers repeatedly pressed claims of election fraud that were almost uniformly rejected by federal and state courts. He’s the third lawyer who could lose his ability to practice law over what he did for Trump: John Eastman faces disbarment in California, and Lin Wood this week surrendered his license in Georgia.

“Mr. Giuliani’s effort to undermine the integrity of the 2020 presidential election has helped destabilize our democracy,” wrote the panel, Robert C. Bernius, Carolyn Haynesworth-Murrell and Jay A. Brozost.


“The misconduct here sadly transcends all his past accomplishments,” they wrote. “It was unparalleled in its destructive purpose and effect. He sought to disrupt a presidential election and persists in his refusal to acknowledge the wrong he has done.”

Giuliani has already had his New York law license suspended for false statements he made after the election. The Washington review panel’s work will now go to the D.C. Court of Appeals for a final decision.

Ted Goodman, a political adviser to Giuliani, criticized the panel’s work as “the sort of behavior we’d expect out of the Soviet Union.”

“I call on rank-and-file members of the DC Bar Association to speak out against this great injustice,” Goodman said in a statement.


Giuliani’s post-election work has made him a key figure in several federal and state probes. He met with the special counsel appointed to investigate efforts to overturn the 2020 election and prosecutors in Fulton County, Georgia, also conducting an investigation.

The three-judge panel examined a case Giuliani argued on Nov. 17, 2020, ten days after The Associated Press and other news outlets called the election for Biden.

The Trump campaign complained that Philadelphia and six Democratic-controlled counties in Pennsylvania let voters make corrections to mail-in ballots that were otherwise going to be disqualified for a technicality, such as lacking a secrecy envelope or a signature. Some other counties did not follow suit.


Giuliani argued the case. While he had once served as a U.S. attorney in New York, the Pennsylvania argument was his first court appearance as an attorney since 1992, the year before he was elected New York mayor, according to federal records.

He spent much of the hearing baselessly alleging a national conspiracy to steal the election from Trump, something the former president continues to argue today.

U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann rejected Giuliani’s arguments days later, noting the Trump campaign had wanted him to throw out millions of votes.

“One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption,” Brann wrote then. “That has not happened.”


The panel’s review on Friday said Giuliani “did not offer any evidence that fraudulent mail-in votes were actually cast or counted,” but instead made his own inferences.

“Mr. Giuliani’s argument that he did not have time fully to investigate his case before filing it is singularly unimpressive,” the panel wrote. “He sought to upend the presidential election but never had evidence to support that effort.”

The panel said Giuliani had violated a rule that prohibits lawyers from “from engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.”

“Clogging the courts with unnecessary and frivolous cases is such a violation,” the panel said.

Rudy Giuliani should be disbarred for pursuing Trump’s false election claims: Review panel

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani could be disbarred in Washington after a review panel on Friday condemned how he pursued the false claim

torontosun.com

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Crazy old White guys.

 

[Dixie Cup]

Rudy Giuliani should be disbarred for pursuing Trump’s false election claims: Review panel
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Nomaan Merchant
Published Jul 07, 2023 • 3 minute read

WASHINGTON — Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani could be disbarred in Washington after a review panel on Friday condemned how he pursued the false claims that then-President Donald Trump made about his 2020 presidential election loss.


Giuliani “claimed massive election fraud but had no evidence,” wrote the three-member panel in a report that details the errors and unsupported claims the former mayor made in a Pennsylvania lawsuit seeking to overturn the Republican president’s loss to Democrat Joe Biden.


Between Election Day and the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol, Giuliani and other Trump lawyers repeatedly pressed claims of election fraud that were almost uniformly rejected by federal and state courts. He’s the third lawyer who could lose his ability to practice law over what he did for Trump: John Eastman faces disbarment in California, and Lin Wood this week surrendered his license in Georgia.

“Mr. Giuliani’s effort to undermine the integrity of the 2020 presidential election has helped destabilize our democracy,” wrote the panel, Robert C. Bernius, Carolyn Haynesworth-Murrell and Jay A. Brozost.


“The misconduct here sadly transcends all his past accomplishments,” they wrote. “It was unparalleled in its destructive purpose and effect. He sought to disrupt a presidential election and persists in his refusal to acknowledge the wrong he has done.”

Giuliani has already had his New York law license suspended for false statements he made after the election. The Washington review panel’s work will now go to the D.C. Court of Appeals for a final decision.

Ted Goodman, a political adviser to Giuliani, criticized the panel’s work as “the sort of behavior we’d expect out of the Soviet Union.”

“I call on rank-and-file members of the DC Bar Association to speak out against this great injustice,” Goodman said in a statement.


Giuliani’s post-election work has made him a key figure in several federal and state probes. He met with the special counsel appointed to investigate efforts to overturn the 2020 election and prosecutors in Fulton County, Georgia, also conducting an investigation.

The three-judge panel examined a case Giuliani argued on Nov. 17, 2020, ten days after The Associated Press and other news outlets called the election for Biden.

The Trump campaign complained that Philadelphia and six Democratic-controlled counties in Pennsylvania let voters make corrections to mail-in ballots that were otherwise going to be disqualified for a technicality, such as lacking a secrecy envelope or a signature. Some other counties did not follow suit.


Giuliani argued the case. While he had once served as a U.S. attorney in New York, the Pennsylvania argument was his first court appearance as an attorney since 1992, the year before he was elected New York mayor, according to federal records.

He spent much of the hearing baselessly alleging a national conspiracy to steal the election from Trump, something the former president continues to argue today.

U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann rejected Giuliani’s arguments days later, noting the Trump campaign had wanted him to throw out millions of votes.

“One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption,” Brann wrote then. “That has not happened.”


The panel’s review on Friday said Giuliani “did not offer any evidence that fraudulent mail-in votes were actually cast or counted,” but instead made his own inferences.

“Mr. Giuliani’s argument that he did not have time fully to investigate his case before filing it is singularly unimpressive,” the panel wrote. “He sought to upend the presidential election but never had evidence to support that effort.”

The panel said Giuliani had violated a rule that prohibits lawyers from “from engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.”

“Clogging the courts with unnecessary and frivolous cases is such a violation,” the panel said.

Rudy Giuliani should be disbarred for pursuing Trump’s false election claims: Review panel

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani could be disbarred in Washington after a review panel on Friday condemned how he pursued the false claim

torontosun.com

They had proof but the courts refused to look at it because they "claim" that it should have been brought up BEFORE the election. How absurd is that - trying to prove corruption before it happens. Huh! Again, misinformation. So what else is new?

 

[spaminator]

Trump lashes out at Justice Department over its decision on defamation suit
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Larry Neumeister
Published Jul 12, 2023 • 3 minute read

NEW YORK — Former U.S. president Donald Trump lashed out on social media against the Justice Department on Wednesday after it stopped supporting his claim that the presidency shields him from liability against a defamation lawsuit brought by a woman who says he sexually attacked her in the mid-1990s.


Trump said in a post on his social-media platform that the department’s reversal a day earlier in the lawsuit brought by advice columnist E. Jean Carroll was part of the “political witch hunt” he faces while campaigning for the presidency as a Republican.


The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Carroll, 79, sued Trump, 77, for defamation months after he vehemently denied her claims first made publicly in a 2019 memoir that a chance encounter between the pair at a Bergdorf Goodman store began with flirtations, but ended in a violent encounter inside a dressing room in a desolate section of the store.

The progression of the lawsuit, filed in 2020, was delayed for three years as an appeals court considered claims by Trump and the Justice Department that he was protected from liability for remarks he made while president. When Joe Biden became president, the Justice Department did not change its position.



But the department said in a letter to a Manhattan federal judge on Tuesday that circumstances have changed since it made its original recommendation and it no longer believes Trump can claim that his comments about Carroll were carried out as part of his official duties as president.

It noted that a court in Washington, D.C., had recently further defined when a president is immune from civil lawsuits and it cited a federal jury’s $5-million award to Carroll in May after finding that Trump had sexually abused and defamed her, though he didn’t rape her. It also considered that the lawsuit has been updated with remarks Trump made about Carroll’s claims after leaving the presidency.


In three posts Wednesday on Truth Social, Trump offered fresh support for claims he made about Carroll that led the jury to conclude he had defamed her.

“The statements that I made about Carroll are all true. I didn’t Rape her (I won that at trial) and other than for this case, I have NO IDEA WHO SHE IS, WHAT SHE LOOKS LIKE, OR ANYTHING ABOUT HER,” he wrote.

The trial resulted from a lawsuit Carroll filed in November after New York state temporarily enabled adult victims of sexual attacks to sue their abusers for damages even if the abuse occurred decades earlier. Her defamation claim at the trial resulted from statements Trump made last October.

For several days, Carroll testified that Trump’s attack caused her to shut down her romantic life afterward and his comments after her memoir was published shattered her reputation and led to a “staggering” onslaught of hateful and occasionally threatening messages toward her.


Trump did not appear at the two-week trial, though significant portions of an October videotaped deposition were shown to the jury.

In Wednesday’s social-media posts, Trump called the trial “very unfair,” criticized the judge as hostile and biased and said his lawyers, “due to their respect for the Office of the President and the incredulity of the case, did not want me to testify or even be at the trial.”

He added: “WE ARE STRONGLY APPEALING THIS TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE!!!”

A day after the verdict, Trump repeated many of his earlier claims about Carroll during a CNN town hall, prompting Carroll to amend her original defamation lawsuit to include those remarks. She now seeks $10 million in compensatory damages and substantially more in punitive damages at a trial scheduled for January that may consist only of a damages phase.

Trump then countersued, saying Carroll defamed him with comments she made a day after the verdict.

The Associated Press typically does not name people who say they have been sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly, as Carroll has done.

Trump lashes out at Justice Department over its decision on defamation suit

Donald Trump lashed out on social media after the department stopped supporting his claim that the presidency shields him from liability.

torontosun.com

 

[spaminator]

Fox News sued for defamation by man named in Jan. 6 conspiracy theories
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Randall Chase And David Bauder
Published Jul 13, 2023 • Last updated 2 days ago • 3 minute read

DOVER, Del. — A former Donald Trump supporter who became the centre of a conspiracy theory about Jan. 6, 2021, filed a defamation lawsuit against Fox News, saying the network made him a scapegoat for the U.S. Capitol insurrection.


Raymond Epps, a former Marine who said he was forced from his Arizona home because of threats, is asking for unspecified damages and a jury trial.


He filed his lawsuit in Superior Court in Delaware on Monday, the same court where Dominion Voting Systems sued Fox for lies broadcast following the 2020 presidential election, and on Wednesday it was transferred to federal court. Shortly before a trial was to begin this spring, Fox agreed to pay Dominion $787 million to settle the charges.

Fox did not respond to texts, phone calls and emails seeking comment on Epps’ lawsuit.

The suit also said the Justice Department told Epps in May that he faces criminal charges for his actions on Jan. 6 and blames that on “the relentless attacks by Fox and Mr. (Tucker) Carlson and the resulting political pressure.”


Epps, who had travelled to Washington for the Jan. 6 demonstration, was falsely accused by Fox of being a government agent who was whipping up trouble that would be blamed on Trump supporters, the lawsuit alleged.



“In the aftermath of the events of Jan. 6, Fox News searched for a scapegoat to blame other than Donald Trump or the Republican Party,” the lawsuit said. “Eventually, they turned on one of their own.”

Although the lawsuit mentions Fox’s Laura Ingraham and Will Cain, former Fox host Carlson is cited as the leader in promoting the theory. Epps was featured in more than two dozen segments on Carlson’s prime-time show, the lawsuit said. Fox News fired Carlson shortly after the Dominion settlement was announced.


Carlson “was bluntly telling his viewers that it was a fact that Epps was a government informant,” the lawsuit said. “And they believed him.”

Carlson ignored evidence that contradicted his theory, including Epps’ testimony before a congressional committee investigating the insurrection that he was not working for the government, and videos provided by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy that showed Epps’ efforts to try to defuse the situation, the lawsuit said.

Carlson is not named as a defendant in the lawsuit. Epps’ lawyer Michael Teter noted that Carlson “was an employee of Fox when he lied about Ray and Fox broadcast those defamatory falsehoods.”

“Fox is therefore fully liable for Mr. Carlson’s statements,” Teter said.


The former Fox star did not respond to a text message seeking comment.

Also Wednesday, FBI Director Christopher Wray, in an appearance before the House Judiciary Committee, denied having any knowledge of Epps being a “secret government agent.

“I will say this notion that somehow the violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6 was part of some operation orchestrated by FBI sources and agents is ludicrous,” Wray told lawmakers. He refused to say, however, how many of the people who entered the Capitol and surrounding area on Jan. 6 were either FBI employees or people with whom the FBI had made contact.

Meanwhile, Epps alleged in his lawsuit that, as a result of the alleged defamatory statements made by Fox, he and his wife have been the target of harassment and death threats from Donald Trump supporters, forced to sell the Arizona ranch where they ran a successful wedding venue business and now face financial ruin. According to the lawsuit, Epps and his wife are living in a recreational vehicle in Utah.


The lawsuit displayed threatening messages Epps said he received, including one that said, “Epps, sleep with one eye open.”

In his defamation suit, Epps claimed that on Jan. 5, the day before the storming of the Capitol, he tried to defuse a tense situation between Trump supporters and police, confronting an agitator referred to in the lawsuit as “Baked Alaska.” That man, later identified as far-right social-media personality Anthime Gionet, was sentenced earlier this year to 60 days in prison.

Epps said that in an effort to persuade Trump supporters that he was on their side, he told them, “I’m probably gonna go to jail for this. Tomorrow, we need to go into the Capitol. Peacefully.”

Epps claims in the lawsuit that he was “shocked and disappointed” when demonstrators started climbing the scaffolding and walls around the Capitol on Jan. 6.

“He had concerns about the election and believed it was his duty as a citizen to participate in the protest. But he did not believe violence was appropriate,” the lawsuit said.

Fox News sued for defamation by man named in Jan. 6 conspiracy theories

Raymond Epps, a former Marine who said he was forced from his home because of threats, is asking for unspecified damages and a jury trial.

torontosun.com

 

[Dixie Cup]

Fox News sued for defamation by man named in Jan. 6 conspiracy theories
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Randall Chase And David Bauder
Published Jul 13, 2023 • Last updated 2 days ago • 3 minute read

DOVER, Del. — A former Donald Trump supporter who became the centre of a conspiracy theory about Jan. 6, 2021, filed a defamation lawsuit against Fox News, saying the network made him a scapegoat for the U.S. Capitol insurrection.


Raymond Epps, a former Marine who said he was forced from his Arizona home because of threats, is asking for unspecified damages and a jury trial.


He filed his lawsuit in Superior Court in Delaware on Monday, the same court where Dominion Voting Systems sued Fox for lies broadcast following the 2020 presidential election, and on Wednesday it was transferred to federal court. Shortly before a trial was to begin this spring, Fox agreed to pay Dominion $787 million to settle the charges.

Fox did not respond to texts, phone calls and emails seeking comment on Epps’ lawsuit.

The suit also said the Justice Department told Epps in May that he faces criminal charges for his actions on Jan. 6 and blames that on “the relentless attacks by Fox and Mr. (Tucker) Carlson and the resulting political pressure.”


Epps, who had travelled to Washington for the Jan. 6 demonstration, was falsely accused by Fox of being a government agent who was whipping up trouble that would be blamed on Trump supporters, the lawsuit alleged.



“In the aftermath of the events of Jan. 6, Fox News searched for a scapegoat to blame other than Donald Trump or the Republican Party,” the lawsuit said. “Eventually, they turned on one of their own.”

Although the lawsuit mentions Fox’s Laura Ingraham and Will Cain, former Fox host Carlson is cited as the leader in promoting the theory. Epps was featured in more than two dozen segments on Carlson’s prime-time show, the lawsuit said. Fox News fired Carlson shortly after the Dominion settlement was announced.


Carlson “was bluntly telling his viewers that it was a fact that Epps was a government informant,” the lawsuit said. “And they believed him.”

Carlson ignored evidence that contradicted his theory, including Epps’ testimony before a congressional committee investigating the insurrection that he was not working for the government, and videos provided by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy that showed Epps’ efforts to try to defuse the situation, the lawsuit said.

Carlson is not named as a defendant in the lawsuit. Epps’ lawyer Michael Teter noted that Carlson “was an employee of Fox when he lied about Ray and Fox broadcast those defamatory falsehoods.”

“Fox is therefore fully liable for Mr. Carlson’s statements,” Teter said.


The former Fox star did not respond to a text message seeking comment.

Also Wednesday, FBI Director Christopher Wray, in an appearance before the House Judiciary Committee, denied having any knowledge of Epps being a “secret government agent.

“I will say this notion that somehow the violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6 was part of some operation orchestrated by FBI sources and agents is ludicrous,” Wray told lawmakers. He refused to say, however, how many of the people who entered the Capitol and surrounding area on Jan. 6 were either FBI employees or people with whom the FBI had made contact.

Meanwhile, Epps alleged in his lawsuit that, as a result of the alleged defamatory statements made by Fox, he and his wife have been the target of harassment and death threats from Donald Trump supporters, forced to sell the Arizona ranch where they ran a successful wedding venue business and now face financial ruin. According to the lawsuit, Epps and his wife are living in a recreational vehicle in Utah.


The lawsuit displayed threatening messages Epps said he received, including one that said, “Epps, sleep with one eye open.”

In his defamation suit, Epps claimed that on Jan. 5, the day before the storming of the Capitol, he tried to defuse a tense situation between Trump supporters and police, confronting an agitator referred to in the lawsuit as “Baked Alaska.” That man, later identified as far-right social-media personality Anthime Gionet, was sentenced earlier this year to 60 days in prison.

Epps said that in an effort to persuade Trump supporters that he was on their side, he told them, “I’m probably gonna go to jail for this. Tomorrow, we need to go into the Capitol. Peacefully.”

Epps claims in the lawsuit that he was “shocked and disappointed” when demonstrators started climbing the scaffolding and walls around the Capitol on Jan. 6.

“He had concerns about the election and believed it was his duty as a citizen to participate in the protest. But he did not believe violence was appropriate,” the lawsuit said.

Fox News sued for defamation by man named in Jan. 6 conspiracy theories

Raymond Epps, a former Marine who said he was forced from his home because of threats, is asking for unspecified damages and a jury trial.

torontosun.com

Video's don't generally lie. He's gonna lose!

 

[spaminator]

Trump says he’s been advised he’s target of U.S. investigation into efforts to overturn 2020 election
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Eric Tucker
Published Jul 18, 2023 • Last updated 1 day ago • 5 minute read

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former President Donald Trump said Tuesday he has received a letter informing him that he is a target of the Justice Department’s investigation into efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, an indication he could soon be charged by U.S. prosecutors.


New federal charges, on top of existing state and federal counts in New York and Florida and a separate election-interference investigation nearing conclusion in Georgia, would add to the list of legal problems for Trump as he pursues the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.


Trump disclosed the existence of a target letter in a post on his Truth Social platform, saying he received it Sunday night and that he anticipates being indicted. Such a letter often precedes an indictment and is used to advise individuals under investigation that prosecutors have gathered evidence linking them to a crime; Trump himself received one soon before being charged last month in a separate investigation into the illegal retention of classified documents.


A spokesman for special counsel Jack Smith, whose office is leading the investigation, declined to comment.

Legal experts have said potential charges could include conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstruction of an official proceeding, in this case Congress’ certification of President Joe Biden’s electoral victory.

Smith’s team has cast a broad net in its investigation into attempts by Trump and his allies to block the transfer of power to Biden in the days leading up to the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, when Trump loyalists stormed the building in a bid to disrupt the certification of state electoral votes in Congress. More than 1,000 people accused of participating in the riot have been charged.


Smith’s probe has centered on a broad range of efforts by Trump and allies to keep him in office, including the role played by lawyers in pressing for the overturning of results as well as plans for slates of fake electors in multiple battleground states won by Biden to submit false electoral certificates to Congress.

Prosecutors have questioned multiple Trump administration officials before a grand jury in Washington, including former Vice President Mike Pence, who was repeatedly pressured by Trump to ignore his constitutional duty and block the counting in Congress of electoral votes on Jan. 6.

They’ve also interviewed other Trump advisers, including former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, as well as local election officials in states including Michigan and New Mexico who were targets of a pressure campaign from the then-president to overturn election results in their states. A lawyer for Giuliani, who participated in a voluntary interview, said Tuesday that he did not receive a target letter.


Trump has consistently denied wrongdoing and did so again in his Tuesday post, writing, “Under the United States Constitution, I have the right to protest an Election that I am fully convinced was Rigged and Stolen, just as the Democrats have done against me in 2016, and many others have done over the ages.”

Trump remains the Republican party’s dominant frontrunner, despite indictments in New York arising from hush money payments during his 2016 campaign, and in Florida, which appear to have had little impact on his standing in the crowded GOP field. The indictments also have helped his campaign raise millions of dollars from supporters, though he raised less after the second than the first, raising questions about whether subsequent charges will have the same impact.


A fundraising committee backing Trump’s candidacy began soliciting contributions just hours after he broke the news of the new letter, casting the investigation as “just another vicious act of Election Interference on behalf of the Deep State to try and stop the Silent Majority from having a voice in your own country.”

Trump was traveling to Iowa Tuesday, where he was taping a town hall with Fox News host Sean Hannity.

The Trump indictments have proven politically challenging for some of Trump’s rivals, who must be mindful of his deep support among many of the party’s primary voters.

Asked about the letter during a press conference in South Carolina, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Trump’s most serious challenger, said he hadn’t seen it, but delivered his most forceful critique to date of Trump’s inaction on Jan. 6.


“I think it was shown how he was in the White House and didn’t do anything while things were going on. He should have come out more forcefully,” DeSantis said. However, he added, “But to try to criminalize that, that’s a different issue entirely.”

House speaker Kevin McCarthy, who had previously criticized Trump for his actions that day, accused Democrats of trying to “weaponize government to go after their number one opponent.”

Trump, since leaving office, has increasingly downplayed the events of Jan. 6, describing the rally he held that day as a “lovefest” and “a beautiful thing.” He has also embraced defendants jailed over their alleged roles in the insurrection, including promising to pardon a “large portion” and to issue an official apology to them if he is reelected to the White House. In June, he spoke at a fundraiser for the defendants and earlier this year collaborated on a song called “Justice for All,” a version of the Star-Spangled Banner sung by the J6 Prison choir and recorded over a prison phone line that is overlaid with Trump reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.


One purpose of a target letter is to advise a potential defendant that he or she has a right to appear before the grand jury. Trump said in his post that he has been given “a very short 4 days to report to the Grand Jury, which almost always means an Arrest and indictment.” Aides did not immediately respond to questions seeking further information.

Prosecutors in Georgia are conducting a separate investigation into efforts by Trump to reverse his election loss in that state, with the top prosecutor in Fulton County signaling that she expects to announce charging decisions next month.

In his post on Tuesday, Trump wrote that “they have now effectively indicted me three times … with a probably fourth coming from Atlanta” and added in capital letters, “This witch hunt is all about election interference and a complete and total political weaponization of law enforcement.”

Trump was indicted last month on 37 federal felony counts in relation to accusations of illegally retaining hundreds of classified documents at his Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago. He has pleaded not guilty. A pretrial conference in that case was set for Tuesday afternoon in Fort Pierce, Fla.

Trump says he’s been advised he’s target of U.S. investigation into efforts to overturn 2020 election

Trump made the claim in a post on his Truth Social platform, saying he received the target letter on Sunday night.

torontosun.com

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

And the MAGA Orchestra is tuning up for a full performance of the Whimper Symphony.

 

[Dixie Cup]

Trump says he’s been advised he’s target of U.S. investigation into efforts to overturn 2020 election
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Eric Tucker
Published Jul 18, 2023 • Last updated 1 day ago • 5 minute read

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former President Donald Trump said Tuesday he has received a letter informing him that he is a target of the Justice Department’s investigation into efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, an indication he could soon be charged by U.S. prosecutors.


New federal charges, on top of existing state and federal counts in New York and Florida and a separate election-interference investigation nearing conclusion in Georgia, would add to the list of legal problems for Trump as he pursues the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.


Trump disclosed the existence of a target letter in a post on his Truth Social platform, saying he received it Sunday night and that he anticipates being indicted. Such a letter often precedes an indictment and is used to advise individuals under investigation that prosecutors have gathered evidence linking them to a crime; Trump himself received one soon before being charged last month in a separate investigation into the illegal retention of classified documents.


A spokesman for special counsel Jack Smith, whose office is leading the investigation, declined to comment.

Legal experts have said potential charges could include conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstruction of an official proceeding, in this case Congress’ certification of President Joe Biden’s electoral victory.

Smith’s team has cast a broad net in its investigation into attempts by Trump and his allies to block the transfer of power to Biden in the days leading up to the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, when Trump loyalists stormed the building in a bid to disrupt the certification of state electoral votes in Congress. More than 1,000 people accused of participating in the riot have been charged.


Smith’s probe has centered on a broad range of efforts by Trump and allies to keep him in office, including the role played by lawyers in pressing for the overturning of results as well as plans for slates of fake electors in multiple battleground states won by Biden to submit false electoral certificates to Congress.

Prosecutors have questioned multiple Trump administration officials before a grand jury in Washington, including former Vice President Mike Pence, who was repeatedly pressured by Trump to ignore his constitutional duty and block the counting in Congress of electoral votes on Jan. 6.

They’ve also interviewed other Trump advisers, including former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, as well as local election officials in states including Michigan and New Mexico who were targets of a pressure campaign from the then-president to overturn election results in their states. A lawyer for Giuliani, who participated in a voluntary interview, said Tuesday that he did not receive a target letter.


Trump has consistently denied wrongdoing and did so again in his Tuesday post, writing, “Under the United States Constitution, I have the right to protest an Election that I am fully convinced was Rigged and Stolen, just as the Democrats have done against me in 2016, and many others have done over the ages.”

Trump remains the Republican party’s dominant frontrunner, despite indictments in New York arising from hush money payments during his 2016 campaign, and in Florida, which appear to have had little impact on his standing in the crowded GOP field. The indictments also have helped his campaign raise millions of dollars from supporters, though he raised less after the second than the first, raising questions about whether subsequent charges will have the same impact.


A fundraising committee backing Trump’s candidacy began soliciting contributions just hours after he broke the news of the new letter, casting the investigation as “just another vicious act of Election Interference on behalf of the Deep State to try and stop the Silent Majority from having a voice in your own country.”

Trump was traveling to Iowa Tuesday, where he was taping a town hall with Fox News host Sean Hannity.

The Trump indictments have proven politically challenging for some of Trump’s rivals, who must be mindful of his deep support among many of the party’s primary voters.

Asked about the letter during a press conference in South Carolina, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Trump’s most serious challenger, said he hadn’t seen it, but delivered his most forceful critique to date of Trump’s inaction on Jan. 6.


“I think it was shown how he was in the White House and didn’t do anything while things were going on. He should have come out more forcefully,” DeSantis said. However, he added, “But to try to criminalize that, that’s a different issue entirely.”

House speaker Kevin McCarthy, who had previously criticized Trump for his actions that day, accused Democrats of trying to “weaponize government to go after their number one opponent.”

Trump, since leaving office, has increasingly downplayed the events of Jan. 6, describing the rally he held that day as a “lovefest” and “a beautiful thing.” He has also embraced defendants jailed over their alleged roles in the insurrection, including promising to pardon a “large portion” and to issue an official apology to them if he is reelected to the White House. In June, he spoke at a fundraiser for the defendants and earlier this year collaborated on a song called “Justice for All,” a version of the Star-Spangled Banner sung by the J6 Prison choir and recorded over a prison phone line that is overlaid with Trump reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.


One purpose of a target letter is to advise a potential defendant that he or she has a right to appear before the grand jury. Trump said in his post that he has been given “a very short 4 days to report to the Grand Jury, which almost always means an Arrest and indictment.” Aides did not immediately respond to questions seeking further information.

Prosecutors in Georgia are conducting a separate investigation into efforts by Trump to reverse his election loss in that state, with the top prosecutor in Fulton County signaling that she expects to announce charging decisions next month.

In his post on Tuesday, Trump wrote that “they have now effectively indicted me three times … with a probably fourth coming from Atlanta” and added in capital letters, “This witch hunt is all about election interference and a complete and total political weaponization of law enforcement.”

Trump was indicted last month on 37 federal felony counts in relation to accusations of illegally retaining hundreds of classified documents at his Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago. He has pleaded not guilty. A pretrial conference in that case was set for Tuesday afternoon in Fort Pierce, Fla.

Trump says he’s been advised he’s target of U.S. investigation into efforts to overturn 2020 election

Trump made the claim in a post on his Truth Social platform, saying he received the target letter on Sunday night.

torontosun.com

Hell, why not simply charge him with being alive & get everything over with! OMG seriously. There is absolutely NOTHING that needs more attention than Trump right?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Hell, why not simply charge him with being alive & get everything over with! OMG seriously. There is absolutely NOTHING that needs more attention than Trump right?

Nice. Knowing your boy is indefensible, you go with counter-attack. Well done.

 

[Dixie Cup]

Nice. Knowing your boy is indefensible, you go with counter-attack. Well done.

Why thank you!

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Try whataboutery next. Whatever it takes to get your own personal Jesus off.

 

[Dixie Cup]

Try whataboutery next. Whatever it takes to get your own personal Jesus off.

Na, I think I'll stick to what I've already said. Would certainly make things go away a lot faster while destroying the country, but what the hell - we're all going that way anyway right?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Na, I think I'll stick to what I've already said. Would certainly make things go away a lot faster while destroying the country, but what the hell - we're all going that way anyway right?

To which "the country" do you refer, the U.S. or Canaduh? I'm doing fine. Sorry you're not, judging by the squealing and wailing.

 

[Dixie Cup]

To which "the country" do you refer, the U.S. or Canaduh? I'm doing fine. Sorry you're not, judging by the squealing and wailing.

I'm referring to the U.S. - hell we're way ahead of you & have no options like you guys do. Besides, I am doing very well thank you & have no complaints except for inept governments in both countries. Sorry Tech, I'm not "squealing & wailing" I'm simply expressing my POV. Keep talking crap as you do. I enjoy the read.

 

[pgs]

To which "the country" do you refer, the U.S. or Canaduh? I'm doing fine. Sorry you're not, judging by the squealing and wailing.

Yup The old I am fine argument . That is why you lost . And fire water .

 

[spaminator]

Judge upholds the $5M jury verdict against Trump in a writer’s sex abuse and defamation case
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Larry Neumeister
Published Jul 19, 2023 • 4 minute read

NEW YORK (AP) — A federal judge on Wednesday upheld a $5 million jury verdict against Donald Trump, rejecting the former president’s claim that the award was excessive and that the jury vindicated him by failing to conclude in the civil case that he raped a columnist in a luxury department store dressing room in the 1990s.


Judge Lewis A. Kaplan said the jury’s May award of compensatory and punitive damages to writer E. Jean Carroll for sexual abuse and defamation was reasonable.


Trump’s lawyers had asked Kaplan to reduce the jury award to less than $1 million or order a new trial on damages. In their arguments, the lawyers said the jury’s $2 million in compensatory damages granted for Carroll’s sexual assault claim was excessive because the jury concluded that Trump had not raped Carroll at Bergdorf Goodman’s Manhattan store in the spring of 1996.

Kaplan wrote that the jury’s unanimous verdict was almost entirely in favor of Carroll, except that the jury concluded she had failed to prove that Trump raped her “within the narrow, technical meaning of a particular section of the New York Penal Law.”


The judge said the section requires vaginal penetration by a penis while forcible penetration without consent of the vagina or other bodily orifices by fingers or anything else is labeled “sexual abuse” rather than “rape.”

He said the definition of rape was “far narrower” than how rape is defined in common modern parlance, in some dictionaries, in some federal and state criminal statutes and elsewhere.

The judge said the verdict did not mean that Carroll “failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape.’ Indeed … the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

Trump’s lawyers were correct in arguing that the $2 million award for sexual abuse would have been excessive if the jury based the compensatory award on a conclusion that Trump had groped Carroll’s breasts through her clothing or similar conduct, the judge said. But, he said, that’s not what the jury found.


“There was no evidence at all of such behavior. Instead, the proof convincingly established, and the jury implicitly found, that Mr. Trump deliberately and forcibly penetrated Ms. Carroll’s vagina with his fingers, causing immediate pain and long lasting emotional and psychological harm,” Kaplan wrote.

The judge said Trump’s argument “ignores the bulk of the evidence at trial, misinterprets the jury’s verdict, and mistakenly focuses on the New York Penal Law definition of ‘rape’ to the exclusion of the meaning of that word as it often is used in everyday life and of the evidence of what actually occurred between Ms. Carroll and Mr. Trump.”

Lawyers for Trump, the front-runner in the 2024 Republican presidential primary, did not immediately comment Wednesday but quickly amended their appeal of the trial to add the judge’s ruling.


Attorney Robbie Kaplan, who represents Carroll and is unrelated to the judge, said in a statement: “Now that the court has denied Trump’s motion for a new trial or to decrease the amount of the verdict, E Jean Carroll looks forward to receiving the $5 million in damages that the jury awarded her.”

The lawyer said her client also looks forward to a second defamation trial against Trump scheduled for January. That claim is based on statements Trump made while he was president and on statements he made after the trial.

Since the early May verdict after a two-week trial, Trump has continued to maintain that he never encountered Carroll at the department store and that he didn’t know her before she claimed in a 2019 memoir that he raped her.


At trial, Carroll testified for three days, saying Trump sexually attacked her in the midtown Manhattan store’s dressing room on a desolate floor near the lingerie section after they had a chance encounter at the store’s entrance and flirted with one another as they shopped for a garment for one of Trump’s friends. The store is located across the street from Trump Tower.

Trump, 77, did not attend the trial. He said in a social media post last week that his lawyers “due to their respect for the Office of the President and the incredulity of the case, did not want me to testify, or even be at the trial…..”

After the trial, Carroll, 79, added new claims to a pending defamation claim and sought an addition $10 million in compensatory damages and substantially more in unspecified punitive damages.

Trump has countersued Carroll, saying he was defamed when she continued to assert after the verdict that she had been raped.

The Associated Press typically does not name people who say they have been sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly, as Carroll has done.

Judge upholds the $5M jury verdict against Trump in a writer’s sex abuse and defamation case

Judge Lewis A. Kaplan rejected the former president's claim that the award was excessive.

torontosun.com

 

[spaminator]

Judge nixes Trump's bid to move hush-money criminal case to federal court
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak And Larry Neumeister
Published Jul 19, 2023 • 5 minute read

NEW YORK — A federal judge on Wednesday rejected Donald Trump ‘s bid to move his hush-money criminal case from New York state court to federal court, ruling that the former president had failed to meet a high legal bar for changing jurisdiction.


U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein found that the allegations in the Manhattan case pertained to Trump’s personal life, not presidential duties that would have merited a move to federal court.


“The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the matter was a purely a personal item of the President — a cover-up of an embarrassing event,” Hellerstein wrote in a 25-page ruling. “Hush money paid to an adult film star is not related to a President’s official acts. It does not reflect in any way the color of the President’s official duties.”

Hellerstein’s decision sets the stage for Trump to stand trial in state court in Manhattan as early as next spring, overlapping with the 2024 presidential primary season in what could be a frenetic stretch of legal action as the twice-indicted Republican seeks a return to the White House.


Separately, Trump is charged in federal court in Florida with illegally hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate and impeding investigators. Prosecutors want that case to go to trial in December.

The Manhattan district attorney’s office, which is prosecuting the hush-money case and fought to keep it in state court, said it was “very pleased” with Hellerstein’s decision. Trump’s lawyer, Todd Blanche, declined comment. The ruling can be appealed to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Hellerstein signaled his decision at a June 27 hearing where he scoffed at defense claims that the alleged conduct at the root of Trump’s charges — reimbursing his longtime personal lawyer Michael Cohen as part of a scheme to bury affair allegations that arose during his first campaign — was within the “color of his office” as president.


In his ruling, the judge said evidence strongly supported the prosecution’s contention that the money paid to Cohen was reimbursement for a hush-money payment.

Trump, a Republican, pleaded not guilty April 4 in state court to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to hide reimbursements made to Cohen for his role in paying $130,000 to the porn actor Stormy Daniels, who claims she had an extramarital sexual encounter with Trump years earlier.

Cohen also arranged for the National Enquirer to pay Playboy model Karen McDougal $150,000 for the rights to her story about an alleged affair, which the supermarket tabloid then squelched in a dubious journalism practice known as “catch-and-kill.”

Trump denied having sexual encounters with either woman. His lawyers argue the payments to Cohen were legitimate legal expenses and not part of any cover-up.


Trump’s lawyers asked in May for the federal court to take control of the hush-money case, contending he couldn’t be tried in state court because some of the alleged conduct occurred in 2017 while he was president, including checks he purportedly wrote while sitting in the Oval Office.

Federal officers including former presidents have the right to be tried in federal court for charges arising from “conduct performed while in office,” Trump’s lawyers argued.


A shift to federal court would’ve meant a more politically diverse jury pool — drawing not only from heavily Democratic Manhattan, where Trump is wildly unpopular, but also from suburban counties north of the city where he has more political support.


Matthew Colangelo, a senior counsel to District Attorney Alvin Bragg, argued nothing about the hush-money payments and reimbursements involved Trump’s official duties as president. He also disputed whether the legal definition of “federal officer” applies to a president or only to other members of the government.

U.S. law allows criminal prosecutions to be moved from state to federal court if they involve actions taken by federal government officials as part of their official duties, among other qualifications. Trump’s request was unprecedented because he’s the first former president ever charged with a crime.

If Hellerstein had sided with Trump and moved the case to federal court, the former president’s lawyers could’ve then tried to get the charges dismissed on the grounds that federal officials have immunity from prosecution over actions taken as part of their official job duties.


But the judge said that argument wouldn’t have flown either, finding that Trump had failed to explain “how hiring and making payments to a personal attorney to handle personal affairs carries out a constitutional duty.”

Aside from the legal arguments, Trump had a practical reason for seeking to move the case to federal court: He didn’t think he could get a fair shake in state court.

Trump has claimed New York’s state court system has been “very unfair” to him and called the state court judge presiding over the case, Juan Manuel Merchan, “a Trump-hating judge” with a family full of “Trump haters.”

Hellerstein rejected Trump’s argument that the indictment could be moved to federal court because it was “politically motivated” and the product of “state hostility.” Hellerstein said there was “no reason to believe that the New York judicial system would not be fair and give Trump equal justice under the law.” And he added that Trump had failed to show that the grand jury lacked a rational basis for the indictment.


Last month, Trump’s lawyers asked Merchan to step aside from the case, arguing that he’s biased in part because his daughter does political consulting work for some of Trump’s Democratic rivals. Merchan has yet to rule on the request. A state ethics advisory panel recently said he shouldn’t have to recuse himself.

Trump’s hush-money trial is scheduled to start in state court on March 25, 2024, in an increasingly crowded legal and political calendar for the Republican frontrunner. In the classified documents case, federal prosecutors have proposed a Dec. 11 trial date while Trump’s lawyers are seeking a delay until after next year’s election.

Meanwhile, two civil lawsuits against Trump are slated to go to trial in the coming months: in October, New York Attorney General Letitia James’ suit alleging he and his company fraudulently misstating the value of assets; and in January, a second trial involving writer E. Jean Carroll’s claim that he defamed her when he denied her allegations that he sexually assaulted her in the mid-1990s.

Judge nixes Trump's bid to move hush-money criminal case to federal court

A federal judge on Wednesday rejected Donald Trump 's bid to move his hush-money criminal case from New York state court to federal court.

torontosun.com