The DOJ has just belatedly revealed that the Hunter Biden laptop really is his. Who Knew?
Anyone with a brain not addled by TDS knew it was legit. The Deep State has evidently abandoned Crooked Joe, by having the DOJ announce this. Who will the Dems run in place of this demented crook ? This is going to be a really interesting year. Buckle up
A Witch Hunt indeed! Using the Judicial System to weaponize innocent people , employees and consultants of the US President, reminds me of Soviet Union, Communist China, North Korea Dictatorship, Nazi Germany in WW11, to mention a few failed and tyranical governments. Excellent recap Brent of the TRUTH, of what is happening here in good ol' USA, in 2024. Any party (Dems or Republicans) willing to be a part of this sham, should be prosecuted. If these lies continue, I fear how this will all end, and it won't be Well....
A suggested topic for Mr. Zepkes next opinion piece would be an expose on the fake electors scheme. That to me is real election interference… not theoretical or rhetorical with no basis …as is much of the spin we hear from both sides of the aisle.
A pragmatic exercise in critical thinking can be obtained searching just this one topic: fake electors. A cursory online search finds partisan and conclusionary pontifications from the usual suspects: NPR, WaPo, Wiki, NYT, etc, etc.
I recommend also having a copy of independent journalist Sharyl Atkisson's book "Slanted" in hand, when one pursues the popular media if seeking a better understanding of this latest buzzword "fake electors".
.........." Slanted, Attkisson digs into the language of propagandists, the persistence of false media narratives, the driving forces behind today's dangerous blend of facts and opinion, the abandonment of journalism ethics, and the new, Orwellian definition of what it means to report the news." ....... (Amazon book review)
A boxing analogy: The Hagler-Hearns fight of 1985 for Hagler's Middleweight title, considered to be three of the most brutal rounds in history. Long into short, Hearns was one of the most terrifying punchers in history, and the shorter Hagler with a reach disadvantage had no choice but to get inside and trade punches, but by the end of the first round, Hearns had broken his hand on Hagler's jaw, and it was all downhill after that for Hearns.
However we feel about Biden or Trump, (I don't plan to vote for either) the Democrats are looking more and more like Hearns in the latter half of the fight.
excellent review of current status regarding just one of the lawfare plays against Trump…good to see this one is turning around (another boomerang) like many others…2024 will be one of our best years ever, as truth will be busting out all over the world…people are waking to the fact that our country (and the world) is at war against the CCP-WEF cabal’s color revolution…our US Military is running the counter insurgency, Trump - who was recruited to run - is merely a field general with a very powerful laser pointer…what a time to be alive! Fight for Trump…
I just read Brent E Zepke Esq very good article on the Trump Litigation and I quote same below>
"I call it the “War of Attrition,” where the hope is that one, or more, will plea bargain to testify against Trump in exchange for not being prosecuted. The fact that none of the 18 have done this is a good indicator that all of them, including Trump, are not guilty. What about the prosecutors?
What Mr. Zepke describes is the abuse of the legal system to target and wage war, unlawfully against your target and their supporters in this case Donald J. Trump.
What Mr. Zepke has just described is the legal word called "Lawfare" defined from WIKI as
"Lawfare is the use of legal systems and institutions to damage or delegitimize an opponent, or to deter an individual's usage of their legal rights.[1][2][3"
Ok Mr. Zepke lets bring your entire Article home like that little Alien "ET" and ask some
questions here about Santa Barbara legal system.
1. Are there local attorneys using "Lawfare" in the Santa Barbara Courts to target people?
2. Are the local attorneys using "Lawfare" making Millions off local Santa Barbara targeting people?
3. Is there a large group of Attorneys using "Lawfare" to extract huge funds from local people?
4. Are the Judges involved in this illegal process called "Lawfare" all for financial gain?
5. How much money are those Attorneys extracting $500 Million Plus ................
5. How many local Judges and local Attorneys are involved? A L O T
6. Is the Santa Barbara District Attorneys office involved. Y E S
7. And is someone doing something about this? Y E S See below>>>>
I agree. We’ve lawfare and related problems locally that are unknown or ignored by the beneficiaries. Those in the know fear the consequences of exposing the beneficiaries.
At a personal level, I need a courageous attorney to sue another attorney on my behalf for malpractice.
“The fact that none of the 18 have done this is a good indicator that all of them, including Trump, are not guilty.”
I think the objection here is foundation. Several of your 18 have pleaded guilty in the Georgia case and are now potential witnesses. As to foundation, neither you nor I are privy to the details of the pleas or prosecutors potential witness list.
But assuming nobody pleas in exchange for not being prosecuted, why do you then assume this is a good indicator that all of them, including Trump, are not legally guilty?
Wrong assumption. Show me the man I will show you the crime - the underpinnings of law fare - require just the opposite of your assumption: "nobody pleas in exchange of not being prosecuted".
Yes, people have chosen to plead guilty to a mishmash of lesser offenses to extract themselves from intentional long and financially ruinous lawfare. Economic exhaustion has long been one of the "legal" options that many a lawyer can and will put on the table.
Abuse of process, malicious prosecution, vexatious litigation, SLAPP and Bivens Actions are all on the books, because the courts can and do get abused by those seeking extra-legal outcomes. Which is also why we allow three bites of the apple, because mistakes and abuses can happen at every level of our legal system: (1) trial court; (2) appeal court; (3) supreme court.
We frequently hear in the lawfare pursuit of Trump - no one is above the law. However, selective prosecution is beneath the law.
That is the gut reaction many are sensing today- two systems of partisan justice are going on in this country today. It is not a good feeling. But it does explain why the more Trump is attacked by partisan lawfare, the higher his approval numbers go up. Something else is going on with in our legal justice system today, for the general public to register that level of contradictory response. "Justice" has lost its essential virtue of being blind.
Thanks for your interest in an important topic. Please read J. Livingston's response as it goes into detail on the issues, mentioned in my piece, of losing income while incurring substantial attorney fees. The longer the prosecutors try the case in the media, the greater the cost to the reputations of the defendants. As former Labor Secretary Donovan said upon being found "not guilty," "Where do I go to get my reputation back."
The Democrats’ campaign strategy for 2024 - go after Trump and his supporters with every phony charge possible in an effort to contaminate the candidates and the election . As you mentioned, “ . . their employment negatively affected, their families suffer the humiliation and expense of paying for lawyers as their credit may be frozen, .” etc., Etc. ETC.
There’s only one way to deal with these morons - recognize that politics is a dirty game and do it better than they do. The GOP ‘high-ground’ Ronna McDaniel talks about is a waste of time - what we need is a street-wise ass-kicker who knows how to fight fire with fire. Instead of always being on the defensive, we need to let accusers know that the phony legal problems they create will generate overwhelming retaliation.
Fani Willis is a perfect example. We need to dig so deep into her past that we find out if she cheated on a third grade test, and expose every illegal, immoral or unethical thing she’s done since then. All these Commie-Dems have skeletons in their closets - we need to let them know that if they attempt their illegal shenanigans on us they’ll regret it big time. They’ll think twice about initiating their phony legal attacks if they know their past sins will be exposed in lawsuits as phony as the ones they’re subjecting Trump to!
Are any of the rioters (protesters)of Jan. 6th guilty of crimes? Did Trump discourage this violence in a timely manner when it could have saved lives? Could the endless (several years to date), and baseless( to date) accusations against the unelected citizen Hunter Biden be seen as an attempt to draw attention away from the elected former President Donald Trump? Do you think “the endless witch hunt” involves collusion and a co ordinated effort between dozens of state agencies, civil and criminal courts, Federal courts, hundreds of witnesses under oath, mountains of evidence including photos and videos and the co ordinated efforts of the “lame stream” media? Do not answer this because a “yes” would undermine your credibility as a deep state, conspiratorial fantasy illusionist. My father in law was a Superior Court Judge and when I used to complain after frequent jury duty that the guilty often walked away Scot free he would note that this was true in this particular case, but leopards do not change their spots and that criminals continue to do the same crimes over and over until they are finally convicted (all of which is a history a judge has accesses to) but not the jury which is blocked from this evidence of past crimes and indictments as prejudicial. The judge assured me that even though justice was blind she was also patient and never gives up. Could our blind and slow justice system be finally catching up with Donald Trump?
Jay Sullivan, Yes; yes; no; yes; and finally no. Welcome to this free-ranging conversation that will help all of us view critically important issues from different perspectives.
And a finally no, I am not a "conspiratorial fantasy illusionist". Stick around. BTW: The guilty do not walk away; those not convicted of a crime walk away.
You are absolutely correct in stating those not convicted of a crime walk away. I overstepped myself here in assuming that someone who is “not convicted” of a crime could still be guilty. Not convicted should always carry the same weight as not guilty.
The truth is these bogus prosecutions are the best thing that ever happened to Trump. After each of the indictments were announced his poll ratings went through the roof. Trump gets to say he's being persecuted by the govt, and if elected, he will exact vengeance on all his opponents, a list that includes many Republicans too. If Trump's lucky, the Dems will continue to bring further charges and indictments, since they are motivating so many of his supporters. One problem is that polls are also indicating that if he is convicted of any of the charges (the charges in the classified documents case are considered the strongest by most experts) he could lose many of the voters he needs to win a general election. A majority of independent voters say they wouldn't vote for Trump if he is convicted of a felony.
An interesting idea that seems so far to have merit. It is entirely possible that no matter how bizarre the case, a jury in D.C. or Fulton County may find him guilty. Much like senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, the election may happen before an appeals court overturns the verdict based on p DOJ misconduct. The judge in the New York case did not take that chance, but instead held him guilty before the trial began---meaning there was no evidence in the record---and is having the trial only to determine the fine.
When elected, Trump did not exact vengeance against Hillary for the infamous Steele Dossier. A problem with all the cases being brought , even if they are all bogus, is that many tire of all the commotion surrounding him: eb even if it is only from him defending himself.
More people are catching on it was not Trump "causing chaos". It was the media's 24/7 frothing about Trump that created the daily chaos. The sheer repetition of the charge of Trump = chaos, was a first clue. Trump was busy getting things done once he got his early am "tweet" off this chest. While the media spun his often accurate early morning charges into a full all day media frenzy. Trump was good for business - their business.
Trump early in his career was interviewed by Peter Graves for the PBS Biography series. (still found online). Trump at this time revealed how he followed Dr Norman Vincent Peale's "Power of Positive Thinking" approach to life, during his membership at Dr Peale's Marble Collegiate Church in downtown Manhattan.
One better understands how Trump acts and reacts to people, events and his own daily choices when one keeps that formative impact in mind. I recall a lot of people in the 1960's were reading "The Power of Positive Thinking" - a best seller as I recall.
Bogus prosecutions? He called the secretary of state in Georgia and told him to find 14,000 votes to give him the victory. How can anyone possible defend this that believes in fair elections? And at the very least, that action deserves a full investigation in a court of law. Imagine if a democrat had done this? Forget the even more egregious actions and comments that led to Jan 6; this should be enough to disqualify him and the mental gymnastics that so-called conservatives use to justify their continued support is shameful
The only evidence of that conversation are the secretary Raffensberger's notes that are not definintive proof but only the version of the guy who just admitted to lying about having the vote counting machines verified.
Will, That is not what what said during the Georgia SOS phone conversation. That is what some in the media reported what was said during the Trump phone conversation. They often get things wrong.
No one person or party has an exclusive corner on "egregious actions and comments". Appreciate less moralizing about others, and more investigative curiosity.
We do share the goal of ensuring all elections are beyond reproach. How do we tighten the current weak links?
"All I want to do is this: I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more that we have because we won the state. And flipping the state is a great testament to our country because, you know, this is just it’s a testament that they can admit to a mistake or whatever you want to call it. If it was a mistake, I don’t know. A lot of people think it wasn’t a mistake. It was much more criminal than that. But it’s a big problem in Georgia and it’s not a problem that’s going away." - if you are okay with a president (or any elected official) using the power of their office to pressure an official to change the outcome of an election than there's really nothing to discuss. And Trump's false accusations of others led to them receiving death threats and they have had their lives changed forever by these actions. This is a moral issue at its core. So I ask you Mr. Livingston, how can you defend this? Thankfully, the republican secretary of state had the type of character and morals to not engage.
Trump is stating his opinion; he is not demanding anyone else do anything. So your leap claiming Trump is pressuring anyone to do anything is unfounded. For the rest of your comments, I can only say .......... bless your heart.
yep, moral mental gymnastics...the very act of calling and asking him to find votes is despicable but he went on to threaten him with a criminal offense: "You know what they did and you’re not reporting it,” the president said during the call. “You know, that’s a criminal — that’s a criminal offense. And you know, you can’t let that happen. That’s a big risk to you and to Ryan, your lawyer. That’s a big risk.” Goes on to say 'they hate what you did to the president' I hope you would agree that none of this is worthy of public office no matter the level, let along the president. Thankfully, there are many moral conservatives who put country over party and did the right thing. We need more of them.
“Trump is stating his opinion; he is not demanding anyone else do anything.”
Neither you nor Will will determine whether Trump’s word form legally defined opinion, and protected by the first amendment, or statements of fact. Trump has made that case in Georgia in part by asserting, ““false statements about philosophy, religion, history, the social sciences, the arts, and other matters of public concern.” - “false statements”
Trump has argued in federal court that his statements are protected by first amendment unsuccessfully. The court stated:
“That Defendant’s alleged criminal conduct involved speech does not render the Indictment unconstitutional. The Indictment notes that “Defendant had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome-determinative fraud during the election and that he had won.” Id. ¶ 3. And it enumerates Defendant’s specific statements only to support the allegations that Defendant joined conspiracies and attempted to obstruct the election certification, such as the allegations that Defendant knowingly made false claims about the election results, id. ¶¶ 11–12”
So, to say that Will’s perspective is “unfounded” when a federal court has already dismissed your perspective simple passes no smell test. Of course, failing to get the case dismissed does not dismiss the argument entirely, but as a matter of law it is a serious blow.
We shall see how far Trump gets in Georgia on his dismissal based on the same. If it is denied, I look forward to the creative “reasons” to be explained to the readers.
Charles: The issue at hand was Will putting words into Trump's mouth, that were never uttered. And then running with the inserted words that Will himself concocted. Bringing in other issues and other cases is not germane to this particular discussion - what in fact did Trump say in this particular phone call. Your expanded discussion does exemplify the complexity of civil debate today: my sound bite can beat up your sound bite.
Encouraging to see folks paying attention to important issues. The Georgia election, its after mass, and the subsequent special election that enabled the Democrats to achieve the majority in the senate that they needed to pass all those spending bills, contain far too many legal issues to be covered in a single article. Perhaps a follow up article, or articles, would be helpful.
It’s beyond time to address local legal corruption and collusion. Who is our oversized legal community has the courage to address? Summarizing a national fully disclosed, over reported President Trump matter is fine; disclosing local lawfare takes both courage and deep financial pockets to survive the anticipated consequences.
The DOJ has just belatedly revealed that the Hunter Biden laptop really is his. Who Knew?
Anyone with a brain not addled by TDS knew it was legit. The Deep State has evidently abandoned Crooked Joe, by having the DOJ announce this. Who will the Dems run in place of this demented crook ? This is going to be a really interesting year. Buckle up
It definitely won't be crooked Joe. I just hope it isn't Trator Obama's 'wife'.
My guess is that the party leaders are discussing this now.
A Witch Hunt indeed! Using the Judicial System to weaponize innocent people , employees and consultants of the US President, reminds me of Soviet Union, Communist China, North Korea Dictatorship, Nazi Germany in WW11, to mention a few failed and tyranical governments. Excellent recap Brent of the TRUTH, of what is happening here in good ol' USA, in 2024. Any party (Dems or Republicans) willing to be a part of this sham, should be prosecuted. If these lies continue, I fear how this will all end, and it won't be Well....
I share your concerns.
A suggested topic for Mr. Zepkes next opinion piece would be an expose on the fake electors scheme. That to me is real election interference… not theoretical or rhetorical with no basis …as is much of the spin we hear from both sides of the aisle.
A pragmatic exercise in critical thinking can be obtained searching just this one topic: fake electors. A cursory online search finds partisan and conclusionary pontifications from the usual suspects: NPR, WaPo, Wiki, NYT, etc, etc.
I recommend also having a copy of independent journalist Sharyl Atkisson's book "Slanted" in hand, when one pursues the popular media if seeking a better understanding of this latest buzzword "fake electors".
.........." Slanted, Attkisson digs into the language of propagandists, the persistence of false media narratives, the driving forces behind today's dangerous blend of facts and opinion, the abandonment of journalism ethics, and the new, Orwellian definition of what it means to report the news." ....... (Amazon book review)
Some of the activities in the periods following the last two elections support your concern.
A boxing analogy: The Hagler-Hearns fight of 1985 for Hagler's Middleweight title, considered to be three of the most brutal rounds in history. Long into short, Hearns was one of the most terrifying punchers in history, and the shorter Hagler with a reach disadvantage had no choice but to get inside and trade punches, but by the end of the first round, Hearns had broken his hand on Hagler's jaw, and it was all downhill after that for Hearns.
However we feel about Biden or Trump, (I don't plan to vote for either) the Democrats are looking more and more like Hearns in the latter half of the fight.
What an interesting analogy.
excellent review of current status regarding just one of the lawfare plays against Trump…good to see this one is turning around (another boomerang) like many others…2024 will be one of our best years ever, as truth will be busting out all over the world…people are waking to the fact that our country (and the world) is at war against the CCP-WEF cabal’s color revolution…our US Military is running the counter insurgency, Trump - who was recruited to run - is merely a field general with a very powerful laser pointer…what a time to be alive! Fight for Trump…
I just read Brent E Zepke Esq very good article on the Trump Litigation and I quote same below>
"I call it the “War of Attrition,” where the hope is that one, or more, will plea bargain to testify against Trump in exchange for not being prosecuted. The fact that none of the 18 have done this is a good indicator that all of them, including Trump, are not guilty. What about the prosecutors?
What Mr. Zepke describes is the abuse of the legal system to target and wage war, unlawfully against your target and their supporters in this case Donald J. Trump.
What Mr. Zepke has just described is the legal word called "Lawfare" defined from WIKI as
"Lawfare is the use of legal systems and institutions to damage or delegitimize an opponent, or to deter an individual's usage of their legal rights.[1][2][3"
Ok Mr. Zepke lets bring your entire Article home like that little Alien "ET" and ask some
questions here about Santa Barbara legal system.
1. Are there local attorneys using "Lawfare" in the Santa Barbara Courts to target people?
2. Are the local attorneys using "Lawfare" making Millions off local Santa Barbara targeting people?
3. Is there a large group of Attorneys using "Lawfare" to extract huge funds from local people?
4. Are the Judges involved in this illegal process called "Lawfare" all for financial gain?
5. How much money are those Attorneys extracting $500 Million Plus ................
5. How many local Judges and local Attorneys are involved? A L O T
6. Is the Santa Barbara District Attorneys office involved. Y E S
7. And is someone doing something about this? Y E S See below>>>>
https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/albuquerque/report-public-corruption
8. Did local Attorneys and local Judges conceal any Russian Organized Crime (ROC) Russians in the
Santa Barbara Courts? Y E S
I think we all have a huge problem right here in little ole Santa Barbara USA
Howard Walther, A Proud Member of a Military Family
Thanks for such a detailed comment. While I am not surprised, I am not familiar with the legal system in S.B: yet.
I agree. We’ve lawfare and related problems locally that are unknown or ignored by the beneficiaries. Those in the know fear the consequences of exposing the beneficiaries.
At a personal level, I need a courageous attorney to sue another attorney on my behalf for malpractice.
Montecito 93108, if you have a real problem with the legal system here in SB
send me a Note via my Linkedin below>>
We know most of the bad players in town and they are many.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/howard-walther-3994791a6/?trk=people-guest_people_search-card
“The fact that none of the 18 have done this is a good indicator that all of them, including Trump, are not guilty.”
I think the objection here is foundation. Several of your 18 have pleaded guilty in the Georgia case and are now potential witnesses. As to foundation, neither you nor I are privy to the details of the pleas or prosecutors potential witness list.
But assuming nobody pleas in exchange for not being prosecuted, why do you then assume this is a good indicator that all of them, including Trump, are not legally guilty?
Wrong assumption. Show me the man I will show you the crime - the underpinnings of law fare - require just the opposite of your assumption: "nobody pleas in exchange of not being prosecuted".
Yes, people have chosen to plead guilty to a mishmash of lesser offenses to extract themselves from intentional long and financially ruinous lawfare. Economic exhaustion has long been one of the "legal" options that many a lawyer can and will put on the table.
Abuse of process, malicious prosecution, vexatious litigation, SLAPP and Bivens Actions are all on the books, because the courts can and do get abused by those seeking extra-legal outcomes. Which is also why we allow three bites of the apple, because mistakes and abuses can happen at every level of our legal system: (1) trial court; (2) appeal court; (3) supreme court.
We frequently hear in the lawfare pursuit of Trump - no one is above the law. However, selective prosecution is beneath the law.
That is the gut reaction many are sensing today- two systems of partisan justice are going on in this country today. It is not a good feeling. But it does explain why the more Trump is attacked by partisan lawfare, the higher his approval numbers go up. Something else is going on with in our legal justice system today, for the general public to register that level of contradictory response. "Justice" has lost its essential virtue of being blind.
Thanks for your interest in an important topic. Please read J. Livingston's response as it goes into detail on the issues, mentioned in my piece, of losing income while incurring substantial attorney fees. The longer the prosecutors try the case in the media, the greater the cost to the reputations of the defendants. As former Labor Secretary Donovan said upon being found "not guilty," "Where do I go to get my reputation back."
The Democrats’ campaign strategy for 2024 - go after Trump and his supporters with every phony charge possible in an effort to contaminate the candidates and the election . As you mentioned, “ . . their employment negatively affected, their families suffer the humiliation and expense of paying for lawyers as their credit may be frozen, .” etc., Etc. ETC.
There’s only one way to deal with these morons - recognize that politics is a dirty game and do it better than they do. The GOP ‘high-ground’ Ronna McDaniel talks about is a waste of time - what we need is a street-wise ass-kicker who knows how to fight fire with fire. Instead of always being on the defensive, we need to let accusers know that the phony legal problems they create will generate overwhelming retaliation.
Fani Willis is a perfect example. We need to dig so deep into her past that we find out if she cheated on a third grade test, and expose every illegal, immoral or unethical thing she’s done since then. All these Commie-Dems have skeletons in their closets - we need to let them know that if they attempt their illegal shenanigans on us they’ll regret it big time. They’ll think twice about initiating their phony legal attacks if they know their past sins will be exposed in lawsuits as phony as the ones they’re subjecting Trump to!
I am reminded of Tucker Carlson's recent analogy about Dad confronting his five year old son over missing cookies
Reaction one: kid fidgets, and denies he did not steal the cookies
Reaction two: kid reacts in fury, and blames Dad for stealing the cookies
Are any of the rioters (protesters)of Jan. 6th guilty of crimes? Did Trump discourage this violence in a timely manner when it could have saved lives? Could the endless (several years to date), and baseless( to date) accusations against the unelected citizen Hunter Biden be seen as an attempt to draw attention away from the elected former President Donald Trump? Do you think “the endless witch hunt” involves collusion and a co ordinated effort between dozens of state agencies, civil and criminal courts, Federal courts, hundreds of witnesses under oath, mountains of evidence including photos and videos and the co ordinated efforts of the “lame stream” media? Do not answer this because a “yes” would undermine your credibility as a deep state, conspiratorial fantasy illusionist. My father in law was a Superior Court Judge and when I used to complain after frequent jury duty that the guilty often walked away Scot free he would note that this was true in this particular case, but leopards do not change their spots and that criminals continue to do the same crimes over and over until they are finally convicted (all of which is a history a judge has accesses to) but not the jury which is blocked from this evidence of past crimes and indictments as prejudicial. The judge assured me that even though justice was blind she was also patient and never gives up. Could our blind and slow justice system be finally catching up with Donald Trump?
Jay Sullivan, Yes; yes; no; yes; and finally no. Welcome to this free-ranging conversation that will help all of us view critically important issues from different perspectives.
And a finally no, I am not a "conspiratorial fantasy illusionist". Stick around. BTW: The guilty do not walk away; those not convicted of a crime walk away.
You are absolutely correct in stating those not convicted of a crime walk away. I overstepped myself here in assuming that someone who is “not convicted” of a crime could still be guilty. Not convicted should always carry the same weight as not guilty.
There seems to be some confusion. My article was about the Georgia case.
The truth is these bogus prosecutions are the best thing that ever happened to Trump. After each of the indictments were announced his poll ratings went through the roof. Trump gets to say he's being persecuted by the govt, and if elected, he will exact vengeance on all his opponents, a list that includes many Republicans too. If Trump's lucky, the Dems will continue to bring further charges and indictments, since they are motivating so many of his supporters. One problem is that polls are also indicating that if he is convicted of any of the charges (the charges in the classified documents case are considered the strongest by most experts) he could lose many of the voters he needs to win a general election. A majority of independent voters say they wouldn't vote for Trump if he is convicted of a felony.
An interesting idea that seems so far to have merit. It is entirely possible that no matter how bizarre the case, a jury in D.C. or Fulton County may find him guilty. Much like senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, the election may happen before an appeals court overturns the verdict based on p DOJ misconduct. The judge in the New York case did not take that chance, but instead held him guilty before the trial began---meaning there was no evidence in the record---and is having the trial only to determine the fine.
When elected, Trump did not exact vengeance against Hillary for the infamous Steele Dossier. A problem with all the cases being brought , even if they are all bogus, is that many tire of all the commotion surrounding him: eb even if it is only from him defending himself.
More people are catching on it was not Trump "causing chaos". It was the media's 24/7 frothing about Trump that created the daily chaos. The sheer repetition of the charge of Trump = chaos, was a first clue. Trump was busy getting things done once he got his early am "tweet" off this chest. While the media spun his often accurate early morning charges into a full all day media frenzy. Trump was good for business - their business.
Trump early in his career was interviewed by Peter Graves for the PBS Biography series. (still found online). Trump at this time revealed how he followed Dr Norman Vincent Peale's "Power of Positive Thinking" approach to life, during his membership at Dr Peale's Marble Collegiate Church in downtown Manhattan.
One better understands how Trump acts and reacts to people, events and his own daily choices when one keeps that formative impact in mind. I recall a lot of people in the 1960's were reading "The Power of Positive Thinking" - a best seller as I recall.
Bogus prosecutions? He called the secretary of state in Georgia and told him to find 14,000 votes to give him the victory. How can anyone possible defend this that believes in fair elections? And at the very least, that action deserves a full investigation in a court of law. Imagine if a democrat had done this? Forget the even more egregious actions and comments that led to Jan 6; this should be enough to disqualify him and the mental gymnastics that so-called conservatives use to justify their continued support is shameful
The only evidence of that conversation are the secretary Raffensberger's notes that are not definintive proof but only the version of the guy who just admitted to lying about having the vote counting machines verified.
Will, That is not what what said during the Georgia SOS phone conversation. That is what some in the media reported what was said during the Trump phone conversation. They often get things wrong.
No one person or party has an exclusive corner on "egregious actions and comments". Appreciate less moralizing about others, and more investigative curiosity.
We do share the goal of ensuring all elections are beyond reproach. How do we tighten the current weak links?
"All I want to do is this: I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more that we have because we won the state. And flipping the state is a great testament to our country because, you know, this is just it’s a testament that they can admit to a mistake or whatever you want to call it. If it was a mistake, I don’t know. A lot of people think it wasn’t a mistake. It was much more criminal than that. But it’s a big problem in Georgia and it’s not a problem that’s going away." - if you are okay with a president (or any elected official) using the power of their office to pressure an official to change the outcome of an election than there's really nothing to discuss. And Trump's false accusations of others led to them receiving death threats and they have had their lives changed forever by these actions. This is a moral issue at its core. So I ask you Mr. Livingston, how can you defend this? Thankfully, the republican secretary of state had the type of character and morals to not engage.
Trump is stating his opinion; he is not demanding anyone else do anything. So your leap claiming Trump is pressuring anyone to do anything is unfounded. For the rest of your comments, I can only say .......... bless your heart.
yep, moral mental gymnastics...the very act of calling and asking him to find votes is despicable but he went on to threaten him with a criminal offense: "You know what they did and you’re not reporting it,” the president said during the call. “You know, that’s a criminal — that’s a criminal offense. And you know, you can’t let that happen. That’s a big risk to you and to Ryan, your lawyer. That’s a big risk.” Goes on to say 'they hate what you did to the president' I hope you would agree that none of this is worthy of public office no matter the level, let along the president. Thankfully, there are many moral conservatives who put country over party and did the right thing. We need more of them.
“Trump is stating his opinion; he is not demanding anyone else do anything.”
Neither you nor Will will determine whether Trump’s word form legally defined opinion, and protected by the first amendment, or statements of fact. Trump has made that case in Georgia in part by asserting, ““false statements about philosophy, religion, history, the social sciences, the arts, and other matters of public concern.” - “false statements”
Trump has argued in federal court that his statements are protected by first amendment unsuccessfully. The court stated:
“That Defendant’s alleged criminal conduct involved speech does not render the Indictment unconstitutional. The Indictment notes that “Defendant had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome-determinative fraud during the election and that he had won.” Id. ¶ 3. And it enumerates Defendant’s specific statements only to support the allegations that Defendant joined conspiracies and attempted to obstruct the election certification, such as the allegations that Defendant knowingly made false claims about the election results, id. ¶¶ 11–12”
So, to say that Will’s perspective is “unfounded” when a federal court has already dismissed your perspective simple passes no smell test. Of course, failing to get the case dismissed does not dismiss the argument entirely, but as a matter of law it is a serious blow.
We shall see how far Trump gets in Georgia on his dismissal based on the same. If it is denied, I look forward to the creative “reasons” to be explained to the readers.
Charles: The issue at hand was Will putting words into Trump's mouth, that were never uttered. And then running with the inserted words that Will himself concocted. Bringing in other issues and other cases is not germane to this particular discussion - what in fact did Trump say in this particular phone call. Your expanded discussion does exemplify the complexity of civil debate today: my sound bite can beat up your sound bite.
I agree.
Encouraging to see folks paying attention to important issues. The Georgia election, its after mass, and the subsequent special election that enabled the Democrats to achieve the majority in the senate that they needed to pass all those spending bills, contain far too many legal issues to be covered in a single article. Perhaps a follow up article, or articles, would be helpful.
It’s beyond time to address local legal corruption and collusion. Who is our oversized legal community has the courage to address? Summarizing a national fully disclosed, over reported President Trump matter is fine; disclosing local lawfare takes both courage and deep financial pockets to survive the anticipated consequences.
Hello Montecito93108 if you would like to contact me please do so at my LinkedIn weblink at
https://www.linkedin.com/in/howard-walther-3994791a6/?trk=people-guest_people_search-card Yes there is alot to be afraid with the large and powerful legal system here in Santa Barbara that controls the entire SB Community but they have now lost that control.
Howard Walther, member of a Military Family