Tag Archives: donaldjtrump

by

The Broadside | Supreme Court Rules Trump Partly Immune To Prosecution; Dems Cry Moar

You may have noticed that I changed the title of my post from “Daily” Broadside to “The Broadside.” It’s apparent to me that as much as I want this to be a daily, it’s been a challenge over the last couple of years to figure out the right mix of priorities in life to make it happen, not to mention the unexpected circumstances that sometimes frustrate my intentions.

So I’m conceding to the reality that I can’t easily make it a daily post and relieving myself (and you) of the expectations the title promised. The change gives me the cover to write as often as I can and when I miss—well, it’s not promising to be daily now, is it?

The best news yesterday was that SCOTUS ruled that U.S. presidents have blanket immunity that covers their “core” acts; their “official” acts may or may not be covered; and “unofficial” acts, have no immunity.

From Ace who knows a whole lot more about this than I do:

The Supreme Court did what many expected it would do: It recognized that presidential immunity exists, but only for certain official actions taken by the president.

First of all, the Court notes that previous decisions have held there is no presidential immunity when it comes to subpoenas for evidence. But the Court rules that these precedents are limited to the case of subpeonaeing records, and do not rule out immunity to criminal prosecution.

It broke the scheme of presidential acts into three categories:

“Core” official acts, which I assume are presidential actions taken in furtherance of the president’s specified duties in the Constitution. So a President could never be prosecuted for conducting foreign policy or directing the military.

“Official” acts, which may or may not qualify for immunity. Which acts are “official” and which of those “official” acts will qualify for immunity has to be decided on a case-by-case basis.

Finally, “unofficial” acts are those that the president undertakes not in furtherance of a presidential power, but only in his capacity as an individual. These never qualify for immunity.

So what this does is puts it back to the lower court to determine what sort of “acts” Trump is being prosecuted for. Were they “Core” acts? “Official” acts? “Unofficial” or personal acts? And how will such acts be defined?

In any case, this will likely push the window for prosecuting Trump past the November election; it certainly stops Jack Smith’s case dead in its tracks.

The usual suspects were pulling out all stops, including Schmuck Chumer.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) criticized the “MAGA SCOTUS” on Monday after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of former President Donald Trump in his case against January 6th prosecutors.

Former President Donald Trump is facing charges in Washington, D.C., filed by Special Counsel Jack Smith concerning his actions on January 6, 2021, when rioters stormed the Capitol. Trump contends that he is immune from prosecution for his official duties.

As previously reported, the Court ruled that presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts but not for unofficial acts. The case has been sent back to the trial court to determine the distinction between the two.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer led Democrats in expressing outrage over the 6-3 decision, in which the conservative majority was led by Chief Justice John Roberts. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Schumer blamed the three justices appointed by Trump.

Cry moar, Schmuck.

by - 1 Comment

Daily Broadside | Rematch: Trump says of Biden, “The whole world is blowing up under him.”

I’m going to try doing something I haven’t, which is to watch the debate and react in real time to what I’m seeing and hearing. Things I’m going to be watching for: Tapper and Bash debating Trump instead of letting him speak for himself; Tapper and Bash framing their questions for Trump with hostility instead of a studied detachment; seeing what kind of questions they toss to Biden (hardball or softball? relevant or irrelevant?); watching for Biden to start strong, then start slurring his schpeesh and getting his facts wrong; hoping Trump doesn’t just attack Biden but puts some solid policy solutions out there that will benefit all Americans but especially the white, working middle class that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats care about anymore; and listening for Trump to announce his vice-presidential pick. It better not be Nimrata Nikki Randhawa Haley.

My notes will be in descending order with some general thoughts at the end.

First question on the economy, and Biden blames Trump for what he “inherited.” Biden is already slurring. He sounds groggy. Trump: we had the greatest economy in the history of the U.S. Got us out of Covid mess; we had a great stock market; inflation is killing us.

Trump slams Biden for taking credit for “bounce back jobs” as proof of a great economy. That’s true; he’s counting jobs that were lost during Covid.

Tax cuts: Trump, with trillion dollar deficits, why should there be tax cuts? “Because tax cuts spur the economy.” “We took in more revenue with less tax.” We have the liquid gold right under our feet, oil and gas.

Biden: Trump had the largest national debt; then he says, “I’m going to fix the tax system.” Biden was in the Senate for 50 years and in the presidency for three and never did anything to fix the tax system. He’s gonna start now?

Biden just choked.

Trump is bashing Biden over immigration. (Trump hammered Biden on the open border all debate.)

Roe v Wade: Trump: I got abortion back to the states. Everybody wanted it back to the states. SCOTUS approved the abortion pill and Trump agrees with the decision. They blocked implementation of Iowa’s ban. Trump believes in exceptions to bans on abortion. We’ve gotten it back to the states.

Trump takes credit for “three great justices”, but that’s not really true; they’re not all “great.” Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh aren’t reliable conservatives. Just look at the censorship decision that ACB wrote this week. It’s an attack on 1A.

Biden: the idea that states should rule on abortion is ridiculous, like turning “civil rights” back to the states. He also complains that it was the law for 51 years. Yes, but it was a terrible decision and SCOTUS can overturn previous decisions.

Seven states have no legal restriction on abortion; does Biden support any restrictions? Biden keeps going to back to Roe v. Wade, which is no longer law. He promises to bring Roe v. Wade back. Biden is scare-mongering about what Trump will do if elected.

Immigration: to Biden: why should voters trust you to solve the crisis? “I’ve changed the law …” You bet he has. He makes it sound like he’s improving things but he wrecked what Trump had in place and opened the border.

Trump: “We had the safest border at the end of my administration. All he had to do was leave it.” Now we have the worst border in history.

You will conduct the largest deportation in history? How? Trump ignores question and hammers Biden on immigration.

Biden refers to his son dying from exposure to burn pits in Iraq. A tired trope.

Trump seems to be triggering Biden. I thought it would be the other way around. Biden is a nasty piece of work.

Russia/Ukraine: Are Putin’s terms acceptable to Trump? Trump hammers Biden on Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, refers to Afghanistan and the disaster it was.

Trump: “The whole world is blowing up under him.” Great quote and good for pointing it out.

Putin’s terms are not acceptable to Trump.

Trump seems to be benefiting from the format. It’s kept him focused and disciplined.

Middle East: Hamas attacks Israel: five Americans held hostage.

Does anyone else notice that Biden’s eyes look almost black?

January 6th: did Trump violate his oath? Trump avoids the question but blames Pelosi for the chaos and points out the recent video of her admitting she was responsible.

Great contrast between Biden and Trump on January 6. Biden thinks all the J6 prisoners deserve what they got.

Is Biden listening to someone? He touches his ear, then writes notes. Watch his eyes.

Biden is hammering Trump with a bunch of lies. Trump doesn’t get rattled … holds up great.

“There are fine people on both sides.” Biden repeats the lie that has been debunked. Even by Snopes.

Biden is losing it. Trump is getting under his skin.

To Biden: black families earn less than white families. What will you do to help? Biden is struggling in his answer. Hard to understand. He just admitted that inflation is hurting black families badly. He’s going to give blacks a $10,000 tax credit when they buy a house.

Trump is hammering Biden on inflation again. Biden: the economy was flat on its back … that’s why there was no inflation when I got it. So he admits there was no inflation when he became president.

All they are doing is hurling accusations at each other.

Climate crisis. “Extreme heat.” Will Trump do anything to combat climate crisis? Trump goes back to police and blacks and Hispanics. Yes, Trump wants “absolutely clean water and air.”

Biden’s repeated words are “damn” and “the idea.” And numbering his points.

Biden goes after the rich to “pay their fair share.” Along with giving blacks a $10,000 tax credit, he’s doing a bang up job dividing us.

Biden is running his sentences together.

Trump accuses Biden of being a liar. He is.

Biden credits “the fastest growing economy in the world” to immigrants. What a doofus.

Trump goes back to immigration and open borders.

Trump blows off making childcare costs more affordable.

Biden says 159 experts voted Trump the worst president in history. Nana-nana-boo-boo.

Trump regularly ignores the questions and speaks to his own topics.

What will Trump do about drug addiction? Close the border to stop drugs and trafficked women. “We need the machines,” to detect fentynal, Joe says. No, we need to close the border, Joe.

Age questions: Biden will be age 86 at end of term. I’ve spent half of my life in politics. Once the youngest, now the oldest. And he’s done nothing good in all that time except enrich himself.

To Trump: you’ll be 82 at the end of your second term. I’m in good health, mentally and physically. He challenges Joe to play golf with him. Biden boasts about being a six handicap.

What the hell did Biden just say about Trump’s health? They’re getting out of control. Only time in the debate the moderators almost lost control.

To Trump: will you accept the outcome of the election? Violence is unacceptable. If the election is fair and free … I wish Biden was a great president because I wouldn’t be here right now. “Stupid decisions” … if it’s a fair and legal election, I’ll absolutely to accept the results.

Biden accuses Trump of being a “whiner.” Biden sounds like a junior high school mean girl taunting the normal girls.

Trump: Biden does nothing. He says things but does nothing. Nobody respects Biden. Trump touts what he did, like “right to try.” We’re a failing nation. It will be great again.

My summary: The moderators get a passing grade. Trump mopped the floor with Biden. Trump demonstrated some verbal discipline. I think Trump benefitted from the format more than did Biden. He was forced to let Biden hang himself. Trump is very believable, unlike Brandon, who trotted out the old and tired talking points of “Charlottesville-fine-people-on-both-sides” (fully debunked), and reference to his son Beau who died of brain cancer after being exposed to burn pits in Iraq (correlation does not equal causation). Biden came off as a poser who fakes his anger and plays the tough guy that nobody believes he is. He slurred his speech, stuttered, mumbled several times. Trump was short on specifics with his policies and boasted here and there about what he would do as president or what would or wouldn’t have happened if he was still president. Trump avoided directly answering several questions. I don’t like that he accepts exceptions for abortion laws, but I can live with it.

A lot of Dems are panicking and there are lots of commentators who believe Biden will be replaced. I’m beginning to believe it myself.

Lots to contemplate this weekend. Have a good one.

by

Daily Broadside | Robert DeNiro Barely More Cogent Than Biden During NYC Rant

For most of my life I never paid much attention to actor Robert De Niro. As an actor, he belongs in the ranks of top-tier performers like Al Paccino, Jack Nicholson, Denzel Washington, Tommy Lee Jones and Gary Oldman.

But Robert De Niro lost his mind when Trump was elected and still hasn’t recovered. It’s always puzzled me. If one wanted a case study of TDS, rage junkie De Niro is it.

Following Biden’s embrace of one-hit wonder Mark Hamill four weeks ago, his campaign arranges a “press conference” featuring De Niro outside the court where Trump’s trial is taking place.

And he shows up with a mask. A mask!

That’s so 2020.

So what drives De Niro’s contempt for Trump? He’s short on specifics but long on speculation.

De Niro, 80, has already narrated ads for the Biden campaign, and told reporters Tuesday that Trump “wants to sow total chaos” and “destroy not only the city” before expanding his argument to say “eventually he could destroy the whole world.”

“I don’t mean to scare you. No, wait, maybe I do mean to scare you,” he said at one point. “If Trump returns to the White House, you can kiss these freedoms goodbye that we all take for granted.

“And elections. Forget about it. That’s over. That’s done. If he gets in. I can tell you right now. He will never leave. He will never leave. You know that. He will never leave.”

Trump will sow total chaos, destroy the city, destroy the country, destroy the whole world, take away our freedoms, and will never leave.

Sowing total chaos? Like admitting tens of millions of foreigners into the country illegally? Like confusing children about their “gender”? Like letting thieves and homicidal maniacs back on the streets with no cash bail after they commit crime?

Destroy the city? Like Democrat governors did in New York, Los Angeles, Detroit and Chicago? Or like in East Palestine, Ohio, where a train derailment resulted in a toxic chemical spill that Biden could care less about?

Destroy the country? Like destroying businesses during Covid? Like shutting down coal? Shutting down the Keystone pipeline?

Destroy the world? Like in Ukraine, Afghanistan and Israel?

Take away our freedoms? Like censoring topics on Twitter/X? Like putting hundreds of patriots in jail indefinitely without due process over nothing more than walking through the Capitol when invited in by the Capitol police? Like mandating masks and like Biden telling us he’s losing patience with those of us who refused the “vaccines”?

Never leave? Like when Biden and his gang steal the election later this year?

There’s only two options here: he either believes his hype or he doesn’t, and I’m inclined to think he believes it.

It’s fascinating and infuriating, but not impossible to believe that he’s serious.

It’s delusional. It’s exactly the kind of things that conservatives would say about Biden, but we’ve got evidence to back up our assertions that De Niro and his constituency have to ignore.

When Trump goes after the Deep State and the grifting rulers, that’s “sowing total chaos.” That’s upsetting the elites like De Niro, who like their place above the “clowns” that he makes room for. Yes, he actually said that.

It’s so weird.

If you have the stomach for it, you can watch the whole thing here:

De Niro’s fragile ego takes a hit when counter-protestors call him “washed up” and a “mook.” I had to look up what a mook was: a foolish, insignificant, or contemptible person. You know, the very thing that De Niro accuses Trump of being.

But he couldn’t take it when it was dished out.

Reality bites when you’re not acting.

by - 1 Comment

Daily Broadside | DOJ’s Case Against Trump in Jeopardy Because Jack Smith Doesn’t Have Authority To Charge Him

It’s going to be a short week. I missed yesterday because I wasn’t feeling well, and I’ll be out of town this weekend. But there’s so much material that I’ll be able to at least post some stuff that will make you want to tear your hair out.

Let’s start with the clown show that is all of the persecution by prosecution of Donald J. Trump. Besides all the inflated charges based on a thin-as-gruel layer-of-ice in the Sarhara, including Garland’s DOJ staging photos of the documents that Trump allegedly took illegally, it turns out that the man prosecuting Trump, Special Counsel Jack Smith, is in fact doing so illegally because he has no constitutional authority to do so.

The liberal news media is full of false stories about how Judge Aileen Cannon of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida has delayed former President Donald Trump’s trial unnecessarily for allegedly mishandling classified documents. But, in fact, the Biden Administration and its Attorney General, Merrick Garland, are themselves to blame for the current delay. Special Counsel Jack Smith claims to be an inferior officer of the United States, but in fact he holds no such office. Smith is a mere employee of the Department of Justice, and he lacks the power to initiate prosecutions. Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 585 U.S. __ (2018) holds that only officers of the United States can take actions that affect the life, liberty, and property of citizens.

Judge Cannon has asked for oral argument on June 21, 2024 on former President Donald Trump’s motion to dismiss Special Counsel Jack Smith’s indictment on the ground that Smith was unconstitutionally appointed to his current job because he is not an inferior officer. Washington, D.C. super-lawyer, Gene Schaerr, has filed an amicus brief in United States v. Trump on behalf of former Attorney Generals Edwin Meese III and Michael B. Mukasey, as well as me and Professor Gary Lawson, arguing that Jack Smith was unconstitutionally appointed to be an inferior officer, and Judge Cannon has asked Gene Schaerr to participate in the oral argument, which he has agreed to do.

The Appointment Clause of Article II, Section 2 provides that: “the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.” Jack Smith claims to be an inferior officer of the United States appointed by the Head of the Justice Department, but he is instead a mere employee.

It sure seems like Smith is unauthorized to charge “Trump with 40 felony counts, including allegedly violating the Espionage Act, making false statements to investigators and conspiracy to obstruct justice.” If it turns out that the judge agrees, Smith’s case will be dismissed and Garland will have to find someone else with the proper vetting to pursue the case. By that time, the election will be here and, God willing, Trump will have kicked this administration out on its keister.

Jack Smith, however, was a private citizen, and not a sitting U.S. Attorney, when Attorney General Merrick Garland named him to be the Special Counsel who would investigate and prosecute Donald Trump. Smith’s appointment as an inferior officer was thus unconstitutional, and therefore the cases against former President Donald Trump, which Smith is prosecuting in Florida and in Washington D.C. must be dismissed. Again, Congress has never by law vested in the Attorney General the power to appoint inferior officers.

[…]

Thank God Judge Cannon has scheduled oral argument on President Trump’s motion to dismiss Jack Smith’s prosecution of Trump for misuse of classified documents by a Justice Department employee who has not been nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The judge should dismiss Smith’s case, and the Eleventh Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court should affirm that dismissal.

Smith should be prosecuted and sued for illegally bringing charges, along with impeaching Merrick Garland.

LOL. That’ll never happen.

Trump did nothing to deserve what he’s getting. This lawless administration is using lawfare to drain Trump’s finances, emotionally destroy him, and keep him off the campaign trail. And it’s doing so illegally.

But Trump seems to thrive in this hostile environment. He comes out swinging and uses the press to his advantage, basically getting in-kind donations with free media coverage that reaches millions and millions of people.

The persecution of Trump in all its forms is a travesty of justice.

by

Daily Broadside | Trump’s 2020 Lawyer Is Suspended But Won’t Back Down

John Eastman represented president Donald Trump in the wake of the 2020 election, challenging the election’s integrity. It’s wound up costing him personally, and The Epoch Times just published a feature about his experience. (If you have a subscription, you can read it here; otherwise I think it’s paywalled.)

Last summer, the State Bar charged Mr. Eastman, the former Dean of Chapman University Law School, with 11 counts of misconduct related to his role in representing former President Donald Trump after the 2020 presidential election.

But, Mr. Eastman told The Epoch Times in an exclusive interview on April 5, he has no regrets about representing President Trump nor for alleging fraud and questioning the election results.

“No. Absolutely not,” he said bluntly. “What I saw at the time raised real serious questions in my mind about the validity of the election.”

Since then, Mr. Eastman said his investigation has confirmed his suspicions “tenfold.”

Funny how, given enough time, anyone who looks at the evidence with an open mind comes away convinced that there are serious questions about how Brandon won that election.

Mr. Eastman, who was accused of not having the evidence to back up those allegations, said he will appeal Judge Yvette Roland’s March 27 ruling recommending disbarment, but in the meantime his law license has been suspended on “involuntary inactive enrollment,” which means he can’t practice law in California.

[…]

Democrat-appointed Judge Roland ruled that Mr. Eastman broke ethics rules by advancing President Trump’s challenges to the integrity of the 2020 election.

The judge stated in her ruling that “despite compelling evidence against him … Eastman remains defiant, refusing to acknowledge any impropriety whatsoever in his actions surrounding his efforts to dispute the 2020 presidential election results.”

“His lack of insight into the wrongfulness of his misconduct is deeply troubling,” she wrote.

“Eastman continues to hold the view that his statements were factually and legally justified. He demonstrated disdain for these proceedings by characterizing them as a political persecution, claiming that the disciplinary charges against him contained false and misleading statements, and that those who brought them should themselves be disbarred,” Judge Roland wrote in her ruling.

His “complete denial of wrongdoing, coupled with his attempts to discredit legitimate disciplinary proceedings are concerning,” she wrote.

We don’t live in a free society anymore. The Marxists are going after the professional classes who represent the opposition. When they’re either jailed, disbarred or otherwise removed, they can more easily go after the armchair opinionists (like me).

Did Eastman have any compelling evidence?

Mr. Eastman drew from evidence provided by Garland Favorito, a retired information technology professional and founder of VoterGA, a nonpartisan, nonprofit election integrity group.

Mr. Favorito, is the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit filed on Dec. 23, 2020, that challenged the authenticity of 147,000 absentee ballots cast in Georgia’s Fulton County.

“He’s an independent, and he is an expert on election integrity issues, who discovered “thousands of ballots that were duplicated and counted multiple times,” in deep blue areas of Atlanta in violation of state law, Mr. Eastman said.

“We also had Michael Gableman, former Supreme Court justice of Wisconsin … who was retained by the legislature to conduct an investigation, and they discovered hundreds of thousands of illegal ballots,” he said.

Mr. Gableman uncovered alleged nursing home fraud, which Mr. Eastman said accounts for much more than the 20,000-vote margin of victory for Joe Biden, and voter turnout rates in nursing homes went from 20 to 30 percent historically to nearly 100 percent, including from within memory care wings.

“Many of the ballots are in the same handwriting, so the illegality opened the door for fraud, which Gableman proved … and it affected way more than 20,000 ballots,” he said.

“There’s no question Wisconsin was stolen. To this day, there are 120,000 more ballots than voters in Pennsylvania, a state where the margin was 80,000.”

Americans used to go to a local polling place such as a neighborhood community room at the library or the local church to vote, but in 2020 mail-in ballots were counted in much larger facilities in big cities such as Atlanta, Detroit, and Philadelphia where it would be “much easier to sneak in a pallet of ballots,” he said.

I believe that the 2020 election was stolen and that Joe Biden’s “presidency” is fraudulent. It’s the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people, even beyond the presidency of B. Hussein Obama.

It will take all of us hanging together in refusing to concede that the election was stolen. The evidence is there—you’re just not allowed to see that it is. Noticing is verboten.

Have a good weekend.

by

Daily Broadside | Make Biden Play By The New Rules

I used to read National Review and Rich Lowry regularly, but they lost me after they published their “Against Trump” issue and started asking me to pay to read their stuff. Still, I’m on their mailing list and will occasionally click over. On Wednesday I found myself agreeing with Lowry’s editorial.

Special counsel Robert Hur found that there was enough evidence to charge Joe Biden with a crime, yet he didn’t.

As we know, Hur concluded that a jury would probably find that Biden didn’t have criminal intent, although he stipulated during his congressional hearing a couple of weeks ago that a reasonable juror might conclude that Biden was guilty.

If this wasn’t an outlandish decision on Hur’s part, neither was it inevitable. Clearly, the fact that recommending charges against Biden would have been a thermonuclear political event, potentially affecting the election outcome, helped stay Hur’s hand. He could have gone by the strict letter of the law but allowed prudential considerations — again, not unreasonably — to play a role.

The ongoing bout of civil cases and criminal indictments against Donald Trump and, soon enough, a criminal trial raise the question: Why, if Trump wins election, should his Justice Department accept Hur’s judgment? Why wouldn’t it simply take Hur’s report and fashion it into an indictment of former president Biden?

After all, if there’s anything we’ve learned recently, it’s that no one is above the law.

Since there are now new rules, why shouldn’t we play by them? Make the Democrats eat their words. They like to trot out “no one is above the law” when it concerns the opposition, but you know they’ll scream bloody murder when it’s applied to them.

See? No one is above the law. That statement, of course, is a truism. In the hands of Trump enemies, though, it becomes something more — a rationalization for hostile prosecutors subjecting a political opponent to whatever they can possibly get him on.

By this standard, what would stop prosecutors in a Trump administration from trying to nail Biden? All the evidence is right there in the 350-page Hur report.

To which I say, “go for it.” Joe Biden has no sympathy from me. If they could nail him on the charges detailed in Hur’s report and send him to prison for whatever is left of his time on earth, I’d be good with that.

Maybe a case against Biden wouldn’t succeed. But since when is that the standard? An indictment would harry and humiliate him, and drain him of resources. It would provide enjoyment to his political enemies. In short, it would do everything that’s been done to Trump, but with lower stakes — and no chance of interfering in an election — since Biden wouldn’t any longer be a candidate for office.

As Letitia James insists, “There simply cannot be different rules for different people.”

Exactly.

by

Daily Broadside | The Persecution of Donald J. Trump Hits a Speed Bump

The outrageous lawfare being waged on the former president took a hit this weekend when the New York Supreme Court ordered New York Attorney General Letitia James to remove a letter asking them to disregard Trump’s argument that posting the scandalous nearly half-a-billion dollar bond is a “practical impossibility.”

In the original letter, Ms. James had asked the court not to accept the testimonies of a Trump attorney and broker who detailed the efforts they’d gone through in trying to obtain a $464 million bond, claiming they were unreliable sources. The defense faulted the state for not providing any “reason to doubt any of their assertions,” however, and only making a blanket statement.

“While attempting to cynically and wrongfully tar the Defendants’ witnesses as ‘unreliable,’ the Attorney General does not actually dispute the truth of a single one of their specific claims,” the defense’s letter reads.

The sworn affidavits submitted revealed that the defense had sought out the large bond since before final judgment was entered—raising the fine from $250 million to more than $350 million during the last days of trial—and that negotiations by four brokers with 30-plus surety companies still resulted in no deal. One of the brokers provided additional context, saying a $100 million bond was considered large and a $464 million bond (which includes the ordered interest) is something few sureties have the ability to issue and would issue only for large publicly traded companies.

The attorney general had argued that these affidavits still didn’t provide enough information on why the defendants had been turned down, suggesting that Trump Organization assets aren’t as valuable as the defense claims.

Of course. Of course. There isn’t enough information in the world that would satisfy the legal assassin who boasted that if elected, she would aggressively investigate Trump’s businesses and finances. This is an all-out partisan witch hunt to pump up her ego by providing the Marxist Democrats an in-kind donation with her election interference.

The fact that the court ordered her to withdraw her letter, while not an epic decision, is still a win for Trump’s defense and perhaps indicates James’ overreach and political calculus. The only way to raise the money would be to liquidate his real estate holdings, something that the defense argued was excessive.

President Trump had posted on social media that to divest of his buildings in a “fire sale” would create irreparable damage—he would lose the buildings he was appealing to keep.

“Perhaps worst of all, the Attorney General argues that Defendants should be forced to dispose of iconic, multi-billion-dollar real-estate holdings in a ‘fire sale,’” the defense’s letter reads. They called it ”textbook irreparable injury” to require the defendants to appeal without penalty only after taking such losses.

“It would be completely illogical—and the definition of an unconstitutional Excessive Fine and a Taking—to require Defendants to sell properties at all, and especially in a ‘fire sale,’ in order to be able to appeal the lawless Supreme Court judgment, as that would cause harm that cannot be repaired once the Defendants do win, as is overwhelmingly likely, on appeal,” the defense argued.

In other good news for Trump, a recent Marquette University/CNBC poll shows that Trump has all but demolished Biden on who Americans trust to handle the border.

“Look at that advantage that Donald Trump has on immigration and border security. It’s near 30 points. This is a tremendous change that’s going on and it’s no wonder that Donald Trump is running on immigration,” Enten observed, before adding, “Voters at this particular point are quite concerned about immigration, and they trust Donald Trump on this particular issue.”

Even among Hispanics.

“If you ask Hispanic voters, who do they trust more on border security and immigration? Overwhelmingly, they trust Donald Trump more, by a tremendous margin. Look at that: 49% to 24%. And that is in line with what we’re seeing in the polls in general among Hispanics, right?”

Meh. This is the same vibe I got in 2020. The country is fed up with the Marxist anti-Americans, but they hold all the power. I will be shocked if Trump wins come November.

by

Daily Broadside | Legacy Media Seizes On Trump “Bloodbath” Comments in Act of Journalistic Sabotage

If you weren’t convinced that the “mainstream” media is your mortal enemy, this should put all questions to rest.

On Friday Trump was in Ohio talking about China building automobile manufacturing plants in Mexico, and planning to sell the vehicles in the United States. He frames his comments as being for Chinese president Xi and says, “we’re gonna put a 100 percent tariff on every single car that comes across the line, and you’re not going to be able to sell those [cars].”

He immediately follows that with, “if I get elected,” meaning that his plan will only happen if he wins the presidency back this fall.

Then, as Trump is wont to do, he speaks in hyperbole, saying, “Now, if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath, for the whole—that’s going to be the least of it. It’s gonna be a bloodbath for the country, that’ll be the least of it. But they’re not going to sell those cars” and he continues to talk about the factories being built in Mexico.

It’s clear that the former president’s comment about a “bloodbath” are part of his commentary about Chinese car manufacturing plants in Mexico. But what do the journalistic rags take as the lede?

Makes for a great headline, doesn’t it? Note that the lede isn’t “Trump says he will place a 100 percent tariff on cars coming from Mexico if elected.” Yawn.

The Wall Street Journal at least had the integrity to put Trump’s comments in context.

But the legacy media, the stenographers for the Democrats, took his “bloodbath” comments and made that the lede, insinuating that Trump is threatening or predicting violence if he isn’t elected. It’s all part of the grand effort to sabotage Trump in the eyes of the public, an ongoing campaign of misinformation and disinformation.

There are some good news outlets that can be trusted, like The Epoch Times, which handled the controversy as good reporting should.

Besides, it isn’t as if the media isn’t familiar with the term bloodbath.

You have good reason to distrust the media.

And you should.

by

Daily Broadside | Elderly Man With Poor Memory Crowned Democrat Nominee

The stair-tripping, mumble-slurring, stage-wandering, shambolic disgrace that is our so-called “president” has apparently been crowned—again—by the degenerates on the Left as their standard-bearer come November 2024.

[So-called] President Joe Biden on March 12 secured the Democratic nomination after an overwhelming win in swing-state Georgia, as his rival former President Donald Trump appears likely to clinch the Republican nomination when several primaries are called later this evening.

President Trump also easily won the Georgia Republican primary on Tuesday, according to a projection by the Associated Press. The Peach State allocates 59 Republican delegates.

“I am honored that the broad coalition of voters representing the rich diversity of the Democratic Party across the country have put their faith in me once again to lead our party—and our country—in a moment when the threat Trump poses is greater than ever,” President Biden said in a statement shared by the White House upon his becoming the presumptive Democratic Party’s nominee.

“Threat.” This from a pathetic dictator wannabe who fronts B. Hussein Obama’s third term and has made the US the laughing stock of the world.

If we lived in anything resembling a free constitutional republic, he’d be tossed to the curb by a landslide come November 5. But because we live in “muh democracy!” that resembles Alice’s upside down and backwards Wonderland, the only way to beat this imposter is to vote in such numbers that the margin of victory is too great for the anti-Americans to cheat like they did in 2020.

Good luck with that.

Trump has also been declared the presumptive nominee for the Republican ticket, setting up the most anticipated—and reviled—rematch of the new century.

Former President Trump is officially the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.

Trump clinched his party’s 2024 nomination Tuesday when Georgia, Mississippi and Washington state held primaries.

With no major challengers left, both Trump and [so-called “president”] Biden, who locked up his party’s nomination earlier in the evening, were on course to collect all or nearly all the delegates up for grabs in Tuesday’s contests, putting each of them over the top and making them the Democratic and Republican presumptive presidential nominees.

Patriots and conservatives, along with like-minded Republicans, face headwinds from half the country who hate them, along with groups like this one that plans to take out $50 million in ads opposing Trump (paywall).

A Republican group dedicated to opposing former President Donald J. Trump is planning to spend $50 million to stop him through a series of homemade testimonial videos of voters who backed him in past elections but say they can no longer support him in 2024.

The group, Republican Voters Against Trump, first emerged in the 2020 campaign and made a return appearance for the 2022 midterm elections. It is run by Sarah Longwell, a leading figure in Never-Trump politics whose focus groups and polling are a staple of center-right podcasts and have made her a go-to figure for political reporters aiming to decipher the motivations behind Trump supporters.

She’s not “center-right” but, hey, it’s a free country. You can support or oppose whoever you want. But don’t try to sell me on how principled you are compared to me. If you’re trying to damage Trump you are actively aiding and abetting the Democrats in their quest to destroy America, and that puts you squarely in the “anti-America” camp. And the big grifters camp. And the David French camp.

We have exactly one chance to get this right. As Benjamin Franklin (may have) said at the signing of the Declaration of Independence, “We must all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”

These clowns want us to all hang seperately.

by - 1 Comment

Daily Broadside | With Republicans Like These, Who Needs Democrats?

Wait long enough and the truth starts to leak out.

A previously hidden transcript of an interview conducted by a U.S. House of Representatives panel that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol has been revealed, undermining a committee claim.

Anthony Ornato, who was the White House deputy chief of staff during the breach, told the committee that he overheard Mark Meadows, who was then chief of staff, on the phone with Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser. According to the transcript, Mr. Meadows wanted to ensure Ms. Bowser “had everything she needed.”

Mr. Meadows “wanted to know if she need[ed] any more guardsmen,” Mr. Ornato testified. “And I remember the number 10,000 coming up of, ‘The president wants to make sure that you have enough.’ You know, ‘He is willing to ask for 10,000.’ I remember that number. Now that you said it, it reminded me of it.”

Ms. Bowser said that “she was all set,” Mr. Ornato recalled.

Mr. Ornato was speaking on Jan. 28, 2022, to the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol.

The committee said in its final report that it “found no evidence” supporting the idea that former President Donald Trump ordered 10,000 troops to be ready for Jan. 6.

“The former J6 Select Committee apparently withheld Mr. Ornato’s critical witness testimony from the American people because it contradicted their pre-determined narrative,” Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), who released the transcript, said in a statement.

“Mr. Ornato’s testimony proves what Mr. Meadows has said all along, President Trump did in fact offer 10,000 National Guard troops to secure the U.S. Capitol, which was turned down,” Mr. Loudermilk, the chairman of the House Administration Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight, added.

Speaking to Fox News, Mr. Meadows previously said, “As many as 10,000 National Guard troops were told to be on the ready by the secretary of defense. That was a direct order from President Trump.”

You know who was on the J6 committee? Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, two of the most cowardly, traitorous RINOed Republicans that exist.

From Fox News:

Ornato’s interview was conducted in January 2022 and attended by Cheney, among other members on the committee. In addition to serving as deputy chief of staff under Trump, Ornato served in the Secret Service for decades.

The committee, which included seven Democrats and two now-former Republican Congress members, Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, concluded that it found “no evidence” that the Trump administration called for 10,000 National Guard members to Washington, D.C., to protect the Capitol.

Cheney and Kinzinger LIED to us. They were part and parcel of railroading Trump. They deserved getting kicked out of Congress. With Democrats beating us over the heads and stabbing us in the back, who needs anyone on “our” side who acts like a Democrat?

As more evidence emerges, it’s clear that J6 was a set up and the people arrested and kept in solitary in the Garland Archipelago and then sentenced to outrageous jail terms are victims of a miscarriage of justice in the service of evil political ends.

You can’t trust the government, and you especially can’t trust Democrats. Democrats must be banned from participation in our political life. That includes Cheney and Kinzinger.