A video of former US President Donald Trump is played on a screen during a hearing of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the US Capitol in Washington, DC, US, on Oct. 13.Photographer: Al Drago/Bloomberg
The congressional committee investigating the Capitol riot moved Thursday to force a showdown with Donald Trump, voting to subpoena the former president to testify and turn over documents about his efforts to undermine the 2020 election results.
Legal experts say they expect Trump to refuse to comply, and that there’s little the committee can do about it. Lisa Kern Griffin, a professor at Duke University School of Law, described the vote as “symbolic.”
“It is understandable that they would make that move, and it underscores their point that he was the driver behind the violence and aware of all of the efforts to overturn the election,” said Griffin, who has taught on the presidency and criminal probes. “But subpoenaing him is a gesture. It will not result in any testimony from the former president.”
If Trump challenges the subpoena in court, or if the committee sues to enforce it, the legal fight could take years by raising largely untested questions about immunity for presidents in and out of office. The US Justice Department brought contempt charges against two witnesses who defied Jan. 6 subpoenas, but chose to not prosecute others, so Trump also could take his chances by simply not showing up.
Any subpoena issued by the committee will expire at the end of the congressional term. And if Republicans take control of the House in the midterm elections next month, GOP leaders are expected to end the committee’s work, likely making any subpoena fight moot.
The Jan. 6 committee hasn’t set a date for Trump to testify or produce documents. Representative Jamie Raskin, a California Democrat, told CNN members hadn’t discussed what they would do if Trump refused to comply.
The former president didn’t take long to respond.
“Why didn’t the Unselect Committee ask me to testify months ago?” Trump wrote in the post on his Truth Social platform Thursday. “Why did they wait until the very end, the final moments of their last meeting? Because the Committee is a total ‘BUST’ that has only served to further divide our Country which, by the way, is doing very badly – A laughing stock all over the World?”
Multiple former Trump administration officials and allies have spent months in federal court fighting the committee’s efforts to gather emails and phone records, arguing that they can’t be forced to testify.
A challenge by Trump’s former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows has been pending for nearly a year. A judge heard arguments in September but has yet to rule. Even if a decision comes before the end of the year, it could be appealed and ultimately got to the US Supreme Court, adding months or even years to the litigation.
If Trump seeks to resist the subpoena in court, he’d likely invoke longstanding Justice Department policies that protect presidents — even after they leave office — from being forced to testify, said Jonathan Shaub, a professor at the University of Kentucky J. David Rosenberg College of Law and former attorney-adviser in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.
In a 2007 memo, the Office of Legal Counsel pointed to the example of former President Harry Truman, who refused to comply with a subpoena from the House Committee on Un-American Activities. Truman wrote in a letter at the time that, “if the doctrine of separation of powers and the independence of the Presidency is to have any validity at all, it must be equally applicable to a President after his term of office has expired when he is sought to be examined with respect to any acts occurring while he is President.”
On Page one of the link to the PDF, President Truman gives his response.
In layman’s terms, separation of powers.
Justice Department policy isn’t binding on judges and there are no past court cases to point to as legal precedent for a former president refusing a congressional subpoena to testify.
Risk of Prosecution
Still, longtime Trump ally and adviser Steve Bannon was successfully prosecuted for contempt of Congress when he refused to comply with a Jan. 6 committee subpoena. Prosecutors also are pursuing a case against former White House trade adviser Peter Navarro.
But former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and former top White House communications deputy Dan Scavino didn’t face prosecution for their refusal to honor subpoenas, even after the committee made criminal referrals to the Justice Department.
“I don’t think he’s really afraid of contempt,” Shaub said of Trump.
The former president has lost several legal fights with Congress over demands for documents, but this is the first time he’s faced a direct subpoena to testify.
Earlier Supreme Court rulings involving Trump-related investigations — including a congressional demand for information about his finances and a grand jury subpoena out of New York — took account of his status as a sitting president, which he no longer holds.
A years-long fight over Congress’ efforts to subpoena testimony from former White House counsel Don McGahn ended last year with a voluntary agreement by McGahn to testify, which left no definitive precedent for how to resolve such conflicts in the future.
If Trump should unexpectedly decide to appear before the committee, there’s a good chance his lawyers would advise him to invoke the Fifth Amendment’s protections against self-incrimination, Kimberly Wehle, a visiting professor at American University Washington College of Law, wrote in an email.
“It’s being done more for the record and for the American people — for the history books — because it’s highly unlikely it will actually produce testimony by the former President,” Wehle said.
The number of people in New York City shelters is setting new records daily amid the unyielding arrival of asylum seekers bused from Texas and elsewhere.
On Friday, New York Mayor Eric Adams declared a state of emergency and announced an executive order to suspend land use requirements to help the city cope with the influx of people.
Adams said he was “angry” the city’s compassion was being “exploited by others for political gain” and what he called a “humanitarian crisis” the mayor said is being “accelerated by American politics dynamics.”
There are 61,000 people currently in the shelter system, “straining our ability to care for New Yorkers in need,” Adams said. He expects the city will have spent $1 billion by the end of the fiscal year
5,500 migrant children have been enrolled in city schools.
Of the 61,000 people in shelters, 20,000 are children. One on five is an asylum seeker.
More than 17,000 asylum seekers have been bused to NYC.
Breaking: Mayor Adams is declaring a state of emergency as he confirms the city is expected to spend at least $1 billion by next June to address the ongoing migrant crisis. pic.twitter.com/6A8vyhCf9v
Do they really just throw "classified" documents on the floor like that?
Former President Donald Trump said during a Wednesday night appearance on the Fox News show “Hannity” that his will is missing and he thinks the Justice Department has it.
Last month, the FBI raided Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property in Palm Beach, Florida, and confiscated boxes of documents, claiming they should not have been in his possession and included classified material.
The former president denounced the unprecedented raid and said the FBI took a wide range of private papers along with other documents.
On Sunday, Trump made his first trip to Mar-a-Lago since the raid, and he spoke about that with host Sean Hannity in an interview at the Florida estate Wednesday night.
Hannity noted that Trump had lost about 500 pages of documents protected by attorney-client privilege.
“They took a lot. I think they took my will. I found out yesterday,” the former president said. “I said, ‘Where is it?’”
“Am I in it?” Hannity asked as Trump repeated, “I think they took my will.”
“That could cause a lot of problems,” he said, smiling at the Fox News host’s question.
“That could cause a lot of problems if that gets published for people who won’t be so happy, or maybe will be very happy,” Trump said.
The former president said the Justice Department “shopped” until it found someone who would sign the warrant to raid his property.
Trump, who was not at Mar-a-Lago for the raid, said he learned of it when a worker called him.
“I was in New Jersey. I got a call in the morning from somebody that’s here. … ‘Sir, the FBI just came in.’ I said, ‘What? The FBA? Who?’ And they go, ‘The FBI.’ And I said, ‘How many people?’ And he said, ‘Many, many people, sir. Many, many people.”
He said he was told the FBI wanted to do the raid “quietly, silently.”
The former president told Hannity that after he received questions from the media about the raid, he put out a statement announcing it.
“These are dark times for our Nation, as my beautiful home, Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, is currently under siege, raided and occupied by a large group of FBI agents,” Trump wrote in a statement on Aug. 8.
“Nothing like this has ever happened to a President of the United States before. After working and cooperating with the relevant Government agencies, this unannounced raid on my home was not necessary or appropriate.”
During the “Hannity” interview, Trump said, “I declassified everything.”
That question was debated Tuesday in a hearing by special master Raymond Dearie, who wanted the former president’s attorneys to point to a specific instance or document proving Trump’s claim, according to The New York Times.
Dearie indicated that absent such proof, he would be inclined to agree with the Justice Department on the issue, meaning documents it says were classified will be treated as such.
Trump has repeatedly criticized the conduct of the FBI during the raid.
“Arrived in Florida last night and had a long and detailed chance to check out the scene of yet another government ‘crime,’ the FBI’s Raid and Break-In of my home, Mar-a-Lago. I guess they don’t think there is a Fourth Amendment anymore, and to them, there isn’t,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
“In any event, after what they have done, the place will never be the same. It was ‘ransacked,’ and in far different condition than the way I left it. Many Agents — And they didn’t even take off their shoes in my bedroom. Nice!!!”
California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday announced a sweeping package of what he called the country’s “most aggressive” climate measures to “accelerate the state’s transition” to non-conventional energy sources.
The package includes 40 bills that appear to provide new green rules on laws related to things ranging from large-scale industry to the family home and private and public transportation.
The Democratic governor’s office said in a statement the package of climate change-focused measures aims to cut pollution and target “big polluters.”
It comes as America’s most populous state has struggled to provide stable electricity for residents amid a heat wave, which saw the state asking residents to use less power and suggest the best times to use air conditioners or charge electric cars.
“This month has been a wake-up call for all of us that later is too late to act on climate change. California isn’t waiting any more,” Newsom said in a statement. “Together with the Legislature, California is taking the most aggressive action on climate our nation has ever seen.”
“We’re cleaning the air we breathe, holding the big polluters accountable, and ushering in a new era for clean energy,” he continued. “That’s climate action done the California Way—and we’re not only doubling down, we’re just getting started.”
In July, Newsom called for “bold actions” to combat climate change. He declared his climate-focused vision for California involves a push to achieve 90 percent “clean energy” by 2035, “carbon neutrality” by 2045, “setback measures” to target oil drilling, carbon capture programs, and to “advance nature-based solutions” to remove carbon from “natural and working lands.”
40 “Green” Bills
Newsom’s office said his sweeping package of measures will create four million new jobs over the next 20 years, cut air pollution by 60 percent, and reduce state oil consumption by 91 percent.
How this would be achieved was not explained in the governor’s news release.
The package of measures, the governor’s office said, will save the state $23 billion by avoiding damage from pollution. It further aims to cut fossil fuel use in buildings and transportation by 92 percent and refinery pollution by 94 percent.
The governor named a list of the 40 new green bills, which touch on things from the broad scope of the climate to more everyday matters such as community air quality, electricity supply, vehicle permits, and gas pricing.
Some of the bills, which were all named in the governor’s news release, include:
AB 1279: “The California Climate Crisis Act”
AB 1389: “Clean Transportation Program: project funding preferences”
AB 1749: “Community emissions reduction programs: toxic air contaminants and criteria air pollutants”
AB 1857: “Solid waste”
AB 1909: “Vehicles: bicycle omnibus bill”
AB 2075: “Energy: electric vehicle charging standards”
AB 2622: “Sales and use taxes: exemptions: California Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project: transit buses”
AB 2836: “Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program: vehicle registration fees: California tire fee”
SB 1063: “Energy: appliance standards and cost-effective measures”
SB 1205: “Water rights: appropriation”
SB 1230: “Zero-emission and near-zero-emission vehicle incentive programs: requirements”
SB 1322: “Energy: petroleum pricing”
SB 1382: “Air pollution: Clean Cars 4 All Program: Sales and Use Tax Law: zero emissions vehicle exemption”
How the package of new green laws and regulations might impact, for example, standards required for cars to be permitted on Californian roads; how and when homes can be cooled; the source of electricity allowed to be supplied to homes; the manufacturing of everyday appliances and products, etc., were not outlined in the governor’s news release.
This latest pronouncement comes on the heels of Newsom enacting regulation to phase out sales of new gas-powered cars by 2035.
Former President Donald Trump with Justice Samuel Alito. Alito briefly blocked a lower court order forcing the Biden administration to reinstate Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy, giving the Supreme Court a few days to consider the case. Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images
By Michael Washburn for Epoch TimesSeptember 16, 2022
Democrats believe their best hope is to position themselves as the only alternative to Trump
In the coming midterms, Democrats believe their best hope is to position themselves as the only alternative to Trump and his brand of Republicanism, according to political strategists.
Democrat candidates and their supporters, they say, are hoping that the furor around former President Donald Trump’s alleged storing of sensitive documents in Mar-a-Lago, as well as his alleged role in the events of Jan. 6 will not abate even slightly between now and the November midterm elections, and will distract voters from the Democrats’ shortcomings, particularly with regard to the economy.
Even in battleground states where a variety of Republican candidates competed in this week’s primary elections, Democrats are acting as if their best bet is to paint all Republicans as nascent or actual extremists and to capitalize on some voters’ dissatisfaction with the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the strategists argue.
President Joe Biden and his party have come in for severe criticism for their handling of the economy and for an inflation report credited with bringing about the stock market’s worst day of 2022 on Sept. 13, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average down nearly 1,300 points. Some economists view the highest inflation in four decades as a function of the Biden administration’s expansionist monetary policy, which they argue has led to too much money chasing too few goods. For fiscal year 2022 as a whole, the federal budget deficit is projected to be $1 trillion.
These dismal figures may motivate GOP voters as much as, or more than the court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization will drive Democrat turnout, strategists predict.
In this context, Democrats are quick to seize on any potentially bad news for Trump as good news for their embattled party. Indeed, for some Democrats, the ongoing investigation of Trump’s alleged legal and financial violations may help cast the midterms as a referendum not only on the current president and his economic performance, but on Trump and those Republicans who, they claim, fit the same mold. Given the severity of Biden’s problems, Democrats will do their best to exploit charges and allegations against Trump to their fullest political advantage whether or not the attacks have merit, strategists say.
“Every day brings the risk of more bad news about Trump, which splashes mud on every Republican. The Dobbs ruling is known and GOP candidates either get on the right side of the issue or shift to the economy, which is a bigger deal for most voters,” Keith Naughton, a political consultant and the director of Germantown, Maryland-based Silent Majority Strategies, told The Epoch Times.
Donald Trump arrives at Trump Tower in N.Y. on Aug. 9, 2022, the day after FBI agents raided his Mar-a-Lago Palm Beach home, in Fla. (David ‘Dee’ Delgado/Reuters)
A Double-Edged Sword?
Mark C. Smith, a professor of political science and Director of the Center for Political Studies at Cedarville University in Ohio, acknowledges Trump’s continuing prominence within the GOP and his popularity with many Republican voters. This has helped make the coming elections, in large part, what some voters in either party would like it to be: a Trump-Biden rematch as much as a spate of House, Senate, and gubernatorial races.
“Unlike other losing presidential candidates, Trump has maintained a strong presence within his party. He is endorsing candidates, raising funds, and holding rallies. This changes the dynamic of the midterm,” Smith told The Epoch Times.
“Interestingly, the Democrats are happy if Trump continues to headline for Republicans. While popular within the GOP, Trump is toxic for independent voters, and he runs poorly with college-educated white voters, as well as suburban women. In light of his recent legal troubles, Democrats are fine with Trump’s expanded role,” Smith said.
But given the severity of the economic problems and other factors, Smith does not believe that the Democrats’ strategy of decrying Trump’s alleged extremism, and that of “Trump-y” candidates in local issues, will succeed.
“If we consider the political climate, this should be a huge election for Republicans. A relatively unpopular president and a struggling economy, in addition to foreign affairs instability, should put the GOP in a strong position,” said Smith.
While the electoral math of midterm contests varies, it is possible to identify a statistical mean when looking at long-term trends, Smith argued.
“On average, the party out of power picks up around 26 House seats, and five or six Senate seats. To the degree this election is normal, it will be good for Republicans and they will take both houses of Congress,” he said.
While turnout in midterm elections is often low compared to presidential elections, Lonny Leitner, vice president of the government affairs firm LS2 Group, which has offices in Iowa and Minnesota, believes that the Mar-a-Lago raid has backfired and that its findings will not dissuade GOP voters.
“I spent a few days out at the Minnesota State Fair, and I can count on one hand how many times someone brought up the fact that they were concerned about the FBI raid, which tells me it is yet another failed attempt by the Democrats to end Trump once and for all. When will they learn?” Leitner told The Epoch Times.
It was far more common for people he encountered at the fair to voice serious concerns over inflation, fuel prices, out-of-control crime, and the crisis at the border with Mexico, Leitner said.
People shop at a supermarket in Montebello, Calif., on Aug. 23, 2022. U.S. shoppers are facing increasingly high prices on everyday goods and services as inflation continues to surge with high prices for groceries, gasoline, and housing. (Frederic J. Brown/AFP/Getty Images)
The Case of New Hampshire
To understand the Democrats’ approach, it is useful to look at one state in particular that has been fiercely contested in recent election years, namely New Hampshire, believes Andrew Smith, Director of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center and an expert on elections and electoral methodology.
Smith believes that New Hampshire is not as politically conservative as its reputation and famous license plate motto (“Live Free or Die”) might lead some people to believe.
“New Hampshire’s electorate is divided between Republicans and Democrats. Democrats generally have a little bit of an advantage in presidential elections, but it’s not that big an advantage in midterm elections with a Democrat president,” Smith told The Epoch Times.
“It’s also a state with higher levels of education and income than most states, and it’s a suburban state,” he said, noting a large proportion of its population lives in the suburbs surrounding Boston. “In that sense, it’s similar to other suburban areas of the northeast that lean Democrat. It’s not a Republican state, that’s a myth,” he added.
Generalizations
In the GOP primary elections held in New Hampshire on Sept. 13, Karoline Leavitt won the race for the first congressional district against a field of rivals including Matt Mowers, Gail Huff Brown, and Russell Prescott, with 34 percent of the vote compared to 25 percent, 17 percent, and 10 percent respectively. In the second congressional district race, Robert Burns scored a victory with 33 percent of the vote versus 29 percent for George Hansel, 25 percent for Lily Tang Williams, and smaller numbers for other competitors.
In the Senate primary, former military officer Donald Bolduc, who hopes to unseat Democrat Senator Maggie Hassan in November, barely edged out his GOP rival Chuck Morse, winning 37.1 percent of the vote to Morse’s 35.8 percent.
In the GOP gubernatorial primary, incumbent Chris Sununu easily trounced all his rivals, winning 78 percent of the vote.
New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu speaks during a ceremony in Manchester, N.H., on Sept. 2, 2020. (Scott Eisen/Getty Images for DraftKings)
The winning candidates come from a wide variety of backgrounds and have diverse views and ideologies. Leavitt is a former assistant press secretary in the Trump administration, Burns is an entrepreneur and former treasurer of a New Hampshire county, while Sununu has a reputation as a moderate Republican who helped secure funding for a cause championed by Democrats, namely state funding for full-day kindergarten.
While some in the media may wish to associate Bolduc with Trump, it is important to remember that he lost New Hampshire’s 2020 Senate primary to Trump-endorsed candidate Corky Messner, Smith said.
In spite of the eclecticism of these candidates and the impossibility of categorizing them all as strictly “Trump-y” figures, Smith argued, Democrats will treat the candidates in New Hampshire and other states as Republicans in the Trump mode in the hope of wooing the roughly 42 percent of voters in the state who register as independents. Smith said that the tactic put to use in New Hampshire is a microcosm of a broad political strategy.
“Democrats are going to use all these candidates’ connection with Trump—whether it’s there or not—as arguments to vote against them. But that’s true across the country. Democrats are running as if Trump is still in office,” he commented.
With the tricky position in which Democrats find themselves amid so much bad economic news, they place their hopes in controversies around a figure who remains powerful and influential within the GOP.
“All the Mar-a-Lago stuff, they’re praying that will go on until after the midterm elections, because they’re running at a moment when the president is not very popular, and that’s a difficult place to be, as we saw in 2010 and 2014,” Smith continued.
In the New Hampshire races in November 2010, Republican candidates won both the congressional districts contested in this week’s primaries, though they did not win the governorship, Smith noted. Looking at the 2010 midterm elections nationally, Republicans won a majority in the House of Representatives, which they held onto in 2014 in addition to winning majority control of the Senate.
President Joe Biden delivers a primetime speech at Independence National Historical Park Sept. 1, 2022 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Biden described “MAGA Republicans” as being extremists who posed a threat to democracy. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
The ‘Extremism’ Charge
Since the spring, when predictions widely favored the GOP in the coming midterms, Democrats have found more opportunities to try to paint Trump and the GOP more broadly as extremist and will rely heavily on this political strategy all the way through the elections, believes David Bateman, a professor of government at Cornell University.***
***According to his own words and published books and articles, Bateman leaves hard left. (Pro-abortion,anti-conservative values, etc) –TPR
This strategy does not come at the expense of, but rather goes hand in hand with, a strong emphasis on the Dobbs ruling and other issues of concern to Democrat voters at the local level, he argued. To a certain extent, voters will decide in accordance with the narratives crafted by the party leadership as Democrat spokespeople try to link congressional and gubernatorial hopefuls to the 45th president.
“Elections are never about one thing, whether that is a referendum on presidential leadership, national economic or other issues, or the local performance and responsiveness of the incumbent. And voters make choices not only on the basis of their priorities, but on the basis of the choices and narratives presented to them by parties. Democrats probably want voters to make a choice on the basis of local issues—which tend to favor incumbents—and then on the extremism of the GOP, as showcased by Trump but as embodied locally by GOP candidates,” Bateman told The Epoch Times.
Though predictions about the likely outcome of the midterms have swung since the spring and do not monochromatically favor GOP candidates as much as before, Democrats still play to what they see as their strengths.
“I expect Democrats’ basic strategy remains the same: have their congressional candidates highlight how they have delivered locally for their districts as well as the extremism of their GOP rivals, while the larger party apparatus and the president emphasize GOP extremism nationally. The abortion decision has helped Democrats a lot, as has the continued attention to Trump,” Bateman said.
The Epoch Times has reached out to the DNC for comment.
NEW YORK, NY – JUNE 25: Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner speaks to a reporter at of the election party of public defender Tiffany Caban moments before she claimed victory in the in the Queens District Attorney Democratic Primary election, June 25, 2019 in the Queens borough of New York City. Running on a progressive platform that includes decriminalizing sex work and closing the Rikers Island jail, Caban narrowly defeated Queens Borough President Melinda Katz and scored a shocking victory for city’s the progressive grassroots network and criminal justice movement (Photo by Scott Heins/Getty Images)
Adam Klasfeld For Law & Crime Sep 14th, 2022, 7:03 pm
Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner (D), one of the first of a wave of progressive prosecutors elected on a criminal justice reform platform, made “false” claims that his office communicated with the family members of the victims of a man that he sought to free from death row, a federal judge found.
The following day, in what could only be described as a rough week for the top prosecutor, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives voted to hold him in contempt for failing to cooperate with the committee investigating his possible impeachment.
“Extremely Disappointed to Learn of the District Attorney’s Stance”
According to a scathing 28-page memorandum opinion, the district attorney’s office wrongly suggested the relatives of the Pennsylvania couple killed by Robert Wharton supported his release from death row. In fact, U.S. District Judge Mitchell Goldberg found, Krasner’s office did not even contact the sole surviving victim of the attack: Lisa Hart-Newman, who was an infant when Wharton killed her parents, turned off the heat, and left her inside the house to die.
“This Court (which only learned of the family’s opposition through the Attorney General’s Office) is not the only one who considered the District Attorney’s representations misleading,” the opinion states. “Lisa Hart-Newman, the infant, now age thirty-seven, who was left to die by Wharton after her parents were murdered, stated she was ‘extremely disappointed to learn of the District Attorney’s stance and very troubled that he implied that the family approved of his viewpoint.’ […] Michael Allen, one of the brothers of the deceased, also noted, ‘[I]t would appear that there was a substantially deficient briefing by the DA’s office regarding the significance and implications for vacating Wharton’s death penalty.’”
Krasner, who worked at the Federal Public Defender’s Office before becoming an elected prosecutor, is an opponent of capital punishment, and one of his early actions in office was to drop dozens of drug charges as the city braced to decriminalize marijuana. His office sided with Wharton in his federal habeas death penalty case on the grounds that his lawyer failed to properly investigate and present evidence of his positive adjustment to prison.
The DA’s office argued they did not they did not need to present a full investigation of the facts for and against Wharton, but Judge Goldberg noted that the Third Circuit gave prosecutors precisely the opposite instruction.
“Trial courts and lawyers take direction from appellate judges,” wrote the judge, who — ethics disclosure here — is the father of Law&Crime’s director of podcasting Sam Goldberg. “This is such a basic legal principle that no precedential or statutory citation is needed.”
“‘Egregious’ and ‘Exceptional’”
Finding Krasner’s office committed “egregious” and “exceptional” violations of the federal rules of procedure, the judge ordered the DA to “send separate written apologies” within 30 days of the ruling to victim family members Tony Hart, Michael Allen, Patrice Carr, and to victim Lisa Hart-Newman. Goldberg, who is approaching his 14th anniversary of his appointment to the federal bench by George W. Bush in 2008, also ordered more candor from the DA in future cases in his courtroom. He declined to impose financial penalties.
The day after Monday’s ruling, a committee of the GOP-dominated Pennsylvania House of Representatives voted to hold Krasner in contempt. Calling itself the Select Committee on Restoring Law and Order, the body was formed over the City of Brotherly Love’s rising crime and murder rates. One Republican lawmaker called for Krasner’s impeachment over what he called the top prosecutor’s “dereliction of duty.”
According to the New York Times, Krasner spurned the legislature’s investigation as antidemocratic and illegitimate. He was voted into office twice by significant margins. The Philadephia Inquirer reported that even large members of his party supported the contempt resolution over his refusal to comply with a subpoena, which passed by a 162-38 margin with almost all Republicans and some 49 Democrats.
The Times reported that the resolution could subject Krasner to a range of penalties — up to imprisonment, but the legislature has not decided upon what to pursue.
Krasner’s office did not immediately respond to Law&Crime’s email requesting comment.
Read the ruling below:
[photo by Scott Heins/Getty Images]
Law&Crime’s managing editor Adam Klasfeld has spent more than a decade on the legal beat. Previously a reporter for Courthouse News, he has appeared as a guest on MSNBC, BBC, NPR, PBS, Sky News, and other networks.
TOPSHOT - Honduran migrants taking part in a caravan heading to the US, leave Arriaga on their way to San Pedro Tapanatepec, southern Mexico on October 27, 2018. - Mexico on Friday announced it will offer Central American migrants medical care, education for their children and access to temporary jobs as long as they stay in two southern states. (Photo by Guillermo Arias / AFP) (Photo credit should read GUILLERMO ARIAS/AFP via Getty Images)
Under President Joe Biden, the foreign-born population of the United States has grown to its highest level ever recorded, the U.S. Census Bureau reports.
Over the last year, the Biden administration added two million new foreign-born residents to the U.S. population — undocumented and legal immigrants on green cards and visas — serving as a boon for Biden’s billionaire donors in the financial industry who are some of the biggest beneficiaries of mass immigration and an ever-growing populace.
According to Steven Camarota at the Center for Immigration Studies, who analyzed the latest Census Bureau data, the foreign-born population hit nearly 47 million this year, which is the largest ever recorded by the agency’s Annual Social and Economic Supplement survey.
Since 1970, the nation’s foreign-born population has quintupled and since 1980, it has tripled in size. In 1990, the foreign-born population was just half of what it is today — with 1-in-7 U.S. residents having been born outside of the country.
“The foreign-born share of the U.S. population is approaching the record highs reached in 1910 (14.7 percent) and 1890 (14.8 percent),” Camarota writes.
Center for Immigration Studies
For America’s working and middle class, mass illegal and legal immigration depresses wages and is a drag on labor force participation among native-born Americans while also pushing American communities to the brink in terms of social services, infrastructure, and sky-high housing costs.
“Just the sheer number of people overwhelms communities,” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) said this week. “This idea of mass immigration — whether it’s illegal immigration or whether it’s just mass immigration through the legal process like the Diversity Lottery or chain migration — that is not conducive to assimilating people into a civil society.”
For the wealthiest of income earners, mass illegal and legal immigration provides an endless stream of low-wage foreign workers as well as more consumers to sell to, more families needing housing, and billions in wider profit margins and reduced wages.
Though many Republicans running in this year’s midterm elections have gone silent on legal immigration levels — with more than a million being awarded green cards every year — GOP voters overwhelmingly continue to back drastic cuts to boost wages and job openings.
The latest Rasmussen Reports survey shows that a majority of 54 percent of likely Republican voters want to cut legal immigration levels by more than half to fewer than 500,000 admissions a year. Meanwhile, a majority of swing voters say they want legal immigration levels cut down to at least 750,000 admissions a year with a plurality supporting cutting levels by more than half.
By Cristina Laila For Gateway Pundit Published September 12, 2022
Biden’s corrupt Justice Department seized phones of two top Trump advisors in the past week.
The Justice Department issued at least 40 subpoenas over the last several days seeking information related to January 6 and Trump’s Save America PAC.
Trump’s top advisors Stephen Miller, Brian Jack and Dan Scavino all received subpoenas.
“Among the recipients of subpoenas from a grand jury sitting in Washington are relatively junior aides from the White House and Mr. Trump’s 2020 campaign. While the subpoenas asked for information concerning the Save America PAC, they also sought communications with several pro-Trump lawyers — like Kenneth Chesebro — who helped devise the electors plan.” – The New York Times reported last week.
According to a new report from The Times, Boris Epshteyn and Mike Roman had their phones seized by the DOJ.
The Justice Department has issued about 40 subpoenas over the past week seeking information about the actions of former President Donald J. Trump and his associates related to the 2020 election and the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, according to people familiar with the situation.
Two top Trump advisers, Boris Epshteyn and Mike Roman, had their phones seized as evidence, those people said.
Among those the department has contacted since Wednesday are people who are close to the former president and have played significant roles in his post-White House life.
Those receiving the subpoenas included Dan Scavino, Mr. Trump’s former social media director who rose from working at a Trump-owned golf course to one of his most loyal aides and has remained an adviser after Mr. Trump left office. Stanley Woodward, one of Mr. Scavino’s lawyers, declined to comment.
The Justice Department also executed search warrants to seize electronic devices from people involved in the so-called fake electors effort in swing states, including Mr. Epshteyn, a longtime Trump adviser, and Mr. Roman, a campaign strategist, according to people familiar with the events. Federal agents made the seizures last week, the people said.
Recall, Trump’s election lawyer John Eastman said the FBI searched and seized his phone in June.
FBI ambushes John Eastman outside restaurant
John Eastman was exiting a restaurant with his wife and friend in New Mexico when FBI agents ambushed him and “forced” him to unlock his phone.
The federal agents then took Eastman’s iPhone 12 Pro.
Tucker Carlson Interviews Conservative Lawyer John Eastman To Discuss The Democrats' January 6th Witch-Hunt & The FBI Seizing His Phone Without Showing Him A Warrant pic.twitter.com/Ei1ZY3IzpX
— The Columbia Bugle 🇺🇸 (@ColumbiaBugle) June 28, 2022
Sadly, no one should be surprised at the desperation being exhibited by the Xiden regime’s handlers trying to keep Trump off the 2024 ticket.
And notice how they keep leaking these stories to the NYT?
Remember that Republican ‘fake electors entering county elections office’ story?
The Washington Post went on an early attack attempting to portray the presence of Jeff Lenberg and other investigators in Coffee County GA as something nefarious. As Jeff details in the podcast, there is much more to the story and the investigation he was conducting was for a very good reason.
Friday on the Conservative Daily podcast, Jeff Lenberg, an expert vulnerability tester, came on to discuss the hit piece articles that have been published by some of the mockingbird media outlets such as the Washington Post, the AP, and CNN. The Washington Post, for example, on Tuesday, ran a piece titled “Election deniers repeatedly visited Ga. county office at center of criminal probe, video shows“.
In this article, they frame “surveillance footage” from Coffee County as if Jeff Lenberg and Cyber Ninjas’ Doug Logan are breaking into this building on a weekend or holiday when no one is “home.”
In reality, they were invited in by the Coffee County Elections Supervisor. You cannot breach an intentionally opened door.
In Pearson v. Kemp, it was stated “defendants’ counsel argued that the secretary of state has no lawful authority over county election officials… Plaintiff could amend their complaint to add the election officials in Cobb…”
If the Secretary of State does not have lawful authority over election officials, and Plaintiff’s counsel agreed, then it should be within the scope of the County Elections Supervisor to ensure their machines are functioning properly. In Coffee County, they were not.
In the fall of 2020, prior to the election, Elections Supervisor Misty Hampton, demonstrated on a YouTube video that she could manipulate ballots any way she would like through adjudication, as long as you had the credentials. You could change a vote in the race that was originally the reason for adjudication , or change a vote on a race that didn’t require adjudication on that same ballot.
Jeff Lenberg also revealed that you can use essentially any type of paper, or even a Xerox copy of a ballot, to run through the machines and they would accept it. By comparison, a vending machine will reject most counterfeit monies. This would imply that a vending machine is safer than our election machines.
On election night, Hampton had problems with the machines consistently running batches of ballots without the machine “choking” on a batch. She became frustrated when the suggested “cleanings” did not solve the problem. Lenberg noted that she said this occurred more frequently on Trump ballots. He later explains the significance of this. One of the election board members called Dominion and said they would give them a half hour to get this machine working or they would call in the news media. The Dominion staff on-site came back inside and asked them to try it one more time. Lenberg notes that, according to Hampton, the Dominion staff were not allowed to touch the equipment. When Hampton tried again and the machine worked “perfectly” from then on, one has to wonder how the machine mysteriously began functioning properly when the Dominion techs returned from their phone call.
The machines in Georgia are not allowed to be networked, however, Lenberg later discovered that, according to the machine’s model number, the motherboard has Bluetooth and wi-fi capabilities built into it. Additionally, it has the ability to “wake up” periodically and “look for a Bluetooth signal.” This is evidenced by the Dominion staff being able to somehow reconfigure that machine so it worked properly without ever touching it.
At this point, I asked Lenberg if there was any investigation into how Dominion staffers were able to “fix” the machine without ever touching it. Of course, there are crickets from anyone who actually has the authority to conduct a criminal investigation and bring about criminal charges. Instead, they want to ensure no one investigates by investigating anyone who does.
Lenberg then talks about the forensic imaging, which he was not a part of. He said that the county election board wanted to have this looked and approved of an outside firm to image the machines safely and by professional standards, including retention of an original copy of the imaging.
Once that was complete, they began testing on the equipment. Lenberg and Logan were both involved in this, however, neither actually touched the machines. That was left up to Misty Hampton, the official in charge of that county office. Lenberg and Logan did help fill out ballots to be used in the testing, but equipment handling was left to the local officials.
The Results
At the end of the testing, both Logan and Lenberg wrote up reports on what they found, which were seemingly ignored by officials outside of of Coffee County.
On the ICP machines, they were “reversing ballots” at a fairly high rate (about 15%) and the reversal was 4 to 1 Trump to Biden ballots.
On the high speed scanners, it was a little more shocking: Lenberg explains that the user interface allows you to change many different scanning parameters like gamma, contrast, sensitivity etc. Lenberg explained: “Well, that’s nuts on its surface. If you have a certified piece of equipment that is counting votes, you don’t want to let an administrator go in and adjust how its going to scan votes. You would never do that!” Yet, one could, even after certification.
Before they began playing with the parameters, Lenberg claims they could run ballots through perfectly with no issues. Thousands of ballots. But when they got to the tenth parameter, that all changed. This parameter allowed the user to “ignore red, blue, green or none”. It was defaulted to “ignore red”. There was no red on any of the ballots they were running. However, when they set that parameter to “none”, the machine would not run Trump ballots properly. They couldn’t run 20 Trump ballots before rejecting a ballot. It would run Biden ballots through no problem, though.
I asked Lenberg at that point if they checked the log files to see what adjustments were done while Dominion was on the phone and “fixed” the machine during the election, but unfortunately, he hadn’t seen those files.
This is the story the mockingbird media won’t tell you. This was a major flaw that was apparent on election day and duplicated during the testing. This should be the investigation. But instead individuals like Jeff Lenberg, who has a well-distinguished career and has held US government clearances, are being investigated and persecuted for pointing out these flaws. He’s being defamed in the mockingbird media while our government officials who likely benefitted from these processes refuse to make our elections transparent to the taxpayers that fund it.
Show us the election. Show us the ballots, Georgia. State law mandates Georgia maintain the 2020 ballots for another two months. And state and federal law mandate the primary ballots still be retained. Show us.
But they won’t. All efforts to see the physical ballots will get stonewalled in the courts after Georgia officials spend hundreds of thousands to fight against transparency. They’ll send in a team of 22 high powered lawyers and spend probably over $100,000 to depose one cyber forensics expert in a civil case and hope that the Fulton Co DA gets something substantive enough to use in her grand jury.
They’re hoping to kick the can down the road just long enough to make this disappear. Meanwhile, the mockingbird media’s fascination with the surveillance footage is leading their sheeple down another rabbit hole to obfuscate the real fraud. And they sop it up. It’s worth noting that they won’t mention the word “breach” without putting “alleged”, “allegedly” or “allegations of” in front of it. It’s almost as if they “allegedly” don’t want to get their “alleged” asses “allegedly” sued off for “alleging” allegations.
I leave the mockingbird media and Fani Willis, the rogue DA in Fulton County, with these questions that I doubt they can answer:
** What crimes were broken? Specifically.
** Why aren’t you investigating the apparent remote access by Dominion in the middle of an election?
** Why aren’t you investigating what Lenberg and Logan found while observing the county officials’ testing?
By Cristina Laila for The Gateway Pundit September 6, 2022
The $20 fast-food burger is coming…
California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) on Monday signed a new fast-food bill that will pave the path for $22 an hour minimum wage.
The new measure passed by Democrat officials and signed by Democrat Governor Newsom, will create a 10-member council with the power to set minimum wage to $22 an hour.
“California is committed to ensuring that the men and women who have helped build our world-class economy are able to share in the state’s prosperity,” Newsom said in a statement. “Today’s action gives hardworking fast food workers a stronger voice and seat at the table to set fair wages and critical health and safety standards across the industry.”
Democrat Assemblywoman Luz Rivas celebrated the new bill and called it a “watershed moment in the history of the labor movement, led by Black and Latino fast food workers…”
Interesting?!? So as an essential Care-giver worker, I still make only $16 per hour. We had to fight for many years for this amount. And now a fast food worker will make $22 per hour, more than I do flipping patties and fries. So basically, I should go and work for McDonald.?@!!
Well, there goes the "Fast Food Industry". No one will buy $14 hamburgers and $10 fries. But then, that's the idea. Killing Low wage jobs so everyone HAS to rely on the GOv't for their income. Socialism coming in from the back door.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday signed a nation-leading measure giving more than a half-million fast food workers more power and protections, despite the objections of restaurant owners who warned it would drive up consumers’ costs.
The landmark law creates a 10-member Fast Food Council with equal numbers of workers’ delegates and employers’ representatives, along with two state officials, empowered to set minimum standards for wages, hours and working conditions in California.
Newsom said he was proud to sign the measure into law on Labor Day.
The law caps minimum wage increases for fast-food workers at chains with more than 100 restaurants at $22 an hour next year, compared to the statewide minimum of $15.50 an hour, with cost of living increases thereafter.
The state legislature approved the measure on Aug. 29. Debate split along party lines, with Republicans opposed. Sen. Brian Dahle, the Republican nominee for governor in November, had called it “a steppingstone to unionize all these workers.”
Restaurant owners and franchisers cited an analysis they commissioned by the UC Riverside Center for Economic Forecast and Development saying that the legislation would increase consumer costs.
That last phrase didn’t need a bunch of “analysts,” it is apparent to everyone but a leftist – aka elementary school dropout, Luz Rivas.
