Category: Elections

Categories
Biden Cartel Corruption Elections Leftist Virtue(!) Reprints from others. Stupid things people say or do. The Courts The Law

Georgia Freedom Caucus Chair Signs Onto Move That Could End in Fulton County Prosecutor’s Impeachment

Good Bad, and the Ugly. David Walter Banks/The Washington Post/Brandon Bell/Getty Images
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis speaks in the Fulton County Government Center during a news conference in Atlanta, Georgia, on Aug. 14. (John Bazemore / AP)

By Jack Davis  August 22, 2023

The chair of Georgia’s Freedom Caucus said that it is time the Fulton County district attorney who has spent more than two years working up to the indictment of former President Donald Trump faced legislative scrutiny.

Trump was indicted last week on conspiracy charges related to his challenge of the 2020 election.

Republican state Rep. Charlice Byrd announced on social media that she is supporting an effort from Republican state Sen. Colton Moore to investigate DA Fani Willis.

“I was elected to do a job, not sit on the sidelines. Given the concerning nature of the recent indictment in Fulton County, I have signed on to Senator Colton Moore’s letter calling for an emergency special session. I encourage my colleagues to do the same,” she posted on her Facebook page.

In a statement posted on social media, she wrote “Having reviewed the evidence of possible corruption in the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office, specifically regarding the indictment of President Donald Trump and eighteen others, I believe it is time the General Assembly investigated this matter.”

She said that she supports Moore’s call for “an emergency special session of the General Assembly to investigate possible malfeasance.”

“If wrongdoing is found, as a duly elected member of the Georgia House of Representatives I am prepared to begin the impeachment process,” she wrote.

“The people demand this matter be investigated fully,” she wrote, calling upon other members to support the proposal.

“We must seek the truth by doing our constitutional duty of overseeing the judicial system, to ensure the oath of office enshrined in law, that every District Attorney must take before assuming office, is respected and adhered to,” she continued.

Last week, when Trump’s indictment was announced, Byrd posted on Facebook, “It’s a dark day in Georgia but the Georgia Freedom Caucus and our coalition partners won’t sit by and watch this totalitarian corruption.”

 

“We must strip all funding and, if appropriate, impeach Fani Willis,” Moore said in a statement last week when he announced his call for a special session, according to Breitbart.

“As a Georgia State Senator, I am officially calling for an emergency session to review the actions of Fani Willis. America is under attack. I’m not going to sit back and watch as radical left prosecutors weaponize their elected offices to politically target their opponents,” he said.

The look of desperation.Joe Raedle / Getty

Trump will be arraigned on the charges against him on Thursday.

I guess these single-digit IQs think they can hold on to power forever. Otherwise, they’d be worried about what’s going to happen to them when the other side uses their tactics against them. — TPR

Categories
Commentary Economy Education Elections Immigration Leftist Virtue(!) Links from other news sources. Opinion Politics Progressive Racism Reprints from others.

New York, California each lost $1T in assets as financial firms fled south New York, California lose trillions amid exodus of financial titans.

High taxes, rising costs, crime spur exodus to red states Fox News Contributor Jonas Max Ferris and Quill Intelligence CEO Danielle DiMartino discuss the population exodus from Democrat states to GOP states over taxes, cost of living and crime on 'Cavuto Live'.

New York, California each lost $1T in assets as financial firms fled south New York, California lose trillions amid exodus of financial titans.

The steady exodus of Wall Street banks and big tech firms from California and New York over the past several years has cost the states nearly $1 trillion apiece in managed assets, according to a new analysis by Bloomberg News.

The departure of companies like Elliott Management, AllianceBernstein and Charles Schwab has drained the two states of thousands of high-paying jobs, further burdening city and state finances by sapping tax revenue.

Commercial property markets have also buckled under the weight of the sudden exit of the finance industry, at the same time they are struggling to find new tenants amid the surge in remote work.

A truck is parked in front of a U-Haul facility on August 31, 2020, in New York City. (John Lamparski/Getty Images / Getty Images)

Bloomberg conducted the analysis by going through the corporate filings from more than 17,000 firms since the end of 2019.

The moves out of major metros like Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York City were often borne out of the desire for lower taxes and warmer weather.

From the start of 2020 through the end of March 2023, more than 370 investment companies – managing about $2.7 trillion in assets – moved their headquarters to a new state, according to Bloomberg. The overwhelming majority of the migration was from high-tax states in the Northeast and on the West Coast and into lower-tax states like Florida and Texas, which boast no income tax.

Florida was the top destination for companies that left New York, with the Sunshine State drawing the likes of Icahn Capital Management and AKR Investment Management. Texas, meanwhile, has shown to be the top destination for companies leaving California.

A general view of Lower Manhattan

A general view of Lower Manhattan as buildings overlook New York Harbor on February 16, 2022, in New York City. ((Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images) / Getty Images)

Not only businesses are leaving California and New York: A growing number of Americans are also migrating to places like Florida and Texas, according to a Bank of America analyst note that is based on aggregated and anonymous internal customer data.

“We constructed near real-time estimates of domestic migration flows and found that pandemic migration trends are not reversing,” the analysis said. Since the first quarter of 2023, the data “suggests that cities that saw a large influx of people during the pandemic have still been growing faster than other cities in recent quarters.”

The analyst note found that San Francisco experienced a big drop in population at the start of the year, with a more than 1% drop in the first quarter of 2023 and a more than 3% decline from 2020 to 2022.

 

The city has been plagued by a spike in property-related crime, according to the California Department of Justice’s Criminal Justice Statistics Center.

New York City also posted a big population decline, losing about 1% of its population in early 2023 and 3% in the prior two years.

“This population shift paints a clear picture,” said Janelle Fritts, a policy analyst at the nonpartisan Tax Foundation. “People left high-tax, high-cost states for lower-tax, lower-cost alternatives.”

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Corruption Crime Elections January 6 Links from other news sources. Opinion Politics Reprints from others.

The Flaw in Trump’s Georgia Indictment.

Finding the flaw was easy. GP Photo.

The Flaw in Trump’s Georgia Indictment.

What’s become of the presumption of innocence?

The question is an urgent one due to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s election interference case against Donald Trump and 18 others, which she has dubiously framed as a racketeering conspiracy.

Why has DA Willis invoked Georgia’s version of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, which is typically applied to mobsters engaged in the familiar rackets of murder, extortion, trafficking in narcotics and stolen goods, gambling, prostitution and so on? Because there’s a giant hole in her case: the lack of a clear crime to which Trump and his co-defendants can plausibly be said to have agreed.

Let’s put RICO to the side for a moment and focus on conspiracy. Very simply, a conspiracy is an agreement to violate a criminal statute. It takes two to tango, so a conspiracy must minimally involve a pair of people. Beyond that, though, it can involve three people, 19 people, 100 people — any number. Regardless of how many people are said to be implicated, however, there is always one requirement: There must be a meeting of the minds about the crime that is the objective of the conspiracy.

If prosecutors allege a large-scale conspiracy, various conspirators may play different roles. In a conspiracy to sell cocaine, for example, some people may handle importation; others handle sales or security, and still others, accounting and management of the cash proceeds. But what unites these role-players in a single conspiracy is the criminal objective — in our example, to sell cocaine. If there is no agreement about a crime, there is no conspiracy.

Usually, this is not a problem for prosecutors. While constitutional due process guarantees that every American is presumed innocent, it also dictates that no American can be charged with a crime and forced to stand trial unless there is probable cause that a crime has been committed.

As a result, even though prosecutors bear the burden of proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt before there can be a conviction, we can easily understand why the defendants have been charged. If they are charged with conspiracy, the indictment will clearly state the crime they allegedly agreed to commit — e.g., drug trafficking, bank robbery, murder, extortion. Whatever the objective crime may be, we understand that the prosecutors, the police, and the grand jury have established to the court’s satisfaction that there is enough evidence to establish probable cause that the alleged conspirators agreed to commit a crime.

Willis’s indictment. She alleges that the 19 people named in her indictment are guilty of conspiracy because they agreed to try to keep Donald Trump in power as president — specifically, to “change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump.” Maybe they shared such an aim, maybe their 19 minds met regarding that objective, but in and of itself, trying to reverse the result of an election is not a crime. You may have noticed that neither Al Gore nor Stacey Abrams was ever led away in handcuffs.

To be clear, it’s entirely possible that people can perform criminal acts in the pursuit of a lawful objective. If they do, they may be charged with those crimes — and if the crimes are serious, they should be charged. That, however, does not mean their overarching objective was a crime. And again, if you don’t have two or more people agreeing on an objective that is a crime, you don’t have a conspiracy.

Willis tries to get around this inconvenience in two ways, neither of which works.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis speaks during a news conference at the Fulton County Government building on August 14, 2023 in Atlanta, Georgia.
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis speaks during a news conference at the Fulton County Government building on Aug.14, 2023 in Atlanta.Joe Raedle/Getty Images

The first is a tautology: She conclusively asserts, on page 14 of the indictment, that this was a “conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump.” That is, the lawful objective of changing the election outcome somehow becomes unlawful because she invokes the apparently talismanic word “unlawful.” But there is no crime of unlawfully trying to change an election outcome — not in Georgia law nor any other American law.

Trying to change an election outcome is legal; the end doesn’t become illegal if pursued by illegal means — instead, those illegal means can be charged as crimes. But there is no conspiracy unless the objective itself is clearly a crime. You don’t see prosecutors alleging, say, that defendants were in a “conspiracy to unlawfully” commit murder or robbery. Murder and robbery are crimes. If two or more people agree to commit murder or robbery, that is an agreement to commit a crime — a conspiracy. To the contrary, an agreement to try to reverse the result of an election is not an agreement to commit a crime.

Willis thus turns to her second artifice, the RICO conspiracy charge. RICO is unique in the criminal law because, instead of targeting crimes, it targets entities — associations of people, referred to as enterprises — that generate revenue through the commission of crimes. The offense is not so much the crimes (referred to as the pattern of racketeering activity), but the enterprise (such as a mafia family) that carries out the crimes. A RICO conspiracy is an agreement to participate in such an enterprise — to belong to the group and sustain the group so that it continues to generate power and profits.

That doesn’t fit the Georgia case. Trump and his 18 co-defendants did not intend or desire to belong to a group, or even see themselves as a group. Their objective allegedly was to maintain Trump in power, not to participate in an enterprise. And unlike a RICO enterprise, the 19 defendants had no intention of sustaining their group — if it even was a unified group. Their only objective allegedly was to keep Trump in office. By Jan. 20, 2021, that objective was either going to succeed or fail, but whatever the outcome, the group would then cease to exist as such. By contrast, a real RICO enterprise must be a continuing threat — one that labors to preserve its existence and operations.

The defendants indicted by Willis did not have an overarching agreement to commit a crime, and they were the antithesis of a RICO enterprise. If, as the DA alleges, they committed discrete crimes in the effort to reverse the election result — such as forgery, false statements, solicitation of others to commit felonies, or hacking into election systems — then they should be prosecuted for those crimes.

But an agreement to do something legal — to reverse the result of an election — is not a conspiracy. And if the presumption of innocence means anything, we must presume people are innocent if the prosecutor fails to allege that they agreed to do something that was actually a crime.

Andrew C. McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor, is a senior fellow at National Review Institute, contributing editor at National Review, and a Fox News contributor.

 

Categories
Commentary Elections Just my own thoughts Opinion Politics

Short and sweet. Why it makes sense for Trump to skip the first two or three debates.

Trump and the rest of the boys and girls. CNN Photo

Short and sweet. Why it makes sense for Trump to skip the first two or three debates. Trump is so far ahead that it would be nothing but a circus side show. Why Debate folks that are around 1 or 2 percent?

Let the debaters thin out as they debate to see who can muster support with the base.

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Biden Cartel Commentary Corruption Crime Elections Faked news January 6 Links from other news sources. Media Woke MSM Reprints from others. The Courts The Law

The Georgia Indictment Was Triggered by Fake News.

The look of desperation.Joe Raedle / Getty

The Georgia Indictment Was Triggered by Fake News.

The indictment against President Donald Trump and 18 lawyers, aides, and supporters has been widely criticized, but even many of the critics have missed the most important flaw: the fact that the entire grand jury investigation began with a bit of fake news.

The fake news was reporting that Trump had told Georgia officials, by telephone, to fabricate votes.

In early January 2020, for example, Trump was reported to have told Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find” the votes he needed to win.

Actually, what Trump said was: “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state” (emphasis added).

Trump was not giving an order. He was talking about his own feelings. And as Scott Adams noted this week, Trump was speaking in the context of believing he had already won the state. He believed the proof was out there; he didn’t need to make anything up.

As George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley has noted: “While others have portrayed the statement as a raw call for fabricating the votes, it seems more likely that Trump was swatting back claims that there was no value to a statewide recount by pointing out that he wouldn’t have to find a statistically high number of votes to change the outcome of the election. It is telling that many politicians and pundits refuse to even acknowledge that obvious alternate meaning.”

The term “find” is also used colloquially, and often, in the context of counting votes. Political analysts on television routinely say that a candidate needs to “find” votes in one area or another, having already been cast, as results are reported by local precincts.

A week later, there was a mistaken report in the Washington Post on Jan. 9, 2021, that Trump had urged a Georgia election investigator, later named as Frances Watson, to “find the fraud.” The original headline was: “‘Find the fraud’: Trump pressured a Georgia elections investigator in a separate call legal experts say could amount to obstruction.”

The Post later had to issue a correction: “Trump did not tell the investigator to ‘find the fraud’ or say she would be ‘a national hero’ if she did so. Instead, Trump urged the investigator to scrutinize ballots in Fulton County, Ga., asserting she would find ‘dishonesty’ there.” But the inaccurate version of the Post‘s original story was repeated throughout the mainstream media before the correction was made.

That does not mean Trump’s conduct was praiseworthy. But there was nothing in his conversations — properly reported, at least — to suggest that he had done anything illegal, especially given that he knew lawyers and skeptical officials were listening to him.

Nevertheless, these reports were partly what prompted Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to launch her investigation, starting with a “special grand jury” and leading to the current indictment.

CNN recently reported that the conversation with Brad Raffensperger were what “kicked off the local district attorney’s investigation.” That conversation, and others, were reported — and misquoted — in a highly partisan context, when Democrats were looking for any way to punish Trump and his supporters.

In Trump’s second impeachment trial, for example, which centered on the Capitol riot of January 6, 2021, the Democrats’ House impeachment managers presented the fake “find the fraud” quote as if it were real, effectively falsifying evidence in the Senate.

It was not the first time fake news had factored into an impeachment.

Trump’s first impeachment was prompted by misleading, second-hand, anonymous media reports about his telephone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The transcript, which Trump declassified and released, showed that there had been no “quid pro quo” for an investigation into (accurate, it turns out) suspicions of Joe Biden’s role in Ukraine. But Democrats stuck with the fake news, even making up a fake transcript.

The pattern in both cases was the same: incriminating media reports, based on leaks that likely came from anti-Trump sources, triggered an investigation that had too much political momentum to be stopped once the contrary, first-hand evidence emerged.

Another fake news story that helped launch an investigation was the claim that Trump asked Russia to hack into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails. Trump joked about Russia finding Clinton’s emails during a press conference in July 2017. His critics claimed that his rather obvious attempt at humor was, in fact, an invitation to a geopolitical rival to commit espionage.

That prompted then-CIA director John Brennan to start a counter-intelligence investigation into the Trump campaign. That investigation fed the “Russia collusion” hoax, which became an attempt to undo the results of the 2016 election. No major figure — not Clinton, nor her lawyers, nor the officials responsible for pushing the lie — was indicted, though Special Counsel John H. Durham convicted an FBI lawyer of falsifying an email (and lost two other cases, likely, in part, because of jury nullification).

It is unclear whether the “special grand jury” in Georgia heard about the calls to Raffensperger and Watson, though it reportedly heard recordings of another call, with Speaker of the Georgia House of Representatives David Ralston.

All three calls are referred to in the indictment approved by a formal, subsequent grand jury on Monday. But the indictment does not cite the falsely reported quotes from those calls, or even an accurate version of Trump’s statement to Raffensperger, which launched Willis’s investigation.

That is because the actual quotes from those calls are, arguably, exculpatory, just like the Ukraine transcript. But it is too late.

Once again, the partisan media, amplifying the political prejudices of anti-Trump officials, has brought the country to the brink.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m.

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Commentary Corruption Elections Links from other news sources. Reprints from others. The Courts The Law

Abrams: Georgia case against Trump riddled with conflicts.

Good Bad, and the Ugly. David Walter Banks/The Washington Post/Brandon Bell/Getty Images

 

  • Abrams: Georgia case against Trump riddled with conflicts.
  • Former President Trump is facing 13 new charges in Georgia
  • The charges stem from alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election
  • Abrams: Fulton County DA Fani Willis has overtly politicized the case

Updated: 

(NewsNation) — Last week, I called for something which I knew was highly controversial. I said that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis should drop her case against former President Donald Trump after federal officials indicted him for basically the same conduct. Not because she doesn’t have a case — Willis certainly has the legal ability and right to move forward — but I argued it simply wasn’t the right thing to do.

I stand by what I said now that Willis and her office have officially indicted Trump and 18 other codefendants in a 41-count indictment, 13 of which are against Trump himself. It’s a wide-ranging racketeering case alleging Trump and his allies conspired to reject the results of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia.

Now, my comments were never related to the others, just the former president. Let me be clear, this indictment reminds us of the absurd lengths that Trump and his team went to try to overturn the actual results of the election.

Trump, of course, denies the charges and has set his own news conference for next week. He says he will present “a large, complex, detailed but irrefutable report on the presidential election fraud which took place in Georgia” which he says will lead to a “complete exoneration” of him.

We shall see. But there are two main reasons that remain as to why Willis shouldn’t be doing this.

No. 1: The federal case makes the Georgia case against Trump duplicative and unnecessary. No. 2: Willis’ case is riddled with conflicts and political considerations that will be easy for the Trump team to exploit.

Willis bringing this case is just bad for everyone, and I mean everyone.

The more important issue is that the federal indictment makes Willis’ case unnecessary. It goes into depth on the Georgia allegations and both indictments highlight similar quotes.

Do we need another case brought on basically the same set of facts?

Jack Smith goes state by state in the federal indictment, very meticulously addressing conduct. So, now are prosecutors in other states going to bring cases against Trump, too? Now, that is different from charging the actual fake electors as Michigan and now Georgia have done.

The biggest argument I hear again and again is that if Trump is reelected, he couldn’t make state charges go away, only federal. That’s true, but that is not a reason for a prosecutor to act and there is no way the state trial is going to happen any time soon.

And if Trump wins the 2024 election, the U.S. Supreme Court barely let Bill Clinton get sued while in office; they will not let a state prosecutor try the sitting president of the United States in a criminal case.

That could be why Willis has pledged to do the impossible, which is to get this case to trial within the next six months. She currently has a gang-related RICO case that is still in its eighth month of jury selection.

But, even the DOJ itself has a policy seeking to limit multiple prosecutions. It says: “The purpose of this policy is to protect persons charged with criminal conduct from the burdens associated with multiple prosecutions and punishments for substantially the same act(s) or transaction(s), to promote efficient utilization of department resources, and to promote coordination and cooperation between federal and state prosecutors.”

The reverse should be true, as well. But, it’s not just that. It’s also Willis’ conduct before Monday night.

She has given more than three dozen media interviews on the investigation. Even the judge overseeing the grand jury said she is “on national media almost nightly talking about the investigation.”

In many of those interviews, she repeatedly kept hinting at the outcome of the case. In the end, it was certainly not a question of if the indictment would come, but when.

Her explanations for why it’s taken two and a half years to get here have made little sense.

“The right to have your vote protected is a serious one and so, you know, I’ve told people many times I’m not going to be rushed. We are doing what is needed for justice,” Willis said in one interview.

That can’t be true. With the special counsel, the delay is more easily understood. Attorney General Merrick Garland likely wasn’t going to bring charges against Trump for trying to overturn the election. Even after the Jan. 6 committee’s criminal referrals, it sure didn’t seem the attorney general was going to act on it, much to the frustration of liberals.

Then, the documents case landed on his lap with the former president seemingly trying to prevent the DOJ from getting back highly sensitive government documents stored at Mar-A-Lago.. At that point, Garland apparently feels he has to deal with it and eventually he appoints a special counsel who then essentially takes it where he wants. That explains that delay.

Jack Smith has only been investigating since November of last year, but what could possibly have taken Willis this long? It took her a year to even request a special purpose grand jury. Why? And that “special purpose” grand jury was just advisory. They heard evidence for eight months and then clearly recommended indictments in February. We know that because the foreperson, just like Willis, sort of hinted at it in an interview.

“We definitely heard a lot about former President Trump and we definitely discussed him a lot in the room. And I’ll say that when this list comes out, there are no major plot twists waiting for you,” the foreperson said.

It all felt like a game. Meanwhile, Willis has also regularly appeared to express her own personal opinions that what Trump did was illegal. After all, the key legal question is: Did he have corrupt intent?

Willis has long made it clear that in Trump’s call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, where he asked the secretary of state to “find” 11,780 votes, that he had that corrupt intent, even before the indictment ever came down.

“You look at facts to see did they really have intent? Did they know what they were doing? Detailed facts become important, like asking for a specific number and going back and investigating and understanding that number is one more than the number that is needed. It lets you know someone had a clear mind that they knew what they were doing,” Willis said in a 2021 interview.

So, if you know that, why has it taken two and a half years? Yes, the RICO case she’s now charging is sweeping and has moving parts that took time. But it still just feels like she has been milking this.

That’s not all. She has also overtly politicized it. Last July, less than two weeks after Willis subpoenaed South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, she used her campaign Twitter account to tweet out a cartoon.

The cartoon showed her fishing Graham out of a swamp with what appears to be a depiction of Trump saying: “I know you’ll do the right thing for the swamp, Lindsey.” All the while, her campaign was using the account to solicit donations.

Can you imagine if that was a Republican prosecutor seemingly exploiting the subpoena of a progressive liberal Democrat to solicit campaign donations? There would be no end to the mainstream media’s hysteria.

But this wasn’t the only time Willis and her surrogates referenced the Trump investigation to solicit followers, tweets and donations for her campaign. And that doesn’t even address the actual documented conflict of interest she had.

Willis subpoenaed alleged fake elector Burt Jones, a Republican state senator who at the time of the subpoena was running for lieutenant governor. Willis then hosted a fundraiser for Jones’ political opponent.

Jones went on to win the election, but Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney could not believe the actions of Willis. In a hearing, he called what she did a “what are you thinking?” moment.

Look, Willis is too far in politically to let this go. I understand that. I also get the arguments about accountability, pardons and state vs. federal cases.

But, I think the right thing to do would have been to let the feds handle a case that is about conduct by the president of the United States while he was president.

And to those who desperately want to see Trump locked up and believe that any prosecution of him is a noble one, well you may come to regret this case. Already Monday, there was the release of what appeared to be a draft indictment of Trump hours before the official indictment was handed up.

The DA’s office called the document “fictitious” but in fact, the charges listed on it turned out to be identical to the final indictment. They weren’t the final charges, but it was a huge blunder and one Willis wasn’t even willing to address.

“No, I can’t tell you anything about what you refer to. What I can tell you is that we had a grand jury here in Fulton County. They deliberated until almost 8 o’clock, if not right after 8 o’clock. An indictment was returned and it was true billed. And you now have an indictment. I am not an expert on clerk’s duties or even administrative duties so I wouldn’t know how to work that system and so I’m not going to speculate,” Willis said.

Except, it immediately gave the Trump team a legitimate argument. I am betting this case will end up giving Trump and his supporters many more legitimate arguments to make about the unfairness the prosecutor and the process.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author, and not of NewsNation.

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Corruption Crime Elections Links from other news sources.

Another case of the FBI sitting on their Ass.

FBI sitting on their Ass.

Another case of the FBI sitting on their Ass.

Since March of 2021 the FBI is sitting on a case from the state of Michigan where a Democrat operative showed up with 8-10,000 phony ballots. The person wasn’t arrested but the state turned this over to the FBI.

To this day nothing. Why? The person who dropped the phony ballots works for GBI Strategies. Who are they? A group hired by the DNC. Need I say more?

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Corruption Elections Government Overreach How sick is this? Links from other news sources. Reprints from others. The Courts The Law Uncategorized

Some of the charges and you be the judge.

Bring it on. Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Some of the charges and you be the judge. Well just like Trump predicted, number four went down last night. Same as the other three. Hearsay and 1st amendment violations. Breitbart had this.

Former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows is among those in the group of co-defendants in the late night indictment, bizarrely, for simply asking for a phone number.

Per the indictment:

On or about the 21st day of November 2020, MARK RANDALL MEADOWS sent a text message to United States Representative Scott Perry from Pennsylvania and stated, “Can you send me the number for the speaker and the leader of PA Legislature. POTUS wants to chat with them.” This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

Other actions taken by co-defendants and Trump were considered “overt act[s] in furtherance of the conspiracy.” Such actions include Trump tweeting about election integrity hearings. In one tweet, for instance, Trump said, “Georgia hearings now on @OANN. Amazing!’” According to the indictment, “this was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.” It categorized similar tweets that way as well, as Trump encouraged people to watch public hearings about the allegations of voting irregularities:

On or about the 30th day of December 2020, DONALD JOHN TRUMP caused to be tweeted from the Twitter account @RealDonaldTrump, “Hearings from Atlanta on the Georgia Election overturn now being broadcast. Check it out. @OANN @newsmax and many more. @BrianKempGA should resign from office. He is an obstructionist who refuses to admit that we won Georgia, BIG! Also won the other Swing States.” This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

…

On or about the 30th day of December 2020, DONALD JOHN TRUMP caused to be tweeted from the Twitter account @RealDonaldTrump, “Hearings from Atlanta on the Georgia Election overturn now being broadcast LIVE via @RSBNetwork! https://t.co/ogBvaKfqG.” This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

Trump’s lawyers responded to the indictment early Tuesday morning, deeming it “undoubtedly just as flawed and unconstitutional as this entire process has been.”

“So, the Witch Hunt continues! 19 people Indicated [sic] tonight, including the former President of the United States, me, by an out of control and very corrupt District Attorney who campaigned and raised money on, ‘I will get Trump,’” Trump said of the indictment on Truth Social.

“And what about those Indictment Documents put out today, long before the Grand Jury even voted, and then quickly withdrawn? Sounds Rigged to me!” he exclaimed, inquiring why he was not indicted two and a half years ago.

“Because they wanted to do it right in the middle of my political campaign. Witch Hunt!” he exclaimed.

Republican allies have also jumped to Trump’s defense.

“Same playbook. New partisan DA trying to make a name for themselves,” Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) remarked.

“Another sham indictment of Trump timed to do maximum damage in the 2024 election—this time with the indictment posted before the grand jury even voted—is no coincidence,” he added. “Americans see through this witch hunt.”

“Justice should be blind, but Biden has weaponized government against his leading political opponent to interfere in the 2024 election,” House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) said.

“Now a radical DA in Georgia is following Biden’s lead by attacking President Trump and using it to fundraise her political career,” he added. “Americans see through this desperate sham.”

Just another day of fear from the left. I guess Trump will address this next week in a live news conference. Should be very interesting. NewsMax I’m sure will carry it live. So how many more points will Trumps popularity grow? This just causes Trump to be more outspoken and vocal.

Categories
Commentary Elections Links from other news sources. Opinion Politics Uncategorized

No Labels party has now grown. In 10 states now.

New choice for Democrats and Never Trumpers?

No Labels party has now grown. In 10 states now. North Carolina, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Nevada, Oregon, South Dakota and Utah. Interesting to see if states like California, New York, and Illinois try to block them.

No Labels are a group of pretend Moderates from both the Democrat and Republican party. I see the Never Trumpers joining because they won’t support the Republican candidate.

Now the Democrats who would look to support them would be your seniors (the ones Obama-Biden pandemic didn’t kill) and the union members who were thrown under the bus because of the green fiasco.

Categories
Commentary Corruption Crime Elections How sick is this? Links from other news sources. Reprints from others.

Democrat Arrested And Indicted On 82 Counts Of Voter Fraud.

Democrat county supervisor Trey Adkins | via WJHL News Channel 11

Democrat Arrested and Indicted On 82 Counts of Voter Fraud.

Editor’s Note: This article has been updated to provide additional information, including the date of events and Trey Adkins’ current party affiliation.

In a startling development, Democrat county supervisor Trey Adkins of Virginia was arrested and indicted in 2022 on 82 felony charges involving voter fraud. He was serving as the Knox District Supervisor for Buchanan County.

Prosecutors say he allegedly showed up at the homes of voters with absentee ballot applications and ballots to ensure he would have their vote.

A grand jury indicted Adkins on 82 felony charges, including 34 counts of false statement and election fraud, 11 counts of absentee voting procedure violations, 11 counts of forgery of a public record, 3 counts of conspiracy to make a false statement and election fraud, and more. (Trending Now: Trump Indicted Again On Criminal Charges)

 

Adkins’ aunt, Sherry Lynn Bailey, was also indicted for allegedly taking part in the scheme, according to local news outlet WJHL.

Bailey faces multiple counts of false statements, election fraud, conspiracy, and forgery of a public record. “Adkins was under investigation by Virginia State Police for over two years,” the report found. “Authorities said they would have little further to release before a trial.”

Prosecutors said, “The Rules of Professional Conduct prevents any lawyer participating in the prosecution of a criminal matter that may be tried to a jury from making an extrajudicial statement that the lawyer knows or should know will have a likelihood of interfering with the fairness of a trial by jury.”

The grand jury found cause to believe “Adkins has relied on an illegal absentee vote harvesting scheme since he was first elected to public office in 2011, repeating the process in his 2015 and 2019 bids for re-election.”

The report continued, “Investigations have shown that the scheme included hundreds of absentee ballots per election cycle and Adkins, with the help of his aunt, is said to have personally run the operation, showing up at the homes of voters himself with absentee applications and ballots to ensure he would have their vote.”

As a small community, the margin of victory is also small (within a couple hundred) so illegal activity can have a meaningful impact on elections.

Adkins responded, “It went on 10 years ago at one of my prior elections, my first election that I won, uh, you know, voters that voted absentee got harassed and asked various questions and had a target on their back.”

Since the indictment, Adkins has switched parties and ran in a recent GOP primary.