The good. Removes the Secretary of State from the State Election Board and bars local election officials, elections board and Secretary of State employees from securing state contracts specific to voting equipment. It also sets deadlines for submitting absentee ballots, establishes additional ballot chain of custody rules. The expansion of the ability to challenge and potentially remove ineligible voters from the voter rolls.
The bad. Some of the features don’t start till 2025 and 2026.
The ugly. The ACLU of Georgia said it planned a legal challenge. Plus the same old Secretary of State is going to oversee this.
When even the most hysterically anti-Trump news outlet has been forced to admit the star witness in the current trial against the former president lacks credibility, you know that case is in trouble.
The case in question was the “hush money” trial Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has brought against Donald Trump regarding the alleged illegality of a payment supposedly made to porn star Stormy Daniels to prevent her from speaking about an alleged affair.
Taking the stand on Tuesday, and irritating the entire courtroom with an unending string of needless details, Daniels’ testimony forced even a CNN legal expert to cast doubts on her overall credibility.
Senior CNN legal analyst Elie Honig appeared on a panel on Anderson Cooper’s show, discussing Daniels’ testimony and cross-examination by the defense.
(I noted that the clip portrays another panel member, Norman Eisman—without realizing it—as just another Trump-hating witch hunter. He wrote a book “TRYING TRUMP -A guide to His First Election Interference Criminal Trial” and served as a Democratic ‘special counsel’ on Trump’s first impeachment trial(!) If that doesn’t shout BIASED!! I don’t know what could possibly make it any MORE obvious. — TPR)
While his peers were more impressed with Daniels’ testimony, especially under cross-examination, Honig admitted he had “the exact opposite impression.”
According to Honig, while Daniels was “plausible on her explanation of what happened in that hotel room” in 2006, she nevertheless fell flat on her face with the cross-examination.
In Honig’s words, in the cross-examination, “her responses were disastrous.”
Citing one of the questions put to Daniels, Honig said “‘Do you hate Donald Trump?’ Yes, of course she does. That’s a big deal. When the witness hates the person whose liberty is at stake, that’s a big d**n deal.”
As Honig pointed out, her statements left a great weak spot for the defense to exploit: “The defense is going to say, she’s willing to defy a court order … She’s not going to respect the order of a judge, why is she going to respect this oath she took?
“So,” Honig concluded, “I thought it went quite poorly.”
Ouch.
She previously signed a statement saying her story about the one-night stand was false.
Now, of course, Honig was only articulating what most who have been paying attention (without being blinded by Trump Derangement Syndrome) already knew quite well.
Daniels’ whole motivation in going after Trump has been the same as everyone else who has been prosecuting him — to prevent him from winning the presidency again in November.
She freely admitted on the stand that she hated him. Daniels admitted she has thus far failed to pay the money she owed to Trump (~$500,000 — TPR) because it “wasn’t fair.” She has previously stated that she would go to jail before she’d pay “that shit” what she owed per court order.
The Post Millennial likewise reported that Judge Juan Merchan, despite tossing out the defense’s mistrial request, nevertheless had to admit Daniels went into far too much detail and was “difficult to control.”
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA – JANUARY 26: Copies of adult film actress/director Stormy Daniels’ book “Full Disclosure” are displayed during a signing at the 2019 AVN Adult Entertainment Expo at the Hard Rock Hotel & Casino on January 26, 2019 in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Photo by Ethan Miller/Getty Images)
For these and many other reasons (including previously signing a statement (see below) saying her story about the affair was false), Daniels was not a credible witness, and could only hinder rather than help the prosecution.
“Over the past few weeks, I have been asked countless times to comment on reports of an alleged sexual relationship I had with Donald Trump many, many, many years ago.
“The fact of the matter is that each party to this alleged affair denied its existence in 2006, 2011, 2016, 2017 and now again in 2018. I am not denying the affair because I was paid ‘hush money’ as has been reported in overseas owned tabloids. I am denying this affair because it never happened.”
–Statement of Stormy Daniels Jan 30, 2018 — prior to Trump’s State of the Union address — and her “interview” afterwards with Jimmy Kimmel.
And the fact that even a CNN legal expert could readily admit that her cross-examination was disastrous for the prosecution was incredibly telling.
Why should a witness who says they hate the defendant and who has refused a court order to pay that defendant be listened to?
Even the most legally ignorant member of the jury had to be asking questions about her credibility after she admitted that.
Daniels cannot be trusted to tell the truth. But, between her active social media presence and eager appearances on shows like The View, that should have been clear before the trial ever started.
It was only because of the blind prejudice of folks like Alvin Bragg that this trial got as far as it did in the first place.
So why was she even allowed to testify? Three reasons: TDS, she took her clothes off regularly for pay, and $$$$$$ in publicity and far-left, deep-pocket donors. — TPR
NYPD officers enter the Columbia University building and detain pro-Palestinian demonstrators as they had barricaded themselves to iconic Hamilton Hall building in New York on April 30, 2024. (Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Those who support Nazi style tactics will regret this one day. Are you listening, Schumer, Raskin, and other Jewish office holders? Make no mistake, the white progressive supremacists are supporters of the pro Hamas rioters. What’s really sad is that some are Jewish and Senators and Congressmen and women.
The rioters have copied Nazi style tactics and Schumer, Raskin, and others remain silent. Why is that? Afraid to upset the base? Of course Progressive non Jews have no issues supporting the Terrorist’s.
The raid was sharply criticized by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) who stated that “if any kid” was hurt during the raid, the “responsibility will fall on the mayor” and Columbia University President Minouche Shafik. Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), slammed the police response over students “simply exercising their first amendment rights.”
In the past the PA Supreme Court had no issues with this and allowed it. Well the federal courts said no. So the Democrats tried again. and what happened? Democrat lawyers requested an en banc review (a decision from the court’s entire slate of judges) and the appeals court ruled against them.
In a 9-4 vote, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday denied a request for en banc review to reconsider whether the date requirement for mail-in ballots is enforceable in Pennsylvania.
18-20 year old are allowed to vote and protest, why not conceal and carry? U.S. District Court judge William S. Stickman decided this week against Pennsylvania’s prohibition on 18-20- year-olds securing a concealed carry permit in order to be armed on their persons for self-defense.
Another NY DA mess. You make the call. New York City Cop Acquitted Three Years After Punching Suspect Who Refused to Leave Apple Store.
It seems as if the NY DA has a history of going after the good guy and losing. This current prosecutor sticks out like a sore thumb Adds credence to those who say affirmative action at work.
Officer Salvatore Provenzano, a 17-year veteran of the New York Police Department (NYPD), was charged with third-degree assault in 2023 — two years after a body camera captured the October 2021 interaction between him and Kamal Cheikhaoui, a man who had repeatedly refused to leave the Upper West Side store, CBS News reported.
Cheikhaoui, whom the New York Postdescribed as a “repeat offender,” was reportedly acting “unruly” in the Apple Store before security asked him to leave, prompting Provenzano and other cops to step in to remove him.
Body camera footage that another responding officer captured begins with Cheikhaoui loudly demanding to purchase merchandise and trying to push past security as Provenzano takes him by the arm and leads him toward the exit. When the suspect gets loose from his grasp and suddenly turns, the officer strikes him in the face:
DA Bragg’s office convened a grand jury, which indicted the officer two years later.
Police union representatives happily announced on Thursday that the charges had finally been dropped.
The Police Benevolent Association of the City of New York (PBA), which represents more than 50,000 active and retired NYPD officers, said it was “grateful to get justice, but Manhattan prosecutors should never have brought the case in the first place.”
“This DA has to stop targeting New York City police officers and go after criminals. It needs to end now,” PBA President Patrick Hendry said during a press briefing. Bragg’s thoughts?
“We work in close partnership with the NYPD every day, and I have immense respect for the officers in uniform,” Bragg said in a statement. “I thank our prosecutors for their hard work and Judge Wiley for his careful and thoughtful consideration of this matter.”
Supreme Court and Donald Trump. Who loses if Trump isn’t granted partial Immunity. The answer is simple. Smith, Garland, Biden, Obama, Kennedy, and FDR.
If the court rules against Trump and he wins in November, those folks in the Obama and Biden Administration best take a permanent vacation to either Iran, Russia, China, or any socialist country like Cuba, Nicaragua, or Venezuela.
Trump would be able to have them all prosecuted for acts that they took while in office. Difference between Trumps alleged crimes and theirs is this. Except for a woman gunned down by a rogue cop, no one died because of Trumps actions. Not the case with Biden and Obama. Kennedy and FDR are dead, so there’s would be a mute point.
Having an Attorney on a jury makes no sense. Especially having two. This is just plain crazy. To have not one but two lawyers serving as jurists? It’s no longer a jury of 12, but two.
The problem with having a lawyer on the jury is that they can be a very strong voice and influence the rest of the panel. And so, if they are … strong to one side or the other, then that can swap everybody else on the panel.
Worse yet, what if one is pro Trump and the other is anti Trump? They would be conducting their own trial during deliberations. Seven New Yorkers were picked this week to serve as jurors.
Of those seven, one is a corporate attorney who lives in Chelsea and grew up in Oregon, while another juror is a civil litigator who lives in the Upper East Side and is originally from North Carolina.
DA Alvin Bragg — dodging criticism from elsewhere.
There have been few light moments in the thunderous collision between former President Donald Trump and the legal system.
But one incident Tuesday put a brief smile on Trump’s face.
Trump faces 34 counts of first-degree falsifying business records, which Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is prosecuting as felonies. The allegations against Trump are that ahead of the 2016 election, former Trump attorney Michael Cohen paid porn star Stormy Daniels $130,000, so she would not go public with claims of an affair with Trump. Trump has denied the affair ever took place.
On the second day of jury selection, one potential juror said he had read Trump’s books “The Art of the Deal” and “How to Get Rich,” according to Newsweek.
After mentioning the second book, the juror asked if he got the title right.
Trump smiled and then nodded. The incident was not videoed because no cameras are allowed in the courtroom.
Although Monday was not very productive, with more than 50 of 96 potential jurors dismissed for saying they could not be fair and impartial, six people made the cut Tuesday, according to the New York Post. The names of jurors are being withheld.
The Post said the foreman of the jury is a married person from West Harlem who came to America from Ireland; another juror is a corporate lawyer who is an Oregon native; one is a female nurse at Memorial Sloan Kettering; and another is a female software engineer.
A juror described by the Post as a “young black woman” said during selection that she respected Trump because he “always speaks his mind.”
Also joining the jury is a 40-year-old from the Lower East Side who said Trump was “fascinating and mysterious.”
“He walks into a room, and he sets people off one way or another,” the IT consultant said. “I find that really interesting. Really, this one guy can do all of this. Wow, that’s what I think.”
On potential juror was rejected for having posted in 2017 on Facebook, “Good news!! Trump lost his court battle on his unlawful travel ban!!!”
He added, “Get him out, lock him up.”
Joshua Steinglass, a prosecutor, asked if the man still thinks Trump should be locked up.
The man drew a smirk from Trump when he replied that he no longer thinks so.
Judge Juan Merchan was irritated once with Trump and warned Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche that Trump mumbled something toward a potential juror “12 feet away from your client.”
“Your client was audibly uttering something,” the judge said. “I don’t know what he was uttering …”
“I won’t tolerate that. I won’t have any jurors intimidated in this courtroom. I will be crystal clear,” he said.
Question: If Merchan didn’t know what Trump said — per his own words — how could he decide Trump was trying to intimidate a potential juror?
Truth and Justice the NY way. https://heartofashepherd.com/
Is it just me or do these NY judges and prosecutors look like the folks who are in prison? I mean just take a look at them. What a bunch of scary looking folks.
And the one judge, the silver fox. Born in Columbia. His father served as a military officer in Colombia. His dad also worked in Colombia’s intelligence service. Need I say more?
And what they all have in common? Political lawfare. To see some of the charges and the restrictions. Trump is not allowed to comment, but all the other folks involved are. How crazy is that?
