There is nothing more corrupt than an investigation that is in desperate search of a crime. But, make no mistake, that is exactly what is happening here.
The Attorney General of New York literally campaigned on prosecuting Donald Trump even before she knew anything about me. She said that if elected, she would use her office to look into “every aspect” of my real estate dealings. She swore that she would “definitely sue” me. She boasted on video that she would be, and I quote, “a real pain in the ass.” She declared, “just wait until I’m in the Attorney General’s office,” and, ”I’ve got my eyes on Trump Tower.” She also promised that, if elected, she would “join with law enforcement and other Attorney Generals across this nation in removing this President from office,” and, “It’s important that everyone understand that the days of Donald Trump are coming to an end.” The Attorney General made each of these statements, not after having had an opportunity to actually look at the facts, but BEFORE she was even elected, BEFORE she had seen even a shred of evidence. This is something that happens in failed third world countries, not the United States. If you can run for a prosecutor’s office pledging to take out your enemies, and be elected to that job by partisan voters who wish to enact political retribution, then we are no longer a free constitutional democracy.
The conceit of the Congress on issues like this is always amusing. The Department of Justice has hundreds — maybe more than a thousand — criminal investigations underway, using all the investigatory powers given to the FBI and federal grand juries. They have access to more than 15,000 hours of video surveillance footage taken by government surveillance systems in and around the Capitol. They have subpoenaed various forms of communication between persons involved in the January 6 happenings, including social media communications and emails.
Yet a commission consisting of 10 members of Congress and a couple of dozen staff members are needed to reach a definitive conclusion about what took place?
Comedy gold.
On May 26, 2020, Dr. Baker performed an autopsy on George Floyd’s body following his death. He is the only expert who testified at Chauvin’s trial who actually examined Floyd’s “injuries.”
On May 29, 2020, the Hennepin County Coroner’s Office issued a press release that reported the preliminary findings to the Hennepin County Prosecutor’s Office as stating that the autopsy “revealed no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation.”
But on June 1, 2020 — three days later — the official Coroner’s Report described the cause of death: “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restrain, and neck compression.”
What happened during that three-day time frame is the subject of the new defense motion which, if true, could potentially help Chauvin along with the three remaining defendants.
The motion contends that after Dr. Baker’s preliminary findings were quoted in court documents, he received a telephone call from Dr. Roger Mitchell, the former Medical Examiner of Washington D.C.,
During this first conversation, Dr. Baker reaffirmed his conclusion from the observations during the autopsy that he did not believe the neck compression played any role in Floyd’s death.
After the call, Dr. Mitchell is said to have written an op-ed intended for publication in the Washington Post that was going to criticize Dr. Baker’s conclusions. Dr. Mitchell called Dr. Baker a second time to advise Dr. Baker of his intention to have the piece published. The motion filed by Thao’s attorney recounts part of that second conversation, and attributes to Dr. Mitchell the following comments:
[Y]ou don’t want to be the medical examiner who tells everyone they didn’t see what they saw. You don’t want to be the smartest person in the room and be wrong. Said there was a way to articulate the cause and manner of death that ensures you are telling the truth about what you are observing and via all of the investigation. Mitchell said neck compression has to be in the diagnosis.
The motion then notes that the final autopsy report has a reference to “neck compression” as having contributed to the cause of Floyd’s death, which was inconsistent with the Preliminary Report which triggered Dr. Mitchell to call. //
The motion contends the contents of both conversations, and Dr. Mitchell threatening to publish an Op-Ed in the Washington Post critical of Dr. Baker amounted to “coercion” under the law, and that the defense should have been provided with evidence of the contacts between Dr. Baker and Dr. Mitchell given Dr. Mitchell’s connection to the prosecution evidenced by the November 5 meeting with four members of the prosecution team.
What separates us from the Third World in our politics, he opined, are the twin concepts of peaceful transfer of power via the ballot box rather than by military intervention and the unwritten and unspoken principle that victors do not use the police power of the state to punish the vanquished. Without the second concept, no sane person will ever relinquish office if they run the risk of ending up imprisoned or on the gallows. Once politics become a blood sport, he said, there is no way to stop the slide into rule by people with guns. I’d never really looked at it that way and can’t, even today, disagree with him. If there is any debt owed to Gerald Ford, it is his preservation of the republic by pardoning Richard Nixon.
With that said, it seems as though the left, which has long detested America, is hellbent on crossing that redline and pushing this nation ever closer to one where the abuse of law and the use of the judicial apparatus as stormtroopers and enforcers rather than the rule of law and respect for tradition prevails. If Politico is to be believed, stay with me here, the left is anticipating that President Trump will soon be indicted on state felony charges in New York: POLITICO Playbook: How Palm Beach is preparing for a possible Trump indictment: //
We need to anticipate that President Trump will, indeed, be indicted by a New York grand jury. The New York attorney general and the Manhattan district attorney have too much political capital involved in their highly public investigation of President Trump to shrug and say, “nothing there, folks.” With the New York power structure in utter chaos thanks to Andrew Cuomo’s predatory behavior, casual cruelty, calculated evasion of the law, and superhuman hubris, there is literally no mechanism left within that state to prevent a revenge indictment that could very well propel the instigator to national prominence. They will give no thought to the long-term damage done to our political life or even the damage done to the Democrat party in 2022 and 2024. The lizard-brain urge to lash out at President Trump is simply too strong to be resisted. //
There won’t be any kind of a face-off between Ron DeSantis and Cyrus Vance over the corpus of Donald Trump. If he’s indicted, he will end up on trial. He will be convicted. He will spend the rest of his life in jail. The left will think they have taught us a lesson, and they will be right. The next Republican president will be under enormous pressure to take a similar Democrat scalp. To be on the safe side and make it hurt, he’ll probably have to take down several prominent Democrats. And the left will ‘wave the bloody shirt’ and demand retribution the next time they occupy the White House. The real question becomes why a Republican from a Blue or even a Purple state would even bother to run for the presidency and what he would do when leaving office meant either prison or financial ruin in defending himself? //
Laocoon • 12 hours ago
Outstanding post!
Take a look at the events that led up to the Spanish Civil War sometime. This criminalization of political opposition, anti-religious fanaticism, doctrinaire socialism/communism/anarchism, a willingness by the state to tolerate political violence from the forces of the left, the personal danger of opposing the favored factions of the Republic...all these combined to spark the Spanish Civil War. The persecution of any non-socialist political opposition to the Republic forced many of their victims to take up arms just to survive.
Increasingly the US is starting to resemble that awful conflict.
Usernotfound Laocoon • 12 hours ago
I’m afraid there is a line that shouldn’t be crossed and the left is desperately searching for it. //
uplateagain • 17 hours ago
The indictment of Trump could well be an historical turning point. A match to pooled gasoline. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo. The British march on Concord to confiscate weaponry. Anyone thinking such an act won't inevitably portend a lot of retribution at the least (actual physical retribution... not political) and quite possibly ultimately full scale civil war, has no concept of how abused and righteously indignant half or more of the country is already feeling about Democratic criminality, bullying, and their working attempt to establish a one-party system and eventual overthrow of Constitutional government and the free market system.
The symbolism of arresting Trump on trumped-up charges would be too great for way too many people to stomach.
Fyrch uplateagain • 2 hours ago
While I may agree with you in spirit, I don't believe the actual anti-fascists in America are cohesive enough to fight back.
The Progressive fascists yell about breaking the system & Whyte Soup/Remacy because they count on the citizenry to meekly bend the knee to outrageous demands simply in order to get on with their lives. It's not just this silliness with wearing masks; we were already letting high school dropouts sexually molest us simply to board a plane, and meekly allowing those in power to get away with the most egregious abuses of law because some paid to watch big men chasing little balls while the rest of us paid to applaud (quoting Michael Crichton).
America's Republic was already sliding into the abyss, not because of a fake insurrection but because people were watching a horde of hOOrs called the Kardashians. //
clconnett • 2 days ago
If the Democrats go down this road there are two options: they stop with one scalp, and we don't retaliate, or we retaliate and they do the same. The problem is that we can't not retaliate. Once they use the state to arrest and detain the politico opposition, there's no closing that door. Either we concede the nation, or violence reigns.
This is not something we should cheer for, but a result we should mourn. //
metalman304 • 2 days ago
Nice theory but think about this....Cy Vance was and is, bossom buddies with Hillary Cankles Clinton. There is no way in blue hell he would retire before taking the first chair on the prosecution of the 45th President and Hillaryś arch enemy. His retirement is more like a signal that a ham sandwhich will be easier to indict than DJT. //
clconnett • 2 days ago
No. It's stupid to wish for further deterioration of our political discourse. This isn't something we callously invite, it's a reality we face with stoicism.
Think about it: Where does something like this end? They take Trump, so we arrest, try and imprison Pelosi, Schumer, and Nadler. So they come for Cruz, DeSantis, Noem, Hawley, etc. The heat is always ratcheted up until... what? What's the final outcome?
I get the attitude of, "We'll let them have it!" Okay. And how many will you, personally, visit in prison, in the hospital, or at their wake? The violence of policing will lead to violence in the streets. And we're all losers then. //
hawkeye1903 • 2 days ago
Yes, stupid to wish for. However - it's very much like the situation facing Israel. We would live in peace with democrats if they would as well, but the democrats have zero intention of letting us live in peace or "otherwise live" if we don't succumb to their boot on our neck. I already know where the democrats intend "it" to end.... we can mourn it, and face it, and prepare for it at the same time.
Girl Who Killed DC Area Uber Eats Driver Pleads Guilty, Literally Gets Away With Murder
By Scott Hounsell | May 11, 2021 2:45 PM ET
Credit: @Mrtdogg/Twitter
In March the country was shocked as it watched two teenage girls attempt to carjack an Uber Eats driver in the DC area, which ended in the death of 66-year-old Mohammad Anwar, an immigrant from Pakistan. The video, which we originally reported on here, is graphic in the detail and shows the girls speeding off in Anwar’s car, Anwar still stuck in the door attempting to wrestle control of the vehicle away from the two girls. The vehicle then crashes at the end of the block, rolling onto its side. The girls are seen climbing out of the passenger side of the vehicle. One of the girls was more concerned about finding her phone, which was lost in the accident, than the welfare of Anwar, whose mangled body is seen lying lifeless near the front of a building.
According to WTOP, the 15-year-old girl pled guilty to felony murder on May 5th and now awaits sentencing on June 4th. The other girl in the car at the time, who is just 13, is scheduled for a hearing next week. As alluded to in our previous reports, the harshest sentence she faces is less than 3 years in a juvenile detention facility.
During a time when the left has been talking about the way that the criminal justice system “victimizes” minorities, little is being said about this case, which is among the most clear-cut cases of murder in a long while. When cases like the Ohio officer who shot Ma’Khia Bryant are being debated and people are questioning whether or not use-of-force was necessary despite clear video evidence of Bryant attempting to stab another girl, it is shocking the left is so silent about this case. Could it be that it doesn’t match their narrative?
Of course, if the suspect in the killing of a Pakistani immigrant were a white 15-year-old boy, the media would be having a field day and the left would be demanding the suspect not only be charged, but spend the rest of his life behind bars. Most certainly, they would be demanding that the boy be charged with a hate crime. Yet, here we are, simply changing the ethnicity and gender of the person, and the left is nothing but the sound of pins dropping.
Not only that, they seem to be defending these girls. The Mayor of DC, instead of demanding justice for Anwar and his family, decided that it was a better time to hold a PSA regarding how to avoid being carjacked. Of course, this doesn’t include arresting carjackers and holding them accountable. The acting police chief of DC stated that he didn’t think that the two girls, who were certainly adult enough to commit a felony, were not adult enough to be charged as such. Fox’s resident leftist apologist, Juan Williams likened the girls’ actions as a “joy ride” that “went wrong.” Yahoo’s then-White House Correspondent, Hunter Walker, had the garbage-iest of takes when he said that the right was simply trying to use Anwar’s death as a means of sparking criticism of blacks.
No matter how anyone looks at this, it is a tragedy. To somehow attempt to excuse these girls in a way that would be different from a white male of the same age, is downright sickening. As Dr. King dreamt that people would not be judged “by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character,” the left seems to think that everything must be judged according to what they define to be fair, which almost inevitably comes down to race, gender, or sexual preferences.
I am sure Mohammad Anwar’s family doesn’t care who committed his murder. What they want is justice, and it was totally denied in this case. //
Avery Mann
8 hours ago
If these girls truly repent, they MAY be able to avoid justice. I don't mean in a courtroom. What goes around comes around. //
clconnett -> Avery Mann
7 hours ago
What has been borne upon a cross of wood will not be charged again to any who bows at the feet of the one who bore it. But, for the one who does not bow, these words remain: Vengeance is mine, I shall repay, says the Lord. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. So let us all flee to the hands that were pierced, lest we fall into them unaware.
Tom Elliott
@tomselliott
Psaki: “I can assure you” the Biden DoJ raiding Giuliani occurred “in an independent manner” //
There are many reasons to brush this claim of independence off as gaslighting, not the least of which is that Psaki is a known liar.
Past that, ask yourself why the FBI only seems to want to push the enforcement of FARA laws when it comes to Trump associates? We’ve got John Kerry literally tipping off the Iranians about Israeli military operations, but he’s not being investigated as a foreign agent. Hunter Biden was paid to testify for a foreign actor before Congress and never even registered as a lobbyist. Yet, Giuliani pokes around in Ukraine to try to expose corruption by Americans like the aforementioned Hunter Biden and that makes him an emissary of the Ukrainians? This is going to strike a lot of people as selective justice, and that’s assuming Giuliani even did anything wrong, of which no evidence of that exists publicly yet. //
Heck, you don’t even have to look past this story for proof of that. Why was this raid immediately leaked to The New York Times so it could be reported through a left-wing, anti-Trump prism? Of course, the investigation into Hunter Biden is locked down like Fort Knox, though. Amazing how the leaks stop the moment a Democrat is the target, right? Tell me again how the DOJ isn’t politicized.
The oligarchy that sucks its money, power, and prestige from America will never forgive the America First president for exposing its corruption. And since they are outnumbered and unloved, the US-based elite comprising big tech, corporate media, the intelligence bureaucracy, and senior Democratic Party officials must stay on offense as long as possible—which is why they continue to hunt Donald Trump and his allies.
On Friday, the Washington Post’s David Ignatius reported that former Trump administration official Kash Patel is “facing Justice Department investigation for possible improper disclosure of classified information.” The 40-year-old lawyer from Queens, New York served in several senior posts under Trump, including National Security Council senior director for counterterrorism, senior advisor to the Director of National Intelligence, and Pentagon chief of staff.
Patel was first forced into the spotlight in 2017 after he joined Congressman Devin Nunes’ investigation of crimes and abuses committed during the FBI’s operation targeting the Trump campaign. An aggressive former federal prosecutor, Patel knew where to look for evidence of FBI and Department of Justice wrongdoing at the top levels. As he began to document their illegal activities, Democratic Party operatives leaked his name to the press in an effort to intimidate him. Friday’s story is a continuation of a four-year offensive against a patriot who helped uncover the scandal underlying Russiagate, the Third-World-style combined media and intelligence operation smearing Trump and his aides as Russian agents in order to spy on them. //
U.S. officials are zeroing in on Patel because he exposed their rot. Now they’re employing the same tactics with which they prosecuted the Crossfire Hurricane operation—leak to the press to kick off a politicized investigation during which they will manufacture evidence to vilify, or even prosecute, an adversary. And so American intelligence and federal law enforcement continue their tragic spiral downwards, through corruption and toward irrelevance.
Wiley was harsh on James, but also sternly challenged him to use his platform to talk more about his own life and the odds he overcame to become one of the greatest basketball players of all time.
I’d love to hear that story, of how you became Lebron James against all odds, instead of always professing the odds are against all people.
Lebron James says “I’m so damn tired of seeing Black people killed by police!” How about this sentence, instead of that… “I’m so damn tired of seeing Black people killed.”
How about this sentence? Even more idealistic. “I’m damn tired of just seeing people killed.” //
"Your skin is not your sin."
In short, regardless of Chauvin’s actions, Derek Chauvin never had a chance for anything approaching a fair trial. He was tried by a jury composed of people who were well aware that the city government wanted Chauvin convicted. They were rightfully fearful for their own lives, property, and careers; if they returned anything less than guilty on all counts, their lives would never be the same…assuming that some number of jurors didn’t hide their feelings to get on the jury so they could ensure the correct verdict.
We have moved beyond the Constitutional ideal of a fair trial to something much more sinister, that is, the use of the judicial process to exact vengeance on a man not only as an oblation to the mob but as a way of moving a political narrative forward. None of us are safe because trials are no longer about guilt or innocence or justice; they are about ensuring the right outcome in the right cases. //
Mitchie
@wittywriter
The George Floyd case would've been an easy way for Republicans to bridge the gap with black voters. After all, we all saw George being murdered. But instead, the GOP let the crazy lead and found themselves on the wrong side of history AGAIN!! I give up. //
If it takes kangaroo trials to build bridges, then I’m not interested in crossing that particular canyon.
Catherine Herridge
@CBS_Herridge
#Context With federal prosecutors today predicting +50O will be charged in connection with the Capitol Riots, data from last Fall shows +300 were charged for riots/civil unrest - including breakout for Portland. //
“Of 96 cases the U.S. attorney’s office in Portland filed last year charging protesters with federal crimes, including assaulting federal officers, civil disorder, and failing to obey, prosecutors have dropped 47 of them, government documents show,” per the WSJ. “Ten people have pleaded guilty to related charges and two were ordered detained pending trial. None have gone to trial.”
“The penalties levied so far against any federal defendants, most of whom were arrested in clashes around federal buildings in Portland including the courthouse, have largely consisted of community service, such as working in a food bank or encouraging people to vote,” the outlet added.
Laura Wides-Munoz
@lwmunoz
·
Apr 20, 2021
George Floyd's death sparked calls for police reform. Why hasn't Congress acted? from @sarahdwire
Whatever happened to police reform legislation?
latimes.com //
Kira
@RealKiraDavis
Hi Laura. There's this guy named @SenatorTimScott and his bill was crushed by partisan Democrats who had no interest in actually solving problems. I'm really surprised you didn't know that. //
Do Laura and her cohorts even care that Democrats — who have been blaming everybody under the sun who doesn’t vote Democrat for the lack of police reform — nixed a bill that would have at least attempted to address the problem?
Senator Tim Scott blasted the Democrats for their partisan and selfish filibuster in an epic rant on the Senate floor. Was it picked up by Journalist Laura and the reporter who wrote the article or anyone at The L.A. Times? Or anyone in progressive media?
Another rhetorical question. //
Steve Guest
@SteveGuest
Sen. Tim Scott: Senate Democrats did not reject “what is being offered” but “who is offering it.” //
Democrats wet the bed on this issue. We need to make them change the sheets or lie in their own lazy mess.
noainc
3 hours ago
This was a show trial, the circus part of the late stage Roman Empire bread and circuses policy to entertain the masses. The officer himself is irrelevant, the facts are irrelevant, the last vestiges of the rule of law are ending. The federal government in its entirety is operated by incompetent socialists, and state by state this is becoming replicated. What we are witnessing is a somewhat unique top down revolution, wherein the elites who control the levers of government are taking the power from the people and reversing the American Revolution. They are taking the wealth and privilege purchased with blood through sacred honor, and wealth earned by hard work and sacrifice in a free society and replacing with corruption, nepotism and generational privilege in a modern form. The noble class along with family dynasties controlling the executive branch has been re created. Our independent, educated and wealthy middle class is being undermined, impoverished and diluted with state sponsored illegal migrants to form a new peasant and serf class, with an approved merchant class represented by big tech and lorded over by an all powerful noble class with no checks or balances.
The only explanation I have seen him provide — and I wasn’t able to pay full attention as the trial process got underway — was that he was unpersuaded that any other county in Minnesota would be better able to provide a trial venue fairer to Chauvin than Hennepin County. I find that rationale laughable.
At the same time, everyone recognized that the sentiment in the activist community was that the trial had to take place in Hennepin County because it is the most racially diverse county in Minnesota, and the chances of having black jurors sit in judgment of Chauvin was higher in Hennepin County than any other county in Minnesota, most of which have negligible minority populations.
That shouldn’t be any factor at all, and the promise of having a higher likelihood of having black jurors in the case — presumably improving the chances of convicting Chauvin notwithstanding the fact that he’s entitled to the presumption of innocence just like anyone else — is antithetical to the notion of “justice.” The judicial system provides for a fair trial for both the accused and the prosecution. “Justice” is in the process of reaching a verdict. “Justice” does not come from decisions to improve the chances for a conviction. Criminal cases are purposely styled as “Minnesota v. Chauvin” or “United States v. John Doe” and not “George Floyd v. Derek Chauvin.” The justice system doesn’t “vindicate” the victim of the crime. The justice system vindicates the rule of law. Circumstances that afford an accused a fair trial, while at the same time degrading the prospects for a conviction are not a basis to render an objection. The right of the accused to due process and a fair trial before the government can incarcerate you are paramount because they are “liberty” interests. The government is seeking to deprive an individual of their liberty. The government must respect and abide by all the requirements that guarantee due process and a fair trial.
“That’s the best we could do” is not good enough.
But that is all that Minnesota has provided
“I do think we should be expanding the court,” she told reporters. “The idea that nine people, that a nine-person court, can overturn laws that … hundreds and thousands of legislators, advocacy and policymakers drew consensus on … we have to … just ask ourselves, I think as a country, how much does that current structure benefit us? And I don’t think it does,” she said.
That’s literally the point of the Court, according to the purpose of the Founders, that nine people sometimes overrule laws and decisions of politicians and others. To be above the political fray, to not do what is popular, but to do what is in accordance with the Constitution, however unpopular it might be. The Court’s decision is based on interpretation of the law, not the politics. //
“How much does that current structure benefit us?” Yikes. According to this logic, why would adding four more justices – what the court-packing Democrats are proposing – make things any better? What’s magical about thirteen? //
The Recount
@therecount
·
Apr 15, 2021
Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA): “The Republicans stole two seats on the Supreme Court … we undo the damage that the Republicans have done by restoring balance. And we do it by adding four seats to the court …”
Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA): “We must expand the court and we must abolish the filibuster to do it.”
“Expanding the Supreme Court rights the wrongs the Republicans have done to this great court. Expanding the Supreme Court is equal justice and will ensure equal justice is dispensed to all Americans.”
The reality: The United States Supreme Court is not broken. Rather, the balance on the Court is not currently to the liking of the left. And the “wrongs the Republicans have done” have been comprised solely of operating within constitutional boundaries agreed upon by both parties 232 years ago and a nine-justice limit in place for 152 years, Ed. //
We’ve seen it time and time and again. When Democrats don’t win by the rules, they try to change the rules — and/or cheat, of course. Hillary wins the popular vote in 2016, but loses the Electoral College? Eliminate the Electoral College.
Yet, if 2016 had been a mirror image? If Trump had won the popular vote but lost the Electoral vote? A: Republicans would not have called for the demise of the EC. B: Democrats would have defended the EC to their dying hypocritical breath.
And so? They set about changing as many state election laws across the country between 2016 and 2020 as they could get away with. Yet when Georgia Republicans enact true election reform — which benefits all voters? Cry “Racism!, “Jim Crow!,” and behave as the left is now behaving.
And when the literal law of the land — nine justices on the United States Supreme Court, a number which even liberal-stalwart justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was opposed to changing — doesn’t go your way? You attempt to pack the Court. All in the name of “democracy.”
Ted Cruz encapsulated it, this morning.
“Today’s Democrat Party doesn’t care about undermining the rule of law.
If Democrats pack the Court, our free speech rights go out the window, our religious liberty goes out the window, and the Second Amendment is effectively repealed from the Bill of Rights.”
So let’s listen to Joe Biden in 2005 talk about how doing the very thing he appears to be trying to do now is a corrupt “power grab.” “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” and FDR wanting to do that was “corrupted by power,” Biden said.
Eddie Zipperer
@EddieZipperer
Reminder: Biden refers to court packing a "power grab" in 2005: //
Here he is in 1987 talking about how it is the “futility and absurdity of the devious” meant to punish the justices for having their own opinions (i.e. acting not according to FDR’s political whim). He says such autocratic things were what led to the revolt against the English.
Jerry Dunleavy
@JerryDunleavy
Biden in 1987 approvingly quoting Senate’s 1937 condemnation of FDR's court packing scheme: “It's a measure which should be so emphatically rejected that its parallel will never again be presented to the free representatives of the free people of America.” //
Jerry Dunleavy
@JerryDunleavy
RBG: “Bad idea when [FDR] tried to pack the court… If anything would make the court appear partisan it'd be...one side saying, ‘When we’re in power we’re going to enlarge the number of judges so we'll have more ppl who will vote the way we want them to.’"
Why not? There’s only one explanation. Prosecutors didn’t tell you. Antifa-friendly Attorney General Keith Ellison, who picked those multiple private attorneys from white-shoe firms to replace regular Hennepin County prosecutors, didn’t tell you. The media obviously didn’t tell you. And the threatening mob that recorded the horrific site of George Floyd handcuffed and prone on a Minneapolis street didn’t tell you. Black Lives Matter certainly didn’t tell you. This is the group that overtly lied about the deaths of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Breonna Taylor, Patrick Kimmons, Jacob Blake, and others. //
Midway through the second week of testimony, defense attorney Eric Nelson showed video from police body-worn cameras from a different angle showing Derek Chauvin’s knee was on Floyd’s shoulder and upper back, not his neck. Prosecutors immediately began changing their verbiage from “neck” to “neck area,” according to Andrew Branca of Legal Insurrection, who is listening to the trial as I am. //
Pills found in the Mercedes SUV and the police squad car, where Floyd had been for a brief time, had meth and fentanyl in them, which he was believed to have eaten to hide evidence from cops. //
Chauvin and his partner came to back up two other cops who had tussled with Floyd in an attempt to get him in the back of their squad car. It was a priority-one call for a non-compliant, suspected drug-addled perpetrator who had just fought with cops. They encountered Floyd, whom his girlfriend testified worked out every day with weights and played sports. Chauvin weighed 140 pounds and is 5’9″, compared to Floyd’s 223 pounds and 6’4″ frame. //
Testimony in cross-examination of the prosecution’s medical care training expert, Nicole MacKenzie, revealed that the hostile crowd could have contributed to Floyd’s death. How? Due to the hostility, threats, and the possibility that the crowd could get violent, the Minneapolis officers had to “load and scoot” Floyd to get to a safe area where they would meet paramedics and treat him. Paramedics arrived at the previous location and had to find where Floyd had been moved to, burning up a crucial eleven minutes.
Van der Veen stressed—when addressing the issue of what Trump did or didn’t do while the riot was occurring—that the House’s single article of impeachment is for incitement and not for anything else.
“To claim that the president in any way wished, desired, or encouraged lawless or violent behavior is a preposterous and monstrous lie,” van der Veen said. “In fact, the first two messages the president sent via Twitter once the incursion of the Capitol began were ‘Stay peaceful’ and ‘No violence because we are the party of law and order.’ The gathering on Jan. 6 was supposed to be a peaceful event. Make no mistake about that.” //
Schoen complained about a lack of due process for Trump, including the House’s impeachment and the Senate’s trial.
“The hatred that the House managers and others on the left have for President Trump has driven them to skip the basic elements of due process and fairness,” Schoen said.
A bigger problem was the lack of opportunity for Trump’s lawyers to review the integrity of the evidence, he said:
On Wednesday of this week, countless news outlets repeated the Democrat talking point about the power of ‘never-before-seen’ footage. Let me ask you this: Why was this footage never seen before? Should the subject of an impeachment trial, this impeachment trial, President Trump, have the right to see the so-called new evidence against him?
More importantly, the riot and the attack on this very building was a major event that shocked and impacted all Americans. Shouldn’t the American people have seen this footage as soon as it was available? For what possible reason did the House managers withhold it from the American people and President Trump’s lawyers? For political gain? How did they get it? How are they the ones releasing it?
The Senate impeachment trial farce once again reminds us that the political class has elevated itself above regular Americans, and that there are only two classes of people in the US: the “elites” and everybody else. They are also reminding us that blatant hypocrisy, double-standards, fairness, equal justice under the law, and even common decency are irrelevant when the political class is on the warpath against someone like President Trump.
We citizens have allowed the political class to become:
- Unconstrained in their appetites; say anything, do anything without consequences (e.g., a sitting US president and his family thoroughly corrupted by Communist China with zero accountability)
- Protected by DoJ and what passes for law enforcements standards – double-standards, in reality (e.g., Obama-era apparatchiks and Democrat congressmen guilty of perjury and remain unprosecuted)
- Flush with money from the oligarchs on Wall Street and in Silicon Valley (e.g., the US Chamber of Commerce owns Establishment Republicans)
- Unaccountable to their constituents (e.g., election fraud is now the law in many swing states; the grossly misnamed HR 1 – “For the People Act of 2021” – will cement mail-in balloting and other fraud nationwide if/when passed into law)
- Blatant in their corruption, crimes, and hypocrisies (e.g., Marjorie Taylor-Greene removed from her committees, but Eric Swalwell remains on the House Intelligence Committee after sleeping with a ChiCom spy)
As RedState reported, former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who was working with Robert Mueller, was given probation and a $100 administrative fee for his role in falsifying an email to renew the already illegally obtained FISA warrant on Carter Page. //
Out of all the nefarious, obviously corrupt figures surrounding this saga, Clinesmith was the only one charged. Figures like Andrew McCabe and James Comey were named in credible criminal referrals, not by politicians, but by the Inspector General, and the DOJ did nothing. In the end, Clinesmith got sentenced for less jail time (in this case none) than George Papadopoulos, whose only “crime” was mixing up a date on a harmless meeting he still admitted to having. To recap, you can forget a date talking to the FBI and have a special counsel crack your skull, but if you work for the FBI, forge a document, and lie about it in order to try to spy on a political opponent, you get probation and glowing media coverage. Laughably, it’s not even a long probation period either. Single mothers caught with weed in their car have gotten more than 12 months probation.