Important Takeaways:
- If former President Donald Trump gets reelected, he could derail the federal legal cases against him, according to legal experts who said he’d have several ways to get out of the jam once he’s back in the White House.
- Special counsel Jack Smith has brought two sets of charges against Mr. Trump at the federal level. One case accuses him of keeping secret documents that should have been turned over to the government. The case is pending in the Southern District of Florida with a trial date scheduled for May of 2024, though experts say it likely will be delayed further into the election year.
- Smith’s other case accuses the former president of fueling the 2020 election chaos by intentionally misleading the country about the results, and pushing for Congress and states to overturn President Biden’s win.
- That case is pending in Washington, with a trial date not yet set. Like the Florida one, though, it could also be delayed close to — or beyond — the election.
- “Delay is always to his advantage,” said Elliot Mincberg
- If Mr. Trump wins reelection and gets into office before a verdict is rendered, he could shut down the federal cases.
- Trump could order his new attorney general to disband the special counsel and drop the charges altogether.
- Trump could also choose to pardon himself at any time — even before a trial takes place. That’s known as a preemptive pardon.
- In the state cases, New York has charged Mr. Trump with falsifying business records concerning hush payments to two women and a hotel doorman.
- In Georgia, the Fulton County district attorney this week charged Mr. Trump and 18 other individuals with crimes related to his effort to have Georgia overturn Mr. Biden’s victory in the state in 2020.
- Mincberg said those cases are more challenging for Mr. Trump.
- “He doesn’t have power at the state level even if he becomes president,” Mr. Mincberg said.
- Trump would have to rely on state pardon boards, which typically — in both New York and Georgia — require the convicted person to have served part of their sentence before receiving a pardon.
Read the original article by clicking here.
Important Takeaways:
- Trump Faces 76.5 Years in Prison in Georgia; 91 Counts, 717.5 Years Overall, Plus Law That Includes Possibility of Death Penalty
- Here are the counts:
-
- 1 – Violation of the Georgia RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) Act, O.C.G.A. § 16-4-4(c) – up to 20 years
- 5 – Solicitation of Violation of Oath by Public Officer – O.C.G.A. §§ 16-4-7 & 16-10-1 – up to three years
- 9 – Conspiracy to Commit Impersonating a Public Officer – O.C.G.A. §§ 16-4-8 & 16-10-23 – two and-a-half years (in Georgia, the crime of conspiracy carries up to half the maximum penalty for the substantive offense, which in this case is five years)
- 11 – Conspiracy to Commit Forgery in the First Degree – O.C.G.A. §§ 16-4-8 & 16-9-1(b) – seven and-a-half years (half of 15)
- 13 – Conspiracy to Commit False Statements and Writings – O.C.G.A. §§ 16-4-8 & 16-10-20 – two and-a-half years (see 29, below)
- 15 – Conspiracy to Commit Filing False Documents – O.C.G.A. §§ 16-4-8 and 16-10-20.1(b)(1) – five years
- 17 – Conspiracy to Commit Forgery in the First Degree – O.C.G.A. §§ 16-4-8 & 16-9-1(b) – seven and-a-half years (half of 15)
- 19 – Conspiracy to Commit False Statements and Writings – O.C.G.A. §§ 16-4-8 & 16-10-20 – two and-a-half years (see 29, below)
- 27 – Filing False Documents – O.C.G.A. § 16-10-20.1(b)(1) – ten years
- 28 – Solicitation of Violation of Oath by Public Officer – O.C.G.A. §§ 16-4-7 & 16-10-1 – up to three years
- 29 – False Statements and Writings – O.C.G.A. § 16-10-20 – five years
- 38 – Solicitation of Violation of Oath by Public Officer – O.C.G.A. §§ 16-4-7 & 16-10-1 – up to three years
- 39 – False Statements and Writings – O.C.G.A. § 16-10-20 – five years
- In addition, Trump faces:
- 136 years in 34 counts in the New York case, involving alleged false business records in the Stormy Daniels affair
- 450 years in the 40 counts in the federal case in Miami, involving alleged mishandling of presidential documents
- 55 years in 4 counts in the federal case in Washington, D.C., involving 2020 election challenges and the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot
- Thus, Trump could face up to 717.5 years in prison. The latter charge in D.C. also includes the possibility of the death penalty.
Read the original article by clicking here.
Important Takeaways:
- Democrats Denied Election Results 150+ Times Before Trump Was Indicted for Challenging Election
- Breitbart News reported, more than 150 examples show Democrats denying election results, including President Joe Biden; two-time failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton; House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY); Reps. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Maxine Waters (D-CA), and Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX); and failed Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams.
- In fact, every single Democrat president since 1977 has questioned the legitimacy of U.S. elections, according to the Republican National Committee. In both 2013 and 2016, Biden claimed that Al Gore won the 2000 presidential election. In May 2019, Biden said he “absolutely agrees” that Trump was an “illegitimate president.” Biden cast doubt on the legitimacy of the 2022 midterms this year.
- Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said it is “appropriate” to have a debate concerning the 2004 election and claimed that there were “legitimate concerns” regarding the “integrity” of U.S. elections. Then-Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) cast doubt on the security of electronic voting machines in the 2004 election, saying he was “worried” that some machines do not have a paper trail.
- [So why aren’t they on trial for questioning the results of an election?]
Read the original article by clicking here.
Important Takeaways:
- Trump Indicted for Racketeering, Same Crime James Comer Believes Hunter Biden Committed
- A Georgia grand jury indicted former president Donald Trump on a racketeering charge, the same offense that House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) believes Hunter Biden committed when he wired money in an elaborate scheme through multiple shell companies.
- According to legal experts, federal law defines 35 offenses that constitute racketeering, including gambling, murder, kidnapping, arson, drug dealing, and bribery.
- The law was originally intended to catch mobsters. In 1987, former United States Attorney Rudolph Giuliani indicted the heads of New York City’s “Five Families” under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). Eight of them were convicted under RICO.
- On Monday night, a grand jury in Georgia indicted Trump for violating the state’s RICO act – O.C.G.A. § 16-14-4(c).
- Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz noted that RICO prosecutions are often overturned on appeal.
- Comer, who was a bank board member for ten years, argues Hunter Biden violated federal RICO law a different way than the Fulton County prosecutor alleges Trump did. He believes the Biden business opened more than 20 shell companies in an elaborate scheme to hide payments and launder money.
- “When you set up a bunch of shell companies for the sole purpose to launder money, that is called racketeering,” Comer said on the Verdict with Ted Cruz in July.
- Through banking transactions, the Biden family business received over $20 million from Russia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan while President Joe Biden was vice president, Comer revealed last week.
Read the original article by clicking here.
Important Takeaways:
- Georgia Grand Jury Indicts Donald Trump and 18 Other Individuals.
- A Georgia grand jury has indicted former President Donald Trump and 18 other individuals in an election interference case. Trump faces thirteen charges, the most significant charge being a violation of the Georgia RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) Act.
- Among the additional individuals charged are former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani (who led the city through the aftermath of 9/11), former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, attorney John Eastman, former Department of Justice attorney Jeffery Clark, attorney Sydney Powell, attorney Kenneth Chesebro, and pro-DeSantis attorney Jenna Ellis. The indictment in total is 98 pages long.
- Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, during a late night press conference, said that the RICO charges faced by the 19 individuals entailed prison sentences. The defendants have been told they have until noon on August 25th to voluntarily surrender. She added that she intends to try all of the defendants together.
- The news comes hours after District Attorney Fani Willis published a charging docket before the grand jury had even voted.
- The uploading of the docket report; the media knowledge of how many witnesses the prosecution was bringing to the grand jury; and knowledge of when the grand jury was voting on the indictment raises serious questions about the process, which is supposed to be sealed from the public.
Read the original article by clicking here.
Important Takeaways:
- Jack Smith’s Charges Against Trump Include Potential Death Penalty
- 18 U.S.C § 241, “Conspiracy Against Rights,” includes a penalty of up to 10 years in federal prison. But it adds that if death results from the actions covered under this provision, the offender may be executed:
- If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
- If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
- They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
- One person — Ashli Babbitt, a rioter shot by a law enforcement officer — died as a result of the Capitol riot on January 6, which Smith said Tuesday was the result of Trump’s claims about the election. But Democrats have blamed Trump for the unrelated deaths of several protesters and Capitol Police officers.
- Democrats — and some of Trump’s Republican opponents — have also tried to blame him for apparent efforts by some of the rioters to kidnap then-Vice President Mike Pence, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). Smith could try to argue the same.
- The other alleged crimes in the January 6 indictment against Trump include lengthy prison terms as penalties as well:
- 18 U.S.C. § 371 – Conspiracy to Defraud the United States
- 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (k) – Conspiracy to Obstruct an Official Proceeding
- 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (c) – Obstruction of and Attempt to Obstruct an Official Proceeding
- If Trump is convicted of all four charges, and receives the maximum non-lethal penalty, he could be imprisoned for 55 years, if the sentences are set to run consecutively. That, in addition to the possible 460 years in prison in the “documents” case that Smith is prosecuting in federal court in Miami, brings Trump’s maximum federal prison term to 515 years, over half a millennium.
Read the original article by clicking here.
Important Takeaways:
- Pence, key Jan. 6 witness, takes aim at Trump over indictment
- “Today’s indictment serves as an important reminder: Anyone who puts himself over the Constitution should never be president of the United States,” Trump’s former vice president said in a statement that also emphasized that the ex-president was entitled to a presumption of innocence.
- Pence addressed this point in his statement Tuesday, saying: “On January 6th, former President Trump demanded that I choose between him and the Constitution. I chose the Constitution, and I always will.”
Read the original article by clicking here.
Ecclesiastes 5:8 If you see the poor oppressed in a district, and justice and rights denied, do not be surprised at such things; for one official is eyed by a higher one, and over them both are others higher still
Important Takeaways:
- Special counsel Jack Smith tallied about $5.4 million in personnel, rent and other expenses on his own budget and prompted about $3.8 million in spending by other Justice Department agencies in the roughly four months after he was tapped by Attorney General Merrick Garland last November to lead the classified documents probe as well investigations related to efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results, according to figures DOJ released Friday.
- Those figures may dramatically underestimate Smith’s total spending since they only account for his activities through the end of March
- The report also highlights the unusual nature of Smith’s investigations and the strong reactions they have generated.
- The new report doesn’t indicate how much the Justice Department spent on the related investigations in the months before Smith, a former head of DOJ’s Public Integrity Section, agreed to leave his job as a war-crimes prosecutor in Europe and return to Washington to take over the politically sensitive Trump probes.
- By contrast, a special counsel appointed in January to look into President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents discovered in his Delaware home spent $615,000 through March and led other parts of DOJ to incur about $572,000 in expenses
Read the original article by clicking here.
Mathew 24:12 And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold
Important Takeaways:
- Democrat slammed after accidentally saying Trump ‘needs to be shot’ before quickly correcting herself
- Democrat Virgin Islands Del. Stacey Plaskett was criticizing Trump’s handling of classified documents during a live segment on MSNBC Sunday when she made the perplexing comment.
- “Having Trump not only having the codes but now having the classified information for Americans and being able to put that out and share it in his resort with anyone and everything who comes through should be terrifying to all Americans,” Plaskett told MSNBC.
- “He needs to be shot,” she said, before quickly attempting to correct herself by adding “stopped.”
Read the original article by clicking here.
Ecclesiastes 5:8 If you see the extortion[a] of the poor, or the perversion[b] of justice and fairness in the government, [c] do not be astonished by the matter. For the high official is watched by a higher official, [d] and there are higher ones over them! [e]
Important Takeaways:
- There are disturbing suggestions that among the reasons lawyers are declining the case is because they fear legal and career reprisals.
- There is a nefarious group that calls itself The 65 Project that has as its goal to intimidate lawyers into not representing Trump or anyone associated with him. They have threatened to file bar charges against any such lawyers.
- I wrote an op-ed offering to defend pro bono any lawyers that The 65 Project goes after. So The 65 Project immediately went after me, and contrived a charge based on a case in which I was a constitutional consultant, but designed to send a message to potential Trump lawyers: If you defend Trump or anyone associated with him, we will target you and find something to charge you with. The lawyers to whom I spoke are fully aware of this threat — and they are taking it seriously…. It may even be worse today….
- Good lawyers… generally welcome challenges, especially in high-profile cases. This case is different: the threats to the lawyers are greater than at any time since McCarthyism. Nor is the comparison to McCarthyism a stretch. I recall during the 1950s how civil liberties lawyers, many of whom despised communism, were cancelled, and attacked if they dared to represent people accused of being communists.
- Our system of justice is based on the John Adams standard: he too was attacked for defending the British soldiers accused of the Boston Massacre, but his representation of these accused killers now serves as a symbol of the 6th Amendment right to counsel. That symbol has now been endangered….
- Trump’s lawyers have now alleged that one of the prosecutors has suggested to Stanley Woodward, the lawyer for Waltine Nauta, Trump’s co-defendant, that his application for judgeship may be negatively affected if he persists in defending Nauta vigorously rather than encouraging him to cooperate against Trump. If that is true – and I have not seen the evidence to support it – then it represents a direct attack on the 6th Amendment.
- Whatever one may think of Trump or the charges against him, all Americans must stand united against efforts to intimidate lawyers and chill them from defending unpopular clients pursuant to the 6th Amendment. Bar associations must look into the threats and actions of The 65 Project and of prosecutors who try… to influence the representation of clients by threats to their careers or other means.
- Hard cases may make bad law but partisan cases endanger constitutional rights. We must do everything to assure that all defendants, including Donald Trump, get the zealous representation to which the Constitution entitled all Americans.
Read the original article by clicking here.
