America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Says the DNC puppet!

Brew is the DNC puppet of the BANANA REPUBLIC? Yes, he is!

Sounds like a WITCH HUNT Brew. Curious timing ain't it, just as the unclassified document linking the BIG GUY to a $5,000,000 bribery scheme while he was vice president comes to light the Biden CRIME REGIME comes up with this diversion.

That hunt...

OF COURSE!!!

If they wrote him a traffic ticket it would be the evil left out to get the Right Wing Messiah.


So.....how much can we put you down for?
I mean, you do love America, don't you?

Tell it to the Grand Jury.

I wouldn’t want to sing a different note either if it ruined the song stuck rent free in my head.

The argument is as fresh as a kid sitting next to someone and complaining that he’s in your bubble.

I watched a Mussolini documentary yesterday…..Pete and Repete were sitting on a log

Trump is a HUGE witch...so greasy and dirty it's hard to ignore all his misconduct that he does in broad daylight...hence, hunting season is always open.

cons defend him and accuse libs of a vendetta, but if Biden did any one of the things Trump has been indicted for, or is being investigated for possible indictments, would those on the right turn a blind eye? ummm...no...

Considering the FBI and the Justice Dept are in the pocket of the DemoBolshevik regime, needless to say, corrupt and weaponized and the LEFTY MSM carrying water for them, Hillary and the Bidens would be locked up if they were Republicans.

Yup, the fix is in. He will probably be indicated in August for January 6th, and in November for the Georgia thing.

Why is all of this happening to Trump? I think it is a conspiracy. There are actually no people on the grand juries. It is all being done by AI. AI can do simple tasks, such as voting. Speaking of voting, voting for Trump will be a simple thing. So simple minds will vote for Trump.

if she or Biden did any of the stupid criminal stuff Trump has done, she'd have been treated the same...


don't think Hillary or Biden or any other past POTUS has publicly handed over classified info to the Russian ambassador in the White House, proving he can't be trusted with secrets....it is a mystery to me that the cons forgave and continue to trust Trump with top secret classified info after that treasonous stunt...reading the filing docs provides a glimpse of the secrets Trump took with him to Mar-A-Lago and tried to conceal when subpoenaed...he has been recorded talking about these docs...

any wonder why his attorneys quit? Just about everybody who works for Trump leave and have mean things to say about him...and yet his fan club keeps sending him money every time he steps on himself in public

Delta, that sounds like a bunch of Salem Witch Hunt malarkey.

Clinton made me wonder why morality was disappearing. Bush made me wonder why a good man could be so wrong for the job. Obama made me wonder why it took so long to elect a person of color. Trump made me wonder why living in Canada suddenly became so appealing.

For what it’s worth, I can see DeSantis beating Biden.

But I think this country is so bat sh1t crazy that they really will nominate Trump….

Trump will spend now to election day dogging Desantis- unless they kiss and make up and Trump is promised a pardon. As to Desantis- I hope the rest of the country sees what he really is about and how he does things.

He has bad hair, bad teeth and a plan?

8 I think spelled “Not raised by commies from birth to be groomed as a puppet POTUS” wrong.

The hair is real, the teeth? Dunno.

A Strong Trump Indictment—but Is It Strong Enough?

The evidence against the former president is powerful, but the jurors aren’t the only ones who will need convincing.

By Alan M. Dershowitz/WSJ
Special counsel Jack Smith is both confident in his case against Donald Trump and sensitive to political considerations—though those considerations are subtler than the kind of partisan advantage that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is after.

That’s why Mr. Smith brought the charges in Florida. He thinks the case is strong enough that a jury will convict Mr. Trump even in a jurisdiction of diverse party affiliations. His confidence may also explain why he alleged that Mr. Trump willfully rather than negligently mishandled classified material. He might also have wanted to distinguish Mr. Trump’s case from those of Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and Mike Pence, none of which allegedly involved willfulness.

What should have begun as a routine civil investigation under the Presidential Records Act has ended up with a multicount criminal indictment, the first federal prosecution ever of a former president or a leading candidate for the presidency. This is partially because prosecutors targeted Mr. Trump and partially because of the unwise way he responded.

Mr. Bragg campaigned for his office on a promise to hold Mr. Trump accountable and delivered when he persuaded a grand jury to hand up a weak indictment. Mr. Smith was appointed specifically to investigate Mr. Trump, and he did his job well. The problem inheres in the office of special counsel, which by its nature selects its target and looks for evidence against him.

Mr. Smith had a lot of help from Mr. Trump. Had the former president cooperated with investigators and immediately returned all the classified material in his possession, as Messrs. Biden and Pence did, charges would have been unlikely. But Mr. Trump did what he always does. He attacked Mr. Smith and resisted his efforts. That provoked investigators to double down, which in turn led Mr. Trump to engage in the allegedly obstructive conduct that forms the basis for several counts in the indictment.

Mr. Smith subpoenaed Mr. Trump’s lawyers and persuaded a judge that Mr. Trump had vitiated the attorney-client privilege by instructing them that it would be “better if there are no documents.” The defense team will claim that Mr. Trump was entitled to maintain possession of classified material under the Presidential Records Act of 1978, which establishes detailed procedures for handling the records of former presidents and a civil process for resolving disputes about them. It doesn’t carry criminal penalties for noncompliance. Remarkably, the indictment never mentions the Presidential Records Act, despite its apparent relevance to any possible prosecution under the Espionage Act of 1917.

The indictment quotes tape-recorded conversations that form the basis for several charges under the Espionage Act. The critical recording is of a conversation between Mr. Trump, a writer, a publisher and two Trump staffers, who were discussing a claim that a senior military official had persuaded Mr. Trump not to order an attack on “country A,” which in context is surely Iran. Mr. Trump points to some papers he found and tells his guests they prove that military officials supported an attack. “This totally wins my case,” he says. “This is secret information. Look, look at this.” Mr. Trump then says: “See, as president I could have declassified it. . . . Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.”

It is possible that Mr. Trump merely waved the papers in front of his guests and never gave them an opportunity to read them, which is apparently not in evidence because the prosecutors don’t have the document. But even those hypothetical facts would be enough to support the charge of willfully possessing classified material in an unauthorized manner.

The reason this recording is so powerful is that it is self-proving. It doesn’t rely on testimony by flipped witnesses or antagonists of Mr. Trump. It is the kind of evidence every defense lawyer dreads and every prosecutor dreams about. This is particularly important because an appellate court could find legal error in the ruling that Mr. Trump had vitiated attorney-client confidentiality and reverse convictions based on his lawyers’ compelled testimony. A conviction that rests on a consensually recorded conversation would be harder to challenge.

Mr. Smith has made a stronger case against Mr. Trump than many observers, including me, expected. The question remains: Is it strong enough to justify an indictment of the leading candidate to challenge the president in next year’s election? Even with the recorded statements, this case isn’t nearly as strong as the one that led to President Richard Nixon’s resignation in 1974. Nixon was almost certainly guilty of destroying evidence, bribing witnesses and other acts of obstruction. Many of the charges in this case are matters of degree. Nor have prosecutors any evidence that Mr. Trump’s actions damaged national security more than those of Mr. Biden, Mr. Pence and Mrs. Clinton did.

When an incumbent administration prosecutes the leading candidate against the president, it should have a case that is so compelling that it attracts the kind of bipartisan support that forced Nixon to resign. No such support is currently apparent, since many Republicans continue to be troubled by the targeting of Mr. Trump. Mr. Smith will have to convince not only a Miami jury but the American public, on both sides of the partisan divide.




Mr. Dershowitz is a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School and author of “Get Trump: The Threat to Civil Liberties, Due Process and Our Constitutional Rule of Law.” He represented Mr. Trump during his 2020 impeachment trial.

Lock
Eeeeeeeeeeeeeemmmmmmm...
U.P. !!!

D.M.V. ADVISES:

"GET TO AIRFORCE ONE AND FLY TO PANAMA"

"Boy, the DOJ sure can put a case together quickly when they want to..." - Hunter Biden.

Watched about 10 minutes. Mostly deflection. But, fodder for the gullible for sure.

Yeah, Trump could be another Bernie Sanders


But I wonder if the GOP will really nominate him. He's in the lead you know....

When one bases a defense on a false premise all that follows is BS.

The “expert” bases his defense on two patently false assumptions.

1) The classified documents are Trump’s personal property.

That is the most asinine argument one can make. Obviously, he either doesn’t understand the concept of government property, specifically classified material, or he attempts of obfuscate it’s purpose. Classifieds material is and always be first and foremost government property. It is NEVER produced for a specific person. It is produced for sole purpose of informing an individual who holds a particular position in government. Hence, it’s produced for the office, not the person. Therefore it’s the office that has need for the material. The person holding that office is merely a custodian for ONLY as long as that person holds that office, whether elected or appointed makes no difference.

2) The President isn’t subject to the laws regarding classified material because of Constitutional separation of powers.

Another asinine assumption. In similar fashion as the tax code which was also created by an Act of Congress the Classified Material program which was signed into law by a previous President. In fact, if the President isn’t subject to laws created by Congress then why can Congress impeach him for high crimes and misdemeanors?

As far as the Deep State is concerned, obviously reading comprehension isn’t one of your well developed skills. I said “if” the allegations are true. Perhaps in addition to listening to a 60 minute rant on a podcast you should take the time to read the indictment. That way you can hear both sides.

Someone should explain that to Biden...

Actually I could use TWO!

One to shit on and one to whip my ass with....