Trump INDICTED!

 From The NYTimes:

Donald J. Trump was indicted in Manhattan on Thursday for his role in paying hush money to a porn star, according to five people with knowledge of the matter, a historic development that will shake up the 2024 presidential race and forever mark him as the nation’s first former president to face criminal charges.

In the coming days, prosecutors working for the district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, will likely ask Mr. Trump to surrender and to face arraignment. The specific charges will be announced when he is arraigned.

And The Washington Post:

A Manhattan grand jury has voted to indict former president Donald Trump, his lawyers said on Thursday, making him the first person in U.S. history to serve as commander in chief and then be charged with a crime.

The indictment, which has the potential to alter the country’s political and legal landscape, came after weeks of speculation about whether and when Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg might take such a step. It sets the stage for a courthouse showdown between one of the most combative politicians in modern American history and local prosecutors who have pursued him for years.

The grand jury had been hearing evidence about hush money paid to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, allegedly to keep her from saying she’d had a sexual encounter with Trump years earlier.

On to Georgia and then the Federal Investigation.

And Now Some Unwise Words...

By my count, it's been 5 years 1 month and 2 weeks since I wrote this:

And Now A Word From The Conscience Of The GOP (A.K.A. Joe The Plumber) 

In the event you're wondering how, on God's green Earth and by all that's holy and good, our Republican friends can continue to obstruct sensible gun control legislation, I believe I have an answer for you.

And it comes from Joe The Plumber - remember him?

In an open letter to some previous (mass) shooting victims, JTP wrote:

I am sorry you lost your child. I myself have a son and daughter and the one thing I never want to go through, is what you are going through now. But:

As harsh as this sounds – your dead kids don’t trump my Constitutional rights.

Yea, remember that?

In that letter he went on:

[A]nyone calling for more restrictions on American’s rights need to back off and stop playing into the hands of the folks who merely capitalize on these horrific events for their own political ends.

They don’t care about your family or your dead children at all. They sound like they do, whereas I sound uncaring and like I say, harsh. Don’t be fooled – I care about your family and mine. The future of our very liberty lies in the balance of this fight.

So there it is: hidden behind all of the ersatz sincerity of the many "thoughts and prayers" tweets we've read recently from the GOP, is this one thought - your dead kids don't trump my Constitutional rights.

That's the root of the root and the bud of the bud of their resistance and that's why you Un-American libtards can't unnerstand! It's their constitutional patriotic duty, dammit! They're protecting us all!

It's just that in this setting, the price of "our very liberty" is simply this: In order to make sure that everyone has easy access to firearms, every now and then (and no one knows where or when), in order to protect our safety and liberty, a few schools/theatres/offices will have to be shot up by someone with easy access to lots and lots of guns and ammo. A few people here and there will have to die a bloody and gruesome death in order to guarantee America's Second Amendment rights.

Thanks be to Joe for pointing this out. They should be celebrating the blood on their hands as the price someone else paid for their freedom.

Your dead kids don't trump my Constitutional rights.

The price for their gun fetish is blood. Lots and lots of blood. Someone else's, of course.

Wise Words

When babies die at a church school, it is time for us to move beyond thoughts and prayers.

--Senate Chaplain Barry C. Black

Connections...That's All I'm Gonna Say

By now we're well acquainted with this story:

An appeals court on Wednesday rejected an effort by former President Donald Trump's attorneys to block Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran from having to testify and hand over records to special counsel Jack Smith's team investigating Trump's handling of classified records after leaving the White House, according to court records.

The three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled extraordinarily swiftly against the request for a stay by Trump's attorneys, who sought to block an order last Friday by the chief judge for the D.C. District Court, who determined the government had made a prima facie case that Corcoran's legal services were likely used by Trump in the furtherance of a crime.

Corcoran was expected to testify as soon as Friday, sources said.

 And were you to click that last link ("in the furtherance of a crime") you'd read this:

Prosecutors in the special counsel's office have presented compelling preliminary evidence that former President Donald Trump knowingly and deliberately misled his own attorneys about his retention of classified materials after leaving office, a top federal judge wrote Friday in a sealed filing, according to sources who described its contents to ABC News.

U.S. Judge Beryl Howell, who on Friday stepped down as the D.C. district court's chief judge, wrote last week that prosecutors in special counsel Jack Smith's office had made a "prima facie showing that the former president had committed criminal violations," according to the sources, and that attorney-client privileges invoked by two of his lawyers could therefore be pierced.

And so on. We've all been following this story, amirite?

Well, ABCNews last night posted a story about another Trump attorney testifying before the grand Jury about the Mar-a-Lago documents:

A top attorney for former President Donald Trump gave previously undisclosed testimony before a grand jury late last year regarding efforts by Trump's team to locate any classified documents that remained in Trump's possession after the FBI's unprecedented August search of his Mar-a-Lago estate, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News.

The Dec. 22 testimony from attorney Timothy Parlatore was ordered after months of wrangling between Trump's attorneys and officials in the Justice Department, who had grown increasingly concerned that Trump still continued to hold onto classified documents after more than 100 were discovered in the August 8 search, sources said.

In fact, just days before his testimony, Parlatore revealed to the DOJ and D.C. district court Judge Beryl Howell that a search of Mar-a-Lago conducted by Trump's legal team on Dec. 15 and 16 had discovered four additional documents with classification markings, according to sources.

For the record, Parlatore was not subpoenaed. He's quoted by ABCNews saying that he voluntarily chose to go to the grand jury. Happily, in fact.

Why do I bring this up?

In the likely event that his name didn't trigger any recognition, let me show you this from Dec 30 of last year (that's only 8 days after he happily and voluntarily testified before the grand jury!). It's about St Sen Doug Mastriano's "testimony" before the January 6 committee:

The bulk of the testimony, such as it is, is Doug's attorney Timothy Parlatore getting all feisty and nitpicky over whether a committee's subpoena was signed with an autopen or whether the committee has designated two individuals to conduct the investigation.

When Parlatore doesn't get the answers he wants, he and Doug walk.

Timothy Parlatore is (or at the very least once was) Doug Mastriano's attorney.

In fact, Parlatore responded to my blog post the very next day. 

And not only is (or, at least was) Parlatore Mastriano's attorney, Pennlive reported:

Parlatore has represented at least two other witnesses interviewed by the Jan. 6th Committee, including Bernard Kerik, the former New York City Police Commissioner and longtime associate of Trump’s attorney, Rudolph Giuliani. His representation of Mastriano, according to state campaign finance reports, is being covered at least in part by Mastriano’s gubernatorial campaign. [Emphasis added.]

I'm not saying that Doug Mastriano is in anyway involved with the Mar-a-Lago documents.

All I am saying is that his attorney when he sat but not testified before the January 6 committee and who's legal fees was paid for (at least in part) by his gubernatorial campaign testified before a grand jury investigating Trump's Mar-a-Lago documents. That attorney also represented Rudy Giuliani and Bernard Kerik before the January 6 committee.

So how tightly is that group intertwined?

Is TODAY The Day?

Perhaps:

A Manhattan grand jury could decide whether to indict Donald J. Trump as early as Wednesday, potentially touching off a sequence of events that could include the unprecedented sight of a former president in handcuffs.

So there's that to look forward to. 

But what else is happening with the Orange Vulgarity's legal issues?

Georgia:

Atlanta-area prosecutors are considering bringing racketeering and conspiracy charges in connection with Donald Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia, according to a source with knowledge of the investigation.

Investigators have a large volume of substantial evidence related to a possible conspiracy from inside and outside the state, including recordings of phone calls, emails, text messages, documents, and testimony before a special grand jury.

Their work, the source said, underscores the belief that the push to help Trump was not just a grassroots effort that originated inside the state. 

Federal:

Prosecutors in the special counsel's office have presented compelling preliminary evidence that former President Donald Trump knowingly and deliberately misled his own attorneys about his retention of classified materials after leaving office, a former top federal judge wrote Friday in a sealed filing, according to sources who described its contents to ABC News.

U.S. Judge Beryl Howell, who on Friday stepped down as the D.C. district court's chief judge, wrote last week that prosecutors in special counsel Jack Smith's office had made a "prima facie showing that the former president had committed criminal violations," according to the sources, and that attorney-client privileges invoked by two of his lawyers could therefore be pierced.

And then there's Trump news surrounding this NY State lawsuit:

The civil lawsuit, brought against Trump by New York Attorney General Letitia James (D), alleges that Trump, his company and family inflated the value of their real estate assets. The suit was filed in September.

And what happened there:

A bomb threat was called into a lower Manhattan court on Tuesday just before a judge was set to hear a $250 million lawsuit against former President Trump.

The threat was investigated by police and the courthouse was closed and searched, with authorities finding that the threat was unfounded, according to court spokesman Lucian Chalfen, who confirmed the news to Bloomberg.

The law and order party at work. 

Yea, lots going on.

 

 

Um, A Question Or Two For Doug Mastriano

We'll start here:

Atlanta-area prosecutors are considering bringing racketeering and conspiracy charges in connection with Donald Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia, according to a source with knowledge of the investigation.

Investigators have a large volume of substantial evidence related to a possible conspiracy from inside and outside the state, including recordings of phone calls, emails, text messages, documents, and testimony before a special grand jury.

Their work, the source said, underscores the belief that the push to help Trump was not just a grassroots effort that originated inside the state. 

And:

The Fulton County probe expanded beyond the Trump phone calls to include false claims of election fraud to state lawmakers, the fake elector scheme, efforts by unauthorized individuals to access voting machines in one Georgia county and threats and harassment against election workers.  

So the Georgia investigation is including the "fake elector scheme" to keep Trump in office even after he lost the 2020 election, right?

Weren't you Trump's "point person" in Pennsylvania for that same scheme?

Yes, you were. 

And then there's this:

Prosecutors in Georgia who are probing the efforts of then-President Trump to overturn the state’s 2020 election results are asking to speak with a lawyer of his in their investigation.

Christina Bobb, an attorney for Trump, has been asked to speak to prosecutors in the case, Bobb’s defense attorney confirmed to ABC News on Monday.

John Lauro, the defense attorney, told ABC that prosecutors did not specify what information they were hoping to obtain from speaking with Bobb, who may also be implicated in the federal investigation into Trump’s handling of classified information.

Wasn't Christina Bobb at a recent rally of yours?

Yes, she was:

Senator, did you ever discuss the fake elector scheme with Christina Bobb? Do you think the Georgia conspiracy investigation will investigate your involvement with the fake Pennsylvania electors?

Senator, will you ever be fully transparent about your involvement with Trump's attempted coup?

EVERY Republican (And MAGA-head) Needs To Be Asked This

We'll start with Reuters:

Former U.S. President Donald Trump on Saturday said he expects to be arrested on Tuesday as New York prosecutors consider charges over a hush money payment to a porn star, and called on his supporters to protest.

And this is what he posted on Truth Social:

Yea, we all know what happened the last time he said to "TAKE OUR NATION BACK" don't we:

 And:

So yes, yes we do.

As a result, there's this from CBS:

A law enforcement source said the New York Police Department along with federal, state and local agencies are gearing up for a possible indictment against former President Donald Trump in New York as early as next week.

The NYPD and other law enforcement agencies — including the U.S. Secret Service and the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force — are preparing security plans in and around the Manhattan criminal courthouse where Trump will potentially appear if he is charged in connection with a $130,000 alleged hush money payment to Stormy Daniels, an adult film star, according to the source. Daniels alleges the money was paid to keep her quiet about a sexual encounter with Trump years earlier.

Every Trump-supporting GOP member has to be asked if they'll denounce the use of violent protest by Trump supporters in the event he's indicted, arrested, prosecuted, and so on.

Every last one of them.

Meanwhile, Outside

Science, from the climate scientists at NOAA:

February 2023 was the fourth-warmest February for the globe in NOAA's 174-year record. The February global surface temperature was 1.75°F (0.97°C) above the 20th-century average of 53.9°F (12.1°C). February 2023 marked the 44th consecutive February and the 528th consecutive month with global temperatures, at least nominally, above the 20th-century average. 

And, of course, the graph:

It's getting warmer out there.

In Case You Missed It - Judge Patricia McCullogh At Mastriano's NAR Rally

Kira Resistance has a snippet:

#Pennsylvania 👀 Judge Patricia McCullough "I was the only Judge in 2020 in the presidential election in the entire country to order the governor to stop certifying the election because of constitutional challenges" @ Mastriano rally
⚠️Running for State Supreme Court #PAGOV pic.twitter.com/ifq3TpyxQQ

— Kira Resistance 🚨 (@KiraResistance) March 12, 2023

What the good Judge failed to mention to Mastriano's crowd is this:

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Saturday rejected a last-ditch bid from Republicans including Rep. Mike Kelly (Pa.) to halt the certification of the 2020 election results in the Keystone State. 

The court’s decision delivered the latest blow for Republicans, President Trump and his campaign to overturn election results in a battleground state that President-elect Joe Biden won by more than 1 percentage point. 

In an order released Saturday night, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court vacated a preliminary order by the Commonwealth Court and dismissed the case.

Judge McCullough's decision was dated November 25, 2020. That decision was overturned 3 days later by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court:

AND NOW, this 28th day of November, 2020, pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 726,1 we GRANT the application for extraordinary jurisdiction filed by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Governor Thomas W. Wolf, and Secretary of the Commonwealth Kathy Boockvar (“Commonwealth”), VACATE the Commonwealth Court’s order preliminarily enjoining the Commonwealth from taking any further action regarding the certification of the results of the 2020 General Election, and DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE the petition or review filed by the Honorable Mike Kelly, Sean Parnell, Thomas A. Frank, Nancy Kierzek, Derek Magee, Robin Sauter, and Wanda Logan (“Petitioners”). All other outstanding motions are DISMISSED AS MOOT.

The Court describes what that case was trying to do:

Petitioners filed the petition for review in Commonwealth Court on November 21, 2020, setting forth a facial challenge to those provisions of Act 77 of 2019, establishing universal mail-in voting in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Petitioners sought a declaration that the aforementioned provisions were unconstitutional and void ab initio, and injunctive relief prohibiting the certification of the results of the General Election held on November 3, 2020. As a remedy, Petitioners sought to invalidate the ballots of the millions of Pennsylvania voters who utilized the mail-in voting procedures established by Act 77 and count only those ballots that Petitioners deem to be “legal votes.” Alternatively, Petitioners advocated the extraordinary proposition that the court disenfranchise all 6.9 million Pennsylvanians who voted in the General Election and instead “direct[] the General Assembly to choose Pennsylvania’s electors.” [Emphasis added.]

Sound familiar?

The Court's next sentence sums up the decision to dismiss:

Upon consideration of the parties’ filings in Commonwealth Court, we hereby dismiss the petition for review with prejudice based upon Petitioners’ failure to file their facial constitutional challenge in a timely manner. 

And we read from Justice Wecht's concurring decision, after point out the huge burden of proof needed to overturn an election:

Petitioners cannot carry their enormous burden. They have failed to allege that even a single mail-in ballot was fraudulently cast or counted. Notably, these Petitioners sought to intervene in a federal lawsuit in which the campaign of President Donald J. Trump—an ostensible beneficiary of Petitioners' efforts to disenfranchise more than one-third of the Commonwealth's electorate—explicitly disclaimed any allegation of fraud in the conduct of Pennsylvania's General Election. See Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. v. Secretary Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, No. 20-3371, 830 Fed.Appx. 377, 381-82 (3d Cir. Nov. 27, 2020) ("[A]s [Trump Presidential Campaign] lawyer Rudolph Giuliani stressed, the Campaign `doesn't plead fraud. ... [T]his is not a fraud case.'" (quoting Mot. To Dismiss Hr'g Tr. 118:19-20, 137:18)). The absence of fraud allegations from this matter—not to mention actual evidence of fraud—alone is fatal to Petitioners' claims.

This is how Judge Patricia McCullough's decision was dismissed - and all other motions dismissed as moot.

Hey, Does Doug Mastriano Know This?

In case you missed it, this happened recently:

While serving as a senior legal advisor to the then-President of the United States and as counsel for his reelection campaign, Jenna Lynn Ellis (“Respondent”) repeatedly made misrepresentations on national television and on Twitter, undermining the American public’s confidence in the 2020 presidential election. The parties stipulate that Respondent’s misconduct warrants public censure, and the Presiding Disciplinary Judge (“the Court”) approves the parties’ stipulation. 

Here's the story:

A Colorado judge has censured Jenna Ellis, a former senior legal adviser to Donald Trump’s 2020 presidential campaign who admitted in state disciplinary proceedings that she made at least 10 false statements about the 2020 election as part of an effort to mislead the public, according to court documents.

So what were some of those statements Ellis admitted were false?

Well, there's this:

On November 20, 2020, Respondent appeared on Spicer & Co. and stated, “with all those states [Nevada, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia] combined we know that the election was stolen from President Trump and we can prove that.”

So that was a lie. 

And then there was this:

On November 30, 2020, Respondent appeared on Mornings with Maria on Fox Business and stated, “President Trump is right that there was widespread fraud in this election, we have at least six states that were corrupted, if not more, through their voting systems. . . We know that President Trump won in a landslide.” She also stated, “The outcome of this election is actually fraudulent it's wrong, and we understand than when we subtract all the illegal ballots, you can see that President Trump actually won in a landslide.”

And that was a lie.

So when, at that Gettysburg hearing in November of 2020, when Rudy Giuliani said:

This voter fraud that took place, which as you will see from the witnesses that we call, had several dimensions to it, several different ways in which it was done. The most dangerous thing is, it is very, very similar in at least six states that we’ve been able to study. In other words, what we’re going to describe to you with these witnesses, happened in roughly the same way in Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia.  

And Jenna Ellis concurred:

I’ll reserve my comments for the end, and I would just echo everything that the mayor so eloquently stated. Thank you very much.

She was spreading the same lie at Doug's hearing.

Why all this?

This is why: 

Doug Mastriano, the Republican nominee for governor in Pennsylvania, has appointed Jenna Ellis, a former lawyer for the Trump campaign who worked to overturn the 2020 election, as a senior legal adviser, his campaign announced on Monday.

And:

“The talent, experience and legal expertise Jenna brings will be an important factor in helping us defeat Josh Shapiro and the extreme Democrat agenda in November,” Mr. Mastriano said in a statement, referring to his Democratic opponent, the state’s attorney general.

And the feelings were mutual:

“Doug Mastriano, I like to say, is the Donald Trump of Pennsylvania,” Ms. Ellis said at a campaign event in Erie last month.

Any comment from St Sen Doug Mastriano about how a senior legal advisor to his gubernatorial campaign has admitted in court that some of what she was saying about the 2020 election was a lie? 

Especially since he was saying the same things?

How St Sen Doug Mastriano Respects Women

Well, yesterday was International Women's Day and so gubernatorial loser St Sen Mastriano pandered:

On International Women’s Day, recognizing the women serving the 33rd Senate District. pic.twitter.com/WXUW4u8xsT

— Senator Doug Mastriano (@SenMastriano) March 8, 2023

But let's not forget that he's still this guy:

When responding to whether or not abortion laws should have exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother, the candidates split in their responses. Mastriano and White say no to exceptions, while McSwain and Barletta said they would have exceptions. In his response, Mastriano said, “I don’t give way for exceptions either. Kathy Barnette, she’s going to be our next U.S. Senator, she is a product of rape.”

Two points to make:

• A 14 yr old girl is raped by her uncle. Doug Mastriano would force her to give birth. The decision would not be hers or hers and her parents. It would be Doug Mastriano's.
• An otherwise healthy pregnant woman discovers that hers is an ectopic pregnancy. Doug would force her through to the end of the pregnancy, at great risk to her health - despite the fact that, with an ectopic pregnancy, the zygote/embryo/fetus always dies. The decision to end that pregnancy would not be that woman's, or that woman in consultation with her Dr. It would be Doug Mastriano's.

This is Doug Mastriano.

Tying Up Some Old Threads (A McCullough In The News)

We'll start here:

#Pennsylvania ⚠️ PA Judge Patricia McC*llough at #NAR Apostle Abby Abildness event
"We know this too, Lord, that you established One Nation Under God. Open the Dome (Capitol) now Lord under a Portal of Heaven. That we may see these Angels coming down. For Such a Time as This"😯 pic.twitter.com/rdlrXjNE8T

— Kira Resistance 🚨 (@KiraResistance) March 4, 2023

This is Judge Patricia McCullough, of the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court.

So is this:

#Pennsylvania 👀 PA Judge Patricia McCullough "He taught that all law is based on Divine Law as taught in the Holy Scripture...no human law should be suffered to contradict these" ➡️ Interview w/ NAR Apostle Abby Abildness #Harrisburg #PAGOV #Philadelphia #BlueCrew pic.twitter.com/vEKDoJCT9i

— Kira Resistance 🚨 (@KiraResistance) November 19, 2022

And this is Pat, at a Wendy Bell rally, saying that "All law is based on natural law. And all law is based on divine law."

This is Judge Patricia McCullough, of the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court.

Living deep in the sacred heart of the National Apostolic Reformation - Pennsylvania local. 

She's also Chuck McCullough's wife.

You remember Chuck, right?  Member of the Allegheny County Council who was arrested in 2009 for the misuse of some estate funds (among other things).

I wonder if Chuck and Pat ever discussed how "all law is based on natural law" when he was writing those checks he had no legal authority to write. Or when he was arrested. Or found guilty. Or (finally) sent to jail.

This weekend, an astute reader sent me a note, letting me know that Chuck's was paroled on February 19, 2023.

He was incarcerated for 1 year, 10 months and 13 days (or thereabouts).

Which seems ludicrous considering it was:

• 6 years, 2 months, 4 days between Chuck's arrest and the beginning of his trial.
• 5 years, 11 months, 25 days between Chuck's sentencing and the beginning of his incarceration. 
• 12 years, 1 month, 28 days between Chuck's arrest and the beginning of his incarceration.

The wheels of justice certainly move slowly for some, eh your Honor?

Also, remember how Trump lost all but one of those court cases designed to keep him in office?

Guess who presided over that one. Judge Patricia McCullough.

It was dismissed by the PA Supreme Court:

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court dismissed a Republican lawsuit seeking to invalidate the state’s mail-in ballots on Saturday evening, the latest legal defeat for Donald Trump in his unprecedented effort to overturn the result of the 2020 election. 

The latest Pennsylvania lawsuit, led by Republican congressman Mike Kelly, was unanimously rejected by the state’s Supreme Court judges, who described it as an “extraordinary proposition that the court disenfranchise 6.9 million Pennsylvanians who voted in the general election”. 

Five of the seven judges argued the case should be dismissed because the challenge had come too late, considering that the absentee voting procedures in the state had been established a year ago. 

The court’s decision overturns an earlier hold on the state’s certification process made by Commonwealth Court judge Patricia McCullough.

Context is everything.