Early Start With Kasie Hunt: 'You're Lying': George Conway Clashes With Republican Commentator Over Donald Trump Guilty Verdict'

Source:CNN with a George Conway vs Scott Jennings live TV debate.

"Lawyer George Conway and CNN Senior Political Commentator Scott Jennings joined “CNN This Morning” to discuss Donald Trump’s guilty verdict in his criminal hush money case." 

From CNN

I'm not going top try to play mindreader and argue that Scott Jennings is lying here. He just might be complete idiot when it comes to New York State law and simply not know what he's talking about. And since I don't know if that's true or not, I'm not going to call him a liar on this. But he might a be political genius (but I have my doubts on that) when it comes to political analysis. 

I think what Scott Jennings is doing here (and this is just my personal theory) is taking a page from Senator Marco Rubio's political playbook. 

When Senator Rubio was running for President in 2015-16, he was almost as Never-Trump as George Conway is right now. Until it not just cost him the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, and almost cost him his U.S. Senate seat. Now, at least until he thought he might have a shot at the Republican vice presidential nomination, he's not Never-Trump or MAGA. He was Marco Rubio and his concern has been really since the 2016 presidential election has been getting through the current MAGA moment, without offending too many Independents in Florida, Or, losing MAGA voters in Florida. 

Scott Jennings is a career Republican and career Republican political strategist and political analyst. He's also in his mid 40s now and is smart enough to know that whether Donald Trump wins or loses the presidential election in 2024, the Republican Party will still be here in January next year. And that's the only place for him to be, as long as he wants to continue to work in American politics. And he believes that right now for him going forward, he has to sound like the partisan Republican, whose always defending the Republican whose in trouble, at call costs. 

To correct one thing that Scott Jennings said: It's illegal in New York to commit one crime to cover up another. False business records in New York is a misdemeanor. Except when you do that to hide another crime and in this case illegal campaign contributions. Which is how Donald Trump was convicted of 34 felonies yesterday, by filing false business records by claiming that they were legal expenses, when the fact is they are political contributions to his political campaign. I'm not a lawyer, but I've followed this case long enough and read enough about it, to be able to explain the crimes that Mr. Trump was convicted of. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

MSNBC: ‘Conviction Has Gotten To Him’: Katy Tur Reports From Inside Trump Tower'

Source:MSNBC anchor Katy Tur talking about Convicted Felon Donald J. Trump at Trump Tower, in Manhattan, New York.

"Former President Donald Trump delivered post-verdict remarks riddled with lies and attacks against Michael Cohen, prosecutors, and Judge Juan Merchan. Katy Tur is at Trump Tower with the latest." 

From MSNBC

I think Katy Tur gives and excellent description and story about how she saw Donald Trump today. And it reminds me of let's say a top rank boxer, the world heavyweight champion, who was not just the heavyweight champion, but maybe had the championship for 5 years, is undefeated, never even been knocked down. But then there's that one title defense where he doesn't meet his match, but where he's overmatched and just gets knocked down, flattened, beaten up. And his whole career and life is never the same after that. 

We'll know in about a week what the American voters, especially Independents and center-right Republicans, who really don't want to vote Donald Trump again, but might do it anyway, but we'll see how these voters think of Donald Trump now being a 34 time convicted felon and how they feel about him next Friday. 

But this reminds me of (for you pro boxing fans) of Mike Tyson, who Donald Trump knows somewhat, who he hosted at his casino in Atlantic City back in the 1980s for several of his fights, this reminds me of Tyson losing to James Buster Douglas in 1990. 

Douglas destroys Tyson and knocks him out in February, 1990. Mike Tyson a year later is charged with raping a woman at an Indiana fashion show and convicted of rape in 1992. He goes from being Iron Mike Tyson and World Heavyweight Champion, to basically just another heavyweight contender, from the time he loses his championship in 1990, to being convicted of rape in 1992, to serving 3 years in prison after that. His whole life really falls apart after losing to Buster Douglas in 1990. And never gets back to anywhere near where he was in the late 1980s, when he was on top of the boxing world and looking unbeatable. 

In a span of 9 years from 2015 to today, Donald J. Trump has gone from being the self-proclaimed King of Reality TV, (if not the actual King of Reality TV) to the King of Political Reality TV, to President of the United States, as well as King of Political Reality TV, to the first incumbent President to lose reelection since George H.W. Bush in 1992 and the only second incumbent President since Jimmy Carter in 1980, to lose reelection, to a 4-time indicted criminal defendant, to now a 34-time convicted felon, in his home city, home bureau, hone state, in Manhattan, New York. And DJT is still the Republican nominee for President of the United States. 

We'll see if DJT just completely loses it and becomes like a Mike Tyson of American politics and American voters completely reject him overwhelmingly. Or, will he get it together be the Donald J. Trump that everyone hates or loves and becomes the favorite to win the 2024 presidential election. And we'll have a much better idea a week from now how running as a 34-time convicted felon, affects is presidential campaign.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Steve Schmidt: 'DONALD TRUMP CONVICTED: What Comes Next? Republicans Call For Retribution'

Source:The Warning With Steve Schmidt talking about the aftermath of Donald J. Trump becoming a convicted felon.

"Republicans are calling for retribution after former President Donald Trump was found guilty on 34 counts by a New York jury. "These senators and members of congress are ransacking, vandalizing the U.S. judicial system," Steve Schmidt says." 

From The Warning With Steve Schmidt

I was watching MSNBC's late coverage of the Donald Trump conviction last night. Not because I'm in love with their left-wing commentators, not even physically. But because I just wanted their legal analysis from their actual lawyers, not left-wing commentators. People like Katie Phang, Andrew Weissman, Ari Melber, are all excellent lawyers. And I wanted to hear what their Democratic strategists (not left-wing activists) thought about how Joe Biden and his campaign, how the party should play (to to speak) the aftermath of the Trump verdict. 

I think Steve Schmidt lays out very correctly how MAGA will play this. They're going to argue that: "The deep state is at it again. They're trying to take down real American patriots, to hold onto power. We can't let this disgrace continue. We must fight back and tear down the deep state!" 

That's not a direct quote, but that's what Donald Trump and his MAGA political cult will be talking about and that's what their political attitude is. 

I think we know how MAGA, the far-right-right of the modern Republican Party will handle this. And I think we know how at least some who are basically still center-right, establishment Republicans, people like Republican strategist Scott Jennings, who simply wants a future in the Republican Party, regardless of who wins the presidential election, will play this as well. 

But the question is how will the Democratic Party Leadership play this? On Jen Psaki's portion of what seemed like a marathon coverage of the Trump verdict, that I didn't catch at all until after 10PM last night, she and her panel got into that, after midnight. Jennifer Palmieri who goes back to John Edwards first presidential campaign back in 2003-04, if not further than that when she handled communications for him, as well as Tim Miller who used to work for Governor Jeb Bush, as well as the House Republicans when John Boehner was the Speaker, made some very good points here. 

Jennifer Palmieri and Tim Miller both agreed and I agree with them that the Biden Campaign can't wait until the Trump felony convictions becomes an old story, before they try to take advantage of it. 

If the Biden Campaign lets June go by without their campaign saying anything about this and not doing anything to promote American liberal democracy and the rule of law, as well as Donald Trump and his MAGA Party coming back to power next year, if they win, where they could just come back to take down our form of government and seek retribution against any Democrat or Republican who they see as a threat to their movement and regime, June will be a lost month for President Biden and his campaign. 

This is the perfect time now to talk about how vital American liberal democracy and the rule of law is. They have the perfect spokesperson when it comes to the rule of law, and I believe the perfect attack person (if you don't like attack dog) in Vice President Kamala Harris. (To pick up on Tim Miller's point) And they should be hammering away at Donald Trump's vulnerability when it comes to liberal democracy and the rule of law, with speech after speech, campaign commercial after campaign commercial. At least until the Republican Party walks that political plank, become political suicide bombers and nominates a 34 time convicted felon for President of the United States, 6 weeks from now. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

NBC News: ‘Donald Trump Found Guilty in Historic New York Hush Money Case’

Source:NBC News covering the historic guilty verdict of Defendant Donald J. Trump.

Source:The New Democrat

“A New York jury on Thursday found Donald Trump guilty on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records — the first time a former U.S. president has been convicted of a crime.

The jury reached its verdict in the historic case after 9.5 hours of deliberations, which began Wednesday.

He’ll be sentenced on July 11, four days before the Republican National Convention. He faces penalties ranging from a fine to four years in prison on each count, although it’s expected he would be sentenced for the offenses concurrently, and not consecutively.

This was a disgrace. This was a rigged trial by a conflicted judge who was corrupt,” he fumed to reporters afterward.

The verdict was read in the Manhattan courtroom where Trump has been on trial since April 15. He had pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records related to a hush money payment made by his former lawyer Michael Cohen to adult film star Stormy Daniels in the final weeks of the 2016 presidential election.

Trump looked down with his eyes narrowed as the jury foreperson read the word “guilty” to each count. The judge thanked the jurors for their service in the weeks-long trial. “You gave this matter the attention it deserved, and I want to thank you for that,” Judge Juan Merchan told them. Trump appeared to be scowling at the jurors as they walked by him on their way out of the courtroom.

Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche made a motion for acquittal after the jury left the room, which the judge denied.

The conviction comes as Trump is the presumptive Republican nominee for president. He immediately set out fundraising off the news, posting on his website that he’s “a political prisoner” and urging his followers to give money.

Legal experts have told NBC News that even if Trump is sentenced to time behind bars, he’d most likely be allowed to remain out of jail while he appeals the verdict, a process that could take months or more. That means the sentence would most likely not interfere with his ability to accept the Republican nomination for president at the July convention.

President Joe Biden’s campaign praised the verdict in a statement, but stressed that Trump needs to be defeated in November.

“In New York today, we saw that no one is above the law,” the campaign’s communications director Michael Tyler said, but the “verdict does not change the fact that the American people face a simple reality. There is still only one way to keep Donald Trump out of the Oval Office: at the ballot box.”

In his closing argument earlier this week, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass told the jury that “the law is the law and it applies to everyone equally. There is no special standard for this defendant.”

“You, the jury, have the ability to hold the defendant accountable,” Steinglass said.

Trump had maintained the Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office had no case and that there had been no crime. “President Trump is innocent. He did not commit any crimes,” Blanche said in his closing statement, arguing the payments to Cohen were legitimate.

Prosecutors said the disguised payment to Cohen was part of a “planned, coordinated long-running conspiracy to influence the 2016 election, to help Donald Trump get elected through illegal expenditures, to silence people who had something bad to say about his behavior, using doctored corporate records and bank forms to conceal those payments along the way.”

“It was election fraud. Pure and simple,” prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said in his opening statement.

While Trump was not charged with conspiracy, prosecutors argued he caused the records to be falsified because he was trying to cover up a violation of state election law- and falsifying business records with the intent to cover another crime raises the offense from a misdemeanor to a felony.

The verdict came after a sensational weeks-long trial that included combative testimony from Cohen, Trump’s self-described former fixer, and Daniels, who testified that she had a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006 after meeting him at a celebrity golf tournament. Trump has denied her claim, and his attorney had suggested that Cohen acted on his own because he thought it would make “the boss” happy.

Other witnesses included former White House staffers including advisor Hope Hicks, former Trump Organization executives, and former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker.”

From NBC News

“Former President Trump has been found guilty on all 34 counts of business document fraud in the New York hush money trial. NBC News’ Laura Jarrett reports as the guilty verdicts came in.” 

From NBC News

As my colleague Fred Schneider mentioned a couple hours ago today:

“I have a prediction for you, if you want. And even if you don’t want it, I’ll give it to you anyway.

Again, no decision on the verdict yet, but just the way this jury is acting and what they’re doing, the questions they’re asking, the evidence they’re reviewing, suggests to me that they’ve found Donald J. Trump guilty of multiple felonies:

They’ve reviewed David Pecker’s testimony, who of course exposed (pun intended) this whole damn affair and scheme, between Trump Inc. (let’s call it) and the two women that they paid off.

They reviewed Michael Cohen’s testimony about the scheme, that was corroborated by David Pecker.

And as Harry Litman said (who is a real-life lawyer) they reviewed the Cohen-Trump phone call about how to pay off Stephanie Clifford (also known as Stormy Daniels) and Karen McDougal.

They’re going through the evidence that the Manhattan DA wants them to and have focused on the evidence that they wanted them too. This looks like multiple felony convictions for Mr. Donald J. Trump.

Again, no decision on the verdict yet, but just the way this jury is acting and what they’re doing, the 

From The New Democrat

Fred and I were thinking he would be found guilty of 9 felonies today and perhaps the jury would let the other 25 felony counts slide (so to speak) because they have Donald Trump’s signature on 9 checks that were use to pay off Stephanie Clifford (also known as Stormy Daniels) and Karen McDougal. But the other 25 I think (as a non-lawyer) you could argue that maybe the prosecution didn’t prove that he’s directly responsible for those checks as well.

But then you go to what the jury was looking at when they were deliberating and it was all about David Pecker exposing (pun intended) the whole hush money scheme. As well as the Michael Cohen testimony that was corroborated by Pecker, and the phone call between Donald Trump and Michael Cohen and you know that Donald Trump was damn well behind this scheme, not just approved it, but with the checks you know that he personally financed it. And I think that’s how the jury got to 34 felony convictions of Mr. Trump, instead of the 9 that have his signatures on the checks.

So I believe for the jury it became about Mr. Pecker’s word and Mr. Cohen’s word, versus Mr Trump’s. And Mr. Trump didn’t even bother to testify and give his version of events to the jury. And the defense brought no one up who could contradict anything that Mr. Pecker and Mr. Cohen testified under oath.

Harry Litman: 'Jury Asks to Hear MORE About Donald Trump's AWFUL Crimes'

Source:Harry Litman talking about Defendant Don.

"The jury in the Trump trial has asked to re-hear some evidence about witnesses David Pecker and Michael Cohen. Harry reviews these requests and explains their significance." 

From Harry Litman

As I'm writing this post at 5:15 PM EST, we still don't have a decision on the verdict. But my colleague Ederik Schneider will have a post about whether Donald J. Trump is judged guilty or not guilty, at around 7PM or so. Unfortunately not even The New Democrat has a time machine, or can predict into the future. So we can't talk about things that haven't happened yet. But stay tuned. 

I have a prediction for you, if you want. And even if you don't want it, I'll give it to you anyway. 

Again, no decision on the verdict yet, but just the way this jury is acting and what they're doing, the questions they're asking, the evidence they're reviewing, suggests to me that they've found Donald J. Trump guilty of multiple felonies: 

They've reviewed David Pecker's testimony, who of course exposed (pun intended) this whole damn affair and scheme, between Trump Inc. (let's call it) and the two women that they paid off. 

They reviewed Michael Cohen's testimony about the scheme, that was corroborated by David Pecker. 

And as Harry Litman said (who is a real-life lawyer) they reviewed the Cohen-Trump phone call about how to pay off Stephanie Clifford (also known as Stormy Daniels) and Karen McDougal. 

They're going through the evidence that the Manhattan DA wants them to and have focused on the evidence that they wanted them too. This looks like multiple felony convictions for Mr. Donald J. Trump. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Jesse Dollemore: 'Apprentice Producer TELLS ALL About Donald Trump Using N-Word On Video!!!'

Source:Jesse Dollemore talking about the claims that a former Apprentice producer has made about Donald J. Trump.

"Jesse reads from and talks about a new article in Slate by a former producer on Trump's reality game show, The Apprentice. The article exposes many interesting details surrounding the show's production, including an account from the producer about Donald Trump using the N-word to describe a contestant." 

From Jesse Dollemore

"A producer on "The Apprentice" said Donald Trump used the n-word in a moment caught on tape that will likely never see the light of day.

In an op-ed for Slate, Bill Pruitt writes that he was one of four producers on the show's first two seasons. He signed an NDA that expired this year — roughly 20 years after "The Apprentice" first premiered.

Pruitt writes that off-camera deliberations about contestant firings were filmed in case the show was ever questioned by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which disallows fixing outcomes on game shows.

Pruitt said Trump used the slur while discussing first-season finalists Bill Rancic and Kwame Jackson.

A Trump campaign spokesperson told Slate that Pruitt's account was a "completely fabricated and bullshit story that was already peddled in 2016." The spokesperson said the claims were resurfacing due to "desperate" Democrats.

Pruitt writes in Slate that producers who'd heard Trump's remarks never discussed the incident in the moment, and he believes the tapes will never be found.

A rep for NBCUniversal declined to comment.

Pruitt isn't the first person involved with "The Apprentice" to claim Trump used the n-word.

Omarosa Manigault Newman, who also appeared on the first season of the show and formerly worked in the Trump administration, said she'd listened to tapes where Trump used the slur. Trump denied the existence of the tapes at the time, calling Manigault Newman "wacky and deranged."

Rumors of "Apprentice" outtake tapes have swirled for years.

Mark Burnett, the reality TV megaproducer and creator of the show, denounced Trump before the 2016 election. But Burnett said he had no legal rights to release any tapes. An MGM lawyer, whose studio bought Burnett's production company, also confirmed at the time that they did not have the rights to release any footage.

"MGM, not Mark Burnett, owns 'The Apprentice.' MGM has agreements with artists across a wide spectrum of creative properties, including 'The Apprentice.' These agreements typically contain provisions related to confidentiality and artist's rights," Marvin S. Putnam, MGM's outside counsel, said in a statement at the time." 

From Business Insider

First of all and at risk of creating some new cure for insomnia or something, I feel the need to state the obvious here. Because apparently that obvious missed Jesse Dollemore as it relates to this story. 

We don't know if this producer is actually correct with this claim here. Like with every other American, you shouldn't just automatically take the word of someone, especially someone who signed a non-disclosure agreement, who says X, Y, or Z, once used a horrible, racist word, when talking about other human beings. 

If this tape is out there and it actually exists, or it ever existed in the first place, and Donald Trump is on it using the n-word, it will get out. But until then it's Donald J. Trump's word (which is worth about as much as bikinis in Antarctica) versus someone who also hasn't established any credibility with the public, at least on this story, either.

I have no doubt that Donald J. Trump is the swine of swines, who should be running for President of Swineland, or some place, instead of President of the United States. I have no doubt how he feels about African-Americans, and other racial minorities, who at best he just tries to use to obtain more power for himself. 

But if you are a responsible journalist or commentator, you just don't automatically take the word of one person, to use against someone you obviously oppose. Which is what Jesse Dollemore is doing to hurt Donald Trump. You have to have solid evidence to back up the claims that the person is using against someone else, first. And then you can go from there. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Dan Mitchell: ‘The Fiscal Case For Federalism’

Source:Dan Mitchell being interviewed about federalism.

Source:The New Democrat

“Fixing entitlement programs is the the most pressing fiscal need in Washington.

In a discussion with the Club for Growth Foundation, I explain that we also need federalism – i.e., shifting programs to the state and local level.

Some of those activities should be left totally to the private sector (agriculture,

housing, etc) while others could be picked up by state and local governments (education, transportation, etc).

As I mentioned in the discussion, Switzerland is a good role model.

It’s arguably the world’s best-governed nation. And I don’t think it’s a coincidence that it’s also the most-decentralized nation.

which case everything is abolished).

National defense (a small share of spending)

Social Security (after being reformed, of course)

Medicare (after being reformed, of course)

My former colleague Chris Edwards wrote about the need for federalism in a column for National Review. Here are some highlights of his article… 

From Dan Mitchell

“Dan Mitchell Extolling the Virtues of Federalism” 

From Dan Mitchell

I have a few responses to what Dan Mitchell is advocating for here before I agree with a lot of what he’s saying, minus the flat tax. 

A lot of today’s so-called Progressives (who are actually Social Democrats or Democratic Socialists) argue that: “This is the way that they run health care in Sweden and the rest of Scandinavia. This is what we should do in America as well.” Meaning that health care, college education, and a lot of other social and economic benefits are run exclusively by the national government in those countries: “So we should do that in America as well.” 

Well, as lot of Conservatives, as well as Liberals, including myself and The New Democrat Blog will tell you, just because one thing might work in one country, doesn’t mean it will work in another. China has been a Communist State for almost 80 years now. That country seems to be thriving economically. Do you really want America to be a Communist State? And that’s just one example of why you don’t want to automatically assume that just because one system might work in one country, that another country should just automatically adopt that form of government as well. 

But that’s what Dan Mitchell is basically doing here. Switzerland is a country of 9 million people. Roughly the same population as the State of New Jersey. It has the same territory as New Hampshire and Vermont combined. America is a country of 330 million people. We are the 3rd largest country in the world in territory and in population. Just because something might work in New Jersey or Texas on a state level, doesn’t mean that would make for good policy nationally. And that’s really my case for federalism here. 

I think when people who aren’t familiar with the term federalism, especially people on the left who are always advocating for more Federal responsibility, power and programs, they think federalism means strong, national, government. That a Federalist wants a strong, national, government. But the fact is the opposite true.

Federalists believe in the Federal Republic. And in federal republics, of course you have a national government. But you also have state/provincial government’s as well. You don’t have the national government handling national defense, foreign policy, monetary policy, interstate law enforcement, along with education, social welfare, marriage, recreation, and everything else.

In federal republics, the states aren’t national agencies. They’re what U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis called: “Laboratories of democracy” And what that means is the Federal Republic is essentially a “free market of ideas”

And the states, as long as they’re within the U.S. Constitution and aren’t violating anyone’s constitutional rights, or are interfering with federal power, like trying to create their own military, or trying to run their own immigration policy, (that sort of thing) they are free to manage their own law enforcement agencies, they’re own education systems, they’re own social own welfare systems themselves. Without the Federal Government butting in and trying to interfere with their own government and trying to tell them what they can and can’t do. Or trying to take over their programs for them. 

So when you have a country as big, as diverse, not just racially and ethnically, or culturally, but politically as well, where you might have some states that look like Scandinavia ideologically, like Vermont, but have some states that look like Switzerland ideologically, like Texas, federalism which is decentralization of governmental power, is really the only form of government that I believe can work in America. And has worked in America for almost 248 years now. 

Erin Burnett OutFront: 'Ex-Donald Trump Official Has Theory On Why Melania Trump Hasn't Appeared At Hush Money Trial'

Source:CNN talking about former First Lady of the United States, Melania Trump.

"Former Trump White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham discusses former first lady Melania Trump's absence from her husband's criminal hush money trial." 

From CNN

"Former White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said Melania Trump has not attended her husband’s hush money trial because she is “thinking of her own optics.”

Grisham, a former top aide to Melania Trump, told CNN’s Erin Burnett on Tuesday that it “doesn’t surprise” her that the former first lady has not paid a trip to the Manhattan courthouse where former President Trump has been on trial for weeks.

“This family is really focused on optics. They’re always focused on optics,” she said on CNN’s “Erin Burnett OutFront.”

A handful of family members have attended the trial to show support for the former president, but Melania Trump and the former president’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, have yet to make an appearance as the court enters its seventh week of proceedings.

“But you know, I think that Melania and Ivanka are both thinking of their own optics, and they haven’t been here the whole time. And I’m just not sure showing up now would do anything but cause more speculation,” Grisham added later on.

During closing arguments Tuesday, Donald Trump, Jr., Eric Trump and Tiffany Trump were all in attendance, as well as the former President’s daughter-in-law, Lara Trump, and his son-in-law, Michael Boulos. Throughout the trial, numerous Republicans and other Trump allies have also attended the proceedings to rail against the case and its key players.

Grisham said she does not believe Melania will show up to court as the jurors begin their deliberations this week. She also said she think the campaign and the former president have asked her to attend.

“I would be absolutely floored if she showed up. There’s just no way, and again, she hasn’t shown up this whole time now. And so, in her mind, I think she would think that she was caving or even look weak to suddenly show up,” Grisham said." 

From The Hill

As I wrote about this 2 weeks ago: 

"I'm not going to claim that I know Melania Trump well, or even personally. Very few people do. She gives new meaning to the term human confidential. (Actually, I think I just invented that term) She's one of the most private people in the world. 

But, as Melania's own former aid Stephanie Winston Wolkoff told CNN anchor Jake Tapper and SW Wolkoff does know Melania very well, I mean she worked for her in New York and at The White House, her marriage with Donald is transactional. 

Every relationship that Donald J. Trump has ever had has been transactional. So why would the relationship with his youngish and still very youngish looking, gorgeous, babydoll wife, whose still better looking than his daughters, be any different? She's with Donald as long as that's good for her." 

From The New Democrat

Maybe I've thought about this for a while, but instead of creating The Apprentice 20 years ago, Donald Trump should've produced a real-life, real, reality TV show called The Trump's. Or Trump Family.Org, because that's exactly what they are. 

Whatever you think of the case against Donald J. Trump (and The New Democrat has been very clear where it stands) this has been a horrible, real life, made for tabloid TV, and broadcast network TV movie of the week, from like the 1980s, nightmare for his current transactional wife Melania. 

Again, I don't pretend to know this woman, but she obviously doesn't think her transactional husband is innocent. And apparently neither does Donald's kids because they only show up after being criticized for not showing up at all. And nothing yet from his oldest daughter Ivanka and her husband, his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

MSNBC: Former Judge John Jones: ‘The Law of The Case’ Will Be ‘Most Important in The Deliberations’

Source:MSNBC talking about Defendant Don.

"The jury is deliberating in former President Trump’s hush money criminal trial, weighing the evidence and witnesses presented by the prosecution to determine if Donald Trump is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Andrea Mitchell is joined by Vaughn Hillyard, Andrew Weissmann, Jeremy Saland, Barbara McQuade, and former federal Judge John E. Jones to review the closing arguments and discuss what the jury is considering in their deliberations." 

From MSNBC

I'm paraphrasing Barbara McQuade here. But she said the strongest evidence against Donald J. Trump, has to do with the checks for the payoffs to Stephanie Clifford (also known as Stormy Daniels) and Karen McDougal. She was talking about he faces 34 felony counts. But he only has to be convicted of 1 of them to be convicted of a felony. 

Former New York City Judge George Grasso was on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360 last night and he was basically saying this, as well as the Allen Weisselberg memo, is the "smoking gun" evidence against Donald Trump in this case: 

"I think he made a real legal and tactical mistake, by diving into People's Exhibits 35 and 36, the Weisselberg notes. So, I think they are the smoking-gun evidence. And I think he dove into a minefield without a plan to get -- to get through it.

COOPER: Do you think he should not have even brought those up?

GRASSO: If anything, I wouldn't -- he like lead with it." 

From CNN

And apparently the jury is already asking questions like: "Do we have to vote to convict on every count to convict the defendant on any of the counts?" And the answer to that is no, as Judge Juan Merchan has already ruled. 

So I think you can see why the legal analysts in this case (who aren't MAGA lawyers and other partisan Republicans lawyers) believe that there's a strong chance that Donald J. Trump will be convicted of at least 1 felony in this case. They have 34 counts against him. They only need conviction on one count to make him a convicted felon.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Donald J. Trump VS Mother Teresa

Source:Donald J. Trump (also known as Defendant Don) & his lead defense counsel Todd Blanche.

"Mother Teresa could not beat these charges. These charges are rigged. The whole thing is rigged!" 

From Donald J. Trump

"Former President Trump fumed Wednesday just after his New York City criminal case was turned over to the jury for deliberations, blasting the judge in the case and bemoaning that “Mother Teresa could not beat these charges.”

Trump spoke to reporters gathered outside the courtroom moments after a jury of 12 New Yorkers began deliberating in the former president’s hush money criminal case.

“Mother Teresa could not beat these charges. These charges are rigged. The whole country’s a mess, between the borders and fake elections, and you have a trial like this where the judge is so conflicted he can’t breathe,” Trump said.

“It’s a disgrace. And I mean that. Mother Teresa could not beat those charges. But we’ll see. We’ll see how we do,” he added... 

From The Hill

On a personal note first: this is my first post for The New Democrat in almost 4 years. I've been spending the last 4 years doing outside work, as well as maintenance work related to this blog. But it's great to be back and I'm back full-time now as a blogger for this blog. 

Before I get into ripping Donald J. Trump about his comments relating to Mother Teresa, I must say almost no one can really compare themselves to her. I mean she was the definition of a saint. She literally spent her entire life even though she came from very humble beginnings growing up in what later became Yugoslavia, before moving to India, trying to help the very less-fortunate improve their own lives. 

And just because someone like a Donald J. Trump has the balls (to be frank) to compare himself with Mother Teresa, doesn't mean that there's a long line of people who are even close to her neighborhood, when it comes to saints on this planet. 

But having said that and just for the fun of it I guess. How many saints are you aware of who've not only been married 3 times, get accused of rape by their first wife, who are not just serial adulterers, who've cheated on all 3 wives, who've cheated on their 3rd wife with a porn actress, and then paid her off to prevent her from going public about their affair, right before a presidential election, where they just happened to be one of the major party's presidential nominee? 

But then add to the fact that Mr. Trump is still lying about his Stormy affair (pun intended) almost 6 years after the story broke, but has his lead counsel Todd Blanche lie for him during his closing statement yesterday. 

You could spend the rest of this year trying to find the answer to this question, because Donald J. Trump literally is in a league of his own, when it comes to American swines. He's the swine to Mother Teresa's sainthood. He's the dark storm cloud to Mother Teresa's bright, shiny, beautiful, warm day. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Ben Meiselas: ‘Donald Trump Lawyer YELLED AT by Judge at CLOSING ARGUMENT’

Source:Meidas Touch talking about Donald Trump’s lack of a defense at his criminal trial.

Source:The New Democrat

“MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on the ending of the closing argument by Donald Trump’s lawyers at his criminal trial where the lawyers engaged in misconduct and were severely admonished by the judge.” 

From the Meidas Touch

“In closings Tuesday, defense lawyer Todd Blanche tried the classic ” but if he did do it” defense.

If Trump did falsify documents, he didn’t do it with the required criminal intent, Blanche argued.

He then showed jurors 3 prosecution exhibits where Trump admits to the hush-money reimbursement.

It’s the classic defense closing argument: My client didn’t do it, ladies and gentlemen — but if he did do it, it wasn’t intentional.

This is the argument that Donald Trump’s lawyer, Todd Blanche, tried out on the hush-money jury in Manhattan on Tuesday.

Yes, Blanche spent the bulk of his arguments denying that Trump committed the charges he’s on trial for.” 

From Yahoo News

No offense to Ben Meiselas and I completely agree with him here, but Yahoo News has the best story here.

Not that I would suggest to the Manhattan DA that they rest their case on what Donald Trump’s defense lawyer Todd Blanche (who proves every single day how inexperienced a defense lawyer that he is) said in his closing argument, because he almost made the prosecution’s case for them, but when the defense is making your case for you, you can almost sit back and relax. Perhaps open up some Cognac and a cigar. (If you drink alcohol and smoke) 

So what the defense is basically saying here is: “If my client were to commit the crimes that he’s being charged with, (including 2 felonies) he wouldn’t have been so stupid in how he would’ve gone about committing them.” 

If you remember O.J. Simpson’s book from 2004 where he’s still officially claiming that he was innocent of the two murders that he got off on 10 years earlier, but he writes a book with the title: “If I Did It” And he argued in that book if he were going to murder Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman, this is how he would’ve murdered those two people. It’s the old admitting guilt without pleading guilty defense. So if you are on that jury, how do you not think to yourself: “Even the defense thinks their client is guilty.”

Michael Smerconish: American Exceptionalism

Source:Michael Smerconish talking about when America was the greatest. 

"When was America greatest?" 

From Michael Smerconish

"When Donald Trump says we need to ‘make America great again,” most Republicans think about the 1950s.

According to Andrew Van Dam at The Washington Post, Republicans believe that the 1950s was the happiest, safest, most communitarian, and moral society of the last 100 years. They think that the 1950s was the decade with the most reliable news reporting, although they believe that the 1980s was the decade with the least political divisions.

Democrats, as you might guess, answered the questions differently... 

From Current

Just to go on the record on this question; even with America being addicted to new technology and always feeling the need to be seen as up to date on new technology, especially as it relates to their smartphones and feel the need to be seen holding a coffee up, especially while they're on the phone or staring at their phone and this country's addiction to celebrity culture, (perhaps all these issues can be blamed on Millennial's) there's no other time that I rather be living in America and no other country in the world that I rather live in, than America. And I'll get into why. 

But before I get into why I think right now is the best time to be an American and living in America, I want to get into what this whole MAGA (or "Make America Great Again") movement is really about. 

There was a time when the Republican Party was stereotyped as the American patriots, the patriotic party, the people who love America. And you still have plenty of Republicans like that.  But most of them are now Never-Trump'ers. 

People like: 

S.E. Cupp, 

former U.S. Representative's Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, Charlie Dent, Ken Buck, and many others who are either still in the House, (because perhaps they're glutens for political punishment) 

as well as current U.S. Senator Mitt Romney 

former Republican governor's John Kasich and Larry Hogan. 

But today thanks to Donald Trump and his MAGA movement, you now have 60-70% (depending on which polls you look at) of the Republican Party now saying that America is no longer a great country. And that they need to: "take back America and give it back to the real Americans" because it's now a country that they no longer recognize. And if you go with Andrew Van Dam article, it's the 1950s and even the 1940s as the two decades they point to as saying that was when America was a great country. 

But if you are a woman of any ethnic or racial background, or any ethnic or racial minority, if you are gay today, would you rather be living in the 1950s or 40s in America, than right now, where you not just have the same constitutional rights and protections as Anglo-Saxon men and other Caucasians, but where those constitutional rights by an large (so system is perfect) are enforced equally under law as the Anglo-Saxons, especially Anglo-Saxon men?

Yes, The American President is a fictional film, but there are times in our lives when even Hollywood can get it right and avoid screwing it up. And to quote President Andrew Shepard (played by Michael Douglas) in that great speech that he gave in that film: 

"America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You've gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say, "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours." You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country cannot just be a flag. The symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Now show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms.

Then you can stand up and sing about the land of the free." 

From American Rhetoric

I know this going to sound partisan, but what actually makes America great right now and has always made America a great country, at least since the 1960s, is what MAGA hates about our great country. 

America is that one country in the world where everyone can make it in America, regardless of our race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexuality, culture, region, etc. If you have the talent and the skills, the character, you'll make it in America. 

No other country in the world has created more freedom, more opportunity, for more people, as well as different kinds of people, as the United States of America. And because of all our advanced freedom for more Americans and people today, no better time to be an American than right here and right now. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Michael Popok & Karen F. Agnifilo: 'Judge in Donald Trump Case Makes KEY DECISION in FINAL MOMENTS'

Source:Meidas Touch- left to right: Manhattan Criminal Judge Juan Merchan & Defendant Don.

"Michael Popok and Karen Friedman Agnifilo on the Legal AF podcast debate: the end of the NY Trump trial, including whether the judge’s decision that the prosecution doesn’t have to prove one particular second crime in order for Trump to be convicted of a felony, is an advantage for the prosecution." 

From the Meidas Touch

I'm not a lawyer, so bare with me. (If you must) But Karen Friedman Agnifilo and Brooklyn defense attorney Arthur Aidala were on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360 about a month ago talking about this exact same issue. And even Aidala admitted that Friedman Agnifilo was very informative and helpful in explaining the Manhattan DA's theory for this case. That they're arguing that the Trump Campaign back in October, 2016, were committing misdemeanors (in this case filing false business records) to commit a felony. (This case election fraud) 

So if two NYPD detectives were in a suspect's apartment with a search warrant looking for illegal narcotics and they go in there and the suspect is assaulting someone. Even though they didn't go into the apartment looking for evidence about a criminal assault, they can still not just complete their legal search, but they can arrest the suspect for assault as well. That's a similar example. Police evidence see another crime happening, while they're looking for evidence to another crime. 

What the Manhattan DA is arguing to this jury is that Donald J. Trump filed false business records, to cover up his illegal campaign contributions to his own 2016 presidential campaign. 

DJT paid off Stephanie Clifford (also known as Stormy Daniels) and Karen McDougal, to keep them quiet about the alleged affairs that they had with them, so they wouldn't make their stories public before the 2016 election. And he filed those payments as legal expenses to his then lawyer Michael Cohen. So yes he's guilty of filing false business records, which is a misdemeanor in New York. But it's also a felony because the 150,000 dollar campaign contributions to his own campaign is illegal on two counts: the contributions were too high under New York law and he failed to report them. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Michael Smerconish: Robert F. Kennedy JR. For President

Source:Michael Smerconish talking about the news stories that he's interested in.

"Today's Headlines from Smerconish.com - Friday, May 24th 2024" 

From Michael Smerconish

As I wrote about Robert F. Kennedy JR. back in March: 

"As an at best Independent Democrat at this point, whose not in love with the Democratic Party politically, or really anything else, for that matter, I would love to see Robert F. Kennedy JR. run for President as a Libertarian. Why? Because it would just confirm what I, what this blog, and what a lot of other Democrats believe about RFK JR. that he's simply a MAGA man, who at the very least doesn't want Joe Biden to be reelected and perhaps even wants Donald Trump back in The White House, where all their MAGA conspiracy theories and avenues to financially profit for them, would open up." 

From The New Democrat

There are 3 main roadblocks that are and could keep Donald J. Trump from getting back to The White House. (Hell, I wish there were 100, especially with all the traffic and people in Washington) 

The 1st roadblock would be Defendant Don getting convicted of felonies next week in Manhattan. Perhaps as many 1-4 Republicans, not just Democrats and Independents, but 1-4 Republicans don't want, or won't vote for a convicted felon for President of the United States. If there's a large turnout for President this year, losing 10% of the Republican Party, would cost Donald Trump the presidency in 2024. Which is about the same percentage that he lost in 2020, especially in Arizona, Georgia, and perhaps Wisconsin as well.

The 2nd roadblock and I my colleague Kire Schneider mentioned about Nikki Haley yesterday: 

"But as all the Republicans on this post have already said, Nikki Haley voters, are just people who voted against Donald Trump. And I would add they are not members of her political fan club. Unlike Trump, she doesn't have her own political cult." 

From The New Democrat

Nikki Haley's voters are not Nikki Haley's voters. Which I know sounds like a car is not a car, a house is not a house, etc. But what that means is they didn't vote for her by and large (exceptions to every rule) because they love Nikki Haley. They voted for her because she's a normal Republican (at least pre-Donald Trump) and she was running against Donald Trump. 

The Republicans who voted for Nikki Haley this year, are center-right, fiscally and economically conservative, hawkish, pro-Constitution, rule of law, Republican voters. Not people who want to take America back to the 1950s and 40s, where it seemed very unlikely that a woman of any background, or any minority, would ever even be thinking about running for President of the United States. Nikki Haley voters are traditional, center-right, Republican voters, who many cases voted for Joe Biden for President in 2020 and did their part in costing then President Trump reelection. 

I've already touched on Robert F. Kennedy JR. But as Michael Smerconish said so himself (maybe he should be working for the Kennedy Campaign with all the free publicity that he gives him on his show) both Bob Kennedy and Don Trump will be at the Libertarian Party convention this weekend. 

RFK and DJT are going after the same voters. We're talking about anti-government, conspiracy minded people, who in some cases have Libertarian leanings, but in many more cases have MAGA leanings. Where at least the militants in the MAGA movement, want to take down the current U.S. Government and replace it with their own nationalistic form of government, that would be there to serve Donald J. Trump's every need and "take back America" to give it back to the "real Americans", as they see themselves.

Bob Kennedy might try to run as some whacked-out, hippie revolutionary, whose still addicted to drugs and has lost more brain cells and has more brain damage that he's even admitted too, and make Bernie and Liz, along with Alex Cortez, and the rest of the so-called Squad in the House, and Jill Stein even, look like flaming moderates. And he would do that just to take votes away from Joe Biden, if that's the campaign that he runs. But he's a MAGA man. He''ll be at the Libertarian Convention, perhaps even seeking their nomination. Not at the Green Party Convention going after the hippie-lefty vote for President. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Tim Miller On Nikki Haley's Endorsement of Donald Trump

Source:The Bulwark talking about Nikki Haley's calculating (my words) endorsement of Donald J. Trump. Who right now is Defendant Don and perhaps by next week will be Convicted Felon Don. But that's her choice for President of the United States anyway. Interesting notion of the rule of law.

"Nikki Haley's EMBARRASSING OUTRAGEOUS Excuse for Supporting Trump... Tim Miller explains why Nikki Haley's endorsement of Trump won't help Trump." 

From The Bulwark

"The former United Nations ambassador said she prioritizes a president who will hold enemies to account, secure the border and support "capitalism and freedom" -- and that while "Trump has not been perfect on these policies," that "Biden has been a catastrophe."

"So, I will be voting for Trump," Haley said." 

From ABC News 

“Unhinged,” “Not Qualified,” “Can’t Win a General Election”: All the Things Nikki Haley Said About Donald Trump Before Announcing She’ll Be Voting for Him in November

After Trump questioned why Haley’s husband, Michael Haley, was not on the campaign trail back in February, saying to supporters, “Where is he? He’s gone. He knew. He knew,” the former UN ambassador wrote on X: “Michael is deployed serving our country, something you know nothing about.” Then, in an interview on Today, she called him “unhinged” and “more diminished” than he was in 2016.

“Can’t win a general election”

Mentally unfit

Last year, without directly naming Trump (or Biden), Haley said the US should have compulsory competency tests for elected officials over the age of 75, saying, “In the America I see, the permanent politician will finally retire.” Earlier this year, she directly questioned Trump’s mental fitness after he appeared to confuse her with Nancy Pelosi. “They’re saying he got confused, that he was talking about something else, he’s talking about Nancy Pelosi,” Haley said in Keene, New Hampshire. “The concern I have is—I’m not saying anything derogatory, but when you’re dealing with the pressures of the presidency, we can’t have someone else that we question whether they’re mentally fit to do this.” Later, she added: “My parents are up in age, and I love them dearly. But when you see them hit a certain age, there is a decline. That’s a fact—ask any doctor. There is a decline.” 

Voting for him is “suicide” for the country

Speaking to The Wall Street Journal in February, Haley said that the idea of making Trump the party’s nominee “is like suicide for our country.”

Might not abide by the Constitution

Asked earlier this year if she thought the ex-president would follow the Constitution were he to win reelection, Haley responded: “I don’t know. I don’t—I don’t know…. I mean…you always want to think someone will, but I don’t know.”

A sexual abuser whom America is too good for

Haley wrote this on social media after a jury ordered Trump to pay writer E. Jean Carroll more than $83 million in damages for having defamed her by claiming she was lying about his assault on her in the ’90s.." 

From Vanity Fair

"Griffin, who worked under Mike Pence and Donald Trump, criticized Haley for saying she'd vote for the former president after dragging him during her campaign.

After regularly using her platform on The View to voice support for former Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley leading up to the November election, former Donald Trump staffer Alyssa Farah Griffin has slammed Haley after the politician publicly endorsed Trump on Wednesday — despite Haley staunchly criticizing him over the last year.

The 34-year-old — who's also a regular CNN contributor — appeared this week on the network's Erin Burnett OutFront program to react to Haley's endorsement.

"It was disappointing but not surprising. She joins a long list of people who are deeply critical of Trump, who have said he was unfit for office, who have launched every attack against them that they could," but ultimately come back into the fold, Griffin told Burnett... 

Griffin speculated that "at the end of the day, careerism, ambition, and being able to have long standing in the GOP is more important to most politicians" than overall integrity.

When Burnett played clips of Haley criticizing Trump in recent months — including footage from a February interview in which Haley said "there is no way that the American people are going to vote for a convicted criminal" if Trump is convicted amid his ongoing legal woes — Griffin went in even further on the former South Carolina governor, who suspended her campaign in March." 

From Yahoo News

"I react to Nikki Haley’s endorsement of Trump. While I’m disappointed, I’m not surprised. Politicians have been putting their ambitions ahead of what’s best for the country for a long time. Now the question becomes: do her voters follow her? I’m not convinced most do. My take on... 

From Alyssa Farah Griffin

I'm going to paraphrase 1 key point that Tim Miller makes here: 

"Nikki Haley's voters aren't Nikki Haley voters. They were Republicans who voted for Joe Biden in 2020 who were looking for a Republican to vote for other than Donald Trump. They were anti-Trump voters who saw Nikki Haley as the vessel to voting against Donald Trump in the Republican primaries...

Pretty much everything has been said here. But imagine back in 2008 had the Democratic Party not just have nominated Barack Obama, who certainly ran as a mainstream Democrat in the general election and they nominated Dennis Kucinich in the primaries instead of then Senator Obama and Hillary Clinton. 

And Kucinich was talking about: 

nationalizing banking and energy, to go along with health care, as well gutting the Defense Department by 80% 

pulling out of NATO 

cutting off of Israel and endorsing Hamas 

and threatening to shut down Fox News and other right-wing media outlets, if he became President. 

But then Senator Clinton endorses Dennis Kucinich anyway. Even though in the primaries she said something like: "America can't afford to have an unhinged Communist as President of the United States." or words to that effect. That's how I see Nikki Haley. 

Look, I voted for Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary in Maryland in 2008. But I see Nikki as the Hillary Clinton of the Republican Party. Someone whose very calculating, who takes hours, if not days, weeks even, who knows, maybe months, to make any basic decision. If she thinks her decision could effect the rest of her political and governmental career one way or another. 

As Tim Miller said, Nikki Haley thinks she has a career post-Donald Trump, perhaps even in a 2nd Trump Administration (if God forbid our long national nightmare turns into a Trumpian State instead) and she's thinking by endorsing anyone other than Donald Trump, or not endorsing anyone for President in 2024, her carer in politics and government is over. 

But as Tim Miller also said, unless Trump nominates her for Vice President and they win, her career is probably over anyway. And this will be really bad for her legacy, especially if Trump loses in 2024 anyway. 

But Haley is endorsing Trump in May, because I guess she still wants to be in the running for Vice President. But if it's still a 50-50 election in September or October, her endorsement would mean more at that point. Which goes again to her political calculator that says she's not expecting him to win. Her endorsement won't even be remembered 4-5 months from now, and she thinks she still has a career in the Republican Party post-Donald Trump. 

But as all the Republicans on this post have already said, Nikki Haley voters, are just people who voted against Donald Trump. And I would add they are not members of her political fan club. Unlike Trump, she doesn't have her own political cult. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.