NYT: Gaetz Sought Preemptive Pardon From Trump

The New York Times is reporting that Florida Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz asked President Donald Trump for a preemptive pardon at the end of his term. Gaetz is reportedly facing sex trafficking charges and the report would indicate that he was sufficiently concerned back at the end of 2020 to seek the extraordinary protection. Gaetz has not responded to the report.

Gaetz, 38, reportedly got nowhere with the Trump White House in seeking his own pardon.  Given Trump’s highly controversial pardons, including many friends and political allies, the rejection would be notable but obviously would be the correct response.

Preemptive pardons are inherently controversial and relatively rare. There was much speculation of whether Trump would grant a prospective pardon to himself. In this case, such a pardon would be outrageous.  If Gaetz engaged in sex trafficking (particularly with an underaged girl) there is no conceivable good-faith basis for a pardon. Gaetz has denied the allegations. He has yet to be charged so we do not know the full extent of evidence against him. For the Trump White House to be able to fully explore the merits of the allegations, it would have had to seek confidential information for the Justice Department — something former Attorney General Bill Barr would clearly have rejected.

Notably, if Gaetz wants to have any political future (which seems diminishing by the day), he needs to be vindicated in these charges, not excused from answering them. A pardon would have avoided the risk of conviction while cementing the perception of his guilt. Gaetz insists that there is evidence that will clearly vindicate him. If so, the path of vindication is not through the White House but the court system.

Fox News has noted that Gaetz suggested during an interview with Fox News in November that then-President Trump should “robustly” pardon “everyone” from Trump himself to administration officials. He said that it was the only way to defend against the “blood lust” among Democrats. If this report is true, he made this comment when he was himself making or about to make a secret request for a pardon. This controversy may deal with uncontrollable lust but not blood lust.

Moreover, his case is not an example of a Democratic “blood lust.” This is an investigation under Bill Barr, Trump’s Attorney General, who investigated both Republican and Democratic figures during his term in office.

If this request was made, it was incredibly inappropriate and unwarranted. It would show a willingness to seek political favors to avoid possible criminal charges.  I have repeatedly said that Gaetz should not be judged in the media before we see concrete evidence.  However, if true, this request would speaks loudly to the character and personal convictions of Matt Gaetz.

 

 

253 thoughts on “NYT: Gaetz Sought Preemptive Pardon From Trump”

  1. President Trump issued a statement today saying that Congressman Matt Gaetz never asked him for a pardon.

    Fake News NYT is at it again.

      1. Lol. And I’m sure the Times never foresaw the possibility of trump making this claim so they ignored their journalistic standards checklist before taking it to publication.

        EB

    1. The NYT didn’t claim that Gaetz asked Trump directly. They said that Gaetz asked the WH.

      Trump didn’t deny that Gaetz asked the WH.

  2. America’s drift to the extreme is worrisome. The law used to stand for something, and you could count on “innocent until proven guilty”. Today that term has been flipped 180 degrees. Now the court of public opinion rules the roost “you are guilty” especially if you’re from the right in politics. The left is very adroit at prosecuting parties without provable quilt, just made up rumor published in their favorite news outlets, which then becomes proof out guilt. The FISA courts doping by the DOJ/FBI to investigate the Trump campaign is just one example.

    1. There a prolific poster on this thread who uses the guy’s hair as evidence of guilt.

      Now I know why I haven’t read threads on the Internet for 7 months.

      Haven’t missed a thing not worth missing.

      1. Hair can be very revealing of a person’s true nature.

        I have perfect hair.

        Gaetz is a combination of Beavis and Jimmy Swaggart.

        He just looks like a sex scandal and he is.

        A classic example of the new Republican. P**** grabbing, corrupt, money-grubbing, doomed.

  3. And they do not want Voter ID’s, this is what you get. Clean up the election process,. Maybe, just maybe we can get better politicians.

  4. Turley! The NEW YORK TIMES is filth! So far, all we have is leaks from the New York Times which can only have come from the equally filthy FBI or DOJ! Wake-up! You cannot trust the DOJ. Bill Barr was just pretending to investigate wrong doing of the FBI / DOJ vs Trump. Barr was clearly NOT Trump’s AG.

  5. Agreed that the evidence has to be put out formally if it is to be so, Jon. Easy to see why your employers rebuffed Gaetz’s employment queries when he put them out though. Also easy to see why Barr couldn’t see his way toward opening the pardon door to him as well, especially with the 25 sexual harassment cases outstanding with Trump. Optics would’ve been super awful even with a base that doesn’t seem to care about these things unless a ‘D’ name is attached.

    EB

  6. I think someone of your resume should avoid repeating NY Times reports as they are most often than not proven false when related to Republicans, they are just Gossip Mongers

  7. By now everyone should recognize that when political slander is involved the NYTimes is not a good source. It lied for 4 years about Trump and now is used as a political weapon that no one on any side can trust.

      1. The New York Times lied about Trump? When and where?

        I know that what the New York Times reported about Trump was so outlandish it seemed like lies, but nope, it’s all true.

        Trump really was that much of a charlatan and a fraud and an appallingly bad leader.

        Which is why he has all been disappeared, stifled, cancelled.

      2. Thanks, Diogenes, but in the follow up response by Ben Marcus, he writes: “The New York Times lied about Trump? When and where?”

        That demonstrates an individual out of touch with reality much like JF with a little more bluster though percentage wise a little less of the four letter words.

        He is not to be taken seriously.

        1. The New York Times certainly reported on and inventoried Trump’s lies if that’s what you mean.

          The New York Times pointed out that Trump was and is a fraud: A wife-cheating, sad-stripper-screwing, student defrauding, charity stealing, tax-evading, draft dodging, veteran inulting con man who couldn’t con his way out of a pandemic.

          That’s what the New York Times reported on and hopefully they played a hand in bringing that idiot down and forcing him out of office.

          I know you had a joyful four years with a president who was as fat old vulgar and stupid as you are.

          But it had to end

          1. BMM to SM: “I know you had a joyful four years with a president who was as fat old vulgar and stupid as you are.”

            BMM nails it.

            BMM to SM: “But it had to end.”

            Yes. And when it did, “S. Meyer” changed his user name to “Allan,” for whatever silly reason.

            The guy’s a head case. And he’s another one who rarely writes a comment that doesn’t include the word “leftist.”

            1. The Fighting Gerbil can’t stop. He got a new pair of dentures but has yet to figure out what orifice to put them in.

              It is strange when a generic anonymous complains if another might have changed his name. It’s the height of Stupidity since a generic anonymous means that the name essentially changes every time he posts. That is why I gave you the label Anonymous the Stupid. That tells everyone what you are if they didn’t already know.

              1. No I’ve just learned you can learn a lot arguing with lunkheads who don’t know anything.

                The smart, decent people of America have had to bite their tongues and take it as Trump flatulated and vomited all over truth, justice and the American way.

                There is a lot of righteous anger out there and it’s now venting itself out of relief that Trump screwed it up and got the boot after one term.

                Moron.

                My friends in Washington say he’s the first president who will go to prison.

                Hope so.

                1. “My friends in Washington say he’s the first president who will go to prison.”

                  Marcus can’t avoid the appeal to authority which is a failure of a couple of other people on the blog. Could they be related?

                  SM

                2. “No I’ve just learned you can learn a lot arguing with lunkheads who don’t know anything.” -Ben

                  Generally, I agree.

                  “Anonymous says:April 8, 2021 at 6:57 PM
                  And he’s obsessing about anonymous comments because he has nothing better to do…”

                  That was said about Allan -Anon/SM-S. Meyer, just to be clear.

                1. “You are just Stupid.”

                  You certainly are, pal. (This is to the anonymous moron at 8:11 PM.

                  1. Anonymous the Stupid, you can’t get over the name you created for yourself.

                    I am efficient. You are Stupid just like the Fighting Gerbil who can’t keep track of his dentures.

                    You should get on your wheel and run circles in your cage rather than on the blog.

          2. “The New York Times certainly reported on and inventoried Trump’s lies … “

            Unfortunately Marcus on the important things that had to do with Trump’s Presidency the the NYTimes lied and was proven to have lied.

            Of course ignorance leaves some people having to complain about personal rather than Presidential duties. You seem to be one of those ignorant people.

            SM

      3. Know the proles don’t like the New York Times because they don’t understand it.

        The smart people love the New York Times because they report the truth and stand for truth justice and the American way.

        1. “The smart people love the New York Times because they report the truth…”

          …most of the time, but let’s not get carried away

          (I know of one significant story that is dead wrong (published in 2016), and still hasn’t been corrected.)

          Here are a couple of stories, you might want to revisit.

          From Wikipedia:

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involving_The_New_York_Times

          Second Iraq War

          Main article: Judith Miller § The Iraq War

          Judith Miller wrote a series of prominently displayed articles[46] “strongly suggest[ing] Saddam Hussein already had or was acquiring an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction”[47] using Ahmed Chalabi as her source, prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. This aided the George W. Bush administration in making the case for war.[48][49]

          Delayed publication of 2005 NSA warrantless surveillance story

          The New York Times was criticized for the 13-month delay of the December 2005 story revealing the U.S. National Security Agency warrantless surveillance program.[125] Ex-NSA officials blew the whistle on the program to journalists James Risen and Eric Lichtblau, who presented an investigative article to the newspaper in November 2004, weeks before America’s presidential election. Contact with former agency officials began the previous summer.[citation needed]

          Former The New York Times executive editor Bill Keller decided not to report the piece after being pressured by the Bush administration and being advised not to do so by The New York Times Washington bureau chief Philip Taubman. Keller explained the silence’s rationale in an interview with the newspaper in 2013, stating “Three years after 9/11, we, as a country, were still under the influence of that trauma, and we, as a newspaper, were not immune”.[126]

          In 2014, PBS Frontline interviewed Risen and Lichtblau, who said that the newspaper’s plan was to not publish the story at all. “The editors were furious at me”, Risen said to the program. “They thought I was being insubordinate.” Risen wrote a book about the mass surveillance revelations after The New York Times declined the piece’s publication, and only released it after Risen told them that he would publish the book. Another reporter told NPR that the newspaper “avoided disaster” by ultimately publishing the story.[127]

          So the latter was a lie of omission…

          1. No the New York Times isn’t perfect.

            Nothing’s perfect.

            But at least they strive to be accurate.

            And when they do get it wrong they own up to it.

            The New Yorker doesn’t get it right either every time.

            They did a story on Hollister clothing that was incredibly inaccurate.

            I told one of their rioters about it. William Finnegan.

            1. Rioters, NYT writers, same thing really. Did they own up to it and correct it?

              It’s all about narrative, not ‘accurate’ reporting of ‘news’

              1. No methuselah, the New York Times believe in truth, justice and the American way.

                The rioters tried to destroy it.

                If the New York Times leans toward the left, they should.

                Republicans screw it up. Democrats clean it up.

                You just keep watching Fox and believe everything they feed you and don’t you worry about a thing.

                1. On Hollister – did they own up to it or correct the errors you brought it to their attention?

                  1. No I was at a surf contest at Kelly Slater’s Surf Ranch in Lemoore, California where I was sitting with my friend Colin and we were approached by a guy who turned out to be William Finnegan – a writer who works for the New Yorker and won a Pulitzer for Barbarian Days.

                    We chatted about Obama and working for the New Yorker, which I have always aspired to except they already have a writer with my name so I guess I am out of luck.

                    But then I sounded him on this story about Hollister Clothing written by Dave Eggers – who shares a name with a famous surfer, in fact.

                    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-actual-hollister

                    The writer talks all about the town of Hollister in Central California which is only obliquely related to the Hollister clothing line.

                    The Hollisters who founded the City of Hollister also bought property up above Santa Barbara, from Gaviota up to Point Conception.

                    That area is revered by surfers as “The Ranch” or “The Hollister Ranch” and that is what the clothing line is named for, but there is zero mention of surfing or the Hollister Ranch in the story.

                    Finnegan said, “Hey I didn’t write it!”

                    So it was sloppy and wrong and that is disheartening to a writer who strives to get it right and considered the New Yorker the Holy Grail for smart, accurate writing.

                    I think I wrote a Letter to the Editor of complaint but I don’t know if anyone saw it, and it wasn’t printed.

                    But they did get it way way way wrong.

                    No bueno.

            2. No the New York Times isn’t perfect. Nothing’s perfect. But at least they strive to be accurate.”

              Marcus, that is the first sign of ignorance. They have lied over and over again but ignorance and laziness prevents people from finding out the truth. When many do they forget about it because if they accepted it they would have to recognize their ignorance.

              SM

              1. Again, you wouldn’t know the truth if it jumped into bed with you.

                You’re just another sad old Trumper living with a bottle of Scotch in one hand and a gun in the other.

                Your Vulgarian Candidate turned out to be a fraud, and you are verklempt.

                The New York Times will never seem truthful to you, because you’re a nitwit.

                Whatever. Good and righteous won out in the end.

                1. Marcus, your ignorance is now on full display. You have nothing and can’t believe others are able to think because you are not able to think.

                  1. This is a waste of time on the likes of you, but here goes. Biden oversaw the Obama administration loaning $465 million to Tesla to upgrade the Fremont plant and build the S.

                    Tesla paid that $465 million back in five years with interest, and they turned that investment into more than 10,000 jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars in new wealth.

                    That’s the Green New Deal.

                    That’s what Biden wants to expand on.

                    Did Trump attempt anything anywhere near that bold and that had that kind of result?

                    No, he didn’t do anything but parade around in a stupid red hat.

                    A useless president and a terrible leader.

                    Biden’s $2 trillion infrastructure and jobs package will expand on what the Obama administration accomplished.

                    1. “This is a waste of time on the likes of you, but here goes. Biden oversaw the Obama administration loaning”

                      Marcus, you have just proven that Biden hasn’t done anything that one can be proud of. In order for you to prove your case you had to refer back to when he was Vice President. Thank you for proving Biden to have done little good and a lot of harm.

                      SM

                    2. No as usual you don’t get it.

                      Biden was there when the Obama Administration made that big loan to Tesla and saw the result.

                      And I repeat: Did Trump attempt or accomplish anything even remotely that successful?

                      That success has inspired Biden’s infrastructure and jobs plan.

                      Because if $465 million dollars could do that much good how much good can !p$2 trillion accomplish?

                      You just don’t get it but you aren’t the sharpest tool in the shed are you?

                    3. “No as usual you don’t get it.”

                      Get what? That Biden is such a failure you have to bring up examples of his actions in the Obama administration? That demonstrates how weak your argument is. Not only that but you point to one example that may or may not have been as effective as you claim forgetting that action existed among a host of others that ended up as dismal failures.

                      SM

                    1. “You forgot to sign off as ‘SM.’”

                      Wow! Anonymous the Stupid, do you really believe my forgetting to put my initials at the end of a post is some big scoop? I wasn’t going to reply to such triviality like I haven’t to so much else you post, but this but this reply shows everyone how small you are and how Stupid your replies can be.

        2. “Know the proles don’t like the New York Times because they don’t understand it.”

          That is the problem. It is the height of ignorance to trust one source especially one that has placed politics ahead of its commitments. It is easy to understand what the NYTimes wants you to believe because that type of news is written for idiots that want confirmation of their PC beliefs. That leaves them ignorant.

          You have been left ignorant. That is why you use bluster instead of intelligence.

          SM

            1. Benjamin Michael Marcus responds to SM on April 8, 2021 at 6:38 PM:

              “You wouldn’t know intelligence if it jumped into bed with you.”

              You’ve got that right, Ben.

              1. Anonymous the Stupid, do you notice that you have to utilize what others say because you can’t create original material? That is a sign that intelligence existing anywhere on your person is unlikely.

            2. Marcus, is that why you got numbers all wrong having to do with California agricultural production? I had to tell you where the problem lay though I question whether you have the ability to figure it out.

              SM

              1. California produces %23 of all the fruits and nuts consumed by Americans and is by far the #1 agricultural state in the nation.

                That’s my point, maybe not 25% of all the food consumed in the country, although that could be right, too.

                And that is why California isn’t as freaked out about immigration as other states.

                We need those people, and most of them get along well.

                1. “California produces %23 of all the fruits and nuts consumed by Americans and is by far the #1 agricultural state in the nation.”

                  That is not 24% of all the food. Your numbers are so far off that anyone that looked at the numbers by now recognizes that nothing you say is based on hard knowledge. You shoot from the hip and hit yourself in the leg.

                  You know nothing about immigration or farming.

                  SM

                  1. Agriculture is worth $100 billion plus all in in California when you add labor and machinery and water and all the other inputs on top of $50 billion in sales of produce.

                    That $100 billion is probably more than the entire GDP of whatever sad little Red State produced a boor like you.

                    California does produce almost 50% of the cannabis consumed in America.

                    13.5 million pounds x $1500 a pound = $20,250,000,000.

                    That alone is probably more than the GDP of whatever Red State you are from.

                    California wholesale pounds for $3,400

                    Cannabis is a $52 billion US industry and Americans consume 29.9 million pounds of the fast-growing annual each year, according to White House reports.

                    America’s largest pot producer—California—grows 13.5 million pounds of marijuana, 60% of it outdoors, regulators estimate. Last October, prices dropped 12% at harvest, LeafLink Insights told Leafly in an emailed statement. Not so this year.

                    The cost of the average wholesale pound in the US is expected to decline trivially this fall from $1,550 to $1,510—$40 bucks, stated Cannabis Benchmarks.

                    1. Marcus, After demonstrating such ignorance are you trying to redeem yourself with this post?

  8. A grown man should not be cavorting with a girl. It appears that is what he has done — although who really knows?

    If it is true, he deserves whatever he gets and then some. He ought to do the honorable thing and resign but politicians rarely cavort with honor.

    1. If it is true, he deserves whatever he gets and then some. He ought to do the honorable thing and resign but politicians rarely cavort with honor.

      If true why are no charges filed? An alcoholic county sheriff would have completed an investigation like this in a week. Either finding facts to support charges, or moving on.

      1. Naw they should keep him in as a figurehead for the New cReepublican Party in the wake of Trump: Plastic, phony, stupid, money-grubbing, pussy-grabbing.

        He looks like a combination of Beavis and Jimmy Swaggart and Falwell. He’s a sex scandal waiting to happen.

        This is the 21st Century Republican party.

        Keep him.

  9. In this day and time…knowing the harsh environment where the politics of today is that of “personal destruction” and the DOJ is suspect at best and a political arm of the Democrat Party at the worst…..the media is the propaganda arm of the Democrat Party….and the whole system seems to prey upon those that object to or fight the Democrat Party agenda……asking for a Pardon is not out order or evil in my view. The need to do so is what is evil and we have seen this played out in the clear light of day. Does the name Carter Page ring a Bell? General Flynn for another?

    Instead of the constant flow of “Leaks”….let’s see the full evidence that shows the Man’s guilt….and also the evidence that shows his innocence…..get on with a Trial in COURT and not on MSNBC, CNN, or the front page of the NYT.

    Until then….no one here knows the truth of the matter…..and to convict him here by your own post is just morally and logically wrong.

    For you on the Left…..I would say the same thing for Cuomo and other Democrats….give them their day in Court and then comment upon the findings.

  10. Gov. Cuomo has not resigned and he never will. Gov. Blackface in Virginia did not step down and he is still governor. Prime Minister Blackface up in Canada never caved and he got reelected. None of these Dems resign in the face of serious and substantial allegations. Gaetz should not resign either. Stand firm and deny, deny, deny.

    1. Trudeau is not a Democrat.

      Northam originally apologized, but then denied being in the photo, and there’s no evidence that it’s him.

      Cuomo should resign.

      As for “None of these Dems resign in the face of serious and substantial allegations,” other Democrats have resigned, like Al Franken and Katie Hill.

      1. They are all on the left. There is evidence about Northam, but you are a leftist so no evidence ever exists until the left says it does. What a turkey.

        1. Northam is either in the Klan hood or the Blackface. It’s on HIS yearbook page. I say he’s in the Klan hood.

          1. You can say whatever you want, but that doesn’t make it true.

            Go through the rest of the yearbook and see whether the photos on a given yearbook page always included the person named at the top of the page, or if they also spread around other photos. The EVMS report on the photo says that on several pages, photos were placed on the wrong page.

            Northam admits to having worn blackface at a Michael Jackson dance competition. I have no problem admitting that. I say: deal truthfully with the evidence, and the evidence about Northam’s yearbook page is uncertain.

      2. Correct. Trudeau not a “Democrat” – he is a ‘virtue signaler’ of the worst sort. Trudeau was not into wearing ‘blackface’ — he was into wearing “blackbody”….there are photographs of him in black BODY. He wiped black all over his arms and legs as well as his face! How odd is that? And yet he survived THAT and he is as PM of Canada ruling over the ‘peoplekind.’

    2. None of these Dems resign in the face of serious and substantial allegations.
      You forgot the esteemed Attorney General of Minnesota, trying to beat some respect into wife.

      1. If Cuomo is guilty he should quit or be fired.

        Same with the rest of them.

        These people are supposed to be creating and upholding the law, not breaking them.

        Same with Gaetz.

        Same with all of them.

        Although what did Trudeau do? Wear blackface. That’s not criminal.

        1. If Trump “wore blackface” just one time ever at any time in his entire life it would have been all over the airwaves on a loop: Trump is RAAACISSST!

          But you have Trudeau who wore black face, black legs, black arms, Afrro wigs, brown face, etc! He did it so many times over years that one observer asked “did he have any other hobbies” than dressing up as black and brown people?

          Did you see Trudeau’s family visit to India several years back? Good lord. He and his entire family played dress up in traditional Indian garb to the point of looking foolish and he was rightly mocked to kingdom come for it. What a doofus he is.

  11. It was very appalling that Trump pardoned his one time campaign manager Steve Bannon. It was very appalling that Trump pardoned his one time campaign manager Paul Manafort. In Bannon’s case, it was a pretty broad and preemptive pardon.

    Why do so many of Trump’s campaign managers need pardons? Even after these guys are gone, we hear about the appalling fundraising scandal by the Trump campaign this Fall.

    To be an associate of Trump is to be a criminal. To be pardoned by Trump is to be a loyal Trump criminal.

    1. “Why do so many of Trump’s campaign managers need pardons? “

      Because the criminal class of Democrats lies, slanders, and steals.

      1. Pardons are always controversial when THE POLITICIAN YOU HATE is doing the pardoning.

        Mark Rich, Chelsea Manning

        1. I agree with that the Marc Rich pardon was appalling. I do not have much of an opinion on Chelsea Manning.

          But the difference is that Trump made those appalling pardons many, many times. Most of his pardons were corrupt things to help his political allies, only because they were political allies.

          We keep hearing about Marc Rich because Bill Clinton did not have dozens of other controversial pardons like Trump does.

        1. Bug, That is always a possibility, but that relies on proof. Manafort wasn’t a particularly likable guy, but there is something fishy in that Manafort’s alleged crimes had been investigated years before yet nothing was done. We have seen what happens to Trump supporters that have been slandered in the press, careers placed in jeopardy, threatened etc. by the Democrat criminal class.

          I think like most things you haven’t thought more than superficially about the pardoning powers of all presidents. Your recent comments to me are too nasty and shallow for any real debate which appears is not your objective.

          1. I know right? Implying that you should actually study the things you’re commenting about is clearly despicable behavior on my end.

            EB

            1. Bug, you have proven yourself to not be a serious commenter and nasty as well. The previous discussions we had demonstrate that completely. I showed you my proof where you were wrong. Instead of discussion your arguments descended into trash over and over again.

              Do you have anything to say about “Manafort wasn’t a particularly likable guy, but there is something fishy in that Manafort’s alleged crimes had been investigated years before yet nothing was done. We have seen what happens to Trump supporters that have been slandered in the press, careers placed in jeopardy, threatened etc. by the Democrat criminal class.” I guess not or you would have said it. Nothing recently has left your lips without it being empty, libelous or insulting.

              SM

              1. Allan S. Meyer, you have proven yourself to not be a serious commenter and nasty as well.

                Manafort was convicted by a jury after consideration of all the evidence, as was Stone.

                1. Anonymous the Stupid you lost the context of the post which was about something being fishy. Your brain is pretty soft so I will repeat what I said again. In the meantime keep posting because you alone account for a large percentage of the postings on this blog. But of course that is only possible because you are here night and day.

                  Do you have anything to say about “Manafort wasn’t a particularly likable guy, but there is something fishy in that Manafort’s alleged crimes had been investigated years before yet nothing was done. We have seen what happens to Trump supporters that have been slandered in the press, careers placed in jeopardy, threatened etc. by the Democrat criminal class.”

              2. S. Meyer,

                “ Do you have anything to say about “Manafort wasn’t a particularly likable guy, but there is something fishy in that Manafort’s alleged crimes had been investigated years before yet nothing was done.”

                There’s nothing “fishy” about Manafort’s investigation. What you don’t understand is that Manafort’s crimes are financial. It takes a long time to piece together evidence and proof of intent. People like Manafort who are smart create complex schemes to cover up crimes. It takes time and research into such complex schemes to provide proof that will hold up in court.

                Bernie Madoff made hundreds of millions and did it for years before he finally got caught. It took long painstaking scrutiny of his complicated schemes to provide the proof.

                Proving Manafort’s own complex illegal maneuvering of money requires patience and time to prove. The burden of proof is on the government and this is why they take time to make sure the case is solid enough to convict.

                Proof is not always a simple straightforward concept of just direct evidence. It’s also about proving intent through multiple complex actions.

  12. Turley purposely failed to mention that Gaetz has been one of the most frequent and lauded guests on Hannity despite the fact that his reputation has long been regarded as suspect by his congressional colleagues who have declined to come to his defense now.

    1. If true, it was not necessary to mention that. You are making an unwarranted assumption. Are you inferring that Professor Turley’s column includes a material misstatement of fact by omitting that? C’mon. He wrote a column, not a prospectus!

    2. congressional colleagues who have declined to come to his defense now.

      He needs no defense, there is no charge.

  13. Most politicians are scum, regardless of party.

    Look at the constant flow of scandal and controversy out of Washington.

    Most of us live quiet lives; they flout the rules that they make for us and many live immoral lives.

    And we obey them!!!

    1. monumentcolorado – giving us the “they all do it, so don’t just pick on Matt”. Referring to politicians, but certainly not him and his kind.

Leave a Reply