Manifest Destiny: Alvin Bragg Searches for His Criminal Kailasa

Below is my column in the New York Post on the continued drama in Manhattan over the possible Trump indictment. Alvin Bragg may still secure an indictment, but the reports of divisions on the grand jury have captivated the press. Donald Trump remains Bragg’s political manifest destiny even if there is no legal landfall in sight.

Here is the column:

It appears that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg will go another week in the legal effort to locate the nation of Kailasa on a map.

Recently, Mayor Ras Baraka and the city of Newark held a formal ceremony signing a partnership with the nation of Kailasa that pledged mutual cultural, social and political development.

After all of the fanfare, pomp and circumstance subsided, a small problem emerged.

Kailasa does not exist.

One can certainly wonder why no one in Newark has access to Google or bothered to ask how a Hindu nation was founded by an accused con man formed on an island off the coast of Ecuador.

However, to their credit, they did not continue to try to prove that Kailasa actually did exist under some creative geographical and political interpretation.

Despite similar widespread doubts over the existence of a viable state crime, Alvin Bragg continues a quest for his legal Kailasa.

While an indictment was expected this week, the grand jury looking into former President Donald Trump will go another week amid reports of opposition in the grand jury over what is viewed as a “weak” case.

The problem is that Bragg has long been searching for a crime in the criminal code to fulfill his pitch during his campaign that he was the man for voters who wanted to bag Trump.

The falsification of business records in reference to the $130,000 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels might have been a possibility, but it lacked two things.

First, it expired as a chargeable misdemeanor after two years — and that was roughly five years ago.

Second, it was a mere misdemeanor that could be brushed off by Trump even if they succeeded.

Prosecutors then created a Rube Goldberg approach and suggested that the misdemeanor was committed to conceal a federal election law violation — a crime that the Justice Department declined to charge.

That theory has been widely ridiculed, even by many on the left. The bootstrapping of a federal crime under this statute appears unprecedented and likely unsustainable.

The reason that the Justice Department likely declined the case was that it had previously tried to show that hush money paid to bury an affair was a federal campaign expense.

It failed in the case of Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards.

There are a host of reasons why a married celebrity like Trump might pay hush money separate from a presidential run.

Bragg himself scoffed at the theory and stopped the investigation when he came into power.

Two prosecutors, Carey R. Dunne and Mark F. Pomerantz, then resigned and Pomerantz took what some of us view as a highly unprofessional and improper act of publishing a book on the case against Trump — a person who was still under investigation and not charged, let alone convicted, of any crime.

The pressure campaign worked and Bragg pushed the dubious theory to a grand jury.

Like Kailasa, the Bragg indictment has an established con man who insisted it exists.

Bragg has Michael Cohen, the former lawyer to Trump. A disbarred lawyer, Cohen is a convicted felon and one of the most repellent figures with a long history of false statements.

Then things got even worse when the lawyer for his star witness came forward with more than 300 emails contradicting his testimony.

Another letter on behalf of Cohen to the Federal Election Commission also surfaced that expressly contradicted his claims.

Finally, and probably most significantly for Bragg, the politics may have turned.

Even Democrats are hard pressed to defend the reported basis for the indictment and Sen. Chuck Schumer declined to express his support for the effort.

The media and pundits have warned that Bragg could be undermining other efforts to indict Trump before the election with this weak case.

Trump has said for years that Democrats have weaponized the criminal justice system against him and Bragg just gave him proof positive to support that claim.

With this raw political prosecution, Bragg fulfilled the narrative of Trump, who is rising in the polls at the very time that Biden is plunging.

The expectation is still that Bragg can get an indictment even out of a skeptical grand jury. He could then bank on a favorable and motivated judge and jury.

Moreover, even if the case ultimately fails on appeal, many in New York will still praise Bragg.

This is a thrill kill case and the prospect for many Democrats of Trump in handcuffs is exhilarating to the point of being indecent.

For some voters, it may be commendable that Bragg would prosecute Trump on a trumped-up case. After all, any prosecutor can bring a real case. It takes a true believer to prosecute when there is no viable crime.

So Bragg continues to stare at the map to find his Kailasa. He just needs to convince a grand jury that they see it, too.

Jonathan Turley is an attorney and a professor at George Washington University Law School.

216 thoughts on “Manifest Destiny: Alvin Bragg Searches for His Criminal Kailasa”

      1. Bragg will probably end up being a junior associate at some small law firm in the middle of nowhere.

    1. @Oldman…

      I’ll take that bet.
      Bragg won’t resign. He’ll stay in office and will plan on running again.

      At most he’ll let the GJ decide and say that he won’t pursue Trump because the GJ made their decision and by law he has to honor it.
      Then let it fade away.

      At this point in time… if he did charge Trump, assuming that he could convince the GJ to approve it… he’ll be facing a prosecutorial misconduct lawsuit from Trump and Trump would probably win…


  1. Everyone should look at the many postings from Anonymous and see what Anonymous the Stupid is saying. He can’t stand liberals like Turley because they endanger illiberal progressivism. There is no reason to read ATS because I summarize a few of his statements here.

    Professor Turley,
    Please stop misleading your readers.

    He’s [Turley] not going to be honest about that, because he likes to feed “the age of rage” that he complains about.

    JT has helped to stir the pot

  2. The House passed the Parents Rights Bill. Will the Democrats do the same in the Senate?

    “The legislation aims to ensure parents have the “right to know what’s being taught in schools and to see reading material” and right to be heard at school board meetings, “

    The left has consistently demonstrated a distaste for Parents.

    1. All education is local.

      Congress cannot tax for, fund or regulate education.

      The department of education is unconstitutional.

      Where the —- is the honest, uncorrupted Supreme Court?

      Judicial Review in the United States

      The legitimacy of judicial review and the judge’s approach to judicial review are discussed.

      The doctrine of judicial review holds that the courts are vested with the authority to determine the legitimacy of the acts of the executive and the legislative branches of government.

      – DOJ, Office of Justice Programs

      1. “All education is local.
        Congress cannot tax for, fund or regulate education.
        The department of education is unconstitutional.”

        George, those are all good points, but the rulings have the backing of force. We need to reverse such changes. As I said earlier to Prairie, our founders were educated in a private system with voluntary associations. I don’t think a Department of Education was ever on their minds.


          “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

          – American Founders, Declaration of Independence, 1776

        2. BTW, have you located that prohibition of secession in the Constitution yet?

          This whole place is the antithesis of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

          American fundamental law is now the Communist Manifesto:

          Central Planning
          Control of the Means of Production (i.e. unconstitutional regulation)
          Redistribution of Wealth
          Social Engineering

          “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

          Communist Political Officers tell everyone what to do – 12% of the population is forcibly imposed into 100% of the scenes in media, movies and TV, as but one example.

          Freedom is nowhere to be found in America.

          1. “BTW, have you located that prohibition of secession in the Constitution yet?”

            No need to. Everyone knows you confused the word secession with insurrection.

        1. Exist illicitly, illegally, antithetically and unconstitutionally.

          At at minimum, promote illegal and unconstitutional union dominion, redistribute wealth to teacher-cum-babysitter union thugs, and fund activities wholly unrelated to education (parents feed/raise their children the last time I checked – gender psychosis, abortion, etc., are not its function).

    2. S Meyer: Distaste? The Left has a hatred for humanity period. But they reserve a special form of hatred for Christians and conservatives (especially minority conservatives), and straight white men. There are others they hate, but these come to mind quickly.

      1. Randy, I won’t object to your further characterization of the word distaste. It is valid.

  3. OT:

    House Republicans voted overwhelmingly to pass an education bill aimed at protecting parental rights on Friday

    This bill establishes various rights of parents and guardians regarding the elementary or secondary school education of their children. Local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools must comply with the requirements of the bill in order to receive federal education funds.

    Specifically, the bill requires schools to notify parents and guardians of their rights regarding the education of their children. These rights include the right to:

    review the curriculum of their child’s school;
    meet with each teacher of their child at least twice each school year;
    review the budget, including all revenues and expenditures, of their child’s school;
    inspect the books and other reading materials in the library of their child’s school;
    address the school board of the LEA;
    receive information about violent activity in their child’s school; and
    know if their child is not grade-level proficient in reading or language arts at the end of 3rd grade.


    Response by the Democrats: “fascism!”

    meanwhile, has anybody seen Brandon lurking the halls of local grade schools?

  4. In other Trump investigation news:
    Judge Howell has reportedly rejected Trump’s claims of executive privilege and has ordered Mark Meadows, John Ratcliffe, Robert O’Brien, Stephen Miller, Dan Scavino, Nick Luna, John McEntee, and Ken Cuccinelli to testify before the federal grand jury hearing the Trump/J6/election certification interference testimony.

      1. That has repeatedly proven true regarding Trump.

        We constantly keep hearing how stupid Trump is – and yet – it is the left who is completely losing it about absolutely everything he does.

        It is the left who constantly is trying to bend, fold spindle and mutilate the law to find some way of converting their neurosis about him into a crime.

        I have seen him say so many things that I thought were the end of his career only to rebound – and often thrive as a result.

        I though the attacks on McCain in 2016 were the end of him.
        I thought the access Hollywood tapes sealed the 2016 election for Clinton.

        Though I find the NYC Daniels thing hilarious. Daniels has made a small fortune autographing Trump pictures at Strip cubs.
        I significant portion of Trump’s base admires him for bedding a porn star.
        Most of his base is behind him specifically for driving “the establishment” crazy.

        The working class has to a large extent come to understand that democrats have betrayed them.
        They love it that Trump goes after them.

        The left has done well in the past spawning class warfare against the Rich.

        Trump is doing much the same thing against the “elite”.
        And the left has not figured out that most people hate them more than the rich.

        People understand Why Elon Musk is a multi Billionaire. Musk has created things of value.
        These same people do not understand why Fauxi is wealthy and powerful – after all he has been lying to them about everything. And he has never created anything of Value.

        Ordinary people have more respect for the “my Pillow” guy, than for over educated elitist snobs from NYC or DC that think they know how to run everyone’s life.

        Trump has taken the left wing nut playbook for attacking the rich and turned it to attack the clerisy, with great success.

        And the clerisy is fighting back by trying to make attacking them into a crime.

      2. One prediction and warning to the left.
        From Nietzsche

        Whatever does not kill me makes me stronger.

        They had better hope they manage to “get Trump”.
        Because if they fail

        “And now at last it comes. You will give me the Ring freely! In place of the Dark Lord you will set up a Queen. And I shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Fair as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stronger than the foundations of the earth. All shall love me and despair!”

        I would further note that Republicans are in an excellent position so long as they can avoid self destruction.

        As the Royal Family likes to say – They have an heir and a spare.

        Trump is the leading candidate for 2024.
        Should he be damaged – DeSantis is waiting in the wings.

        At this time DeSantis and all his supporters should accept that – while he has a very bright future, This cycle belongs to Trump, absent imploding or the left actually succeeding in taking him out.

        I would note, that should the left actually succeed in taking Trump out – short of doing so in a way that actually persuades incredible numbers of people they were right, That empowers DeSantis. And anything short of annihilating Trump makes Trump stronger.

        The left – so many of them on this blog are desperately hoping Bragg indicts – failing to grasp that they have put themselves in a lose lose situation.

        If they do not – Trump triumphs and it will be HARDER to go after Trump elsewhere.
        If they do – there will be a circus – and they will lose – one way or the other and they will look evil vindictive political and bad.

        Things are made worse by the fact that Biden has so many REAL problems.

        I mean honestly – which matters more – Trump sleeping with a Porn Star or the president of the united states getting millions from China ?

    1. You keep praying that magic will happen and you will get Trump locked up.

      How well did this all work with Muellers unconstitutional investigation ?

      President Trump – on the advice of MGowan and other attornies fully cooperated with Mueller – they gave him everything.
      Trump growled frequently in public Ranted constantly.
      But never claimed any priviledge – and what did Mueller come up with Zip, Nada, Zilch.

      Alot of Whining claiming trump did not cooperate – because he sent mean tweets about Mueller.
      Whoop di do.
      You are allowed to call a witch hunt a witch hunt.

      Even the things Mueller claims he did find – such as the tiny IRA twitter bot interferance
      We now know from the twitter files – Did not happen.
      Twitter executives Tried desparately and repeatedly to find actual russuan bots.
      Told Mueller and the FBI repeatedly – no bots., Was told to look again and did.
      NO BOTS – and Mueller Knew this and LIED.

    2. I do not personally give a schiff about executive privilege – Howell has already proven to be a legal and constitutional ignoramus so I would automaticely presume the result is error.

      But I do not care.

      The courts have been all over on exectuive privildge, there is no clear defintion or scope to it. It appears to mean whatever some judge at some moment thinks it means.

      While there is Zero doubt that there is and must be such a thing as executive priviledge the scope is not really defined by law, constitution or logic,

      Beyond that a president when dealing with executive decisions especially in an emergency must be allowed to have advisor provide that president with all possible options no matter how absurd without fear of legal repercussions.

      I personally do not think executive priviledge should be any broader than that.

      I highly doubt it applies to whatever these Trump officials were claiming.
      I do not beleive it applied to Bannon or Navaro either.

      But they WERE allowed to assert it, and contra Judge Carter and another illegal and unconstitutional application of the law – it was incumbent on CONGRESS to go to court to overcome the claim. DOJ was not allowed to go – Congress subpeona’d you – We are criminally prosecuting you.

      Failure to comply with a Subpeona is NOT Criminal If you do not like the fact that your subpeona was blown off – get a court to rule on it,
      Then if the other party refuses you can claim a crime.

      Separately however broad or narrow executive priviledge belongs to the person who was president at the time of the communications.

      Prior to Biden every single president has fully supported and gone to court to defend every prior presidents assertion of executive privilege.
      Trump defending assertions of priviledge by Obama.

      But the left and democrats no longer give a schiff about the law or institutions. Everything is politics. Biden and the Biden WH give ZERO thought to the fact that in Two years – They will likely be the ones claiming priviledge – with a different person as president.

      We have had so many instances over the past decade of Democrats not thinking ahead that have blown up in their faces.

      You have a court that is 6-3 against you – because you abandoned traditional norms.
      Have fun in 2025.

      As to this case – absent the manufacturing of Crimes – as we have with Bragg in NYC it is irrelevant whether these people testify or not.

      Your hope that Trump committed a crime does not make that into a fact.

      We all already know more than enough to KNOW there was no crime.

      So have fun.

      I look forward to more left win nonsense that people saying things they do not like is somehow a crime.

      What needs to be addressed is that House republicans need to conduct PUBLIC paralelel investigations to all this politically weaponized nonsense – sop that just as we have seen with J6 or with what has been made public regarding the idiotic Daniels nonsense – the public actually gets to see the REAL truth.

      We have had such problems with that.

      You are so sure you are going to “get Trump”
      At the same time you are working so hard to keep everything secret.

      You kept everything related to the collusion delusion secret as much as possible.
      Produced a report that was more damning to your claims that Trump,
      and then we find out that report was mostly LIES – not even any real russians. OOPS

      You keep ranting about “overturning and eleciton” something tha has happened on occasion and is not a crime.
      While at the same time demanding to keep secret everything about the election.

      How canj anything related to J6 be a crime – including violence – if you can not PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt there was no election fraud.

      When Govenrment keeps secrets – the people are entitled – even obligated to distrust.

    3. If you prove that Trump Ordered Raffensberger to commit election Fraud.
      If you prove he beleived there was no election Fraud.
      If you prove he lead the effort to get states to offer alternate slates of electors.
      If you prove he actively sought to get congress to refuse to certify the election.

      You STILL have no crime.
      Trump has no authority over Raffensberger.
      It is irrelevant what he beleived – free speech even protects lies.
      State legislatures are constitutionally free to offer slates of electors, And arguably only those from the legislature are legitimate.
      Trump has no authority to order congress to do anything – again free speech is protected, even speech conspiring to do something constitutional that you do not like.

      Hillary tried and succeeded in getting several electors to change their votes – no one charged her with a crime.

      Because there is no crime. And trying to sway and elector is arguably more criminal than trying to sway congress, a state legislature or a state secretary of state.

      For speech to be a crime it must direct an illegal act, and they person speaking must have the authority to direct the person they are speaking to to act.

      You do not have ANY of that – and it is pretty much impossible for you to get that.

      We all KNOW the relevant facts. There is no deep dark secret held by Trump advisors.

      The best you will get from these witnesses is alot of testimony of Trump ranting alot. And I doubt you will get that.
      But even if you do – ranting about what you want to change but have no power to change is not a crime.
      Nor is ordering what you have the actual power to do – so long as the act ordered is itself legal.

      Those of you on the left are still desparately trying to convert I do not like what Trump says or does into crimes.

      So awfully 1984 of you.

      Those who make peaceful revolution impossible,
      will make violent revolution inevitable.

      John F. Kennedy

      Did Kennedy just engage in incitement to violence ?

  5. I see the Biden Administration has a new public health menace, air conditioners. What’s next, flush toilets?

  6. Over the last seven years, Trump’s enemies have spent tens of millions of dollars, without success, trying to send him to prison. As we enter year eight, the efforts to take Trump down are becoming increasingly desperate.

  7. After Trump beats this amateur indictment from Bragg,he’s just gonna say one thing, “NEXT”!

    1. Law enforcement sources told NBC News that Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg has now received a death threat — a note addressed to Bragg today said, “Alvin – I’m gonna kill you.” It contained a small amount of white powder, which was later deemed non-hazardous.

      1. It is common for high-profile, controversial, public figures in both parties to receive such threats.

        1. But not good, and not good to encourage with claims that indictment will lead to “death and destruction.”

          1. CNN
            MARCH 4, 2020

            Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) stood outside the Supreme Court on Wednesday surrounded by abortion rights supporters and delivered a pointed message aimed at President Trump’s appointees to the court, Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh.

            “I want to tell you, Gorsuch; I want to tell you, Kavanaugh: You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price,” Schumer said while the justices were hearing arguments in a critical Louisiana abortion case. “You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

            JUNE 9, 2022

            The Justice Department has charged the man who was arrested near Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s house in Maryland early Wednesday with attempting or threatening to kidnap or murder a US judge.

            1. Dems really shouldn’t try using biblical phrases. It’s not their thing, they know it, we know it, and it shows.

              The phrase is: For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.. (Hosea 8:7)

              Schumer said: “You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price.” It doesn’t get clunkier than that.

  8. Turley Covering Wrong Trump Case

    Trump attorney Evan Corcoran testified Friday in the Mar-A-Lago classified documents case, after he was ordered to share information with the grand jury that would otherwise be shielded under attorney-client privilege—a development that could have damaging implications for former President Donald Trump.

    Corcoran drafted a letter in June, 2022, saying the documents Trump had turned over to the government were all the remaining classified documents at Mar-A-Lago, which was later proven false, as investigators later recovered an additional 100 markings when they searched Mar-A-Lago the following month.

    Curiously Professor Turley is never quite up to date with regards to breaking news. This story, however, is fairly significant. Lawyer Evan Corcoran may have testified that Trump misled him concerning the classified documents Trump refused to turn over.

    1. Classification, declassification and archiving of material is solely and exclusively a function of the executive branch.

      The legislative branch has no power to usurp the power of the executive branch.

      Legislation regarding classification, declassification and archiving material is unconstitutional.

        1. Nice attempt at a “workaround” – you get an “E” for effort or ediot, your choice.

          The legislation is unconstitutional; the “executive” can’t sign unconstitutional legislation.

          1. Judicial rulings have enforced the Presidents plenary power to be the final say on what is Personal, vs Presidential record.

        2. The legislative branch singularly legislates legislation.

          The president may sign or veto legislation.

          The legislative branch may approve or override the presidential veto – a contingency wherein the president has enjoyed no participation.

          The executive branch is wholly unnecessary to conclude the process of legislation by the legislative branch.

          Article 1, Section 1

          All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

  9. Can you believe that Turley is accused by Anonymous of fueling the age of rage. Remember the woman who raged when Trump was sworn in. Anonymous has got to have some big ones to talk about Professor Turley feeding the rage. So I give you a hero of the left. The left has been in a rage for the last six years. What a stupid one sided comment.

        1. God forbid. Literally.

          Though all this cross talk may make Thinkitthrough want to raise hell.

          There is nothing sexually explicit about David. Thus, it is not porn. It was a friggin “classical” curriculum for heaven’s sake.

          But, I assume Turley will not write an article where the right is anti-free speech and pro-safe spaces.

          1. 🙂

            ATS is pornographic. He will bring up David and the Bible but he seeks to protect the left’s ability to sexualize our five-year olds.

      1. “Are you claiming . . .”

        So your point is that it’s okay to peddle graphic sex (including bestiality) to children?

        Or are you, yet again, getting your kicks and giggles from throwing sand in people’s eyes?

        Wait for it: Weasels using weasel words to weasel out.

          1. Some like to conclude before all the facts are in. That is typical of ATS who expects people to forget his errors when there is more information.

            The person was not fired but resigned. It was not due to one issue, but many.

            One issue was the teacher said: “Don’t tell your parents,” Another was that the teacher was supposed to send out an information flyer to the parents. There is more but ATS isn’t interested.

            Parents have a right to know about things they might find disturbing. That is why the Parent’s Rights bill was passed in the House.

            ATS wants young children abused. That is why he provides such links. Something that most would not be disturbed about is the example, but he doesn’t mention the disturbing things.

        1. What is “peddling graphic sex?” A statute?

          Perhaps the disconnect is the result of a lack of sex education in schools?

          Next youre gonna tell me a hospital is a brothel because babies are naked.

          1. That is funny, ATS, but you have a point. Some badly need sex education. However, should sex education be an indoctrination seminar replacing math and English? Many children can’t count or read, but you want to add your problems. Learning sixty or more pronouns is a bit too much for a first-grader, don’t you think?

            1. Yes, as a former first grade teacher, sex education is a necessity. Kids as early as second grade at another school in our area were attempting to perform fellatio in school, not because they understood what it meant but because they were imitating their parents.

              Pretending like sex doesn’t happen in elementary school is not a solution to the problem of poor parenting.

              This idea like it’s a zero sum game, where math/literacy suffer, is also ridiculous. Sex ed is not something that requires an hour a day.

              Finally, public education en masse is, by design, indoctrination. That is literally its purpose. Teaching US exceptionalism in high school is just the most obvious example. If you are interested, I recommend…


              1. I recommend….

                “Boland was caught on undercover video, captured by Project Veritas, declaring that he rejects candidates who espouse conservative or Catholic beliefs, are older than 30, or sympathize with concerns about parental rights in education. Instead he prioritizes recruiting non-Catholics because they’re less likely to be conservative, he said, making it easier to advance what he calls “subtle” progressive indoctrination in the classroom.

                “You don’t hire them,” Boland said of Catholic applicants. “Because if someone is raised hardcore Catholic, it’s like they’re brainwashed. You can never change their mindset. So, when you ask them to consider something new, like a new opportunity, or ‘you have to think about this differently,’ they’re stuck — just rigid.”


              2. “as early as second grade at another school in our area were attempting to perform fellatio in school,”

                I understand ATS your advocacy to teach second graders about fellatio. Pardon me for saying that it is crazy. No one wants to prevent counseling for the two committing fellatio, but that need not be a discussion for all second-graders. additionally, it doesn’t prevent that type of activity from happening.

                “Pretending like sex doesn’t happen in elementary school is not a solution to the problem of poor parenting.”

                Poor parenting is a problem, but that doesn’t mean we have to teach five-year-olds the Kama-Sutra.

                “This idea like it’s a zero sum game, where math/literacy suffer, is also ridiculous. Sex ed is not something that requires an hour a day.”

                When one wants to teach, one concentrates on the subject matter. Very young children learn many new things in school, more than math and English. They cannot adequately absorb too many new things, especially subjects they or their culture are not ready for.

                “Finally, public education en masse is, by design, indoctrination. ”

                That is interesting and where we might have some agreement. It is off-topic and needs a separate discussion. It also ties into the rationale for ending the public school system.

                Disclaimer, I have no problem with discussions of sex or nudity commonly seen in art history classes. The sticky point where young children are concerned is that the state is not the parent.

  10. So the Grand Jury met on Thursday. One would think that with such a drop dead case the Jury would have issued an indictment in the first ten seconds of the meeting. So what’s the hang up? Now they’re saying that the leak about the indictment was used by Trump to draw attention. CBS published the leak but of course Trump is to blame. You can count on the Democrats once they’ve been caught to blame it all on Trump.

    1. “One would think…”

      Nah. YOU might think that, but informed people don’t think that.

      And yes, “Trump is to blame” for everything that Trump says. No one is putting those words in his mouth but him.

      1. “And yes, “Trump is to blame” for everything that Trump says. No one is putting those words in his mouth but him.”

        That is only when his words are proven to be accurate and in context.

        ATS thrives off of quotes that are out of context or do not exist.

    2. The Democrats, the Rinos and the Never Trumpers. Go check out some of the blogs on the right. The Uniparty sticks together.

  11. Professor Turley,

    Please stop misleading your readers. The misdemeanor statute of limitations is 2 years, but it tolls for each that Trump is not in the State of New York. He spent 81 days of his presidency in New York. Therefore, he would have needed to spend over 80 percent of his post-presidency time in New York for the statute of limitations to have expired. Are you suggesting that Trump is commiting tax fraud by claiming FL residency when he is in fact spending most of his time in New York?

    Come on. As a defense attorney, you are well aware of the exceptions to the misdemeanor statute of limitations rule.

    At least be honest with your readership.

    1. He’s not going to be honest about that, because he likes to feed “the age of rage” that he complains about.

      1. Amen. Seriously though, with Trump yet again invoking violence, misguided readers thinking the SoL has expired after reading Prof Turley’s blog may be convinced to riot.

        It is completely valid to think a misdemeanor like this should be second fiddle to other investigations (and I would agree), but there is no question that the misdemeanor is a chargeable offense.


      Professor Turley, please publish the e-mail address and ISP of each Anonymouse – or require a nom de plume – for the purposes of efficacious rebuttal.

      The identities of those who exercise their freedom of speech must be established in order that opposing speakers may act in kind and accurately configure and direct their refutation.

        1. The Turley Blog is private property and only Professor Turley may “claim and exercise” dominion.

          The section of the Sedition Act that criminalized false and malicious statements about the federal government is patently and irrefutably unconstitutional as it denies citizens their 1st Amendment Freedom of Speech. The federal government considers truthful statements about its crimes and corruption “false and malicious” causing that section of the Sedition Act to be self-serving and corrupt, allowing the federal government to hide its crimes legally which is preposterously antithetical and unconstitutional. Take a good look at Flight 800 (the only “spontaneous fuel tank explosion” in history), its coverup, and related departments of the federal government.

          You may have heard that the Supreme Court of 1973 was found to have been erroneous, biased, political and corrupt and in its support of abortion as a constitutional right.

          The Supreme Court of 1869 issued a totally political and corrupt decision on manifestly constitutional secession, which is clearly neither prohibited nor precluded in any way by the Constitution, which the Founders availed themselves of with respect to their acquisition of independence from Great Britain and which is ubiquitous around the planet and throughout history.

          The Supreme Court has politically and corruptly upheld irrefutably unconstitutional Obamacare three times.

          One can discern that the Supreme Court makes political decisions and acts high criminally as a second, supplemental, legislative branch.

          DeSantis may sue for defamation.

      1. George, I have been screaming for some time that Turley needs to drop the “Anonymous” label. I am fine with everyone being anonymous, including me, but if everyone could just pick a darn name we could ignore the partisan embeds that are on this site to the tune of 100 comments for every story.

        To those of you that aren’t the one loser that goes by Anonymous please create a name so as to end this pain in the neck.

    3. The wording of the statute is “continuously” out of the state. He cannot be said to be “continuously” ouf of the state if he is frequently popping back now and then. The purpose of tolling is to keep a claim alive while the putative defendant cannot be served with process. In New York, civil law seems to have abolished “out-of-state” tolling where the putative Defendant can be served with legal process in the other state, which theseadays is anywhere in the United States.

      1. “He cannot be said to be “continuously” ouf of the state if he is frequently popping back now and then.”

        New York’s highest court ruled in 1999 that “continuously outside this state” means “all periods of a day or more that a nonresident defendant is out-of-State.”
        Trump is still welcome to have his attorneys make your argument, and he can see what the court rules.

        1. Anonymous@3:33pm. I hope his attorneys do make the argument. The ruling in Knobel is irrational in modern law, since it is now easy to serve out-of-state residents with legal process in most cases. If someone were “hiding” out-of-state under an alias (e.g., Anonymous), then the ruling might make sense. Even the Knobel court recognized this:
          “The focus of the tolling provision of CPL 30.10 is “the difficulty of apprehending a defendant who is outside the State” (People v. Seda, 93 N.Y.2d 307, 312). Thus, all periods of a day or more that a nonresident defendant is out-of-State should be totaled and toll the Statute of Limitations.”
          In 1995, the California Law Review Commission proposed aboltion of a similar rule in California, reasoning:
          “This recommendation proposes the repeal of Code of Civil Procedure Section 351, which tolls statutes of limitations when the defendant is out of the state. Section 351 is based on outdated notions of personal jurisdiction and service of process, and it is unconstitutional as applied to cases involving interstate commerce. Repeal of Section 351 would further the policies underlying statutes of limitations, protect courts from having to adjudicate stale claims lacking any meaningful connection to the state, and eliminate inequities that may arise when tolling is applied to brief periods of absence.
          The recommendation would also require courts to extend the delay reduction deadline for service of process where the plaintiff shows that even with the exercise of due diligence, service cannot be achieved in the time required.”

    4. Fool, the statute states that the tolling is done when the target is out of state and the state in UNABLE to reach them. I believe that NY knew where Trump was at all times. Damn liar.

      1. Incorrect. See (a)(I). The reachability requirement is (a)(ii). “Or” , not “and” is rather important here. Are you familiar with the difference between basic conjunctions?

        “In calculating the time limitation applicable to commencement of a criminal action, the following periods shall not be included:
        (a) Any period following the commission of the offense during which (i) the defendant was continuously outside this state or (ii) the whereabouts of the defendant were continuously unknown and continuously unascertainable by the exercise of reasonable diligence. However, in no event shall the period of limitation be extended by more than five years beyond the period otherwise applicable under subdivision two.”

      2. The SOL is moot. Bragg is trying to charge a violation of federal campaign law, not a state violation because the state violation has a 2 year SOL. Which has run. States cannot prosecute federal criminal violations just as the Feds cannot prosecute state violations of law. Two different jurisdictions.

    5. Only if the prosecution doesn’t know the whereabouts of the accused. The rational for tolling is so an accused cannot disappear until the SOL runs out. Trumps whereabouts were always known by the prosecutor, and Trump was always represented by counsel who was in contact with the D’s office. They even invited him to testify before the grand jury. The focus of the tolling provision of CPL 30.10 is “the difficulty of apprehending a defendant who is outside the State” (People v. Seda, 93 N.Y.2d 307, 312, 690 N.Y.S.2d 517, 712 N.E.2d 682). Where the location of the accused is known, actually known to everyone, including where he lives, where the prosecution is in communication with the accused’s counsel, then there is no difficulty in apprehending the accused, thus is no tolling.

      The alleged “felony” is a violation of federal campaign law, not state law. States cannot prosecute federal criminal violation because they have no jurisdiction, just as federal court cannot prosecute state criminal violations because federal courts have no jurisdiction over state criminal law.

      When there is both a federal criminal statute violation and a state criminal violation for the same crime, each respective court prosecutes their own violation, e.g, state prosecutes state violation and Feds prosecute federal violations. There is no over lapped and no double jeopardy if there is a not guilty in one court and a guilty in another. See 10th Amendment.

      That leaves only the misdemeanor charge which has a 2 years SOL. That’s long gone

      The governor of New York tolled SOLs because of Covid for 288 days, Both SOLs had run.

      1. None of us knows what Bragg will charge Trump with. People’s guesses about it aren’t knowledge.

        1. Is what ATS just said knowledge? No. It’s an attempt to make himself sound reasonable and look smart. It does neither. The future is unpredictable, so what he told us is known by everyone and doesn’t infer intelligence.

        2. BS. We have laws. Bragg can not charge something that is not a crime.
          Each crime withint the law has required elements.
          Brag can not charge a crime where he does not have atleast prima fascia evidence of all required elements.

          This is not difficult – Bragg does not have infinite possibilities.
          Bragg is not going to charge Trump with reckless driving.

          I wouild note several of you on the left have ranted that Cohen plead guilty to violations of election law specifically related to this
          as somehow proving a crime.
          I have pointed out that guilty pleas are not relevant.

          However another Lawyer noted that Cohen Plead Guilty to PERSONALLY paying Daniels 130K.
          That was the plea BECAUSE it is only a crime if the money comes from Cohen.
          The supreme court ruled long ago that people have no limit to the amount they can contibute to their own campaign.

          Put simply the evidence the Left claims proves this, is actually evidence that Bars this.

          Cohen has already allocuted that HE Not Trump was the source of the money paid to Daniels.

          I would note this tanks ALL of Braggs case.

          If Cohen Not Trump paid Daniels, then Trump’s payments to Cohen are “legal fees” and there is not merely not Fraud, but not even error.

          So if Trump gets a Judge that is not a clueless left wing nut, Brag MUST prove Cohen lied in his guilty plea – just to get in the door.

      2. Try again. I will copy the very first sentence of your cited case, People v Seda.

        “In this prosecution for multiple attempted murders, we must decide whether the tolling provision of CPL 30.10(4)(a)(ii), which excludes from the statute of limitations period any time during which the whereabouts of a defendant are continuously unknown and unascertainable by the exercise of reasonable diligence, applies to the time during which the identity of the defendant — known initially only as “The Zodiac” — remained unknown, notwithstanding intense police efforts to identify and find him.”

        It very clearly states that it is addressing (a)(ii), not (a)(I).

        You made the same mistake hullbobby did. These are two different statutory provisions which deal with separate rationales for rolling the statute of limitations. There is no ascertainabilty requirement in NY.

        Moreover, the Court of Appeals case, Knobel, makes the same quote you do. And shows how it applies to (a)(I).

        “The focus of the tolling provision of CPL 30.10 is “the difficulty of apprehending a defendant who is outside the State” (People v Seda, 93 NY2d 307, 312). Thus, all periods of a day or more that a nonresident defendant is out-of-State should be totaled and toll the Statute of Limitations.

        The “difficulty” is described as any period of a day or more that a nonresident defendant’s is out-of-state…

        So, unless you have a citation to a case that overrules the highest court in NY’s very clear holding on this matter, you cannot claim that the statute of limitations has run on a misdemeanor charge of falsified business records.

        And, contrary to what you stated previously, misdemeanor is not based on federal elections law at all. It could be charged as a standalone offense. Of course, the DA is unlikely to limit it’s charges to the misdemeanor variety, but the fact remains that the charge is definitely available.

  12. At least Real President Donald J. Trump is a real, red-blooded American.


    “Woman Who Knew Obama in High School Says He’s a Transvestite”

    Mia Marie Pope knew Obama at their Punahou high school in Honolulu, Hawaii, during the late 1970s. She knew him then by the name of Barry Soetoro. In an interview on October 31, 2013, with Reverend/Dr. James David Manning, the pastor of Atlah World Missionary in Harlem, Pope says Barry “always portrayed himself as a foreign student,” was a pathological liar and “very much was within the gay community.” It was “common knowledge” that Barry “wasn’t interested in girls” but “was strictly into men.” He also used to hustle rich white homosexual men for money to buy cocaine. I did a post on Pope’s interview on November 7, but somehow missed another bombshell that she dropped later in the interview.

    Here’s a transcript I took beginning at the 18:10 mark in the video above [deleted, YouTube]: Pope: “Have you had the opportunity to see the picture of him [Obama] in drag on YouTube?”

    Manning: “Yeah, there’s a picture of him in drag, in a leather outfit that’s really revealing more flesh and the only place that it covers up is his genital, but everything else is fully exposed. It looks like some sort of a sadistic outfit. I’ve seen it, yes.”

    Pope: “Yep. And those boots he’s wearing are in a man’s size. So for anybody out there that thinks he dredged it out of his mother’s closet on a dare or something, remember he’d have to have those boots specially made to a man’s size.

    I actually saw Barry, not in that outfit, and I wasn’t present while that picture was taken, but on a couple of occasions. There was a movie called Rocky Horror Picture Show that was really popular back then, and so one of the lead characters in that was, I think, played by Tim Curry, and the teenagers would go week after week after week and go see this. Well anyways, he [Obama] would dress up as a transvestite sometimes for that. So I actually saw him in other attire, similar to that picture that you’ve just described.”

    – Paper Blog –

  13. Just how much does Fox pay you to keep spinning the same BS, Turley? First of all, you don’t know anything about what’s going on with the grand jury and/or with DA Bragg’s office, so you are speaking out of your anus when you attempt to claim knowledge. Secondly, your pal, Billy Barr, is the one who quashed the DOJ’s prosecution of Trump back when he was in office. This has been widely reported, and is certainly not proof that there’s no merit in charging Trump. Barr disgraced himself when he tried to get out in front of the Mueller Report and lied about its findings. Third, there’s no comparison between John Edwards and the fat one you are paid to defend. Edwards’ situation is far more sympathetic to a jury for several reasons, including the fact that he isn’t a chronic, habitual liar, a well-known and disrespected con man like Trump. Edwards was a personal injury attorney who represented injured people and victims of medical malpractice. Rielle Hunter isn’t a porn actress–she was a campaign staffer. They had a child together whom Edwards supports. Then, you have the fact that Trump and his lawyers have repeatedly lied, claiming that the money came from his own funds, but he claimed the $130K hush money payment as “attorney fees”, which was a lie. Cohen went to prison over this and other conduct on behalf of Trump, too. Attempting to compare John Edwards’s situation with Trump is lame.

    Or, its today’s post just a deflection away from Trump’s most-recent crime–threatening DA Bragg on his social media post, in a split-screen with the fat hog wielding a baseball bat at DA Brag and promising “death and destruction” if he is indicted. Can there be any doubt what message the pig is sending? Even the disicples should be able to see just how pathetically desperate the fat hog is over the prosepect of his arrest. And, last time I checked, it’s illegal to threaten a public servant. Oh, and he also called DA Bragg an “animal”. Spin that one away if you can, Turley.

    1. Gigi.

      We know the indictment was expected days ago. That alone leads credence to speculation.
      Several other facts are also known – most of those were listed buy Turley.

      There is not a fact claimed by Turley in this that is not demonstrably true.
      We do know something of what has occured in the GJ – because witnesses are not bound to secrecy.

      Turley is also correct in his legal analysis – the case is incredibly weak.

      SOMETIMES even left wing nuts from NYC choke on garbage.

      The Left has promissed time and again that Trump is guilty of Substantive crimes.

      This GJ is being asked to indict for jay walking where the only witness is a perjurer.

      maybe a few jurrors are unhappy that they were promised steak and have been fed a rotting vegetable burito.

      We do not know what is going on.
      We do know that it is not what was choreographed.

      1. The dying fake news media cable shows and talking heads would be fini without Trump Trump Trump to give them their daily fresh squeezed Orange man juice they all need to keep afloat.

        Say it with us Gigi: The Orange Man is worth the squeeze.

    2. ANTIFA Gigi writes again. Tell me that she doesn’t sound like she’s taking her talking points from the ANTIFA handbook.

    3. You say Barr quashed prosecution of Trump – while false – even if True that would be laudable.

      Over Time much of the Mueller investigation – and substantial portions of his report are coming apart.

      It is now KNOWN that Before Mueller was appointed crossfire Huricane was DOA – the FBI had concluded that there was no foundation to keep the investigation open.

      That would have been known to Mueller at his appointment or shortly thereafter.

      He was legally obligated to end his investigation – one he had agreed would be conducted according to long established DOJ rules – as well as the constituton.
      Which prohibt investigations where there is no credible allegation remaining.

      More recently the Twitter files have revealed the Hamilton 68 was a Hoax, and that Twitter searched religiously to find the IRA Russian Bots that Mueller claimed influenced the 2016 election – and Twitter NEVER found them and concluded reluctantly that they did not exist.

      If Barr Quashed Mueller – good for him. He quashed an illegal and unconstitutional investigation drowning in lies.

      And here we are seeing the same again.

      A manufactured crime that does not exist, once again being used to “get Trump” by vicious partisans on the record as comitted to getting Trump.

      If you have to mutilate the law to get someone – it is well past time for you to wonder if maybe YOU are the real problem.

      Many democrats ARE correct to worry that another failed effort to GET TRUMP. is likely to backfire.

      As Turley noted – Trump’s fortunes are rising as Biden’s fall.

      A Trump prosecution may distract from Biden’s serious problems – but it also may amplify them.

      Going after Trump for Trivialities while Biden faces serious accusations strengthen’s Trump and weakens Biden.

      As Derschowitz noted – possibly correctly a Trump indictment may have been exactly What Trump wanted.

      While some on the left salivate at the thought of a Trump mug shot to use in the election – in all likelyhood it is Trump that would feature that Mugshot.

      Look at the past two years – Trump has been in danger of fading , becoming irrelevant – when he is ignored.
      But when you go after him – his polls rise, his competitors lose ground.

      I do not pretend to know the psychology of elections perfectly.

      But I know what I have seen.
      And the Evidence is that Trump and his prospects thrive on adversity and wane when he is ignored.

      If you want Trump to Win the 2024 Election – Go after him full throated.
      If you want him to fade into obscurity – ignore him.

      Regardless, as has been clear in the past 9 months – Going after Trump always makes Biden look bad by comparison.

      Biden needs a distraction right now, He has all kinds of problems.
      But Trump is the WRONG distraction. That just makes things worse.

      Trump does best int he roll of underdog.
      If you want him to crush Biden – making him appear the underdog especially in fights you will lose,
      is the best way to assure he is elected.

    4. NUTCHACHACHA, you’ve got them all eating out of the palm of your hand – they really believe you are “Gigi.”

      Dang! You go, sista!

      Oh, and may we abolish unconstitutional affirmative action and general unconstitutional public assistance yet, or do you still need them?

    5. Adam Kinzinger: “A former President threatened “death and destruction” while posting a picture of himself with a bat, next to a government official who is investigating him. This is not normal, not ok, and there is NO excuse for any Republican to take a pass on commenting.”

      Kinzinger is right: it’s not normal and not OK. Will any other Republicans condemn it?

      1. Stop lying. The truth is you supported the summer riots by Antifa, the riot directed at Kavanaugh, the near death of a Supreme Court judge. You sound like an idiot.

      2. “Will any other Republicans condemn it?”

        The Left would have the credibility to make such a demand, if it would condemn its own shock troops (Antifa, BLM), and its own shock-troop instigators, e.g., Maxine Waters, Nadler, Pelosi.

          1. They have done far worse. They misused the law and misdirected people. They damage the nation and all those that strive for freedom.

          2. ATS, what is to be disturbed about. The left did much worse. Remember the riots over the summer? How were they portrayed? Peaceful riots even though people were killed and buildings burned.

            You are a disgrace trying to over-politicize a picture that isomer funny than violent. You don’t care about the people your rhetoric kills.

      3. Jonathan Turley: “While some of us have criticized recent inflammatory rhetoric related to the Manhattan investigation, former President Donald Trump has continued unabated, including now posting a disturbing image of himself, Alvin Bragg, and a baseball bat.”

        No Republicans here seem to agree that it’s a disturbing image. Unlike Turley, they won’t condemn it.

          1. As I said: No Republicans here seem to agree that it’s a disturbing image. Unlike Turley, you won’t condemn it.

            1. Why doesn’t ATS condemn each Antifa riot death separately? He doesn’t care about violence, death or destruction. He pretends, but we all know the truth. He is a liar and a trickster.

              There is no need to condemn Trump for the picture. It was somewhat humorous and no violence occurred. If it were Antifa we would see the bat moving towards someone’s head and splitting it open.

            2. And I said: it’s not in the article, which is what this discussion board discusses. Swing and a miss.

              P.S. We’re not your monkeys, we’re not going to jump through your little hoops. “Condemning” things is left-wing cheap-talk sissified sanctimonious signal-virtue language.

              1. You think Turley engaged in “left-wing cheap-talk sissified sanctimonious signal-virtue language” when he condemned the photo?

                You consider it “off-topic.” I don’t. The column is about Bragg, and Trump’s photos were directed at Bragg.

                1. I didn’t say it was off topic. I said it wasn’t in the article. Try and comprehend this thought: people who comment on what’s in the article don’t necessarily read tweets on Twitter that may also be on topic. I didn’t even notice it until you mentioned it, and this article has been up two days. You’re whining, “oh it’s so terrible that people haven’t condemned the image” when it’s not even in the article that people are reacting to. Swing and a miss.

                  1. You’re clearly aware of it, and you’re choosing not to condemn it.

                    Adam Kinzinger: “A former President threatened “death and destruction” while posting a picture of himself with a bat, next to a government official who is investigating him. This is not normal, not ok, and there is NO excuse for any Republican to take a pass on commenting.”

                    1. You’re clearly aware of it, and you’re choosing not to condemn it.

                      Are you really that self-unaware after what I’ve explained? If I had seen it on my own and was asked whether I approved, I would have said no. But I’m not going to condemn it now because – as I already said – I’m not your monkey and I’m not going to jump through your hoops.

                      As for citing Adam Kinziger as some kind of moral authority – all I can say is: really? really? I mean, hahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!

                    2. Oldman, ATS is playing the when did you stop beating your wife game. ATS beats his wife all the time and we saw that when Antifa was rioting, killing, and burning down buildings. ATS had a high as he had when the Kavanaugh hearings occurred.

                      He is dishonest and perverted. The picture of Trump with a bat can be taken many ways, but for the most part, it was humorous even though many would consider it bad taste.

                      Since when does the left have good taste? Since when has ATS had good taste? Never. They are complaining about what they wish they could do and get away with. They are not peaceful. The best one can say is that their violence is presently being withheld.

                    3. S. Meyer – ATS is quite transparent. His approach strikes me as similar to someone who goes to a Ukrainian soldier on the front lines, and says, here is a picture Zelensky posted to social media. See on the left Zelensy is holding a baseball bat, and on the right is a picture of Putin. Now I demand that you condemn Zelensky for posting this.

                      If the soldier didn’t just stare at him in disbelief (or shoot him dead), the soldier would break out into a hearty laugh.

                    4. Putin is a dictator, a murderer, and a war criminal. He ordered his armed forces to invade Zelensky’s country. It’s hardly analogous.

  14. It is dubious whether Alvin and His Chipmunks (Mespo) are even capable of deciphering a sextant, much less negotiating the relevant cartography.

  15. Dodge Ball, that’s what I see, Democrats’ of all persuasions continuing to hit the wall, suffering whiplash on the balls return. How many times have they endeavored to pin the tail on President Trump and instead stuck the Donkey (jackass)? How can anyone accept the false narrative offered by the Democratic Party as a fruitful path? Their Utopian dream has caused hardship, disorder and racial division (naming just a few examples) all the while pushing us closer to a military confrontation. These foolish authoritarians must be defeated; they are a clear and present danger to the United States of America.

    There are a few lines in the song “Hotel California” which might define the Democrat party’s voter: “Last thing I remember, I was Running for the door, I had to find the passage back to the place I was before, Relax, said the night man, We are programmed to receive, You can checkout any time you like, But you can never leave.”

  16. Dear DA Bragg:

    Under your leadership, violent crime has skyrocketed some 23%. About 100 of your Assistant DAs have quit. Crime victims and your own police force detest you. Residents fear walking your streets. The State Department need to issue a “Do Not Travel” to tourists. Perhaps most destructive of all, you have created the specter of political “criminals.”

    Dear Mr. Soros:

    Congratulations on your successful efforts to destroy America’s criminal justice system.

      1. “And these data . . .” — liars and statistics

        “Surges in robbery, burglary and other crimes drove a *22 percent increase in overall major crime* in New York City last year [2022] . . .” — according to the *NYT* (and countless other sources) ( (Emphasis added)

        1. Notice how you’ve moved the goalposts from “violent crime.” For example, your own link says “There were 433 homicides last year, about an 11 percent drop since 2021 and the fewest since 2019. … Last year, about 300 fewer people were shot than the year before. Shootings in 2022 also fell to 1,294, a 17 percent decrease.” Some violent crime increased, but most has continued to decrease in 2023:

      2. “George Soros’ quiet overhaul of the U.S. justice system” 8/30/16

        While America’s political kingmakers inject their millions into high-profile presidential and congressional contests, Democratic mega-donor George Soros has directed his wealth into an under-the-radar 2016 campaign to advance one of the progressive movement’s core goals — reshaping the American justice system. The billionaire financier has channeled more than $3 million into seven local district-attorney campaigns in six states over the past year — a sum that exceeds the total spent on the 2016 presidential campaign by all but a handful of rival super-donors. His money has supported African-American and Hispanic candidates for these powerful local roles, all of whom ran on platforms sharing major goals of Soros’, like reducing racial disparities in sentencing and directing some drug offenders to diversion programs instead of to trial. It is by far the most tangible action in a progressive push to find, prepare and finance criminal justice reform-oriented candidates for jobs that have been held by longtime incumbents and serve as pipelines to the federal courts — and it has inspired fury among opponents angry about the outside influence in local elections. “The prosecutor exercises the greatest discretion and power in the system. It is so important,” said Andrea Dew Steele, president of Emerge America, a candidate-training organization for Democratic women. “There’s been a confluence of events in the past couple years and all of the sudden, the progressive community is waking up to this.”

        – Politico

      3. WASHINGTON (TND) — In an effort to fight stubborn crime in New York City, Mayor Eric Adams has asked shoppers to lower their masks when entering stores.

        “We’ve gotten so used to the mask that we don’t realize that a large volume of people are wearing it, not because of COVID, because they’re criminals,” Adams said during a press conference last week.

        While overall crime rates continue to decline in New York City, robbery rates remain stubbornly 41.7% higher than they were two years ago.

        Retailers are also experiencing a 26.5% annual increase in thefts committed by organized crime groups in 2021 according to the National Retail Federation.

        Walmart announced they will close eight stores in five states this year citing poor performance. While Walmart executives haven’t directly blamed theft for the new store closures, back in December, CEO Doug McMillon warned closures would happen if crime rates didn’t improve.

        Conservatives claim that Democratic-led state and local governments have emboldened criminals by failing to enact tough-on-crime policies. Others argue that the staffing crisis currently hitting police departments is making an already bad problem worse.

Leave a Reply