Below is my column in The Hill on the trouble brewing at CBS over the seizure of the files of acclaimed investigative reporter Catherine Herridge. The column broke the story on the uproar over not just her being laid off but her being locked out from her files. I am now hearing from CBS sources that the network is moving toward a resolution to turn over the files after the outcry. However, the concerns over Herridge’s firing and the network’s handling of her confidential notes continues to draw fire from journalists and commentators. The union issued a statement (below) after the column that “CBS News’ decision to seize Catherine Herridge’s reporter notes and research … sets a dangerous precedent for all media professionals and threatens the very foundation of the First Amendment.”
Here is the column:
“Anyone who isn’t confused really doesn’t understand the situation.” Those words, from CBS icon Edward R. Murrow, came to mind this week after I spoke with journalists at the network.
There is trouble brewing at Black Rock, the headquarters of CBS, after the firing of Catherine Herridge, an acclaimed investigative reporter. Many of us were shocked after Herridge was included in layoffs this month, but those concerns have increased after CBS officials took the unusual step of seizing her files, computers and records, including information on privileged sources.
The position of CBS has alarmed many, including the union, as an attack on free press principles by one of the nation’s most esteemed press organizations.
I have spoken confidentially with current and former CBS employees who have stated that they could not recall the company ever taking such a step before. One former CBS journalist said that many employees “are confused why [Herridge] was laid off, as one of the correspondents who broke news regularly and did a lot of original reporting.”
That has led to concerns about the source of the pressure. He added that he had never seen a seizure of records from a departing journalist, and that the move had sent a “chilling signal” in the ranks of CBS.
A former CBS manager, who also spoke on condition of anonymity, said that he had “never heard of anything like this.” He attested to the fact that, in past departures, journalists took all of their files and office contents. Indeed, the company would box up everything from cups to post-its for departing reporters. He said the holding of the material was “outrageous” and clearly endangered confidential sources.
Herridge declined to make any public comments on her departure.
CBS also did not respond to my inquiries about this.
A source within the the union, SAG-AFTRA, confirmed that it has raised this controversy with CBS and remains extremely concerned about the effect of this action on journalistic practices and source confidentiality. The union believes this is “very unusual” and goes far beyond this individual case. “It is a matter of principle,” a union spokesperson added. “It is a matter of serious concern. We are considering all of our options.”
For full disclosure, I was under contract twice with CBS as a legal analyst. I cherished my time at the network. I have also known Herridge for years in both legal and journalistic capacities.
CBS is one of the world’s premier news organizations, with a legendary history that includes figures from Murrow to Walter Cronkite to Roger Mudd. That is why the hiring of Herridge was so welcomed by many of us. The network was at risk of becoming part of the journalistic herd, an echo-chamber for Democratic and liberal narratives. It had been mired in third place for ages, and it was moving in the wrong direction by alienating half of the country.
Herridge had been a celebrated investigative reporter at Fox News. An old-school investigative journalist, she is viewed as a hard-driving, middle-of-the-road reporter cut from the same cloth as the network’s legendary figures.
The timing of Herridge’s termination immediately raised suspicions in Washington. She was pursuing stories that were unwelcomed by the Biden White House and many Democratic powerhouses, including the Hur report on Joe Biden’s diminished mental capacity, the Biden corruption scandal and the Hunter Biden laptop. She continued to pursue these stories despite reports of pushback from CBS executives, including CBS News President Ingrid Ciprian-Matthews.
Given the other layoffs and declining revenues, the inclusion of Herridge was defended by the network as a painful but necessary measure. But then something strange happened. The network grabbed Herridge’s notes and files and informed her that it would decide what, if anything, would be turned over to her. The files likely contain confidential material from both her stints at Fox and CBS. Those records, it suggests, are presumptively the property of CBS News.
For many of us who have worked in the media for decades, this action is nothing short of shocking. Journalists are generally allowed to leave with their files. Under the standard contract, including the one at CBS, journalists agree that they will make files available to the network if needed in future litigation. That presupposes that they will retain control of their files. Such files are crucial for reporters, who use past contacts and work in pursuing new stories with other outlets or who cap their careers with personal memoirs.
The heavy-handed approach to the files left many wondering if it was the result of the past reported tension over stories.
Regardless of motive, the company is dead wrong.
These files may contain sources who were given confidentiality by Herridge. The company is suggesting that the privilege of confidentiality (and the material) rest ultimately with CBS. As a threshold matter, that cannot be the case with regard to files that were generated during Herridge’s long stint with Fox News. Yet CBS appears to be retaining those files, too.
When sources accept confidentiality assurances, it is an understanding that rests with the reporter. It is a matter of trust that can take a long time to establish on a personal level between a reporter and a source.
It is certainly understood that the network stands behind that pledge. However, most sources understand that their identity and information will be kept protected by the reporter and only disclosed to a select group of editors or colleagues when necessary. It is the reporter who implicitly promises to go to jail to protect confidentiality — and many have done so. Such agreements are less likely to occur if sources are told that any number of unnamed individuals, including non-journalists, could have access or custody of these files.
When “Deep Throat” agreed to disclose his identity to Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, he was assured that they would protect it until his death. He would not have been so inclined if he had been told that this was a type of privilege by committee with potential disclosures to corporate, legal and HR personnel. Reporters like Herridge have long served as the primary defenders of privileged sources. Indeed, Herridge is still in court defending confidentiality over a series of stories at Fox News in 2017, even at the risk of being held in contempt.
CBS is suggesting that it will allow unnamed individuals to rifle through Herridge’s files to determine what will remain with the network and what will be returned to the reporter. That could fundamentally alter how reporters operate and how willing sources are to trust assurances that they will be protected.
In criminal cases involving privileged information, the government has an elaborate “filter team” system to wall off access to information under review. In the court system, judges use in camera and ex parte reviews to protect such information. Ironically, the media itself seems to take a more ad hoc approach. Indeed, CBS seems to have adopted a “Trust us, we’re the media” approach. However, that could expose these files to the access of unnamed lawyers, tech staff and others who are conducting this inventory and analysis.
CBS should reconsider this move before it does real harm to itself or its reporters. Ironically, it should not want to be the custodian of such records, which can expose the company to production demands in litigation, such as the ongoing fight over the confidentiality of the Fox sources. To store such documents is to invite a storm of subpoenas.
CBS could be forcing a showdown with the union, which must protect not only this journalist but all journalists seeking to maintain control and confidentiality of their files.
The union may have no choice but to go to court to force CBS to protect journalistic values, including a demand for an injunction to force the company to secure these files and bar review until a court has had a chance to consider these questions of confidential and proprietary claims to the files.
Famed CBS anchor Walter Cronkite once said “our job is only to hold up the mirror — to tell and show the public what has happened.” It now appears that CBS itself will have to look into that mirror and answer some questions of what happened to the confidential records of Catherine Herridge.
Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro professor of public interest law at the George Washington University Law School.
Here is the statement of the SAG-AFTRA union:
SAG-AFTRA strongly condemns CBS News’ decision to seize Catherine Herridge’s reporter notes and research from her office, including confidential source information. This action is deeply concerning to the union because it sets a dangerous precedent for all media professionals and threatens the very foundation of the First Amendment.
It is completely inappropriate for an employer to lay off a reporter and take the very unusual step of retaining and searching the reporter’s files, inclusive of confidential source identification and information. From a First Amendment standpoint, a media corporation with a commitment to journalism calling a reporter’s research and confidential source reporting “proprietary information” is both shocking and absurd.
The retention of a media professional’s reporting materials by their former employer is a serious break with traditional practices which supports the immediate return of reporting materials. We urge CBS to return this material to Catherine in support of the most basic of First Amendment principles. We are encouraged by recent outreach by CBS News to SAG-AFTRA on this matter, and we are hopeful that it will be resolved shortly.
One has to ask what files she had in the office, and what files she had elsewhere.
Not sure why she would have her notes or info from FOX in CBS…
If as Turley suggests… she should contact a lawyer to protect herself.
If CBS/BlackRock were to use / misuse her intel… that would not end well for anyone.
OT but fun:
Pinnociwade and Fanitasy, the Dim attack dogs nipppng at Trump in Georgia, both testified their meretricious relationship began after he was appointed to persecute Trump. A new affidavit from an investigator looking at Wade’s cellphone data reveals 35 visits to Fani’s love shack (she said no more than 10) some ending as late as 3 am, 12000 texts and 2000 phone calls BEFORE his appointment. This along with joint trips to Napa (the valley not the auto parts store) , Belize and other romantic venues and a former pal saying rumors of a professional only relationship before appointment are way overrated. Fani is on her fanny a lot apparently and Wade is wading in way over his head. Sayonara, you two!
In 2015 Catherine Herridge reported on the FBI’s concern regarding the use of encryption by terrorists. She is an intelligent reporter that will have respect for her confidential sources.
Dear Jonathan Turley
In line with what happened to Ms. Herridge, do you have a work computer at the University which employs you? If so, perhaps you should keep off-site backups, and cleanse that computer of any sensitive information. You are surrounded by leftist students, faculty, and other employees. If you haven’t already.
Yours truly,
Floyd
Can you say Warren Commission?
Nothing ‘Confusing’ Here
CBS Nixed A Controversial Staffer
The veteran investigative reporter, who has a First Amendment case that’s being closely watched by journalists nationwide, was among 20 CBS News staffers who lost their jobs Tuesday as part of a broader purge of 800 employees across parent company Paramount Global, sources told The Post.
Herridge’s departure comes as the journalist faces heat for not complying with US District Judge Christopher Cooper’s order to reveal how she learned about a federal probe into a Chinese American scientist who operated a graduate program in Virginia.
Herridge may soon be held in contempt of court for not divulging her source for the investigative piece she penned in 2017 when she worked for Fox News and be ordered to personally pay fines that could total as much as $5,000 a day.
The scientist, Yanping Chen, had been investigated for years on suspicions she may have lied on immigration forms related to work on a Chinese astronaut program, according to Herridge’s report.
Chen is suing the FBI for damages claiming the leaked information was par of a campaign to damage her reputation. Federal prosecutors ended their six-year probe of Chen without bringing charges.
https://nypost.com/2024/02/14/media/cbs-sparks-outrage-over-firing-of-catherine-herridge-lone-voice-at-network-probing-hunter-biden-laptop/
…………………………………….
TURLEY READERS: Google “Yanping Chen / Catherine Herridge” and see all the coverage that comes up. There is no way Turley is unaware of this controversy.
Entire Controversy Explained
Dr. Yanping Chen’s Privacy Act lawsuit against the FBI, DOD, DHS, and DOJ continues to press forward after recent, favorable rulings ordering reporter Catherine Herridge to disclose the government sources who leaked Dr. Chen’s information to Fox News.
The lawsuit (filed in 2018) seeks accountability from the federal government for selectively leaking to Fox News information about Dr. Chen gathered during an FBI investigation. After the investigation ended with no charges, former Fox News reporter Catherine Herridge published a series of reports that damaged the reputation of Dr. Chen and the University of Management and Technology, which Dr. Chen owns. Ms. Herridge’s reports notably displayed confidential materials from the FBI investigation, including personal photographs of Dr. Chen and her family, memoranda from FBI interviews, and Dr. Chen’s immigration and naturalization records.
https://www.apajustice.org/yanping-chen.html
……………………………..
No wonder Herridge was included in the layoffs at CBS. They don’t want a journalist who’s beholden to a former employer, Fox News, for a story that went badly.
How did the story go badly ?
Herridge is an actual investigative reporter. She reported on information from govenrment sources. That is what reporters do.
She is refusing to provide the names of those sources. That is also what ethical reporters do.
Chen avoided a conviction – if the government did not have the evidence to convict that is the right outcome.
That does not change anything regarding Herridge’s reporting.
News stories do not require a beyond a reasonable doubt standard.
Black Rock, the company buying up all our real estate and homes and property owns and controls one of our three major news networks? …. wait, …what…
Black Rock is the name of the building where the CBS headquarters is housed in NYC.
This is a well-known fact for…roughly 50 years.
Ahh, well it wasn’t for me. First I ever heard that, of course I pay zero attention to New York, … cesspool that it is.
Turns out by the way, that “Blackrock” does in fact own 16 percent of CBS.
Go figger…
I doubt 1% of people polled west of Philadelphia would connect Black Rock to CBS. I have half my brain used for storing worthless trivia. If I had heard this bit, I would remember.
Jonathan: And there’s more braking news. Alexander Smirnov has now been re-arrested under a new warrant issued by a judge in California. AS was originally arrested in Las Vegas but released by a magistrate judge under conditions–including a GPS monitor. Why the re-arrest? I suspect David Weiss thinks AS might be a continuing flight risk.
What is curious is that despite AS’s admission he fabricated the bribery allegations against Hunter and Joe Biden, your good friends at Fox think it’s all part of a deep state conspiracy by the Biden administration to retaliate against AS. Fox host Jesse Waters told his audience that the problem is that AS is “too credible” and that is why he is being targeted. Sean Hannity went so far to suggest Weiss is a Democratic operative-despite the fact that Weiss was appointed by DJT and is currently prosecuting Hunter Biden. Oh well, conspiracy theories are what we have come to expect from Fox.
Finally, in a fiery speech to the National Religious Broadcasters just before the S. Carolina primary, DJT talked about WWII and the external threats to the country. DJT now claims the threat is within: “This time, the greatest threat is not from outside of our country. I really believe this. It’s the people from within our country that are more dangerous. They’re very sick people…to achieve victory in this fight…we still need the hand of our Lord”. Naturally, when you speak to the NRB you have to invoke the Lord.
DJT is right on one thing. There are some very “sick” people within the country. They’re DJT supporters. Yesterday, an unnamed man in San Diego was arrested for threatening election workers in Arizona. In one voicemail the man said: “You wanna cheat our elections? You wanna screw Americans out of true votes? We’re coming (expletive)”. Unfortunately, we have seen a lot of threats by DJT supporters against election workers, judges and prosecutors. DJT encourages those threats. That’s why the real threat from within the country is DJT. Lord, help us!
So you think it is a GOOD thing for SC Weis to court shop when he can not get a favorable ruling ?
I doubt Smirnov is a flight risk. Nor does it matter. If Smirnov were to disappear – YOU would be claiming that was proof that all kinds of misconduct by Biden that are not referenced by Smirnov were all perfectly correct.
The best outcome of this case for those on the left would be for Smirnov to disappear.
I hope he does not. But I understand fully why he would.
I would further note this is a very MINOR offense – even if true. It is highly unlikely that any |CHS has been 100% truthful to the FBI.
Weis bringing this case is the actual threat to national security – it will case FBI CHS’s to think twise about providing the FBI information.
You say alot of things in your post that are NOT properly reported elsewhere.
And you are a completely disreputable source.
It is not worth the effort to look up all the false claims you constantly make.
If you wish to be beleived – CITE sources.
You “say” that AS has “admitted” something – please provide quotes from AS confirming that.
Otherwise I must presume like most of what you post it is just made up nonsense.
Yes alot of people think the AS Indictment is an effort to protect Biden.
Read the indictment – MORE THAN HALF has nothing to do with AS and is filled with irrelevant defenses of Biden’s alleged conduct.
I would further note that alot of the indictment does NOT say that AS lied, it says that what AS claims to have heard must be false, because Biden was no longer president when he heard it.
Even if True, that has no bearing on whether AS heard what he alleges, nor on whether it was true.
Two separate FBI field offices found AS HIGHLY RELIABLE. One found THIS allegation by AS to be credible and refered it to Weis for prosecution.
Instead Weis prosecuted the “whistleblower” – which over and over is what we have seen in the Biden administration.
Trump is correct – the US will never be conquered by outside forces.
The threat is from within.
I would note this is NOT particularly unique – all great nations of the past failed from within.
The San Diego man you cite was engaged in protected speech.
Arresting him and prosecuting him is a waste of time and money.
SCOTUS has already ruled on this issue – for a “threat” to be a crime, it must be specific, immediate, and credible.
This meets NONE of those requirements.
This “threat” is weaker that Schumer telling Kavanaugh and Gorsuch that if they mess with Row they will not know whats coming for them, they will reap the whirlwind.
You can dislike the speech of the SD man or myriads of top democrats in this country, but their speach is first amendment protected speech.
There first amendment does not say that vague threats by the left are acceptable, but those from the right are crimes.
Your ranting that DJT is a threat while LITTERALLY proving that he is correct that YOU are the threat.
Let me be clear – I fully support using every single tool within the law to remove the lawless judges and prosecutors that we are seeing all over.
I would impeach them, disbar them, and where appropriate prosecute them.
I hope that republicans as a whole are “coming for them”.
Where I part from pretty much all democrats and many republicans, is that my threats are confined to what is possible within the law, and I am not looking as left wingnuts like you do all the time to bend, fold, spindle and mutilate the law in order to “Get” people who I beleive are corrupt and deserve far more severe punishment than the law allows.
I have criticised others here who threatened to convict democrats of treason over very bad but often not illegal acts.
You do not defeat fascists by becoming the fascists.
Dennis,
you do realize you are howling at the moon over a non-specific threat to directed specifically at people who commit election fraud ?
This is no moral or legal difference between
“You wanna cheat our elections? You wanna screw Americans out of true votes? We’re coming (expletive)”.
and
“You wanna murder and rape? You wanna screw Americans with violence? We’re coming (expletive)”.
It is self evident that YOUR idea of criminal speech is driven by the political lean of the speech not some objective standard.
“There are some very “sick” people within the country.”
Correct,
anxiety and depression have doubled in the 21st century after decades of decline.
Anxiety in women is double what it used to be.
Anxiety in that under 30 is double what it used to be
Anxiety among those on the left is double what it used to be.
If you are a white male conservative over 50 your odds of having anxiety/depression are less than 1:10.
If you are a white female progressive under 30 your odds are nearly 4:5
There are quite clearly some very sick people in this country – and the statistics are they are nearly all on the left.
Everytime there is some violence, some mass shooting we all wait with bated breath for the politics of the perpitrator to emerge.
We can guarantee that if there is a hint of right wing in the perpitrator – if as an example the perpitrator is a game eco terrorist – but also anti-immigrant – we will be told with great authority thist is all driven by right wing hate.
Conversely when we hear little or nothing you can pretty much guarantee this person is a crazed left wing nut that went postal.
Those of you on the left have gone batschff crazy over J6 for nearly 4 years – despite the fact that J6 was minor compared to any night in 2020 at Portland, or the BLM Riots everytwhere, or what occured outside the WH in June 2020, or the takeover of downton Seattle in 2020, or the Pussy hat riots in 2017 at the Trump imaugural.
And the entire country knows that if we Vote Trump into office in 2024 – that the left is going to wreak havoc on the country immediately afterwords.
The righty learned something from J6 – The right is not permitted to engage in traditional political protest.
If anything goes wrong they will be demonized, Further they will have to deal with the infiltration of Antifa and the FBI who will be seaking to proven the right is violent.
The right has moved to other ways of protest. We are seeing the Truckers boycott of NYC, We saw the Budlight boycott – which even Kid Rock who started it and Trump can not end. Which BTW I am fine with.
Bud light got arrogant wiuth its market, and lost.
Just recently SF had to recind a policy barring SF government from doing business with companies in states that did not conform to nutty SF policies. This blew up inSF’s face and made it impossible to complete projects and run government at any costs.
Waivers were being granted all over the place just to keep above water.
I expect that Trump will win decisively in 2024, But if he does not – Democrats are not changing, we will get 4 more years of failure – there will eventually be a red tsunami.
Regardless the data is clear – the incidence of “sick people” is exponentially higher on the left.
John Say: Still at it with rambling and nonsensical posts? When will you learn? For brevity sake I will make my responses fairly short:
(1) SC David Weiss (why can’t you spell names correctly?) has jurisdiction to prosecute federal crimes in CAL. He is prosecuting Hunter there because that is where Hunter lives. So Weiss is not forum shopping.
(2) Lying to the FBI is not a “MINOR” offense. It’s a violation of 18 USC, Section 1001 and carries a penalty of up to 5 years in prison. Does that satisfy your need for sources?
(3) You say “all great nations of the past failed from within”. But that doesn’t explain why DJT is making that claim now. DJT says everything was great during his presidency–no complaints about a lot of “sick” people then. DJT is complaining now because he is under criminal indictment in four different jurisdictions, is on the hook for $83.3 million to E. Jean Carroll and just got hit for $355 million judgment by Judge Engoron. I would be unhappy too but that doesn’t mean the country is falling apart from within.
(4) The man in SD doesn’t have “first Amendment protected speech” to threaten election workers. 18 USC 245(b)(1)(A) makes it a federal crime to threaten them.
You often make predictions that come back to haunt you. You predicted DJT would win the case before Judge Engoron. So did Alina Habba and she is an attorney. But she should have known better. In your case I will give you a pass because you are just dumb. I think you need to get a new ouija board because the one you have is definitely not working!
1). The Crime was not committed in CA. Having US jurisdiction does NOT mean you can try any case you want anywhere you want.
There is a reason that the classified documents case is being prosecuted in FL.
Further where Hunter’s home is located is NOT relevant. Weiss is not charging Hunter.
AS did not say he met with Zolechevsky in CA.
You will note that Smith is prosecuting Trump in DC and in FL – one completely separate charges.
Weis is not going after AS for completely separate charges. Even if AS lied to the FBI on two separate occasions in two separate places and there are two charges.
they would Still be one indictment and trial in one court so long as the alleged lies were about broadly ONE topic. Further if convicted the charges would likely merge.
Weis did not get what he wanted out of the first judge – who recognized this as a weak case that would not likely result in incarceration if AS was convicted.
I would note that his game of trying to jail defendants to force them into a plea deal is common place and it is morally WRONG.
You left wing nuts tried to do it with Manafort. Mueller successfully did with with Batina – the only actual conviction of a real russian that Mueller got – after sitting in jail for 2 years a russian college student plead guilty to illegally lobbying NRA executives and was deported immediately to Russia. This was also a technique used against J6ers.
Just to be clear prosecutorial (and judicial) corruption is not limited politics. It is extremely common in my county for defendants to be jailed prior to trial, or during appeals – often for years on cases that the DA KNOWS they will lose at trial or on appeal.
The defendant SOMETIMES gets the choice of pleading in order to get out of jail, or the DA just decides to hold them for years until the finally lose and are forced to let them go.
We saw this with the Cosby case. Do not get me wrong – there is little doubt about what Cosby did, and that he belongs in jail.
But the prosecutors used and the judge allowed evidence that was certain to be thrown out on appeal to convict him. They held him in jail for years, until the state supreme court threw out the case.
This is commonplace and it is WRONG.
In response to Dennis McIntyre (let’s see if you pass the class CONSTITUTION AND LAW CRIMINAL JUSTICE) and to contribute to a very important point, where John said:
– “Just to be clear prosecutorial (and judicial) corruption is not limited politics. It is extremely common in my county for defendants to be jailed prior to trial, or during appeals – often for years on cases that the DA KNOWS they will lose at trial or on appeal.”
– “The defendant SOMETIMES gets the choice of pleading in order to get out of jail, or the DA just decides to hold them for years until the finally lose and are forced to let them go.”
*The Cato Institute has been doing work to denounce this immoral practice. Clark Neily, Senior VP for Legal Studies @CatoInstitute posts continuously in X:
“And yes, I stand by that description. The most essential culprits are unconscionable over-criminalization, plea-driven mass adjudication, and near-zero accountability for police and prosecutors. We have two systems: one on paper, and the other in reality.”
JUNE 7, 2020
America’s Criminal Justice System Is Rotten to the Core
https://www.cato.org/blog/americas-criminal-justice-system-rotten-core
(2) Mueller prosecuted several people for the same crime. He struck no jail plea deals or 90 day incarcerations.
It is a VERY MINOR crime. In fact nearly all the J6 “crimes” are minor crimes that regardless of the max sentence would rarely if ever get significant jail time for first offenders – UNLESS you piss of democrats. BTW there is no actual crime of Lying to the FBI.
The crime is lying to a government agent. It is a very very old statue and until very recently it was never used in the criminal law enforcement context. It was originally enacted int he late 19th century When the federal govenrment started to pass laws demanding that businesses provide the govenrment with information. Fairly quickly the businesses figured out that though they had to file the required forms – they did not need to be accurate. So just like the misuse of SarbOx against J6 defendants the “lying to the FBI” nonsense is really a documents crime. It is essentially the same thing as Bragg is shilling in NY.
I did not ask you for a source on the law – I am well aware of 18 USC 1001 as is anyone who has been on this blog for any length of time.
You have alleged a number of FACTS that you have provided no support for.
Those of you on the left do this comonly – the “Trump said X” nonsense being a prime example. Trump as an example did NOT say he would void the constitution. You can not rearrange the words in a sentence anyway you want or completely ignore the context.
You have made a number of claims regarding AS that you have not backed up.
From what I have read of the indictment – Weis has no case. He wasted half the indictment on timing related nonsense that was irrelevant and logically incorrect efforts to prove Joe Biden had not committed a crime.
AS reported to the FBI what he had heard from Burisma executives.
AS claimed that he was told that Hunter and Joe were paid millions by Burisma to shutdown the shokin investigation.
This conversation allegedly took place in 2017. Weis thinks it is significant that Biden was not VP in 2017. And wasted lots of the indictment on that irrelevant argument.
First, All that matters is that AS APPROXIMATELY accurately reported what he was told.
He is an ear witness and what he claims to have heard is hearsay. It would be difficult to get admitted in a criminal trial, but it CAN be used in an investigation, and it can be used in a grand jury.
AS would not be guilty of lying to the FBI if what he reported was wrong. He would be guilty if no one told him what he reported – whether it was right or wrong. AS would not be guilty of anything if what he reported to the FBI was actually legal conduct by the bidens.
Simply brilliant! I admire and congratulate you for patience (I couldn’t!) My grandfather would have said, Ridonkeyoulus (re-donke-you-lus)!
I would like to ask you something, because it is something I don’t understand.
If Weis is the Special Prosecutor to investigate Hunter, what hi’s doing accusing an alleged witness who could contribute to his case?
Is it like yet Special Prosecutor Jack Smith who investigating Trump, accused Christopher Steele of defaming Trump in the Steele dossier?
(3) You say “all great nations of the past failed from within”
I do not say that – History tells us that. It is a huge theme of history.
“But that doesn’t explain why DJT is making that claim now.”
Why is an explanation needed ?
Regardless, the left and the right are in agreement that the US is failing – just for different reasons.
The fact is that both the left and the right are likely wrong. That said there is NO MERIT to the lefts argument.
No nations has failed for moving to slowly to roll back racism, sexism, homophobia, …..
But all great nations that have lost their moral foundations have failed.
AS Adams tautologically observed
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
Absent near universally shared moral foundations no nation can exist. We talk here about laws and law enforcement,
but absent voluntary and intuitive compliance with the law – imposing law entirely by force would require more law enforcement than people. Even totalitarian states depend on the majority of people intuitively following the law and using force and terror only against a minority of people.
Unlike many others here who make perfectly good arguments refuting you on the basis of the law or constitution.
I normally go deeper. The constitution is a creation of man. It is not the inerrant word of god delivered on stone tablets by angels.
Its merit is that it works.
Is it that hard for you to understand that the social contract – government itself requires more than a majority to work.
it requires near universal agreement to atleast grudgingly follow the law.
That requires law that does not deviate far from our shared moral values.
This is a major reason why the left claim that the law can be used to “nudge” people toward good conduct is morally wrong.
It rests on the premise that a minority of people – or under optimal circumstances a narrow majority of people can FORCE others to do as they wish – that is IMMORAL.
“DJT says everything was great during his presidency–no complaints about a lot of “sick” people then.”
DM AGAIN – I have ZERO interest in anything you calim that Trump said absent an actual quote in context.
The MSM Democrats and you pretty close to UNIVERSALLY are LYING when you start a sentence with “DJT says”
“DJT is complaining now because he is under criminal indictment in four different jurisdictions, is on the hook for $83.3 million to E. Jean Carroll and just got hit for $355 million judgment by Judge Engoron.”
Yes, he is compaining about obviously lawless conduct by those running our legal system.
Let me ask you – in every one of these cases if you changed ONE of the follwing attribtutes – the venue, the judge, the prosecutor, do you think you could get a conviction ? The obvious answer is NO. If you can only convict someone of something in 2% of the country and only then only 2% of prosecutors would bring the case and only 2% of judges would not know the case out of the court – then you are by defintion LAWLESS.
” I would be unhappy too but that doesn’t mean the country is falling apart from within.”
Actually it does. And noted in a prior post – if you require a trifecta of conditions that are true only 2% of the time to get a conviction – then you are by defintion LAWLESS.
When Adams wrote that our constitution was suitable only for a moral and religious people, he meant TWO things.
First, govenrment and law that does not rest on a near universally shared understanding of morality is LAWLESS.
That government that acts outside that near universally shared morality will fail – or to use Trump’s term is “sick”.
“(4) The man in SD doesn’t have “first Amendment protected speech” to threaten election workers. 18 USC 245(b)(1)(A) makes it a federal crime to threaten them.”
You quoted what the SD man said – that wrote is first amendment protected speech.
No it is NOT a federal crime to threaten people whether they are election workers or not.
For a threat to be a crime rather than protected speech it must be specific, immediate, and credible.
Please learn something about the law and constitution. This has been in front of the supreme court many many times in the past 150 years.
I would note this should be obvious even to you.
If I say “Do what I ask or I will hold my breath until I turn blue” – that is a THREAT. Under no circumstances is it a crime.
If you are stabbing someone in front of me and I say “Stop or I will shoot you” – that is a THREAT. Under no circumstances is it a crime.
Anyone but a moron understands that Only a specific subset of all threats constitute crimes.
In the specific instance of the SD man you cited, you provided ZERO evidence that what was threatened constituted a criminal act.
“If you do not pay me, I will kill you” – is a criminal threat.
“If you do not pay me, I will sue you” – is not
I would further note that the SD mans alleged threat was predicated on criminal conduct by election workers.
Ordinary people ARE allowed to use force in response to criminal conduct. The force must be proportionate to the crime,and there are other criteria.
In SHORT you have NONE of the elements required for an actual criminal threat.
All you have is speech you do not like and your own personal FEELINGS of being threatened.
We have seen that in a number of these stupid left wing nut cases recently.
YOUR FEELINGS do not limit the first amendment rights of others.
A criminal threat must meet specific objective criteria of the law.
Something is not a crime merely because you FEEL threatened.
“You often make predictions that come back to haunt you.”
Nope.
“You predicted DJT would win the case before Judge Engoron.”
I did not. I have said from the start that it was likely that Engoron would slam Trump.
I said that because it was obvious from the start that Engoron was lawless.
“So did Alina Habba and she is an attorney.”
Maybe she did, but not in anything I heard. And you are not a credible reporter.
What she DID say repeatedly and correctly was that there was no fraud.
What I have said repeatedly is that What Trump was accused of happens 100% of the time in real estate transactions.
What I and many others have said is that Fraud requires actual harm to someone.
I would further note that what I have said, and what Habba has said is that they will win on appeal. Frankly Trump’s legal strategy in most of these cases has been to win them on appeal.
I am pretty sure that YOU claimed – based on idiots in the left wing nut media that Habba was doing a crappy job of preserving grounds for appeal – you did this based on the fact that Habba was not objecting in the court – after Engoron threatened her with contempt if she did.
Yet, you have not read any of Habba’s motions filed with the court – everyone of which is both a record and a basis for appeal.
I would further note that Habba has had 4 interlocutory appeals of Judge Engron’s intermediate decisions and she has won every one of those. She is well set to overturn or radically limit Engoron on appeal – because he ignored the decisions of the apellate courts in this case.
You have claimed I made false predictions – I have predicted this accurately.
It is really stupid to lie to my face about what I have said in the past.
My ability to read crystal balls – like most everyone is limited.
But when I have made predictions my track record has been pretty good. Not perfect, but still pretty good.
Further I am far better than you or almost anyone on the left at not merely stating what the LAW or constitution actually says, and how it must work, but also how the courts – whether biased to the left or not will act.
Engoron is wrong on the law and on the facts. But that does not mean he is NOT predictable.
The only thing difficult about predicting left wing nuts is gauging exactly how bat schiff crazy they are.
” But she should have known better.”
Known better than what ?
I though you claimed to have been a lawyer in the past.
You seem to know very little about the job.
EVen If Trump was guilty as sin and had $hit for a case – Habba’s job is to argue as forcefully as possible for him.
There is nothing Habba has said that perfectly reputable lawyers do not say about guilty clients.
But Habba does not have a guilty client, she has a lawless prosecutor and a lawless judge.
“In your case I will give you a pass because you are just dumb. I think you need to get a new ouija board because the one you have is definitely not working!”
Insults are not arguments.
I care not a witt about your assessment of my intelligence.
Very very few people in the world call me dumb, and the few like you who do, I take it as a compliment.
It is a sign that you can not make an argument.
18 USC 245(b)(1) Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, by force or threat of force willfully injures, intimidates or interferes with, or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with—
Going back to what YOU have said the SD man said.
Did he use FORCE ? No.
Did he threaten the use of force ? No.
Did he injure ? No
Did he attempt to injure ? No
Interfere and intimidate require that what is being interfered or intimidated is a lawful act.
The SD person specifically refered to consequences for Cheating in the election.
You can ALWAYS threaten lawful consequences for lawless acts.
You have chosen to insult my intelligence but you can not even read or understand the very laws YOU cite.
Further you confuse feelings with Facts.
There is no law that protects anyone – not even election workers from interferance or intimidation when they are committing unlawful acts.
The SD person you cite SPECIFICALLY tied his remarks to ILLEGAL acts.
The way you are trying to read the law, a prosecutor who tried to indict an election worker who was caught on video stuffing a ballot box would have violated the law.
you NEVER think past the surface of your arguments. You make presumptions about others that you know nothing about, and you convert your feelings into facts.
The law does not deal with feelings. Intimidation is not a subjective FEELING, it is specific acts.
My posts are long, because your errors are numerous.
You are extremely good at acheiving a high density of error.
But that is unsurprising, that is common place when your writing is as vague and generalized as your thought.
You do not think about what you write, and you pretend the law uses words so broadly as to catch everything in their net.
Something that would make criminals of all of us.
The first amendment LITERALLY invalidates all laws restricting or criminalizing speech EXCEPT very specific speech that is not protected.
Regardless of what words are used, speach is not protected – it can be criminalized if and only if it is clear, advocates/threatens for lawlessness, immediate, and likely to result in lawlessness.
Is it really that difficult for you to understand that it is not a crime to threaten to hold my breath until I turn blue if an election worker cheats ?
‘
“Lying to the FBI is not a “MINOR” offense”
And….the FBI lying to the American people (about EVERYTHING) is what? A major offense?
Dennis says this: “DJT is complaining now because he is under criminal indictment in four different jurisdictions, is on the hook for $83.3 million to E. Jean Carroll and just got hit for $355 million judgment by Judge Engoron. I would be unhappy too but that doesn’t mean the country is falling apart from within.”
I repeat…”but that doesn’t mean the country is falling apart from within.”
Uh, yes it does, Dennis. That is exactly what it means. WTF is the matter with you? I mean, really.
Dennis says: “You often make predictions that come back to haunt you. You predicted DJT would win…”
Brace for impact, Denny, because Trump is going to be the next president of the United States. And we know that will come back to haunt YOU, and a whole lotta bad people who have abused their power and who know exactly what they’ve done. Bye bye baddies, your day in court is coming….
Worthwhile to note that none of the other Biden surrogate networks, NBC, ABC, or CNN have covered or opined on this story. It says a lot. Mainstream media is not about reporting the facts to the citizens any longer, its about being Biden’s “home team”!
Braking news? Why didn’t you stop.
?
Those of you on the left think that Weis is a hero for indicting AS – in record time, Why has it taken so long to indict hunter that Statutes of limitations have expired ? A FARA prosecution should be a no brainer – yet none has been filed. AS was refered to SC Weis by the FBI for use in prosecuting Hunter not the other way arround.
Regardless if Weis is your hero for going after AS – how can he be a goat for allegedly confusing cocaine and sawdust ?
It is possible to explain all Weises conduct with political bias. It is NOT possible to consistently explain his conduct with competence honesty and integrity – reqardlkess of your ideology.
You said, “It is possible to explain all Weises conduct with political bias.”
Exactly right. Occam’s Razor. Which was probably somebody else’s razor, maybe even Aristotle’s. According to wiki. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
Another nuance to political bias, is that there are usually competing interests in political parties. So, with James Comey, for example, I regarded his refusal to prosecute Hillary as political bias, evident by some of his other actions. That would be a bias either for Democrats, or against Republicans – on a simple basis.
What tripped me up, was his going on about Hillary, and the way that he couched his refusal to prosecute (which was never his decision to make.) I think he threw Hillary under the bus, and swayed the election. How could that be so if he was biased in favor of the Democrats? Well, was he just enjoying the limelight and got caught up running his mouth? Or, was he biased for another faction of the Democrats, which while not wishing to taint the party, did not want her being the President?
And with Hur – did he mention Biden’s cognitive problems because he needed an excuse not to prosecute, or was he throwing that tidbit in because he was “working” for a competing Democrat Party interest, who wants Biden off the ticket? Or, was he just being honest?
I don’t know.
Since you wish to rant about spelling – it is “breaking news” not “braking news”.
Read the books by Bernie Goldberg about his time working for CBS. Goldberg was a good liberal until he woke up and his books show how biased CBS has been for decades.
In a race to the bottom we have NBC and CBS fighting like maniacs to be the worst. I’ve thought that NBC won the title (they do own MSNBC) but this action by CBS is really egregious.
I can not get worked up over this. Herridge was hired to broaden CBS’s appeal and to try to stave off further decline and possible bankruptcy.
CBS firing Herridge is a clear signal to shareholders and to consumers that CBS is totally int he tank for the left.
The consequences will be paid for by the fall of their stock and the failure to attract enough viewers to pay the bills.
I would note for all the attacks on Fox – nearly all fox pannels include atleast on democrat. And those democrats are given the free reign to express their views. I personally would prefer to see a few more democrats at Fox – though they have a large number of contributors and guests – such as Turley and Derschowitz.
The way to get to the truth is to let those who hold values you do not like make their best arguments.
“The way to get to the truth is to let those who hold values you do not like make their best arguments.”
Nice, John Say
Just a paraphrase of
“He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion… Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them…he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.”
― John Stuart Mill, On Liberty
“When my man Wade tells me it’s a G, I tell him it’s a G-String !”
fani then twerks her fanny for the continuing courtship consummations
“On September 11, 2021, Wade arrived at the condo address at approximately 10:45 PM. He left the address at 3:28 AM and arrived at his Marietta residence at 4:05 AM. He then texted DA Willis at 4:20 AM. ” (Trump attorney FIOA Wade cellphone data)
https://technofog.substack.com/p/new-cell-phone-records-prove-da-willis?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
“I don’t do my friends like that, I do Wade!”
fani’s fanny fandom fabulous fantasies
“cash me outside”
fani goes for a dr phil famemaker
Turley is just flat-out shameless for trying, once again, to create some sort of conspiracy theory involving mainstream media: “The company is suggesting that the privilege of confidentiality (and the material) rest ultimately with CBS. As a threshold matter, that cannot be the case with regard to files that were generated during Herridge’s long stint with Fox News. Yet CBS appears to be retaining those files, too.” First of all, this reporter worked for CBS–did their contract spell out to whom notes, files, etc belonged? If so, that’s controlling, and would not be unusual because she is an employee of the network, not an independent contributor. Turley tries to make the case that it is “presupposed” that files are not the property of CBS. Claiming something is “presupposed” won’t get you far in a court of law, something Turley knows all too well. Secondly, Turley really doesn’t even know whether the materials retained by the employer were “generated” when she worked for Fox. Does that lack of a controlling fact stop Turley from railing against CBS, implying that the reporter was “fired” because she had dirt on Joe Biden, which is really what he’s trying to claim without anything resembling proof? Nope. One of his assignments is to criticize mainstream media, espcially if in doing so he supports his employer, Faux News. Turley also tries (but fails) to make the case that somehow this reporter was working on something detrimental to Joe Biden and that his administration was “pushing back”. Again, where’s the proof? Turley, per instructions from his employer, is paid to throw dirt on Biden. Most shocking of al is that the reporter did not comment on any of the crap Turley is trying to sell, so all of today’s blather is second-hand hearsay calculated to mislead the disciples, people Turley knows will believe any BS, just like the Big Lie.
I’ve been on this blog for about two years. I have never come across a commenter more filled with hateful, ugly, tunnel-visioned, repetitive commentary (and critical of the blog host) than you. Why are you here everyday? What do you seek to gain?
Gigi must be one of those paid operatives that we have read about from Twitter and Facebook. Or else she is just another nut.
PS. Why is heck do you read her garbage? I haven’t read her insanity since she was Natacha.
(I read the first sentence of almost everyone. I look at her first sentence, then skim down to the bottom and move on.) (did you see my comment yesterday to you and S.Meyer, FLoyd, about the old Robbie Benson/Rod Steiger movie, The Chosen?)
I did not see your comment. Sorry I will look up The Chosen.
Lin, I did see the comment and I even replied to it. Thanks a lot!
I think she has a secret crush on Professor Turley and she’s just mad because he never returns her calls.
Lin, some people do not think even if they have the capacity. Natasha is one of those. She responds reflexively. The stimulus heads to the brain, but upon reaching the brainstem, it reflexively responds untouched by human cerebral activity.
S. Meyer,
Thank you for the laugh.
I generally just scroll past, but on the occasions that Lin or John Say do their oh, so epic take downs of them, I have to go back and read to understand the context.
Natasha reads more like some hyper-emotional angst ridden high school teenager who thinks using multiple emojis the use of the word “pig” is really giving it to them!
Not really.
When I think of Natasha, I think of this woman.
I found this last night. I am not sure what it is. LibsofTikTok posted it:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1760770630528762254
Floyd, they are nuts and look it. I linked further down: https://x.com/blanc31080/status/1759818146024730889?s=20 People can look and act like animals.
FWIW, I found the book that I was talking about yesterday, with the writings of the Western World. Of course, I had the title all wrong. It is Readings in Western Civilization, by Knoles and Snyder. I ordered me a copy, particularly because there was something in it from someone, maybe Julius Caesar? It was about Germanic women, and the “Come back victorious or come back on your shield” thing. If I have the right book. I will know in a few days.
Yes, Lin, maybe you are right–how dare I point out that the fired reporter about whom Turley is trying to create the illlusion was fired to shut her up because she supposedly had dirt on Joe Biden doesn’t have anything resembling evidence or even a statement from the reporter herself supporting the innuendoes Turley’s trying to create? How dare I point out that Turley is a paid mouthpiece for a media outlet that got fined several million dollars for lying about voting equipment being manipulated to benefit Joe Biden? How dare I point out that Turley criticizes Judge Engoron’s ruling as “excessive” without citing any portion thereof that is not supported by admissible evidence, or for complaining about NY law requiring posting of cash or a bond to cover the judgment when there is a money judgment. Turley knows that NY law allows a cause of action for material misrepresentations on financial statement even when a loan procured by fraud did not default–damages are assessed based on the benefits gotten from the lies and misrepresentations–so why does he repeat the alt-right media theme that the judgment against Trump, which is well-supported by evidence, is outrageous or unfair because the lenders didn’t lose any money? The point is Trump COULD HAVE defaulted–because he has done so before–6 business bankruptcies. Who do I think I am to point out these facts? Turley’s writing, in which he ASSUMES, without discussing the actual evidence, that the judgment award is UNFAIR or OUTRAGEOUS, is abusive of his status as a law professor. He knows NY law, and he also knows how gullible Trump supporters are. A law professor who rails against a money judgment as being unfair or excessive, without pointing out any facts or flaws in the evidence, and when applicable law allows for an award even when there is no default, is intellectually dishonest.
I am an patriotic American attorney who is thoroughly sick and tired of paid pundits selling their credentials to pump up talking points by alt-right media that promotes the candidacy of a twice-impeached pathological liar who is beholden to a Russian dictator–a proven racist, misogynist, and utter failure as president who just can’t stop lying. He is counting on the election to free him from his federal criminal prosecutions–all due to his own misconduct. He pumps his supporters for money to pay for his attorney fees and fines by playing the victim, and Turley is helping in this effort, which is immoral because he knows that Trump supporters have been lied to and are gullible. There’s nothing “hateful, ugly (or) tunnel visioned” about pointing out the fallacies of Turley’s purchased commentary, just like today’s post that is lean on facts and heavy on innuendo, unsubstantiated facts or evidence, lacking even any statement or evidence directly from the reporter herself. That, too, is intellectually dishonest and beneath a law professor. Maybe I expect too much–I cannot think of any law professor of mine who would stoop to do what Turley does.
You said, “I cannot think of any law professor of mine who would stoop to do what Turley does.”
I agree! All the other law Professors are busy kowtowing to the Democrats and lying for them – Tribe, Andy Weiss, Elias, Cheminsky etc. Thank the Lord for Turley!
You’re such a hack it must be painful for you.
SAG-AFTRA, the union which represents CBS staffers, condemned the network for seizing Herridge’s notes and research from her office.
“This action is deeply concerning concerning to the union because it sets a dangerous precedent for all media professionals and threatens the very foundation of the First Amendment,” the union said in a statement to The Post.
Now the demoncrats don’t ever support Unions, and call them liars, because ignorance and lies are queen for demoncrats.
Shame on you.
Shakdi: WHAT DOES HER EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT SAY ABOUT OWNERSHIP THE FILES? Answer that one, if you can. If you can’t then STFU.
OBVIOUSLY it is in her favor.
CBS has said “they are packing up the files and have swore they won’t be reading them”.
So CBS pulled an illegal jerk move.
I mean try to keep up.
Read a few articles that people have linked.
Shakdi: go ahead–post the contract. What? You don’t have the contract? Without the contract, nothing is “obvious”. I never click on links to pro-Trump media, because it is not trustworthy, just like today’s Turley post.
Gigi, that’s another stupid comment. If you ” never click on links to pro-Trump media, because it is not trustworthy”, how would you know?
Moron!
Aparently you can not read – Turley EXPLICITLY noted that CBS confiscated Herridge material from her time at Fox.
There is not contract in the world that can make the property of either Fox or Herridge into the property of CBS.
Turley doed not provide enough details – and you do not know them to evaluate beyond the FACT that as CBS confiscated some propertty that is clearly not theirs, that they may well have violated their contract.
Personally, the message I read from Turley’s post is “CBS Screwed themselves” – the legal parts will get sorted out by the courts.
You can pretend that CBS does not look bad. But even that does not matter much.
Hiring Herridge was an effort – and a pretty wise one to keep bankruptcy at bay.
Firing Herridge is an act of self harm by CBS.
Fights overcontracts etc are tangents.
A decade ago I was a founder in a small startup that was bought by a large global company in order to get our technology.
That company was #3 in the world, but it was steadily losing ground to two larger company’s in Taiwan and South Korea.
They are facing bankruptcy unless something changes – not immediate, but within the next decade.
Over the next 5 years the giant company that bought us, slowly dismissed one by one all the people from the startup it bought.
Eventually firing the founder and letting him leave with the technology that they Bought us out to get.
The culture between the startup and the huge corporation was different. Further we were bought specifically because the CEO of the huge company understood that without some radical new approach that was NOT coming from the inside, that they were on the slow road to failure.
But in the end DESPITE knowing exactly why they bought us, they slowly killed us because they did not want to make the changes needed to survive.
CBS has done the same with Herridge.
Between CBS, CNN and MSNBC there is only enough room in the market for One successful left wing nut media outlet.
Having 3 means they all slowly fail. CBS made a laudable effort to try to broaden its market beyond the lunatic left.
That was a very good choice, But not one their corporate culture could manage.
Herridge will do fine. CBS remains in trouble.
“because they did not want to make the changes needed to survive.”
That happens a lot, with companies and countries. See Sears, see Kodak, etc.
John Say: YOU are the one with reading comprehension problems: Turley said: “Yet CBS appears to be retaining those files, too.” “APPPEARS TO BE “does not equal: DID. The reporter herself does NOT claim that CBS took her Fox files, so why would Turley imply that they had, other than to create an illlusion that CBS is trying to cover up a scandal or improperly snoop into confidential sources the reporter got from Fox? Turley doesn’t know, but you believe he said they retained the files. You prove my point about gullibility.
Turley did more than “presuppose, he correctly pointed out that the first amendment does not work if a reporters sources and notes belong to the company that it works for.
You are correct this ultimately will be a matter of contract.
Herridge is NOT some off the street hire. It is near certaint hat she has a thoroughly negotiated contract that contains provisions for exactly this.
Assembly line workers have take it or leave it generic employement contracts. Well paid reporters have sylable by sylable negotiate contracts.
We do not know – because we have not seen the contract, but it is unlikely Herridge ceded ownership of her work.
You essentially cite generic law on this – but that law is ALWAYS subordinate to contracts.
Further you are not correct on the law.
As a rule 9-5 employees do not own their work product – whether it is creative or not.
At the opposite end of the spectrum – independant consultants OWN their work product – those who hire them are buying a by default unlimited right to use. In the middle – Herridge is closer to an independent consultant – things are cloudier. But I would bet that Herridge owns her own work.
You said: ” Turley EXPLICITLY noted that CBS confiscated Herridge material from her time at Fox.” NO. Turley did NOT “explicitly” say any such thing, and Turley knows that people like you, who believe Trump’s lies, will believe that he DID say this–which is why he is getting paid for. THAT’s my point. And, it’s wrong. Also wrong is the inflammatory verbiage Turley uses like “seizes” when referring to her files–which implies force or some sort of wrongful confiscation. The fact is that she left CBS’s employment. She has said nothing about this fact. Beyond that, we really don’t know anything else, but to try to stretch that fact into some sort of cover-up of dirt on Joe Biden or wrongful confiscation of documents belonging to the reporter from
her time at Fox, much less implicating the First Amendment, is a stretch at minimum, or is intellectually dishonest.
The demoncrats will throw her in the biden gulag with Assange soon
Ninety percent leftist press has an ounce of integrity?
Dream on.
The false words and actions of ‘progressives’ is a path of weakening the people which, if successful, will result in the fundamental transformation of our constitutional republic.
𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐬𝐢 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐥𝐬 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐇𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐞𝐞 𝐓𝐨 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐥 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐃𝐨
It’s tempting to look at Big Tech, corporate media, and federal agencies as distinct industries and entities with their own goals and organizational structures, but that’s not the right way to analyze them in 2024. In reality, they are just different systems within the same organism, similar to how eyes, ears, and legs are all part of a human body. They have different roles and functions, but all are subordinate to the same overarching goal: total power.
By: Sean Davis ~ February 23, 2024
https://thefederalist.com/2024/02/23/the-american-stasi-controls-what-you-hear-and-see-to-control-what-you-think-and-do/
𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭: 𝐂𝐁𝐒 𝐍𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐒𝐞𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐝 𝐅𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐬, 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐮𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐑𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐅𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐉𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐂𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐇𝐞𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐝𝐠𝐞
By: Debra Heine ~ February 22, 2024
https://amgreatness.com/2024/02/22/report-cbs-news-seized-files-computers-and-records-of-fired-journalist-catherine-herridge/
Jonathan: Speaking of “bad times at black rock” Judge Engoron just denied DJT’s request to delay the enforcement of the $355 million judgement against him. That means the judgment is about to be entered and the 30-day clock will start running unless DJT is able to come up with nearly $500 million for an appeal. And it appears DJT is having a hard time finding a bond company to take him on as a client.
What is interesting is the letter (2/21) DJT’s attorney Cliff Robert sent to Judge Engoron requesting the delay. In the letter it states the addresses of the properties included in the judgment are “incorrect” because the entities now have FL addresses. In opposition to that move SC Andrew Amer pointed out the following: “The Court should reject Defendant’s attempt to change the business addresses of six entities…to Florida as the record establishes [the entities] are located at 725 5th Avenue in New York, the office building in which the executives who carry out the business activities of these entities…”
So what is this about? DJT is up to his same tricks. He is in panic mode. It’s a desperate last minute scam to avoid the judgment by moving his business addresses to FL. He is trying to do that so AG James can’t seize his assets. But AG James and Judge Engoron are on to DJT’s tricks to avoid accountability. That futile attempt will fail.
Now I know. Many of your loyal followers think Judge Engoron is “corrupt” and is out to get their leader. But you have to ask this Q. If you were the judge would you be sympathetic to a defendant who has personally and viciously attacked you, your wife, your son and your law clerk?
He did it (Judge Engoron) because he was on the way out of the door (retirement) anyway, and got assigned the Case which handed him a golden-parachute (bonus) by the Establishment for services rendered. He’ll be off the Bench by the end of the Year (retired).
There never was any case. Nipple exhibitionist perv declared Trump guilty, then demanded half a billion.
When I come and take your residence and kick you out on the street the Q you have to ask is “Did you offend me with your vicious personal attacks, because you never got even your water bottle from the residence.”
Don’t take a crap in the streets.
What you call tricks is called THE LAW.
Musk just had a massive stupid judgement against him in Delaware – what has historically been the most business savy state int he country.
Musk is changing the state that his businesses are incorporated in – and there is nothing Delaware can do about that.
Trump was free to move his corporations where ever he wishes. He can not move the physical buildings, but he absolutely can move their legal addresses. I would further note that is not likely something that happened since the Judgement. I may have happened before the case, it may have happened during the case, even if it happened After the case it still legal up until the judgement takes effect.
I would further note that the part of the judgement denying Trump and family members control of the business is unconstitutional and inoperative. Trump and his family will remain the major and probably the SOLE shareholders of the companies.
Engron can pretend they can not reappoint themselves as the management of the company, but they absolutely retain the right to control the company.
One of the simplest things that Trump can do is form a new corporation – say in Florida. Have that corporation offer to buy all the shares of the NY corporation – The share holders in FL – Trump and his family can decide what they will offer. The Shareholders in NY -= Trump and his family, can decide what they will accept. Trump FL couple legally buy Trump NY for $1, that would legally and entirely void the efforts of Engron to take control of the businesses. Further it could be done in a way such as to Bankrupt Trump NY and leave Engron with no way to collect on his judgement.
I do not think we will see anything like that – though without any doubt Trump is going to move his legal business out of NY.
Whether he sells his properties their or not is separate.
There is also near zero chance of Engron’s decision being upheld.
That should be obvious to even dingbats such as yourself.
Aside from the myriads of legal problems – Engron ignored appellate court decisons that already reduced the scope of this case.
The decision has shocked the conscience of people and of businesses.
Hoschul is Rushing to make it clear to NY businesses that this is a one off decision that only applies to Trump – stupidly beleiving that makes anything better.
As Kevin OLeary from Shark tank noted – there is nothing Trump did that every single bussiness that borrows money does not do every single day.
There is an entire industry – the “due Dilligence” field – which is a sub division of BANKING – because the responsibility for verifying the assets securing a loan rests solely with the lender.
I KNOW THIS, because one of the businesses that I own is a small due diligence firm. To my knowledge I have never done a Trump property,
Though I did do buildings adjacent to several Trump properties.
And I have done buildings more valuable than many trump Properties.
My business is hired by BANKS. – Why Because 2 millenia of tradition, and several decades of law make due dilligence on loans the SOLE responsibility of the BANKS.
James has used a Consumer statute – which if it applied to banks at all would only involve Fraud by the bank to customers.
This law does not apply where there are no ordinary consumers.
This is also an idiotic attempt to warp the law. While even consume fraud statutes are stupid, wrong and unconstitutional – we have chosen to allow them in the mistaken beleive that consumers are naive and powerless – ask Budlight and Disney if that is true.
The US constitution forbids government from interfering in private contracts – that is litterally in the constitution.
I expect the courts will overturn this quickly.
I wish they would do so because they understood the decision was lawless and unconstitutional.
But they will do so to stem the damage this decision is doing to New York.
New York ALREADY has serious problems with large numbers of middle class through uber wealthy leaving. It has problems with businesses leaving.
Trump noted that he has already paid huindreds of millions in taxes to NYC for his businesses.
Some of that is property taxes, I would note that if Engron was correct that Trump valued his properties – that means he overpaid his taxes.
Regardless, all or those taxes – Except the property taxes would go elsewhere If Trump moves his official business elsewhere.
Corporate taxes are paid int he state where the business is incorporated.
Not only are you going to see Trump leave NY, but myriads of other businesses.
There is no problem with a DE or FL corp owning property in NYC, taxes on the profits of that Corp would be paid where the business is incorprated. Further businesses that move where they are incorporated remove themselves fromt he jurisdiction of idiots like Engron.
The Reason Hoschul RUSHED to undermine Engron’s decision is to stop capital flight from NY.
One of Many reasons that NY courts will likely reverse this quickly is to stop capital flight.
“Trump and his family, can decide what they will accept. Trump FL couple legally buy Trump NY for $1, that would legally and entirely void the efforts of Engron to take control of the businesses.
Further it could be done in a way such as to Bankrupt Trump NY and leave Engron with no way to collect on his judgement.”
John, are you stretching what can be done too far? IMO, the collection of judgment by Engoron would not significantly change, provided he could collect the decision in the first place. Maybe you can expand what you are thinking.
Trump has already filed a notice of appeal. It is certain that before the 30 days expires Trump will have filed an actual appeal.
The moment that appeal is docketed Judge Engron loses control fo this case ENTIRELY.
This is why the DC case against Trump is stalled right now. Only one court can have jurisdiction over a case at a time.
AG James can not seize his assets – that would be unconstitutional.
She can put leins against his properties, that is about the most she can do.
Governments do this all the time.
The real sick Game here is to try to thwart Trump from being able to appeal.
Normally the losing party in a case must post a bond securing the judgement in order to be able to appeal.
As Turley has noted the requirement that Trump post a bond for a huge award that he will with near certainty overturn on appeal is an improper punishment in and of itself.
This BTW is why Alex Jones and Guiliani declared bankruptcy shorty after the judgements against them.
They could not possibly post the bond required to appeal, by filing for bankrupcy, they regain their right to appeal.
Trump is worth sufficient that he likely can not regain the right to appeal by filing for bankruptcy.
Separately – in what world do you think it would be a good idea for NY to “seize Trump Assets” ?
Ignoring the slowly building backlash in the business and other communities against this.
The idiot Engron has appointed to run things lost 2.5M before the appealte court foreclosed her actions.
Do you honestly think that Engron, James or some judge he appointed can successfully run a multibillion collar company ?
There are only about 1000 Billionaires in the US.
I know that you are idiot enough to think that the highly successful are merely lucky, but that is idiocy.
It is not going to be just Trump that is harmed as you fail at this idiocy.
I met Bill Gates decades ago. I have talked with him. I am smarter than he is. I am more of a polymath than he is.
I have been successful in my life and have no regrets, but I am NOT Bill Gates and even though he is wrong about many things I am right about,
I am not capable of building 80B in Wealth and he clearly is. There are many many many factors that go into extraordinary success. The top 1% of the country DO NOT have the attributes for success that the top .0001% do. No do the top 10% of the country for the most part have what it takes to be in the top 1%.
I know you think this is easy – but it is not. My IQ is likely higher than that of Trump or Gates. Intelligence alone is NOT enough to be them.
The left rants about the pay or CEO’s Do you think that Kodak shareholdres wish they would have paid a few hundred million more for a better CEO to avoid going bankrupt ?
Trump’s NY Businesses hire thousands of people – when the idiots you put in charge lose many of their jobs – are you going to take the blame you deserve.
There are several boycotts and business reactions to this – we will have to see how they play out.
There is a truckers strike in the works targeting NYC. If that is 10% as successful as the Budlight boycott, NYC will lose billions every month.
Courts are not supposed to be effected by the consequences of their decisions – only following the actual law.
And if you beleive that I have swampland in FL to sell you.
Outside of having significant real property in New York City or State, is there any reason for a major business tycoon-type to be there? I mean, if you own a Broadway dance troupe, maybe. But unless you provided support services for Goldman Sachs or something, why not opt for Florida or Texas like Kevin O’Leary? Just a 10% differential on state income taxes could be tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. It seems to me like, if you do not have to be there, then why stay? I know there is culture, and opera, and Broadway, and museums, but you have to wade through planked out addicts and crazy people to get to them. It seems like there are already a trickle of people leaving, and how does this silly farce not accelerate it.
“why stay? I know there is culture, and opera, and Broadway, and museums”
You got it Floyd. Along with those things are hotels and private lodging. For many, not fabulously wealthy, the taxes saved can pay for those things.
Engoron is not corrupt because he is out to get Trump – though any judge who is out to get anyone is by definition corrupt.
Engoron is corrupt because he is elevating his personal biases above the letter of the law.
I do not think Engoron is corrupt, he is.
Why is it that all your arguments are emotional ?
If you are a judge and you are unable to stick to the law regardless of the rhetoric of lawyers, defendants, etc – then you MUST recuse yourself.
Trump is not entitled to Engoron’s sympathy – but that is NOT what you are actually talking about.
What you are arguing is that Engoron is entitled to respond to Trumps criticism by going outside the law.
I would further suggest that you consider what is occuring in the GA case. Whether you like it or not, evidence of misconduct and/or bias on the part of the judge or prosecutor including biases driven by paramours, or families is fair game.
You are constantly attacking Justice Thomas for the legal actions of his wife.
Of course there is a fundimental difference between Thomas and Engoron.
Thomas is an appealat corut judge in the highest court in the land.
He does not decide FACTS, he decides issues of law and constitution. These are not “personal”. Defendants do not appear before the supreme court, and the cases are not about personality.
Yet you think bitter personal attacks on Thomas and his family are OK, But Engoron is magically protected.
I’m surprised that Harridge would keep her files in the CBS office, where they could be accessed by management and snoopy colleagues. If she lives in NYC, I understand that most people have tiny apartments, not houses, so space may have been an issue, but with her (presumed) income, she could have bought a second residence in a safe, small community far away from NYC, where her files and computers would be safe from prying eyes and confiscation. And title it to a Delaware corporation, so nobody would know where it is. Oh well….too late now.
Straight up Stasi. This is insane, and if you still vote dem, what in the name of Zeus is wrong with you? This. Is. A. Regime. And they do not care about your life or your well-being. We actually have the opportunity to avert a 1930s level global crisis. But that will require blue voters to do something different, and I just don’t know if they are capable of escaping the cages of their thinking. Really. EVERYTHING, including your own personal comfort, are on the line. You will not be insular forever in the face of this. Get out of the mental prison and read the bold-lettered writing on the wall. Insanity.
Several years ago, I wrote to Ms. Herridge about some small bits of technology that I had knew about. I never expected a reply. After all, who am I? Just a concerned citizen. But lo and behold, I got a response which started a short correspondence about my information. She was genuinely interested and it’s crazy that such a fine investigative reporter should be fired in this manner. You can’t tell me with a straight face that a billion dollar communications company couldn’t find the money to pay her instead of some of the sycophantic dead wood they have there, starting with Acosta.
I guess its possible that my correspondence wound up in the hands of some politicized Anti-Trump supporter or the FBI. Who knows.?
Come and get me, you MFs. I’m 83 with pancreatic cancer. The thought of life imprisonment doesn’t scare me at all.
OT: A devastating filing has been made in the Willis/Wade case. An analysis of telephone records from Jan 1 to Nov 30 2021 shows 2000 calls and 12,000 texts between Willis and Wade, mainly at night. Geolocation data shows him visiting her 35 times, at least twice (Sept and Nov) late at night departing at 3 and 4 am. This strongly suggests they both lied in affidavits and in testimony in court. Technofog’s substack has the story and a link to the filing.
OMG! I never heard of TechnoFog. Thank you so much! When you said “devastating”, you were under-stating it. This was fatal! I like this one:
Geolocation data indicates Wade was at DA Willis’s condo “at least 35 occasions”. The data revealed he was “stationary” at the condo “and not in transit.”
I bet that rascal was anything but stationary! I bet he was all over that bed! LOL!
https://technofog.substack.com/p/new-cell-phone-records-prove-da-willis?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
Trump’s lawyer actually telegraphed this during the hearing when he asked Wade how he would respond if geolocation data showed him to have been repeatedly in the area of Willis’ condo in 2021. He stammered out some unpersuasive response.
Your wonderful post needs music!