Drs. Ragda Izar and Afaf Moustafa caused a controversy recently at UCLA medical school after publicly rationalizing the self-immolation in front of Israel’s embassy of airman Aaron Bushnell in February to protest Israeli policies. Dr. Izar is listed as part of the UCLA staff. It was, according to one of the doctors, a “revolutionary suicide.” We recently discussed a mandatory lecture at the UCLA medical school of one of the university’s “activists-in-residence” replete with anti-Semitic postings and racist rhetoric.
The professors made their comments as part of a panel on “Depathologizing Resistance” as reported previously by The Washington Free Beacon.
Dr. Izar stated that Bushnell “carried a lot of distress…but does that mean that the actions he engaged in are any less valid?” She suggested that it is “normal to be distressed when you’re seeing this level of carnage [in Gaza].”
Dr. Moustafa is quoted as saying “Psychiatry pathologizes non-pathological … reactions to a pathological environment or pathological society. It’s considered illness to choose to die in protest of the violence of war but perfectly sane to choose to die in service of the violence of war.”
Neither doctor ever evaluated or examined Bushnell. At the end of the discussion, Dr. Izar acknowledged that psychiatrists should not comment on people they have not evaluated.
There have been a few self-immolations in history as a form of protest, particularly the famous case of Thich Quang Duc who burned himself alive to protest the Vietnam War in 1963.
However, as a lay person, I would venture to say that it is not “normal” or “valid” to set yourself on fire in a protest. If self-immolation is the new normal, this could make the “publish or perish” culture of the faculty a bit more precarious at UCLA.
Between racist lectures from “activists-in-residence” and self-immolation rationalizations, it is not clear when UCLA medical students hunker down on such tangential matters like the central nervous system.
The widespread canard that Thich Quang Duc was protesting the Vietnam war has virtually displaced the truth: he was protesting the persecution of Buddhists by the Catholic Diem regime.
I would suggest you listen to Glenn Greenwald’s podcast episode on this incident- he presents much more information that makes your conclusions premature here.
Jonathan: There was also something very “distressing” about the comment from John Say on this blog. He states at the end of his comment: “There is a very large possibility that the jury does not make it through the trial. The Judges (sic) refusal to make public the names of the jurors means that they received very limited vetting by the lawyers involved. But that will not hold up for long. The public will find out who these jurors are–and when it does their backgrounds will be crowdsourced” (4/20@4:17am).
First, there is a reason Justice Merchan made the jury anonymous. To prevent DJT from attacking and intimidating any juror to try to influence his/her decision. No criminal defendant is allowed to do that. DJT has already attacked witnesses–like Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels. Merchan has imposed a gag order to prevent DJT from doing that.
And all jurors were properly “vetted”. All prospective jurors were asked to fill out the 42 juror questionaire to eliminate any juror with a bias. In addition, DJT’s lawyers had 10 preemptory and unlimited challenges for cause. The entire 12 juror panel and the 6 alternates were accepted by DJT’s lawyers. It’s nonsensical to complain the jury was not properly “vetted”. DJT could have been more active in selecting the jury–but he kept falling asleep. DJT’s supporters, like John Say, can hardly complain about how the jurors were selected.
In every criminal case the defendant is entitled to a jury of his peers. That has been embedded in our criminal justice system since the Founding Fathers wrote our Constitution. They didn’t want a system of kangaroo courts. They wanted a system in which a criminal defendant is presumed innocent and only a jury of ordinary citizens can find otherwise. And they didn’t want a system in which criminal defendants could attack and intimidate jurors to try to influence their verdicts.
But Say seems to thinks it’s perfectly acceptable to identify jurors and subject them to attacks and intimidation. Why? Because he thinks DJT has rights no other criminal defendant is entitled to in our criminal justice system. Such claims of exceptionalism have no part under our system of justice. Say’s comment is both contrary to the law but dangerous!
Dennis
There’s always room for one more manic dolt at the BBQ. I prefer extra crispy.
Jonathan: It looks like there be two things going on simultaneously on Monday. First, opening statements will probably start in Justice Merchan’s case after jury selection was completed this week. Second, at the same time Judge Engoron will hold a hearing at 10:00am re AG James’s challenge to the $175 million bond posted by Don Hankey’s KSIC. James is asking Judge Engoron to rule the bond is defective because KSIC is not licensed in NY to be a surety and it’s reserves of only $138 million are not adequate to cover the bond amount. I expect Judge Engoron to agree with James and, perhaps, give DJT about another week to procure another sufficient bond. If he doesn’t expect James to start proceedings to enforce the judgment.
Then, there appears to be a lot of misunderstanding by some on this blog about Justice Merchan’s gag order. John Say, a non-lawyer who often gets the law wrong, claims the gag order “violates Trump’s right of free speech” (4/20@4:17am). John needs to get some sleep–probably explains all his nonsense in the middle of the night! But John has two supporters. You and Alan Dershowitz who also declared on “X”: “The gag order is unconstitutional. You cannot prevent a defendant from attacking the witnesses, from attacking the judge’s daughter…”.
Your claims and those of John Say and Dershowitz will be news to the DC Court of Appeals. DJT had appealed Judge Chutkan’s gag. On Dec. 8 of last year the DC Court upheld Judge Chutkan’s gag order saying DJT could not attack attack witnesses, court staff or family members of counsel, the judge or court staff. Justice Merchan patterned his gag order specifically on the ruling by the DC Court. DJT also appealed Justice Merchan’s gag order but the NY First Judicial Department rejected the appeal.
So every court that has considered the gag orders has found them constitutional. It looks like lawyers and non-lawyers alike don’t seem to understand the law!
WTF does this have to do with the Middle East?
EnMoron does not have jurisdiction over the case – it has been appealed – he is DONE.
Whatever EnMoron does it is likely Trump will ignore – as will the appeals courts – unless james tries to act on it – and then the appeallate courts will Biden slap EnMoron.
As a separate matter – the nonsense James is arguing is irrelevant. There is no requirement that a appeals bond come from a licensed Surety in NY – that is the application of the wrong law to the wrong case. Further KSIC is backed by BILLIONS, as is Trump
I do expect that EnMoron will do something stupid – as he has at every step of this case.
He held a trial on a law that is tried in a completely different set of Courts in NY, He granted himself jurisdiction he does not have.
Over a case using a consumer protection law that must be tried in a diffferent court system that the NY supreme court has decided does not require a jury trial – because a violation of the law CVAN NOT result in more than deminimus penalties – otherwise the 8th amendment and the common law requirement of jury trials and the NY constitutional requirement for jury trials would apply.
And that is ignorin the fact that as a matter of law THERE IS NO FRAUD.
All you have is James engaged in an attempt to violate about half a dozen of Trump’s constitutional rights with the aide of EnMoron.
You seem to be ignoring that the court already issued a TRO enjoinging James/EnMoron from enforcing this jusgement – that is SEPARATELY from reducing the bond amount.
TRO’s are granted when as a matter of law the moving party is likely to prevail, and the harm caused by waiting until that occurs is significant.
Whiel the TRO is NOT a final order. It is binding.
BTW it is going to come up in the Merchan case – as Coangello is trying to get in EnMoron’s oppinion from that case.
But he can not – the oppinion is NOT final until the appealks courts are done, and it is NOT inforce – because the appeals courts haven temporarily enjoined it.
That means they have already concluded EnMoron is likely Wrong.
My “claims” are not claims – they are the actual law as decided by the US Supreme court, and Federal Law and as applied to the states via the 14th amendment.
They oldest case on this dates back to 1838 – that is almost 200 years ago.
Yes, Several apeals courts have upheld these gag orders. That does not alter the fact that the apeals courts are wrong.
The Colorado Supreme court upheld the removal of Trump from the CO ballot – and the U supreme court rejected that 9-0.
the DC court of apeals found that Trump had no immunity as president. 4 members of the Supreme court thought it was likely that the DC court of appeals was wrong and SCOTUS will be hearing that case I beleive this week also.
DC courts also beleive that a law governing the destruction of documents applied to political protests – 4 justices of the supreme court thought that was wrong – and after oral arguments the fundimental question is whether the decision will be 5-4, 6-3 or 9-0.
I am betting on a 9-0 ruling but on very narrow grounds so that they can get all 9 justices on board.
We will hear the presidential immunity arguments shortly. While I highly doubt Trump is going to get a blanket Win.
At the same time this is just about ZERO chance the court adopts the DC appeals courts “balancing test” decision.
Which BTW is the exact same idiocy that has been used to uphold these Gag orders.
The gag orders issue is perfectly clear.
WITHIN the courtroom – the judge has the authority to maintain order – this is the same as the requirement that people are orderly when they attend a speech at a campus.
Your first amendment rights do NOT mean that you can shout down the legitimate speaker at an event or disrupt a court proceding INSIDE the courtroom.
Outside the doors of the courtroom the Judge has no authority. Especially none to limit the speach of the defendant.
Arguably he has SOME authority over the lawyers int he case – and especially the prosecutor – they are officers of the couirt, and the prosecutor is an agent of the government and has no free speech rights while acting as an agent of the governemnt.
The only allowable limits on a criminal defendant are that they can not commit a crime. And if they do – even that is NOT in the jurisdiction of the court. The prosecutor can file additional charges.
I would note it should be OBVIOUS that you are wrong.
First there is not a single Gag order that applies to the Judge – or the prosecutor – even enMoron and Merchan and chutckan KNOW that Trump can “attack” the prosecutor or the judge.
But next – if the Witnesses, and court staff and prosecutors staff have the first amendment right to free speech – so does the defendant.
Frankly – which you do not seem to grasp the Defendants right to free speech is GREATER than court staff, prosecutors, staff, their families, witnesses etc.
Next, while YOU& (and often the judges) use loaded words – like Attack or Threaten – the FACT is that the speach you are sanctioning Trump for is TRUE. And in MOST cases it is not Trump saying this, it is Trump retweeting what someone else is saying.
This is no different from Trump standing outside the courthouse with documents reflecting the legal oppinion of dozens of legal experts tht this case is garbage.
Trump was gagged for reposting a NY Post article that exposed Judge Merchan’s conflict of interests, because of his adult daughters involvement in prosecuting Trump.
You are making the incredibly stupid and unconstitutional argument that you can silence Trump for speaking the Truth – while allowing others to lie in public
You are litterally arguing that the famous Shepard case was WRONGLY decided by the supreme court.
The court of the Shepard case – and all of the very few cases that allow courts SOME ability to gag people is that the court must protect the DEFENDANT from false bad publicity. There is no a single case in which SCOTUS has found that a court can gag a defendant.
Dennis – all your nonsense does is prove that this is all unconstitutional political theater – election interferance.
The jury has been selcted – jeophardy either applies or will very shortly.
As of yet, Trump has not appealed the Merchan Gag order – or some other decisions of Merchan’s.
My guess is that is calculated. As of now a successful appeal on the gag order as an example ENDS the case entirely.
Bragg Merchan can no longer get a redo, without the Gag order, when the courts decide the gag order is unconstitutional.
If the courts find Merchan should have recused himself – this is over. Bragg can not retry with an unconflicted judge.
There is a reason that we follow the rule of law, that we follow the constitution, that we provide defendants due process.
That is because when we do not – WE ARE DONE. If you do things right – and you get a conviction – the convictions stands.
If you do not – the case is over.
You keep saying “but this politically biased nut job left wing court has agreed”.
That is a pathetic argument.
I can violate the rights of others – because I can get the worst judges in the country to agree ?
Trump takes every oportunity he can to say “I am fighting for you, because if they can do this to me, they can do this to you”
And idiots like EnMoron and Kaplan and Chutckan and Merchan and James and Bragg and Smith go out of their way to prove that is true.
If someone comes forward and claims you diddled them in bergdorfs 35 years ago – can you prove you did not ?
Right now it is pro-life protestors at abortion clinics that are getting swatted for free speech.
But the law applies both ways – Do you want a Trump DOJ sending SWAT teams to pro-choice protestors homes ?
Supreme court justices have had protests – sometimes violent at their homes. In front of the court – sometimes inside the court.
Do you honestly think they are going to support jailing J6 defendants for 2 decades when every session someone violates the same law and at worst gets a slap on the wrist.
You have rpeatedly attacked Clarence Thomas bitterly and personally – all the conservatve justices are attacked all the time, many of the justice on the left are attacked.
Has the supreme court EVER issued a gag order ?
You have spied on catholic churches, on parents trying to get decent education for their kids not political and sexual indoctrination.
You have arrested people for asking Schoolboards to do something about the rape of their daughters in school.
If Government can go after Trump for saying his home in MAL is worth more than you think it is, Why can’t they go after you ?
Every single person seeking to sell property wants the highest possible price. Every person looking to buy wants the lowest.
You are literally criminalizing the process of buying and selling.
YOUR government is incredibly dangerous to ordinary people.
You rant about legal issues – and you have been near uniformly right – about the way that biased left wing nut courts would rule.
While you have been near universally WRONG about the eventual results of all cases.
You are making so many mistakes you are destroying yourself and your party and your ideology.
John Say: What in the world are you talking about? You claim “Trump has not appealed the Merchan Gag order–or some other decisions of Merchan’s”. FACT CHECK: False. DJT has filed 11 appeals with the NY Appellate division including the gag order.
Just today DJT filed another emergency appeal under CPL 230.30 claiming he cannot get a fair trial. In the appeal DJT states: “A fair and impartial jury cannot be selected in New York County as evidenced by the extreme difficulty in procuring venire [jury panel] from the significant bias against President Trump that permeates the jury pool”
I expect this last ditch appeal will also be rejected. Why? (1) Timeliness. Such a claim should have been filed BEFORE the jury was sworn in; (2) Waiver. DJT’s lawyers agreed to the jury panel. They used their challenges to weed out jurors who might have a bias against DJT. There are actually at least two jurors who expressed some support for DJT.
DJT’s concept of a “fair trial” is where all the charges are either dismissed or the jury is composed of only those wearing MAGA hats. No criminal defendant is entitled to a jury of only those who support him. DJT is getting a jury that is “fair and impartial”. That’s all he is entitled to in this case!
Finally, you have to invent things to try to support your position. I never said “but this politically biased nut job left wing court has agreed” When you have to make up stuff you are, to use your words, “making so many mistakes you are destroying yourself and your party and your ideology”!
https://youtu.be/22hjv3VtEyE?si=8a1cLUyAi7ucmfrt
I don’t like the nightmare appearing to take hold here slowly and deliberately.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
“And, for thou wast a spirit too delicate/To act her earthy and abhorred commands…/she did confirm thee…into a cloven pine–”
So interesting that A Wrinkle in Time and this bit from The Tempest came to me. I feel we need to get away from IT.
Confine thee. Autocorrect preferred confirm. So autocratic of it.
Jonathan: Well, it looks like jury selection is almost complete in the case before Judge Merchan in Manhattan. Twelve jurors have been seated and only the alternate jurors remain to be picked. We could see the actual trial start as early as Monday.
And DJT continues to nod off during jury selection. Kind of boring for him but it shouldn’t be because the jury will hold DJT’s liberty in their hands. His lawyers are concerned about DJT continually falling asleep. So they prepared a book of “fables” for him to read to try to keep him awake. It consisted of a pile of press clippings and editorials fawning over DJT and defending him in the case.
Apparently, that did keep DJT awake for awhile. Because at a break in the proceedings DJT went outside to address the press. He held up the large pile of articles and said: “These are all stories over the last few days from legal experts. This is Wall Street Journal editorial. But all of these stories are from legal experts saying how this is not a case”–all written by what DJT claimed were credible sources.
Now among the articles specifically cited by DJT were those by Fox contributors Andrew McCarthy and Jonathan Turley. That’s right. DJT thinks you are a “legal expert” and a “credible source”. Coming from DJT, who indulges in wild conspiracy theories and whose sources are almost invariably unreliable, that’s an endorsement I wouldn’t want to gloat over.
CNN’s fact checker Daniel Dale pointed out that DJT’s speech outside the courtroom was “mostly uncheckable, subjective opinion”–about “corrupt” Judge Merchan and how the entire case is orchestrated by Joe Biden’s WH. The kind of subjective opinion without any basis in fact. Dale added that the articles DJT held up were “largely his usual friends. The usual suspects praising Trump, defending Trump in the conservative media”. Now you should be “distressed” that Dale puts you in the category as the “usual suspects”. But, hey, if you think like DJT even bad publicity keeps you in the public eye.
Unfortunately, all the fawning praise in the articles displayed by DJT won’t be be admitted into evidence in the case before Judge Merchan. Only facts and evidence are admissible. Like your claim that Judge Merchan’s gag order is a violation of DJT’s “free speech” rights (see your column of 3/27). Don’t expect your claim will get anywhere with Judge Merchan or the NY Appellate Division!
^^^troll^^^
I was kind of wondering if Dennis was the guy at the BBQ in the park across from the courthouse today.
CNN = Communist News Network
“subjective opinion without any basis in fact”
Try these facts on: Matthew Colangelo.
———————
Dec 2022
CNN
—
Matthew Colangelo – who recently served as a senior official in the US Justice Department and before that served as an attorney on the Trump Foundation investigation with the New York attorney general’s office – will now serve as senior counsel to Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, according to an announcement from the office.
———————
@JeffClarkUS
Matthew Colangelo was once the Acting Associate Attorney General in the Biden Administration. The Associate AG is the #3 spot at USDOJ.
One simply does not leave an elevated spot like that at Main Justice to take up a job as just one lawyer on a prosecution team for the Manhattan DA’s Office.
That would be reverse career upward mobility, putting your career in reverse gear and punching the gas.
What is it that explains this mystery? It’s not so hard, really. Colangelo has clearly been asked to deliver a mortal blow to Trump’s reelection campaign and keep him from sending Biden packing out of the White House.
Either Biden and his people dispatched Colangelo to Manhattan or Colangelo independently decided it would be great for his career — high hero potential — if his jump to Manhattan allows him to wound President Trump.
———————–
@alexbruesewitz
REMINDER: Biden’s DOJ placed one of their Senior Officials in DA Bragg’s office to help lead the persecution of Donald Trump.
This COMMUNIST SHOW TRIAL is being 100% orchestrated by the Biden admin!
_______________________
Dennis: What is it called when incontrovertible FACTS and evidence are laid out in front of someone and yet they still cannot SEE it? What is that word? DELUSIONAL? Brainwashed? Propagandized? What is the word for it?
Dennis: What is it called when incontrovertible FACTS and evidence are laid out in front of someone and yet they still cannot SEE it? What is that word? DELUSIONAL? Brainwashed? Propagandized? What is the word for it?
Biden, and his press secretary, continually repeat the claim that Trump called veterans “suckers and losers”…
That is a lie.
That is false.
That is fiction.
But we all know that Joe Biden is a lifelong pathological liar.
It is what career politician Joe Biden does: He lies.
You have to wonder why neither Joe, nor his black, lesbian spokes person are rarely, if ever, called out by the press or even the so-called FACT CHECKERS, for obvious lies?
It’s just such a mystery.
Biden gaffes are low hanging fruit. Yesterday he said his uncle was eaten by canibals. And his press secretary unable to defend the statement attacked the press for bring it up.
Yes and listen to the whole tape and you can hear Biden say at the end of his cannibal story that it angers him to think how Donald Trump looked at rows and rows of our dead soldiers’ graves and called them “suckers and losers.” It seemed to be the point of Biden telling the tale in the first place. Biden calls them heroes, while Trump calls them suckers and losers.
Yet Biden never gets fact checked by the media when he repeats one of his lies –like the ‘fine people on both sides’ lie Biden based his entire 2020 campaign on, and repeats to this day without pushback or correction.
Wonderful.
When you condemn Billy boy Clinton for aiding and abbeting the Rwandan Holocaust, I’ll be sure to agree with everything you vomit. What a sick dog. Attacking Trump as Slick makes a million bucks a speech. Pure genius.
Dennis – All of these gag orders violate the first amendment – they not only violate Trump’s right to free speech – but the right of the public to hear what he has to say.
Further this entire farce in NYC is election interference.
Bragg is now demanding – and Merchan is doing nothing that the defense get no notice of the witnesses.
That is a clear violation of due process – that would be a handful of other constitutional amendments.
Merchan is making such a hash of this trial the ONLY risk that Trump faces is the indeterminate risk to his election prospects.
If you honestly think there is a chance that this prosuction will survive on appeal – your deluded.
You can continue your wishful think all you want.
You are correct that Jury selection is complete.
More evidence of an unconstitutional rush. It took 2 months just for jury selection in the Boston Marathon Bomber case.
You honestly think that it is EASIER to get an unbiased jury for Trump ?
Regardless,. jurors were dropping like flies. More than 1/2 of the jury pool was excused because they admitted – before any questions were asked they were too biased to sit. Large numbers were dismissed for cause. And SO FAR two jurors that were actually seated had to be removed either because it was found that they lied about their biases or because they concluded AFTER they were seated that they were too biased to sit on this jury.
There is a very large possibility that this jury does not make it through the trial. The Judges refusal to make public the name of jurors means that they received very limitted vetting by the lawyers involved. But that will not hold up for long. The public will find out who these jurors are – and when it does their backgrounds will be crowdsourced.
This jury does not hold Trump’s liberty in his hands. Whatever the outcome of this Trial – no conviction will be upheld. The case was garbage before it started, and Merchan has already made innumerable significant errors.
It is not worth arguing with you – because you are blind, seeing only what you want to see.
But 78% of people see not just this trial – but all the attacks on Trump as just efforts to rig the election.
You can claim that is not evidence all you want – but it is the perception of nearly 80% of the country.
It is not often that 80% of the country is wrong.
Not facts and evidence are NOT all that is admissible in court. This is purportedly a court of LAW. The law comes first.
You claim that Trump’s first amendment rights do not matter – that is an unbeleivably stupid claim.
Of course they do. And Merchan, Chutkan, EnMoron and Kaplan have gotten that WRONG.
There are only a few instances in which SCOTUS has ever upheld a “gag order” – every single one of them has been where actual rights were in conflict. In the context of criminal trials every single one has been to protect the rights of the DEFENDANT.
Regardless, Merchan and Trump are playing a gigantic game of chicken here – and Merchan has the disadvantage of being in a lose lose position.
Trump is going to rail about Merchan to the end of this trial – and people are hearing and they are listening.
I do not know if Trump will follow Merchan’s orders or not.
I suspect he will not.
I suspect he will dare Merchan to hold him in contempt or jail him.
You are salivating at the prospect – but that is a lose lose for Merchan.
He can not back down, and he can not enforce the gag order. Both as a matter of law and as a matter of perception.
Merchan has lost his temper several times so far. He is already railing about defense motions.
Today he told the defense they MUST accept his decisions – that is FALSE.
He has also rushed this trial and if jeophardy does not apply today – it will shortly.
That means the stakes for Merchan and Bragg go up exponentially.
Numerous constitutional scholars have told Trump to appeal the gag order.
My bet is that he and his lawyers have delayed – first until jeophardy applies, and then they are going to wait for Merchan to do something egregious – and he will. Trump may chose to go to the Supreme court oral arguments on immunity, or he may go to Barron’s graduation.
You rant and rave that Merchan will lock him up. You do nto seem to grasp that Trump WANTS merchan to even more egregiously infringe on his rights. He wants an appeal issue in the middle of this case that touches every single amendment in the bill of rights – and but for the 3rd amendment prohibition against quartering soldiers in citizens homes, he may get it.
You are constantly nit picking Trump’s inconsequential errors regarding the law. Those are unimportant – Trump is not a lawyer, and they would not be important even if he was. But Merchan has made numerous legal errors, and has infringed on Trumps rights – and not just his free speech rights.
The outstanding question is NOT will Trump win this because of judicial and prosecutor error much later on appeal. But will Merchans conduct result in a winning appeal DURING the case.
Merchan has already screwed up by refusing to recuse himself. The conflict involving his daughter is enormous, but it is not the only conflict he has. Merchan was involved in the Cohen Perjury before EnMoron nonsense, and he was heavily involved in the the railroading of Weiselberg – and he crossed ethical lines with Weiselberg. Weiselberg will likely be a witness in this case.
Merchan realized that he has stepped over the line in the Weiselberg case and psassed sentencing of Weiselberg to another judge when it was originally before him. That was a recognition that his involvement in the weiselberg plea deal/extortion precluded him from sentencing Weiselberg – but it also precludes him presiding over a case where weiselberg will be a witness.
Those of you on the left do not seem to understand that There is no right for a judge to preside over a particular case – there is no right for a prosecutor to prosecute a specific case. Where there is a conflict – the judge and the prosecutor must yeild. Even where there is the perception of a conflict.
We have to wonder just how much will be Merchan’s payoff for hanging a felony around Trump’s neck before the election? It’s going to be enormous. Merchan will be worshipped as a hero by libtards from sea to shining sea. The appeals process matters not a whit. It is the damage being done to Trump now that matters to them.
Dennis Alan Derschowitz is a Harvard professor of law emeritus, one of the most distinguished law professors int he country.
And one of the most significant criminal defense attorney’s of the past half century. In addition he is one of the leading scholars on free speech and the constitution over that same period of time.
Andrew MacCarthy is a former US attorney who has prosecuted many many criminal cases.
Do I really need to reiterate Prof Turley;s CV ?
Even AG Barr has finally come out against this nonsense. Barr is no friend of Trump – but He is connecting both the lawless attacks on Trump AND Biden’s lawless actions as president.
Nor are Derschowitz, MacCarthy and Turley alone – there are dozens of other lawyers and jurists – far more capable that Merchan who Trump is citing.
Finally – you seem to think the fight is going on inside the court room – it is not.
The important fight is going on outside the courtroom but ABOUT the courtroom.
Micheal Coalgelo – the Obama Attorney that has been chasing Trump from the Biden WH to the J6 case to the James case and not to Merchan is trying to get into evidence all kinds of things from the prior cases. As a matter of legal ethics Trump’s lawyers must oppose that – and their will be a bitter fight. But Trump should HOPE that gets in, As a matter of law if even one of those cases is reversed – and all are being appealed, then allowing anything from that case into this case is error that poisons the entire trial.
Wise prosecutors do not go out on a limb when others are still seeking to cut that limb off.
But ignoring the legal battle in court – the vast majroity of people have already decided the EnMoron case and the Carrol Case were “unfair”.
Do you really think that trying to incorporate lawfare that you have already lost in the court of public opinion and are likely to lose on appeal into this case is a good idea ?
You do not seem to grasp that Trump gets even stronger everytime he LOSES – so long as people see the lose as evidence of corruption.
In a recent poll only 35% of adults think that Trump broke the law in this case. That is pretty much every left wing nut in the country.
People already KNOW all the facts.
You talk about evidence – as if Bragg has some secrets to reveal. But there are none. There are minor details that are not clear.
There is noting of consequence that people do not know.
People know all the facts and have decided.
I also found it odd but the same poll found only 24% of people beleive Trump will be convicted.
Personally I beleive that absent Trump getting an appeal issue that allows him to get the trial pitched int he middle he will likely lose.
But that conviction will be viewed as a miscarriage of justice by most of the country.
You do not seem to understand the most important FACT.
The real Trial is not taking place in the courthouse in manhattan. It is taking place in public. And YOU and the left are the defendant.
And that trial is about how corrupt YOU are.
Here are the facts.
DJT paid Micheal Cohen a fixed monthly fee for legal services. over a period of approximately 18 months – most of which was after the election. He paid that Personally from his personal checkbook – where he identified it as legal fees.
Micheal Cohen used those funds for a variety of legal purposes – including drafting, and securing a Non-disclusre agreement with Stephanie Cliffords aka the porn Star Stormy Daniels.
There is some debate as to whether Daniels approached Trump or Cohen approached Daniels.
Disgraced and in jail attorney for Clifford Avenatii says that he dropped Cohen as a client when he learned that she had lied about that.
Avenatti is not credible – nor is Cohen and Clifford is only slightly better. However Aventatti claims there is documentary proof that Clifford approached Trump first. Legally it is of minor importance – though if Clifford approached Trump it can be deemed to be criminal extortion.
It is a fact that Clifford has denied the one time stand with Trump atleast 8 different times – including in sworn documents to the court.
Again this is of only minor legal significance – except that it goes to Cliffords credibility. It is pretty close to a requirement of the law that a jury may not beleive a perjurer over someone who had not engaged in crimes in falsification.
There is no evidence – asside from the testimony fo Clifford and Trump regarding whether this one night stand ever took place.
There are no hotel records. While Cliffords story has more detail that should be possible to verify than Carrolls todate no facts have been d to prove or disprove the claim.
Mostly that has little legal significamce – and as a matter of law pretty much nothing lated to clifford aside from the existance of the NDA should be admissible in court.
The only thing relevant to the Bragg prosecution is that Trump paid Coehn legal feees and one of Cohen’s taks with respect tot hose legal fees was the NDA with Clifford. As a matter of law – it does not matter if Clifford is telling the truth or lying.
The NDA is very real. And it is the claim that NDA is an an illegal campaign contribution on the level of a fellony that is core to Braggs case.
Bragg must prove that the NDA exists – which is trivial, that the sole purpose of the NDA was to win the election. Federal election law is clear – for an unreported payment to violate campaign finance laws its ONLY purpose must be for the election. The FEC has consistently held and told campaigns that dual or multipurpose payments do not violate federal election law. Merchan can not find otherwise – because even if the FEC was wrong – even if a court ultimately concludes otherwise – which BTW is not going to happen because there is a great deal of caselaw – mostly related tot he IR regarding how dual purpose expenditures must be classified, regardless Trump is entitled to rely on the FEC long expressed position that dual purpose payments do not violate election laws. Further none other than Jack Smith tried this in the Johanthon Edwards case – which was far more egregious – and Smith LOST that case.
Edwards used money from a wealthy donor to pay over a million to a pregnant staffer during the campaign – but also to hide the affair from his wife who was dying from cancer.
As a matter of law – the entire portion of Braggs case regarding Campaign finance violations is INADMISSIBLE.
Federal election law is FEDERAL law not state law. The DOJ refused to prosecute this. The FEC did not even fine Trump for this.
Bragg can not in state court try a federal crime. This is no different from Border states trying to enforce federal immigration laws.
Texas has had to pass its own border laws to allow it to attempt to secure the border – and the question as to whether those TX laws violate the federal supremecy clause is as of yet undecided by the US supreme court. Though a lower federal court upheld TX laws using a clause in the constitution that would only apply to the situation currently at the border.
As a rule States have no power to enforce federal laws, and very limited ability to prosecute state laws that duplicate federal laws.
So put simply – neither Brag nor Merchan can legally weigh anything regarding federal election laws in this case. They do not have jurisdiction. If TRump was convicted in a federal court of Felnony violation of Federal election laws – Bragg could continue with the state case – though again Daniels etc would not be testifying. The court would note the federal conviction as an established fact.
But no there has been no indictment, no charge, no trial, no conviction for a federal election law violation and Bragg may not even attempt to prove otherwise in a state court. So the core to this case is entirely outside of Braggs jurisdiction.
But that is just one of many flaws in this case.
Miceal Gohen has already plead guilty to campaign finance violations. He now denies that his guilty plea was truthful.
But as a matter of law that does not matter.
Merchan CAN and MUST take judicial notice of the FACT that Cohen has been convicted of campaign finance violations for this specific payment to Daniels. In Cohen’s guilty plea Cohen asserted that the payment to Clifford was from HIs money.
That precludes as a matter of law any claim that Trump violated federal election law.
I would further note the claim that Cohen paid Daniels with his own money is supported by the FACTS.
DJT is not a party to the NDA. The NDA is between Clifford and Cohen. If Clifford violates the NDA she owes over a million dollars to Cohen – not Trump. I would furher note that all this has been litigated almost 8 years ago. Clifford tried to Sue Trump and the courts have alrteady determined that Trump was not a party to the NDA – Clifford not only lost her lawsuit but owes Trump approximatley 600,000 in legal fees ordered by the court that she has never paid and refuses to pay.
What is important is that other courts have already found that there is no contract, no NDA between Clifford and Trump.
So the NDA is not admissible as a matter of prior case law.
The Next legal problem that you have is that Trump paid the legal fees to Cohen PERSONALLY
Even if you magically were able to get past the other legal obstacles – which would be insurmountable – except that Merchan lawlessly ignores the established law on numerous relevant issues. It is still perfectly legal for a candidate to contrinue anything they want for any purpose to thie campaign. There is supreme court caselaw on this.
Put simply if Trump personally paid for a Trump campaign add – in arguably a campaign expenditure and did not report it – there woudl still be no crime. You can not violate election laws in the way you spend your own money. Otherwise federal election laws are unconstitutional.
So for about half a dozen legal and factual reasons – nearly all of this case should not legally get into the court room.
Everything regarding Clifford, everything regarding the NDA, everything regarding alleged campaign finance law violations is entirely inadmissible on about a dozen different factual and legal grounds.
What that leaves you with is Braggs claim that Trump committed fraud by calling legal expenses legal expenses.
Payments for NDA’s are legal expenses. Payments to cohen for legal work – including securing and even paying for a settlment or NDA’s are legal expenses. So there is not even a falsification.
But presuming that you can claim there is a falsification – it is a misdemeanor and the statute of limitations has expired.
So again legally this case is dead.
But lets go futher and address the misdeamenaor and presume that Trump’s records are false – which they are not.
False and Fraud are NOT synonyms.
As we have discussed before Fraud requires actual harm.
Even a claim that someone committed perjury in the court under oath – requires not merely a statement under oath that is FALSE, but one that caused some actual harm.
If a witness says that they say the defendant rob a bank, but lies about what they had for lunch the day before – that is NOT perjury.
Fraud requires:
A knowingly false statements
That you have a duty to others be truthful about.
That others relied on to their harm.
No one was harmed by Trump’s allegedly false records.
Therefore there is not even a misdemeanor.
Put simply – Trump is not being prosecuted for a crime – he is being prosecuted as election interference. And that is a crime.
UCLA’s head of medical morgue was also selling body parts and organs on the black market. It’s a fine place these days.
https://www.intomore.com/the-internet/wtf/apparently-trump-cant-stop-farting-during-trial/
https://wegotthiscovered.com/politics/wait-did-donald-trump-fart-in-court-or-have-a-right-poo-the-diaper-don-speculation-explained/
This just happened!
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/shocking-video-shows-man-engulfed-flames-outside-trump-trial-nyc
@Floyd
Saw that too. No, no, these people are not well. Generationally. Into perpetuity. Good luck getting ANYONE to address the mental health crisis we are facing (this is not how sane adults deal with their problems). Terrible.
Update at ZeroHedge says he was throwing out flyers that said “NYU is a mob front.”
There are three factors that correlate strongly to anxiety and depression today.
Being progressive, young and female.
When you teach people that words are violence – you should not be surprised that they live in fear.
Let me ask the question another way –
Is it pathological to think that there are some things worth dying for?
Jonathan: A lot of “normal” people get “distressed”. But few resort to self-immolation to express to express their opposition to official policy. As you mention in 1963 a Buddhist monk set himself on fire in Saigon to protest the US backed Diem regime’s repression of the Buddhist religion. That one act did not change Diem’s policies.
In similar fashion, airman Bushnell’s self-immolation was an act to protest Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Who is to say this was the reaction of otherwise a “normal” person who received many awards during his military service? Like the monk in Vietnam, Bushnell’s isolated act will not change Israel’s policies–or the Biden administration’s support for those policies. Mass protests are the only way to change official policy. Nixon ended the Vietnam War only because of mass protests around the country that made the continuation of the war impossible. Biden is already feeling the heat from mass protests over his support for Israel and he has been forced to make changes in response to those protests because he knows a lot of voters, especially among younger voters, are not happy with his continued support for Israel.
War does a lot of bad things to otherwise “normal” people. During the Vietnam war a lot of young drafted men decided they had no quarrel with the Vietnamese people who were fighting for their independence. So what did they do? They went to prison, fled to Canada or went underground. That was their “rational” response to a war they opposed. Those who agreed to be drafted went to Vietnam where they were told to burn down villages, engage in using napalm and defoliants –killing hundreds of thousands of innocent Vietnamese civilians. And their response to such atrocities? They smoked a lot of pot and took other drugs to block out the “distress” they experienced. If they survived they came back with PTST–requiring medication and stays in veteran hospitals under psychiatric care. They suffered the rest of their lives. Some even committed suicide because they could not deal with their “distress”. That’s what war does to otherwise “normal” people.
The pathology of war is well known to psychiatrists like Profs. Izar and Moustafa. War requires the forced dragoon of young men who have no personal animosity with people thousands of miles away. So governments have to resort to propaganda to convince young men, at least today in the US, to volunteer for military service. That means convincing the volunteer that the “other” is “evil” and must be destroyed. Bushnell apparently decided that the killing of over 33,000 innocent Gazan Palestinians was not what he signed up for.
So I think Dr. Moustafa got it right–even though he had not personally examined Bushnell. That’s because Bushnell is now dead. Bushnell’s act of immolation was a “non-pathological” response to the “pathology” of Israel’s policy of trying to wipe out any semblance normal life in Gaza. That means destroying hospitals, the infrastructure, housing and reducing the Gaza population to a level that can be controlled by the IDF. That is the “pathology” that needs to examined!
While there is alot of absurdity – this is almost normal for you.
No suicide by immolation is not normal. It is the sign of a deeply disturbed person.
We can debate israel’s policies – I suspect we can agree that Israel has made mistakes – as has the US and every other nation in the world.
But the left’s pretence there is some kind of partity between Israel and terrorists – absurd.
One of the horrors of war is that even when your cause is just there are going to be absolutely horrific things that good people are going to do. That is why we avoid war where possible.
It is also why when we are at war – where possible we WIN.
\There is no substitute for victory.
Whether those on the left like it or not – Israel is not going anywhere.
And as a nation it has a commitment to the security of its own people above all else.
If necessary Israel would kill all Palestinians to secure the safety of its own people.
Most of us do not believe that is necessary – and hopefully we are correct.
Regardless, innocent people get killed in wars – even just wars.
The US killed far more innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan than Israel has in Gaza.
I would further note that the protesters of today are NOT anti-war. They are anti-Israel.
Putin is killing far more people that Israel. More people than were killed in 2 decades of US fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Yet there are no marhes in the US to end Putins attacks against Ukraine.
Progressives have no actual principles – only often conflicting values.
I would also suggest that you think about the real significance of mass protests.
The Pentagon papers did more to end the vietnam war than all protests.
The Pentagon papers revealed that the governemnt was lying to people.
It has no strategy to win the Vietnam war, and it had no idea what it was doing and what we were actualy fighting for.
That impacted middle aged and middle class VOTERS – far more than protests.
Those on the left forget that Nixon ended the vietnam War – and he did not give a crap about young protesters.
He did so because of middle class and middle aged voters. Nixon Bomber North Vietnam back to the bargaining table and negotiated a deal that give the US a fig leaf of leaving with Dignity. Not much different from What Trump did with the Taliban. With very similar results.
Neither the vietnam war nor the Afghan war ended as the consequence of the protests of young left wing nuts.
They ended because the very same people that showed up for J6 were disillusioned with their government.
Even today – Democrats care about these Anti-Israel protestors – But only because this is an election year and they can not even a tiny part of their base to sit. Democrats are in a bind – because they need both the Jewish vote and the anti-Israel vote
And they are having difficulty getting enough votes. Republicans have similar problems on different issues – but not nearly as devisive.
Liz Chenney may not vote for Trump, But Bill Barr will, DeSantis, Will, even Halley will.
Worse still while we do not know how this lawfare will play out with respect to the election – it is Unifying Republican leaders behind Trump.
Republican leaders are both aware there is nothing in these prosecutions, AND that there is nothing being done to Trump tht can not be done to ANY politician.
Bushnell appears to have had serious mental health issues. As did Allezeo who Imolated himself over some bizarre conspiracy theory yesterday.
We have serious and worsening mental health issues in the US today – and these CLEARLY all fall at the feet of the left.
The left is an active driver of chaos in government and in public life, and while some chaos is a necesity – to much chaos drives anxiety and depression. The interplay between social media and the cancel culture of the left drives mental health problems.
There is an order of magnitude difference in the rates of anxiety and depression between young progressive women and old conservative men.
It is the left that has convinced its own that one wrong word and they could be cancelled – shunned.
It is the left that seeks to make the abnormal normal while concurrently making nearly all conduct – especially normal conduct risky.
The left has simultaneously made it more acceptable to have sax without intamacy, while concurrently making even casual “hookups” riskier and less common. We have a generation that is not only not having intimate relationships, not forming families, but not even having casual relationships.
You can identify as attracted to zebra’s. But you can not act – even int he most shallow ways towards forming a relationship with another person without significant risk.
Need one wonder why 79% of young adult progressive women self identify as suffering from anxiety and depression ?
We have a generation that not only can not define what a woman is – not because they are stupid, but because they are afraid, because any answer at all is dangerous – risky, but that is having enormous difficulty with social relationships.
When words are violence, trying to form a relationship with another is the equivalent of mugging or even rape.