Below is my column on Fox.com on the closure of the government and defense cases in the Trump trial. It is clear that the government is going to achieve its objective in avoiding a direct verdict and giving this matter to the jury, which it hopes that the paucity of direct evidence of a crime will be overcome with an abundance of hostility to Donald Trump. As I previously have written, I am still hopeful that these jurors will vindicate the New York legal system with at least a hung jury. In the end, we will see if a Manhattan jury will exercise blind justice or willful blindness.
Here is the column:
With closing arguments scheduled for Tuesday, May 28, the prosecution of former President Donald Trump will finally head to a jury. Judge Juan Merchan has refused every opportunity to bring an end to this politically manufactured prosecution. Now it will be up to 12 New Yorkers to do what neither the court nor the prosecutors were willing to do: adhere to the rule of law regardless of the identity of the defendant.
Merchan has allowed the government to bring back into life a dead misdemeanor and convert it into 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first degree. To accomplish this legal regeneration, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has vaguely referenced a variety of crimes that Trump allegedly was trying to conceal through the business record violations.
The problem is that he has left the secondary crime mired in uncertainty to the point that experts on various networks are still debating what the underlying theory is in the case.
Indeed, Bragg is expected to finally state with clarity what he is alleging … at the closing arguments of the case.
In the meantime, the prosecution is pushing to make it easier for the jury to convict. First, they have vaguely referenced a variety of possible offenses from tax to election violations. Bragg initially laid out four possible predicate crimes. It is down to three – a tax crime and violations of state or federal election law.
Merchan has ruled that the jury does not have to agree on what crimes were being covered up so the jury could literally have three different views of what happened in the case and still convict Trump.
Prosecutors are also seeking to effectively shorten the playing field by allowing the jurors to convict on a lower standard of proof for the key term in using “unlawful means.” The defense wants the jury instructed that it must find that such use of “unlawful means” was done with willful intent.
The prosecutors do not want to use that higher standard. For the defense, it is effectively reducing the field to the end zone to make it easier for the prosecution to score.
In the last few days, the Bragg strategy has come into sharper focus in one respect. Bragg is not counting on the evidence or the law. He is counting on the jury. Call it the Lawrence O’Donnell factor.
After Michael Cohen imploded on the stand in the trial, even experts and hosts on MSNBC and CNN stated that his admissions and contradictions were devastating. Cohen is not only accused of committing perjury in his testimony, but he matter-of-factly detailed how he stole tens of thousands of dollars from the Trump organization.
After being disbarred and convicted as a serial perjurer, Cohen waited for the statute of limitations to run on larceny to admit that he stole as much as $50,000 by pocketing money intended for a contractor.
Liberal commentators acknowledged the fact that Cohen had committed a far more serious offense than the converted misdemeanor against Trump (but was never charged). Yet, one figure stepped forward to assure the public that all was well.
MSNBC host O’Donnell said that he watched the testimony and that Cohen did wonderfully. Keep in mind that Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche asked Cohen point blank: “So you stole from the Trump organization, right?” Cohen answered unequivocably: “Yes, sir.”
O’Donnell, however, rushed outside to declare that Cohen was merely acquiring a bonus that he thought that he deserved as a type of “self-help”:
“Cohen [was trying] to rebalance the bonus he thought he deserved. And it still came out as less than the bonus he thought he deserved and the bonus he had gotten the year before.”
In other words, he first determined that his employer should pay him more and then elected to lie to his employer and steal the money. It is akin to New Jersey Democrat Sen. Bob Menendez claiming, in his nearby trial, that the gold bars and cash found in his home were just his effort to secure a well-deserved bonus for his public service.
O’Donnell was widely mocked for his galactic spin. However, he reflects the greatest danger for the Trump team. O’Donnell was showing a type of willful blindness; a refusal to acknowledge even the most shocking disclosures in the trial.
Some of the jurors admitted that MSNBC is one on their news sources and they exhibit the same all-consuming O’Donnell obsession with Trump. If so, they could listen to contradiction to contradiction and simply not recognize them like the MSNBC host. For some, Cohen could burst into flames on the stand but their eyes will not move from the person behind the defense table.
Many viewers have been raised in an echo chamber of news coverage where they avoid opposing facts on both the left and the right. They actively tailor their news to fulfill a narrative or viewpoint. A jury of O’Donnell’s peers would convict Trump even if the Angel Gabriel appeared at trial as a defense character witness.
It is the ultimate jury instruction not from the court but from the community. With jurors “back in the world” for six days and going to holiday cookouts and events, they will likely hear much of that social judgment and the need to “rebalance” the political ledger through this case.
Jonathan, stop trying to 2nd guess the Jury…they haven’t even been handed the case to decide.
My hunch, and it’s just a hunch, is that the Jury will be highly influenced by the Defense’s Closing Argument, and specifically whether that summation insults the Jury’s intelligence by trying to manipulate them emotionally (as Trump will do if allowed to dictate the Summation).
Trump’s vulnerability is that he is prone to insulting anyone who he fears.
that Dennis McIntyre and PBinCA write almost identical verbiage is not a coincidence. In the above comment he makes mistake of addressing Professor Turley by his first name just like Dennis.
frauds, liars, DNC paid trolls all manipulators
Trump’s vulnerability is that he is prone to insulting anyone who he fears.
how rich!!!
Is there anybody Trump has not insulted with verbal garbage?
He’s very good at afflicting the comfortable.
It’s noteworthy that that the DNC trolls started using the word “garbage” about 2 weeks ago. Maybe it is the person in different guises.
Add ‘Gigi’ to the list, there are often many similarities there, as well.
PBINCA – not only shouldn’t this case have gone to the jury – it should not have gone to trial.
Even when there is no political factors to a case Juries are notoriously unreliable.
In my county the more serious the charges the less evidence a jury needs to convict.
We have litterally had a man convicted of murder based ton the Dream testimony of a witness.
Stuff that should not get in gets in.
Trump’s Keeps Gaslighting
But Turley Never Notices
The former president’s Truth Social account posted a video posing the question “What happens after Donald Trump wins?” and providing a possible answer: In the background was the phrase “unified Reich.”
That maneuver — floating an outrageous policy and then pretending he had done no such thing — is another tool that Trump routinely uses. After Trump’s Truth Social account shared the video with the slightly-blurred “unified Reich” message, his spokeswoman claimed the video had been “created by a random account online and reposted by a staffer who clearly did not see the word, while the president was in court.” The campaign removed the post.
The disavowal is part of the game, says Jason Stanley, a Yale philosophy professor who specializes in the rhetoric of fascism. “You do it and then you deny it and it’s just systematic, over and over and over again,” he told me in a phone call. “The people who want to hear it hear it, and it signals the direction you want to go in.” And for those uncomfortable with the extremism, the denial provides “a way of lying to themselves and telling themselves this is not what’s really going on.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/05/24/trump-fascist-rhetoric-reich-policy/
……………………………….
This piece cites numerous instances where Trump used fascist rhetoric, or said something completely outrageous, then denied it shortly thereafter. We’ve seen it too many times to believe these are just innocent gaffes.
Yet Professor Turley never seems to notice. Instead he keeps painting Trump as a ‘victim’ worthy a sympathy. Which is another fascist stratagem: ‘Portraying the leader, and his followers, as victims of unjust plots’.
Is Johnathan Turley a closet fascist?? If not, why does he never notice Trump’s constant game of, “I’m really a fascist but not really”..?
Another Fascist Trope: ‘The Rigged Election Threat’
The Times has documented more than 500 campaign events, social media posts and interviews during the 2024 cycle in which Mr. Trump falsely accused Democrats or others of trying to “rig,” “cheat,” “steal” or otherwise “influence” the next election — or of having done so in 2020.
Mr. Trump has adapted the specifics of his accusations with each of the three election cycles. But in each case, his pattern of discourse has followed the same contours. He sows doubt about the legitimacy of the election, and then begins to capitalize on that doubt by alluding to not necessarily accepting the election results — unless, of course, he wins.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/05/24/us/politics/trump-election-results-doubt.html
Is it unlawful to question an election?
No, if you go to court with evidence showing specific irregularity.
Yes, if after you’ve had that chance, and come up with nothing (according to Rudy), and then try to manipulate people into thinking there was something, and that you deserve to remain in office….going as far as filing false slates of Electors (fraud), yep, what started out as legal before going to court is now totally illegal when taken as far as Trump took it. Thank you for the question.
so who are you now? Dennis? PBinCA? Svelaz? Wally? turdrunner more likely
bwahahahahaahahahaha
You can have plenty of evidence (like 2020), but if the court scuppers it’s duty and refuses to look at it (like 2020) there is no recourse/justice.
Like when Al Gore presented evidence that the hanging chads in Florida cost him the election?
Like when John Kerry presented evidence when questioning the legitimacy of the voting machines in Ohio?
Like Hilary presented evidence of Russian interference? (Has she ever actually conceded that she lost? Has Stacy Adams?)
They all “claimed, without evidence” as the media likes to say, that their losses were the result of someone or something stealing their rightful victories from them.
It is not illegal to have an alternate slate of electors. It’s been done before.
Anonymous, talk is cheap. Courts need PROOF.
Not to hold hearings they do not – They need credibly claims – affidavits are sufficient.
Proof is something that is establishe or not, at hearings – efter discovery, and where witnesses are cross examined and evidence is tested.
Not a single 2020 Election case was actually dismissed over lack of proof.
Not a single court allowed discovery or witnesses, or examination and cross examination.
That is where in the US we determine whether there is proof
The 2020 election cases were all dismissed using a variety of legal games and truicks.
For mootness, before the election for lack of ripeness after the election using laches, or standing.
In many cases the very same court that refused to allow Trump to challenge corrupt election changed before the elections because it was too early ruled AFTER the election that it was now too late.
Many of these are important legal doctrines. But the purpose of them is NOT to prevent actual cases and controvercies from being adjudicated or to prevent Judges from making tough calls.
It cannot be unlawful to question an election otherwise Hillary would’ve been indicted years ago.
In communist countries, yes.
You mean by trying to bury the NY POst hunter Biden story in 2020 ? Or by counting hundreds of thousands of mail in ballots that never had signatures verified in GA ?
Or do you mean the weaponization for law enforcement and the courts as a political campaign strategy ?
Regardless, the reason that the left is so terrified right now is that Trump is 7pts ahead of where he was in Nov. 2020.
For Democrats to tip this election they MUST win the popular vote – and by atleast a full percent.
If the do not – the courts WILL take seriously allegations of Fraud.
Currently trump will win the popular vote by about 7M votes – if the polls are correct.
Democrats can not push through 7M fraudulent votes without getting caught.
The left likes to Rant that Fraud is rare in elections – that is FALSE. It is Rare in elections where one candidate wins significantly.
The Fascist Left hopes you overlook all their totalitarian action and focus on their imaginary claims about opponents.
They are a clear and present danger to America with this Stalinist Show Trial just another among the many examples.
^^ DNC paid troll. Ignore. ^^
Yes, Trump constantly uses “fascist rhetoric” as defined by idiot left wing nuts who think being told that they are actually going to have to pay off their college loans is Fascist.
Do you idiots understand that most of us are away that the Jusse Smollet nonsense was a HOAX ?
Fewer are aware that all or nearly all of the Swastika’s and other Nazi or racist graffetti that shows up on our campuses COMES FROM THE LEFT.
Most of it is HOAXES – like the supposed nooses at NASCAR, but some of it is actual LEft wing nut anti-semitism.
Are there actually a few moron’s on the right capable of this nonsense ? Sure, but for every one on the Right dumb enough to do something like this, there are a dozen Left wing nuts who think they can get away with a HOAX.
Do you actually think that you can produce studies and papers and spin and tell us all What Trump says – when all we need to do is go to our listen to a Trump rally or follow Trump on Truth Social ?
Why exactly should we trust you or your sources – when we can far more easily hear Trump right from his own mouth ?
People listen to Trump and follow him and learn quickly – that you are lying.
We listen to Biden and learn quickly that he is rarely decipherable, and never truthful – though at this point in his life he is likely demented enough to Beleive what he is saying.
This Blexit activist is exceptional. Listen to her message:
https://x.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1793861660094177342
Just a lil help OFK:
Video Link:
https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1793762201993367552/vid/avc1/1280×720/5YAsuGlFK0MTqi9S.mp4?tag=14
“bring back into life a dead misdemeanor and convert it into 34 felony counts”
That’s a hydra on steroids. One dead head turned into 34. Hercules, step forth with your torch!
Samuel Alito: waive whatever flags you wish proudly. Democrats can go F*** themselves
“In July 2016, Ginsburg told the New York Times: “I can’t imagine what this place would be—I can’t imagine what the country would be—with Donald Trump as our president. … For the country, it could be four years. For the court, it could be—I don’t even want to contemplate that.” She said that if her late husband were around to see a Trump presidency, he would have said: “Now it’s time for us to move to New Zealand.” A few days later, Ginsburg doubled down in an interview with CNN, calling Trump a “faker” and saying: “He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego. … How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns?” Ginsburg then apologized for her comments, but she never recused herself from cases involving Trump, including one about the disclosure of Trump’s tax returns.
Why didn’t Senate Democrats call for Ginsburg’s recusal following her public comments opposing Trump during the 2016 campaign? “Because I don’t remember her doing that. I don’t remember her doing that. And, like, who said that she did that?” Kaine told The Dispatch. When The Dispatch pointed out those Ginsburg comments were made in on-the-record media interviews, Kaine replied: “I don’t know. I would have to see that to believe that to be true.”
Asked the same question about why she didn’t call for Ginsburg to recuse, Hirono replied: “Why don’t we deal with the issues that are before us now?” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island told The Dispatch: “I don’t know what cases she was ruling on at that point. They [Republicans] weren’t asking for [recusal].”
https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/dispatch-politics/a-double-standard-in-alito-flag-flap/
Anonymous said: “Samuel Alito: waive whatever flags you wish proudly. Democrats can go F*** themselves”
EXACTLY. First.,Alito and his wife are not co-joined identical twins. His opinions and hers do not necessarly match, and he is not, and should not be held, accountable for her political sentiments. Second, from what I understand, SCOTUS Justices have an affirmative duty to serve unless formally disqualified, which obviously has not happened to Alito. I now see that Demoncraps Tick Turbin and Shill-Don Whor3Hou$3 are requesting a meeting with John Roberts on this “issue”. Hopefully, Roberts does the right thing, which is to not give those buzzards so much as the time of day, but, frankly, I don’t trust him on that.
Senate Judiciary Democrats request meeting with Chief Justice Roberts over Alito flag controversy:
https://justthenews.com/government/congress/senate-judiciary-democrats-request-meeting-chief-justice-roberts-over-alito
This flag-upside-down is a violation of norms. Altho it’s a mistake to try to read someone’s mind by a flag displayed at home residence, or displayed by his wife. Why? because of the sinister ways it can be interpreted.
you are a violation of norms. oh, and of basic biology too
YTou can interpret someone else’s flag anyway that you wish.
The odds of your being correct when you try to engage in mind reading of other people is near zero.
But lets presume that the upside down american flag is Alito’s personal expression of concern that this country is in danger.
he is both free to beleive that, and correct.
Further that is a view that is shared by nearly the entire country – fight and left. heeeeeeeeee LBiden is the end of the rule of law, and monumental incompetence.
It would not surprise me to have Judge Chutkan flying an upside down american flag as a signal of distress – except that she probably does not KNOW that is what an upside down S flag means.
Regardless she is free to do so.
What I find incredibly interesting is that symbols and flags that sprung up accross the country starting 9/12/2001 that were popular right and left for a long time are now all purportedly sympbols of white supremecists.
ALL the flags of the revolution mean the same thing – “Do Not F$%K with us”.
That was the message to the british in 1776, that was the message to Al Queda in 2001.
That is the message of those flying the same flags today.
If your the one “F#$King with us” you might want to think seriously – that did not go so well for Britian in 1776, nor Al Queda in 2001.
It is unlikely to go that well for you today.
Was it worth the cost to rid the world of Hitler? Would it be worth the cost to rid the world of Putin?
The following seems to be going “viral” and is getting a lot of thumbs up by notables in higher ed. Whether it is true or not, I do not know. I do observe how the left looses their schtick over these things, and I find it quite entertaining.
Cynical Publius
@CynicalPublius
So Donald Trump held a huge, wildly successful rally in the Bronx today. That itself is in many ways remarkable, but what I find quite noteworthy is not what happened, but what DID NOT happen. Let me explain.
The population in the Bronx is predominantly black and Hispanic. Like most of America’s urban centers, the Bronx suffers from disproportionate amounts of crime, poverty, drug use and gangs. With that in mind, let me tell you what did NOT happen at this rally:
1. Trump did not put on an affected, fake accent of an A.M.E. Zion minister or Chi Chi Rodriguez (See: Hillary). He was simply Trump, without airs or any patronizing words or thoughts.
2. He did not tell the people of the Bronx that they were victims. He told them that they were powerful and could solve their community’s problems themselves.
3. He did not demonize any groups of Americans as the evil “Other.” Yes, he criticized the failed policies of Democrats and poked fun at their foibles, but he reminded everyone that we are all Americans first, from coast to coast.
4. He did not promise to solve the problems of the Bronx with handouts or wealth redistribution. He merely promised that he would help set the national economic conditions so the community itself could solve its own problems through jobs, business and education. He promised empowerment, not victimhood.
Contrast all of this with what a Democrat would say under the same circumstances. Heck, contrast it with the vile speech of hate and victimhood Biden gave at Morehouse College this past weekend. The difference is stunning.
What scares Democrats about this rally is that it shows them that the people whose votes they have taken for granted for many decades are starting to leave the Democrat Plantation of Victimhood in favor of the uplifting, empowering message of Donald Trump and his aspiration to make America a place that is “great again” for ALL Americans.
The times, they are a-changin’.🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
11:40 PM · May 23, 2024
·
2.3M Views
https://x.com/CynicalPublius/status/1793849475963945041
^ That’s a whole lot of truth right there. The Trump message is catching on, especially with minorities, and people are smart enough to reject the Democrats’ tired old messages from yesteryear.
Great comment; thanks for posting.
“ After Michael Cohen imploded on the stand in the trial, even experts and hosts on MSNBC and CNN stated that his admissions and contradictions were devastating. ”
It wasn’t Cohen who imploded. It was Costello. He couldn’t keep his behavior and emotions in check. He did Trump a disservice and most likely gave the jurors the clarity of who Trump really is. A liar and a cheat.
George,
That horse is dead. Stop beating it.
@Iowan2,
That’s the truth. Professor Turley is paid to spin reality for the Fox News crowd including Trump supporters.
We’ll find out next week if Trump gets convicted. Costello did an awful job and Turley knows it.
Costello was blocked at every turn by the prosecution objecting and Merchan sustaining their inane objections. The deep-blue rig was most definitely in.
Even Derschowitz beleives the problem was Mrchan – not Costello.
Merchan has not been using the same standards for the prosectuion as the defense from the start.
He has not handle objections the same way.
Daniels and Cohen’s direct testimony was lead far afeild – by the prosecutor and the wtinesses.
The defense BEGGED Merchan to set guard rails from the start.
He id not – as a result if a conviction occurs – it will be overturned.
Yet Costello was not allowed to testify to fiurther impeach Cohen – even thought there is ALWAYS the right to impeach a witness,
Nor was Costello allowed to testify to the misconduct of the prosecutors – we might have avoided this entire mess if the GJ would have been provided exculpatory evidence hich Costello brought to the GJ, and which prosecutors are REQUIRED to present.
They were also BARRED from objecting to it in this trial – Exculpatory evidence is ALWAYS admissible.
From the start – this case has been lacking any crime. The allegation of document fraud has failed misserable – the reocreds are not fraudulent, and Trump had nothing to do with creating them. Though Cohen’s invoices were fraudulent – a Fraud AGAINST Trump by Cohen
But core to the prosecutions case has always been another crime.
But there is no other crime in the indictment, in the charges,
Courts are NOT permitted to introduce evidence of crimes not charged. See the recent Weinstein case.
There is ZERO difference between Daniels starting to testify that Trump’s conduct bordered on RApe, and the Prsecutors refering to other alleged unlawful conduct that was NOT charged.
But now at the end of the Trial the Jury is being told they can consider a variety of allegations – that were not charged and they do not even have to agree on them.
Worse still – to the extent the Jury will have these other Crimes that need not actually be proven to ANY standard, the jury need not even agree on them, and if the law is explained at all – we will have a state judge telling a state jury what Federal election laws is, when we could have had the federal election law explained by the Chair of the FEC who along with the rest of the FEC – did not charge Trump, did not fine Trump, did not refer Trump to the DOJ, did not even slapp Trump on the wrists – Because candidates can spend as much as they want of their own money on their own campains.
Alternatively the Jury can decide this was to hide tax fraud. Though again NO ONE has testified to Tax Fraud, there is no evidence of Tax Fraud, there are no charges of Tax Fraud, the prosecution did nto try to make a case for Tax Fraud.
This case never should have resulted in an indictment had it been handled honestly.
All this case has done is prove how dishonest the left is.
If you do not wish to be accused of election fraud – do not practice THIS type of election fraud.
Many Democrats – like AOC are admitting this is an effort to thwart Trump from winning the election.
It is 10,000 miles from any actual crime.
People enjoy making me miserable so why should I care if they are ever made miserable by nuclear fire balls?
Because the only one responsible for your happiness is you. Saying mean things about you is free speech – a right.
Murdering others is a crime.
So, where are the instructions? Aren’t they needed for counsel to structure their closing arguments?
If jurors cannot agree on a single “other crime,” Trump should not be convicted. Saying that it’s OK to convict if they all agree that SOME other crime was committed should not be good enough.
The reason the case should be thrown out is there is no “other crime charged”.
This is little different from the defenses demand for a mistrial when Daniels started alleging Rape.
Only this is worse. We have 3 uncharged crimes, that Trump is not actually being tried for, that the prosecution has provided little or no evidence of, and yet the Jury is allowed to consider – and does not even have to agree on to convict ?
They might as well add Daniels rape allegation to the list – it too is uncharged, has no evidence, but could by equally bad arguments be being covered up by business records that Trump did not write or direct, that are not fraudulent.
It violates more than due process it runs afoul of almost half the bill of rights.
The right to confront your accuser.
Who accused Trump of Tax Fraud ? Who Accused Trump of Election Fraud ?
The defense in a criminal trial is NOT burdered with trying to disprove whatever batschiff allegations come over the transom, because the Judge allows in testimony – not even actual evidence, just oppinions, Adn in some cases not even witness statements – just stuff prosecutors are saying without providing evidence.
I guess those fussy old rules of evidence, together with irrelevant testimony meant to inflame the jury, those musty old things just don’t matter any more. A lot of really smart people say so.
This is so bad it is not even about irrelevant testimony.
No witness has provided EVIDENCE of tax fraud.
No witness has provided EVIDENCE of election fraud.
Vague claims are not evidence. Opinions are not evidence.
A crime is defined by a law. The prosecutor MUST charge that crime in order to introduce evidence of that crime.
During the trial the proscution must provide SOME evidence of EVERY element of the crime.
If they miss even one element – the judge is obligated to drop that charge.
We charge specific crimes – because that no only allows the defense to know what they are defending against,
But it also brings in the LAW and the specific things the prosecution MUST prove.
There is no such thing as the crime of covering up half a crime, or 1/4 or a mere allegation.
You can almost hear CBS choking on the words, admitting that the Trump rally in South Bronx was a success, and in particular, a hit with Blacks and Hispanics:
https://x.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1794027718171906468
Yesterday there were trolls quoting The Guardian (!) as saying it would be a failure. But the far-left Guardian was wrong as usual, and deliciously so.
In a similar vein, this reporting inexplicably made it past CNN’s censors:
https://x.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1793879211578736640
But, but Trump is a racist.
The people love President Trump. We’ve got a lot of love, check this out:
https://x.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1794059297988513875
Jonathan: Then there is the “Alito Factor”. Alito is under attack for displaying an upside down American flag in front of his home–just after the J6 insurrection and before Biden was inaugurated. Alito tried to deflect by blaming his wife for the incident. But the flag flew upside down for several days right next to the driveway of the Alito residence. So Alito could clearly see the flag as he left and came home from work. It’s a case of Alito’s “willful ignorance” of a symbol for “Stop the Steal” and insurrection.
Now the NY Times has published a photo of a “Appeal to Heaven” flag flying in front of Alito’s summer home on Long Beach Island in New Jersey during July and September of last year. What does that flag symbolize? It’s the symbol of the far-right Christian nationalists who consider the US a “Christian nation” —that there should be no separation of church and state. In speeches around the world Alito has endorsed that view. And the “Appeal to Heaven” crowd were the back bone of the attack on the Capitol. Photos of J6 show many of the insurrectionists carrying the flag.
It couldn’t be more stark. Alito is “conflicted” because, by displaying the two flags, he is showing his clear political bias in favor of DJT. A Supreme Court Justice is supposed to be “fair and impartial”. Alito has displayed his utter disdain for that principle. Will Alito recuse himself in the two pending J.6 related cases now before the Court? Not unless he is forced to by Chief Justice Roberts. But Roberts has shown no backbone in running his Court. Another reason the public does not trust the Supreme Court to be a fair arbiter of important legal issues.
Now the NY Times has published a photo of a “Appeal to Heaven” flag flying in front of Alito’s summer home on Long Beach Island in New Jersey during July and September of last year. What does that flag symbolize? It’s the symbol of the far-right Christian nationalists who consider the US a “Christian nation” —that there should be no separation of church and state. In speeches around the world Alito has endorsed that view. And the “Appeal to Heaven” crowd were the back bone of the attack on the Capitol. Photos of J6 show many of the insurrectionists carrying the flag.
100% fact free. It is a flag created by George Washington. It the Appeal to Heaven Flag and is from the writings of John Locke
VERY subversive uh.
Iowan2: numerous January 6 insurrectionists were carrying this flag. There are lots of photos showing this. The association of this flag with the Big Lie and the attempted insurrection IS Dennis’s point. Alito flew that flag to show solidarity with the insurrection, and NO ONE believes the fib about MRS. Alito flying the flag upside down in and around January 6 because of a spat with her neighbor.. Alito hasn’t any business being involved in J6 cases, especially the issue of whether Trump is entitled to immunity. Judges, especially a SCOTUS Judge, are supposed to refrain from politics or political statements. Alito knows this, and so does Roberts.
“numerous January 6 insurrectionists were carrying this flag.”
Yes, a flag designed by George Washington and inspired by John Locke.
A bunch of J6 protestors probably had bibles – does that mean no supreme court justice can own a bible.
Yes, this flag is associated with apealing to god to help fight election fraud.
It is also associated with John Locke, and designed by George Washington.
Might this mean that Aliton opposes the criminal prosecution of peaceful protestors ?
We can only hope. All 9 justices should be flying that flag.
Is it Bias to support the first amendment ?
“There are lots of photos showing this. ”
Many of them carried amenrican flags too – shoudl we stop flying those ?
There was no attempted insurection. There was an attempt to through protest stop the certification of a fraudulent election.
Dop you understand that the weaponizartion of lawfare to prevent Trump from campaigning, much less winning, is a really bad look for people trying to claim there was no fraud in 2020.
This lawfare is election fraud.
The cancelling of the NY Post story is election fraud.
The failure to follow the election laws was election fraud.
Why do you expect us to beleive YOU that the claims of Fraud are a big lie – when there is so much election fraud you are OPENLY engaged in ?
“Alito flew that flag to show solidarity with the” first amendment – Kudos to him.
I do not care what you do not don’t beleive. pretty much everyone beleives this country is under serious threat.
What we disagree about is WHO is the threat. If Alito thinks that Trheat is from YOU
Great.
If it is Bias to side with the constitution and the first amendment – then I expect ALL supreme court justices to be biased.
There is one and only one thing that occured on J6 that is an actual crime – and that is the very limited violence.
There is pretty strong evidence that was triggered by the CP first tear gassing themselves and then the at the time peaceful crowd.
Regardless, J6 protestors who were actually violent should get the same sentences as the BLM protestors who committed similar acts.
A protest is a protest, there is no requirement that others think your protest is justified. We allow Nazi’s and the KKK to protest.
BLM protestors who threw molatove cocktails into occupied police cars got 18month suspended sentences.
That seems about appropriate for the most violent offenders – there was not a single molatove cocktail at J6.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government”
This is from our founding document. It is also from John Locke
Our government is only legitimate if it has the consent of the governed.
Contra those of you on the left – it is the obligation of Government to Get the consent of the governed and to PROVE it has that consent.
The NORMAL process for securing that consent is elections. I would note that is Not the only way to gain the consent of the governed or to lose it.
Elsewhere in the Declaration we are told that even when things are going wrong – we are obligated to be long suffering.
That does NOT mean we must accpet whatever we are told. Only that “the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it” including the current administration or the current government or even form of government requires we try every other option first.
In 2020 – the GOVERNMENT was obligated to follow our laws – not make up news ones on the fly.
The laws of a country are expected to work – whether those in power claim emergency or not.
George rants about the lawless actions of Lincoln. George is correct. While Lincoln was a great president he also occasionally acted far outside the law, and constitution – and he did not need to.
YOU were NOT justified in changing the way we conduct election because of Covid.
If there is a huricane on election day and only half the people in a state come out to vote – SO BE IT.
The law is the law. Murder is illegal even during Covid or a huricane. Abandoning the legal process for running an election at the last minute without following normal process is Election fraud.
38 states in this country have Secret ballot constitutional amendments. In those states – mailin ballots or any other form of voting that violates those requirements is Election fraud. If you do not like it – change the state constitution.
SCOTUS pitched Row, and many states – including some red states enshrined the right to abortion in their constitution.
I think that was a mistake – abortion is not a right. Though there is a right to control of your own body.
Regardless, in those states – abortion is now a right guaranteed by that states constitution. That is how the rule of law actually works.
The Constitution of the unites states says that federal elections are controled by Congress and state legislatures.
We can fight over what role the state governors and state courts have but there is ZERO doubt that the FIRST word and the FINAL word on election law is the State Legislatures. If you do not like that – Change the constitution.
But YOU unconstitutionally changed election laws using Covid as a pretext. There is no clause in the constitution that says it no longer applies during a pandemic.
Our laws and constitutionas are written for good times and for emergencies. If they do not work in an emergency – then we no longer have the rule of law. It is ALWAYS possible for thos in power to manufacture an emergency to hold power.
Regardless, in 2020 you DID NOT FOLLOW the rule of law.
Further when Challenged you DID NOT FOLLOW THE RULE OF LAW.
The actual standard for an election challenge is quite low. In 2000 Al Gore did not like a very close outcome in Florida and with the assistance of FL courts sought to recount the votes until he got the results he wanted.
There was no allegation of fraud – he just did not like the count and hoped that if the ballots were recounted enough times – he MIGHT win one of those counts.
I would note that he likely was right. The margin of error in FL in 2000 was likely about 50,000 votes. Any victory less than that could just be random chance – it could even just be the way the errors in counting fell.
Ultimately Gore lost by about 150 votes in the closest presidential election in US history.
There is pretty close to zero doubt that if he recounted the vote enough times – atleast one would result in him winning.
It is NOT possible – even with absolutely no fraud to count all the ballots perfectly EVER.
This is one of the many reasons we MUST have simple election laws – that opt for the smallest possible error or doubt, NOT the ease of the voter. Making something more convient for voters always comes with greater complexity and therefore greater error in administering the election.
We saw examples of that in 2020 all over the place But the best examples were AZ and NV in 2022 – though FL in 2000 is a beautiful example too.
Aside from credible claims of fraud in 2022 – no rational person is going to claim that the 2022 election in AZ and NV were examples of trustworthy elections.
I would note the French vote on ONE DAY – no early voting. They vote on PAPER BALLOTS at precints, and the ballots are counted BY HAND. And the French have final results by midnight ALL THE TIME. Paris is larger than any US city except NYC.
Holding an election that can be trusted is NOT HARD.
But those of you on the left do everything possible to make that much harder.
Locke and Washington are subversive and Washington is an “insurectionist”.
Actual treason is defined in the constitution – because our founders were terrified of EXACTLY the nonsense that comes from deciding that the political protests of those out of power are crimes.
There is no actual crime of insurrection in the US, there is an unconstitutional crime of sedition – which has a bad abusive but fortunately limited history.
There is no crime of trying to overturn an election – much less a fraudulent one – or Al Gore would be in jail now, along with Clinton and Abrahms.
I am told that the current “plan” is to move forward on the DC prosecution AFTER the election (without any charges SCOTUS dissmisses such as 1512C or that are immune), get a quick conviction and use that as a basis to challenge Trump’s certification in Congress.
Perhaps you notices that the flag symbols that you interpret as Far-Right symbols are also expressions of traditional American patriotism. Does the New York Times know this?
bremondco: Not after January 6th–the pine tree symbol was coopted by the insurrectionists. You want to know just one reason by those of us who are not dazzled by Turmp find him so repulsive–because in spreading the Big Lie as a salve for his massive, but delicate ego, he invokes American patriotism–always standing in front of the American flag, even hugging it at one point. He plays “God Bless the USA”, when any thinking person can clearly see that he has NO religion whatsoever–no values–he is a serial adulterer and cavorts with porn actresses and nude models–all for that ego. He has managed to delude millions of people into being blind to the reality that he’s anything but an American patriot. He insulted John McCain, a true American hero, because McCain saved the ACA;–something he wanted to abolish because it was a crowning achievement for our first black president. He called our brave servicemembers “suckers and losers”, and, at Arlington National Cemetery, he told Gen. Kelly that he “didn’t get” why his son would risk his life in service to his country. He refused to attend a service at a military cemetery because it was drizzling out and it would cause his pompadour to fall and expose his bald spot. He lied and said that a helicopter cannot fly when there are drizzling conditions. He had his father’s tenant, a podiatrist, fake up medical records claiming a nonexistent bone spur to avoid being drafted during the Viet Nam conflict. More than this, he is a racist and misogynist. He’s NO role model, but he craves the power, attention and adulation of the US presidency. He has proven that he will do literally ANYTHING to get what he wants. He has undermined the confidence of Americans in the integrity of our elections, and continues to lie about losing in 2020. He attacks prosecutors, judges and witnesses and undermines the confidence of Americans in our judicial system because he hs being held to account for his conduct. He complains about border security, yet got brown-nosing Republicans to block the bipartisan border security bill worked on for months–solely to create a fake issue to run on. If he really cared about border security, he would not have done this–border agents were clamoring for the help this bill would have provided that Trump blocked. There is nothing either traditional or patriotic about Trump–a malignant narcissist who nearly destroyed our country in the 4 years he was in office. And yet, he and MAGA media continue to lie about current conditions being bad when we have the most-successful economy in the world, record low unemployment, and the stock market at an all-time high.
” Not after January 6th–the pine tree symbol was coopted by the insurrectionists.”
Then copt it back.
Regardless there was no insurection.
Those repeating the term insurrection prove themselves FOOLS.
The american revolution was an insurrection. Keep this nonsense up and you will eventually get an insurrection.
I would further not that the founding document of this country explicitly says that ” it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,”
and that includes by “insurrection”
And actual insurrection is not a crime. Though losing one might be.
The US had real insurrections early on. The ONLY US President actually to lead the army in battle as president – George Washington put one down. There were guns and shooting, and the actual insurrection was put down, and with the execption fo a few ring leaders no one was prosecuted.
Because the people who formed this country knew Far better than you, that the real threat to the country is stiffling protest,
Gigi,
most of this has been debuked dozens of times.
When you continue to Say yhat someone said something – they did not say – that make YOU a liar. A serial liar.
Trump is not the first president who has been unfaithful to his wife.
You are free to use that as the basis for voting. But I would bet you voted for Clinton and that would make you a massive hypocrite.
Clinton ACtually raped women – not the implausible nonsense of E. Jean Carroll.
If we are to beleive Ashley Biden’s diary – Joe took showers with his preteen daughter.
Tara Read is more credible that E Jean Carrol and she claims Biden raped her.
It is not like Biden does not have a long history of inappropriate behavior with women and children.
While Trump did NOT say most of the stupid things you claim, he did insult McCain and over something that was not politics, but true heroism. I thought that was the end of his campaign. It wasn’t.
Biden has disrespected our military in his actions. He cost 13 lives needlessly in Afganistan.
His foreign policiy has made the world in arguably more volatile.
it is not random chance that Russia invaded Ukraine under Biden or the Hamas started a War under Biden.
We can trade insults all you want. Though you greatly harm your credibility by repeatedly lying.
Trump is far from my perfect president. He is not a match for most of the presidents of the 20th century.
But he is still better than Biden, Obama or Bush.
We do not get the choice of perfect.
It is way late – but Democrats still can pitch Biden and put someone better than Trump in – though I have no idea who that would be.
It’s not working Dennis.
Sure Dennis, whatever you say
https://reason.com/volokh/2024/05/23/on-flags-and-collars/
the US a “Christian nation” —that there should be no separation of church and state
Since ‘separation of Church and State” is a fiction, its no so much ” . . .” should be no”, but . . .”There is no”
You are such a dishonest bad actor. Joseph Goebbels grins up at you from hell with great approval. Which is it, MMFA or CAP?
So What ? An upside down american flag is a recognized symbol of danger.
One of the few things that the left and right are agreed upon is that this country is under threat.
Republicans Correctly see the threat as incompetent lawless democrats.
Democrats think it is dome nebuolous threat to democracy. As James Mumford pointed out to Pelosi at Oxford last week.
Populism is not a threat to democracy IT IS DEMOCRACY.
The appeal to heaven flag is one of many famous Revolutionary war flags.
There is a Gadsen dervied flag flying at my house – my Wife put it up, I helped her. It says “Don’t treat on me” and it has a picture of a Uterous formed by snakes on a yellow feild.
Is that some white christian nationalist flag ?
“The Pine Tree Flag (or the An Appeal to Heaven Flag) was one of the flags used during the American Revolution. The flag, which featured a pine tree with the motto “An Appeal to Heaven”, or less frequently “An Appeal to God”, was originally used by a squadron of six frigates commissioned under George Washington’s authority as commander-in-chief of the Continental Army in October 1775.”
There is a US stampe with the “Appeal to heaven” flag on it.
The Flags of Maine and Vermont are derived from the Pine Tree Flag.
The origins data back to John Locke – the author of the social contract that is the foundation of the US Declaration of independence and our constitution.
Absolutely Trump supporters have used that Flag – particularly at the J6 protests, The efforts to get congress to do the right thing and thrwart certification of a fraudulent election was an “appeal to heaven”.
Aparrently in YOUR world – anyone who calls on god for held, who prays is a white chritian nationalist.
BTW what even is that ? Many people at J6 were not white, Most of the people at the recent Trump rally were not white.
Most of this county is christian. In europe most countries have a Christian Democratic party and in many cases that party is the ruling party, often it is socialist.
Nationalism is NOT a sin. Nor is it racism.
This is just more left wing nonsense trying to expand the scope of things that are allegedly evil.
American Exceptionalism is INHERENTLY nationalist – are you saying that Alito is a proponent of American exceptionalism and that is evil ?
Out money all says “in god we trust” – is that “white chistian nationalism” ?
If alito flew and “in god we trust” flag would you be going bonkers ?
It is near certaint hat Alito’s view of the constitution is deeply influenced by Locke – the US Constitution and declaration of independence are deeply influenced by Locke.
It is likely that Alito believes our current politics are a threat to the country – nearly everyone beleives that.
He just correctly believes YOUR lawlessness is the threat. And you beleive Trump is the threat.
After 9/11 US flags sprung up accross the country. I put up a flag pole at my home the week after and flew an american flag and a Gadsen Flag, and have ever since. I also have a pride flag at my home and a Dont Tread on me Uterus flag.
But then you have already likely decided I must be a nazi.
Shows how clueless you are.
No flying flags does not make you biased.
The constitutional rightss of J6 defendants have been Trampled all over.
What we have seen is WORSE than Wilson imprisoning Eugene Debbs for Sedition over 100 years ago.
Harding was wise enough to pardon him. Debbs was a communist candidate for US president and a thorn in Wilson’s side.
So NOW this is NOT the first time a candidate for president has been criminally prosecuted by weaponized lawfare by a democrat president
I fully expect that Trump will pardon of commute nearly all the J6 sentences.
That is the only possible remedy for lawless political prosecutions.
Should Alito favor J6 defendants – ABSOLUTELY, Because the constitution – specifically the first amendment REQUIRES IT.
This trial is evidence that Biden and the Democrats know they rigged the last elections and their actions in this travisty of American justice is a projection of that fact.
D M – in your eagerness to defame the good professor, you ignore his earlier comment that he would generally not call a witness for the defense where he believes he has already won the case. As for your wet dream of jailing Trump, you seem to ignore the certainty that this farce will be overturned on appeal.
Finally, the fact that the judge’s family originates from a non-Western European country is not wholly irrelevant, even if non-PC. Attitudes are tied to particular cultures which are tied to particular countries. When you leave that country, you carry the attitudes with you. Children reflect the attitudes of their parents.
Edward Mahl: I am surprised you would endorse DJT’s racist tropes about Justice Merchan. How is the fact Merchan was born in Columbia relevant to the trial or to any of his rulings? But you bizarrely think it’s relevant that Merchan comes from a “non-Western European country” and “attitudes are tied to particular cultures which are tied to particular countries”. What “attitudes” do you have in mind? Please explain. Would you prefer that judges come from predominantly White Western countries? This just shows your racism!
Coincidentally, Judge Eileen Cannon, who presides over the Mar-a-Lago case, is also originally from Columbia. Why don’t you and DJT complain about her “attitudes”? DJT doesn’t complain because she is his ally in trying to slow walk her case so it can’t be tried before the election. DJT has no complaints about her “attitudes”. Seems you are as guilty of hypocrisy as your leader!
attitudes are tied to particular cultures which are tied to particular countries”. What “attitudes” do you have in mind?
By that sounds so familiar Where have I run across this concept? Where?
Oh yea.
“Be a natural-born citizen of the United ”
“Have been a resident of the United States for 14 years”
The argument that EM made is NOT racist, it is CORRECTLY that culture does effect ones understanding of the law and the rule of law.
That is one of the Reasons that the US can take in immigrants from arround the world,
We can absorb their music, their food, and many other aspects of their culture.
But we CAN NOT allow their understanding of core american principles – the rule of law, the importance of individual liberty and the constitution and bill of rights to drive out our own.
The foundation of this country rests on a small number of very important principles – that are not fully shared by any other nation in the world – that is American exceptionalism. We can not allow immigration to undermine that.
The good news is that many immigrants came here specifically because of those values.
immigrants from eastern Europe, from China, from Cuba, from Venezuela.
There is zero doubt that MErchan has no understanding of the american concept of the constitution or rule of law.
I doubt that problem is the result of his columbian origens – we have plenty of left wing nuts whose ancestors came on the mayflower who have lost those core principles.
stupidity justice
Trump will be convicted on no evidence, and with no crime identified.
New York juries are not legal representative juries and national separation is the only answer aside from another civl war-style conflict.
I ❤️ NYC
You’ve Got to hand it to Judge Juan Merchan,
He’s orchestrated the one of the best pieces of Performance Art
since Andy Warhol and Nina Hagen hit town.
His, “Are You Staring Me Down?” rath to Atty. Robert Costello, upon “sustaining a flurry of prosecutors’ objections”,
to the Drama Queen Order to the Court Officers to “Clear the Courtroom!!!”, The Judicial equivalent of Shouting FIRE in a crowded theater 🔥
NYC – Where Juries can be: Bought, Sold, and Blackmailed by the Government and Others just as easily as in any other Hometown America.
Cross your fingers 🤞 Don’t Fret, Donald can’t loose – Orange is the New Red, White, and Blue 🇺🇸
[Link] letras.com/nina-hagen/180379/
Just noticed that the comments I submitted earlier today were never posted. When I tried to submit them again, it prompted the message “Duplicate comment detected; it looks as though you’ve already said that!”
Looks like “Duplicate comment detected; it looks as though you’ve already said that!” is actually code for Turley & his cohorts not appreciating the points I made & are not going to post them. Tells you everything you know about Turley’s reluctance to engage in an open honest debate.
Just for the fun of it, I’ll try posting my comments again & see what happens.
Turley says Cohen stole tens of thousands of dollars intended for a contractor which the Trump campaign enlisted to rig polls, but the Professor is presumably unconcerned that Trump stole tens of thousands of dollars in charity donations intended for the Children’s Aid Society, the United Way, the United Negro College Fund & other charity groups. Trump agreed to shut down the Trump Foundation after he & his family were caught using charity donations for their personal use & his political campaign. Trump paid $2 million to reimburse the 8 charities whose donations were misused by Trump & his family.
Turley is clearly more offended by Trump’s long-serving personal attorney taking money intended for a contractor to rig polls than by Trump using charity donations for his own personal use. Easy to see why Fox News employs the Professor as a legal consultant.
The Trump foundation was a private trust – The Trump family – including the Trump children are the beneficiaries of that Trust.
We are way past the Trust case. Ultimately trump resolved the matter as he likely will continue – by moving his legal entities to states that actually follow the rule of law.
There was absolutely no requirement that the Trump foundation give any money to the charities you mention.
That was a choice , and you can not defraud anyone by making a free choice they they do not like.
The Trump foundation was NOT a public trust int he way the Clinton foundation or the Carter foundation are.
It is a private entity whose beneficiaries are the Trump family. It is not a charity. even though it sometimes contributed to charities.
The case against it was more left wing nut lawfare.
Here’s what Turley & his cohorts blocked me from mentioning in response to Cohen pocketing money intended for a contrator.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/money/trump-pays-court-ordered-2m-over-alleged-misuse-of-trump-foundation-funds
So ?
I am sure that Trump would be happy to pay 2M to evade the lawfare of Letitia James.
This is no different from the Daniels NDA Money was paid to kill an embarrassing story that may or may not be true.
Nothing to see.,
Ah, the pleasures of self-dealing paranoia!
“Ah, the pleasures of self-dealing paranoia!”
You’re right bremondco. I now realize Turley & his cohorts typically wait 2 hours before posting each comment submitted to their website. Lesson learned!
JT, how shameful of you to castigate a Jury before they have even begun deliberations (“willful blindness”). If and when this Jury returns not-guilty or hung on the felony charge, I will delight in rubbing your nose in it for your speculative grievances and lack of trust in the Jury system. This is our core institution of justice, and yes, it puts consequential decisions in the hands of non-legal-experts, but there is wisdom in that design. Would you rather have judicial elites deciding guilt or innocence? Or, the Court of Public Opinion with its battling infowarriors unrestrained by evidentiary standards?
What grounds have you to not trust the Jury to render justice?
Relax, and let the Jury hear Closing Arguments, and the Judge’s breakdown of what the law says. Let the Jury sort this out.
He didn’t castigate the jury, he raised the question of which way they will go. He also focused on MSM propaganda destroying the jury pool before they do any jury duty. I have had conversations with the MSNBC crowd, and he is very accurate….no support of their argument just regurgitation as if that makes it fact. Where I am more concerned than Turley is these folks tend to eliminate anyone outside of their views from their life. So if they are the typical MSNBC watcher, more than likely they will be surrounded by an echo chamber cheering them on to do “what’s best”. And I don’t know how anyone can take anything on MSNBC seriously and not be willfully blind.
What grounds have you to not trust the Jury to render justice?
Because Merchan has shown he is biased against the defendent.
The case should have turned away, due to lack of charges
Jury selection was finished in record time
Allowing Daniels to testify, flies in the the face of rules of evidence. Not a single question posed to her touched on the charges of the indictment.
Merchan denied the Defense a wittness to explain Election law.
Merchan denied Costello to answer questions in full.
That’s a short list of why I dont trust the Jury. Merchan allowed testimony that was not relevant, and denied relevant testimony for the Defense.
No one is castigating the Jury. Even Trump has not said anything about THIS Jury yet.
At the same time there is no expecation that a jury selected in manhattan that excluded anyone who voted for Trump, and that has been spoon fed legal $hit by MErchan will reach an honest and just conclusion about a case that never should have resulted in an indictment much less trial.
Turley is correct – for 10,000 reasons this case should not go to a jury.
Here is hoping the jury is less corrupt than the judge and prosecutor.
Do you honestly beleive this case would have been brought to a grandjury if Trump was not running for president again ?