Yesterday, I was notified by the Justice Department confirming that a recent swatting indictment includes the person or persons responsible for my own swatting a year ago. One of the defendants, Thomasz Szabo, was arrested a couple weeks ago.
The indictment below charges two foreign nationals: Thomasz Szabo, 26, of Romania, and Nemanja Radovanovic, 21, of Serbia.
Szabo and Radovanovic are each charged with one count of conspiracy, 29 counts of threats and false information regarding explosives, and four counts of transmitting threats in interstate and foreign commerce.
Their alleged conspiracy began as early as December 2020. It continued through January 2024, using personal identifying information, including home addresses, to falsely report emergencies to provoke a police response at the victim’s home. According to the Justice Department, they used various monikers to communicate. Szabo used “Jonah,” “Jonah Goldberg,” “Plank,” “Rambler,” “War Lord,” “Shovel,” “Cypher,” “Kollectivist,” “Mortenberg Shekelstorms,” and “NotThuggin2”. Radovanovic used “XBD31,” “XDR,” “Angus,” “Thuggin,” “Thug Hunter,” “NotThuggin,” “DCL,” and “AOD.”
The indictment alleges that their crimes encompassed 40 private victims and 61 official victims, including members of Congress, cabinet-level executive branch officials, and senior federal law enforcement officials. It also included four businesses, four religious institutions, and one victim university.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Conor Mulroe is prosecuting the case. Under the Crime Victims Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. 3771 (1), the indictment triggers ten rights for me and the other alleged victims, including the right to be heard at a hearing involving any plea, sentencing, or parole proceeding. I was given my own Victim Identification Number (VIN) and Personal Identification Number (PIN) under the CVRA for future communications.
I am grateful to the Justice Department and these cooperating U.S. and foreign offices for their work in finding the alleged culprits who swatted my home between Christmas and New Year’s in 2023.
Whatever the role politics may have played, or our current divisions, swatting constitutes a very serious crime that can result in lethal accidents and trauma for victims. It also pulls law enforcement resources away from real crimes. In my case, five or six officers were needlessly pulled from their other duties to respond to the call.
For some, these stories become irresistible opportunities to vent against the victims or even bizarre attacks on conservative legal theory. The liberal gotcha site, Above the Law, covered my swatting with the usual ad hominem attacks while adding a truly unhinged spin to the story. Senior Editor Joe Patrice (who has defended “predominantly liberal faculties” and not hiring conservative or libertarian law professors) insisted that swatting is somehow the fault of gun owners, Second Amendment advocates, and “edgy” police:
“Swatting is a byproduct of a nation awash in more and more powerful weapons and more and more edgy cops. And that makes these false police reports regrettably a manifestation of our age of failing to confront the disconnect between the text and history of the Second Amendment and the lazy ahistorical interpretation of this Supreme Court.”
Prosecutors notably did not include the conservative justices as co-conspirators with Szabo and Radovanovic.
This indictment is a valuable addition to deterring a crime that has become all too common. The fact that this investigation stretched to Hungary and Romania showed the extraordinary effort needed to make these arrests. The arrests are the result of an investigation that involved a global effort, including the U.S. Secret Service Washington Field Office and Criminal Investigative Division, the FBI’s Washington Field Office and Minneapolis Field Office, the U.S. Capitol Police, the U.S. Secret Service’s Bucharest Resident Office, Miami Field Office, Syracuse Resident Office, Springfield Resident Office, the FBI’s Legat Office in Bucharest and the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Western District of Washington, the District of South Dakota, the Middle District of Florida, the Southern District of Florida, the Southern District of Illinois, and the Northern District of New York.
As more such cases are prosecuted, it will hopefully shatter the sense of anonymity and impunity of such culprits. Once again, I am very thankful for the effort of all of these agencies in bringing this case.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
This is good to see.
Also good to see is there are members in the agencies the good professor mentions who continue to fulfill their civic and agencies duties faithfully. Thank you to all of them.
Like to see these fine young men get prison time and then get deported back to their countries. If those countries add additional prison time, that would be good to see.
It would probably be a good idea for the DOJ to take a look at the trolls who lurk in this comments section. It is certainly within current capabilities to identify even the anonymous trolls. Based on the things they post, it is certainly within the realm of possibility that they would engage in such tactics as “swatting”. Investigation might also reveal more than just nefarious deeds in the past: in light of their recent utterly humiliating defeat at the polls, one can only guess what these shadow puppet trolls are plotting, as the restoration of the Once and Future President approaches.
So, you support Federal surveillance of those who make anonymous comments on the theory that there *could* be some overlap between them and some jerks involved in swatting? What, then, differs that recommendation wrt one from leftists wanting anyone expressing a non-woke POV surveilled? Further, to the best of my knowledge, *nobody* who posts comments here used their full, legal, name. So, what do you claim distinguishes a poster using a made-up moniker and posting as “Joe Blow” with a fictitious email address, and someone who declines to fill out either of those fields, resulting as a post from “anonymous”. I’ve seen some worthwhile comments from you here, but to me, this one is ludicrous. It smacks of advocating government retaliation on anyone expressing an “unapproved” opinion.
Prof. Turley.. in case you still have a look here.. Glad you are safe from those swatters…. truly! Thank God there are some DOJ, FBI, etc. workers who are concerned with real crime!
On January 20th Donald Trump will start to fundamentally change America. Elections have consequences.
* With so many law enforcement agencies involved domestic and international what was the price tag on the apprehension of these two punk thugs? They’ll be locked up for how long?
Lakes Riley’s murderer was convicted. A life sentence without for parole was imposed . Will he really stay locked up? Perhaps Mr. Riley might be given the right to just shoot him stone cold dead.
Contemplate the vast apparatus of government – bureaucrats, police, intelligence, politicians, etc. – which makes this entire story even possible. Mr. Turley is grateful to this apparatus, but never mentions that SWAT teams are unconstitutional and need to be abolished. We’ve forgotten that freedom does not and cannot co-exist with a police state.
Hopefully they receive LONG prison sentences!
Your neither born a liberal or conservative, but there those born with varying intelligence quotient and inelegancy. That being said, most of the left in America are gauche, ware rose colored glasses, have an inflated ego, clappers on the ear’s to hear nothing that’s contrary to their idea of nirvana and nasty to those they oppose. They spew false bravado of success when there was failure, use laws not applicable to charge and claim innocence upon exposure of guilt. They preach State before individual and have surrender to the idiom of non-individually (Orwell’s 1984?).
Ending with George Orwell “Power and Politics”: ‘Being in a minority, even in a minority of one, did not make you mad. There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad.’
“but there those born with varying intelligence quotient and inelegancy.”
I’d like to see some support that some people are born with “inelegancy”. Seems very mush like that attribute would be nearly 100% learned behavior.
“much” – inelegant typo
Your [sic, you’re] neither born a liberal or conservative . . .
I’m not so sure. I think there is a predisposition one way or another, and Gilbert & Sullivan back me up on that:
When in that House M.P.’s divide,
If they’ve a brain and cerebellum, too,
They’ve got to leave that brain outside,
And vote just as their leaders tell ’em to.
But then the prospect of a lot
Of dull M. P.’s in close proximity,
All thinking for themselves, is what
No man can face with equanimity.
Then let’s rejoice with loud Fal la – Fal la la!
That Nature always does contrive – Fal lal la!
That every boy and every gal
That’s born into the world alive
Is either a little Liberal
Or else a little Conservative!
Fal lal la!
From Iolanthe, Act II, the song “When All Night Long a Chap Remains,” at the 2:13 mark below:
Above from Oldmanfromkansas (Trump IS the resistance)
Professor Turley, I am so sorry the comments section of your blog has become as blighted as it has. Whatever happened to civility? I miss Darren. Can we maybe restrict commentary to those who use their actual identity, instead of hiding behind “anonymous” whilst splattering us all with their verbal excrement?
This is simply the MAGA cult in all its glory.
They are just an angry mob of misfits.
Anger is the only emotion they have.
Insults are the only interpersonal interactions they are capable of.
Even though they won, they continue these angry, vile outbursts.
In my experience the most vile and insulting comments have been from those opposed to MAGA, especially those with TDS who show up here daily.
Your own reference to “angry mob of misfits” is an example, if perhaps a very mild one.
The left always wields the Alinsky rule, derived from Goebbels, of accusing their opposition of doing what they are ACTUALLY doing.
Your comment represents “textbook” democrat projection, in its simplest form. The fact that you can’t stop yourself, exhibits the total lack of awareness that accompanies leftist behavior.
The TDS is strong in this one.
Are those not upset about the outcome of this election angry ?
Not especially. Mostly we are looking forward with varying degrees of hope and expectation to the future.
Everyone who voted for Trump did not do so because he is some savior.
But everyone who voted for Trump did so because Harris, the left, YOU offered them WORSE choices.
The election is over, and with respect to those of you on the left – NOTHING has changed.
We still get this nonsense that 51% of the country was “mesmerized” by Trump.
That this election resulted from the mass deception by Fox or Brightbart or OAN or Infowars,
That anyone who voted for Trump is garbage,
That those who did not vote for Harris should be “cancelled” by their friends, relatives, spouses.
There the barest tiny flickers of an effort to REALLY figure out why Trump won.
And you all go on as if the country did not give a giant FU to leftist extremism.
In the prior post Anonymous Left Wing nuts were STILL trying to argue that elementary school staff – teachers, and librarians should be able to “trans the kids”, that it is somehow “book banning” for parents, to demand their legislators, or school boards not reserve space among the few thousand books out of the millions published that can be in a school library for pornography.
By far this was the most frequent explanation exit polls found for voting for Trump.
And yet STILL those of you on the left can not left go.
Just look at the absolutely absurd claims made by “Above the Law”
Of all the arguments against the 2nd amendment – SWATTING is just about the stupidest.
And we have repeatedly been told that “above the law” is near the pinnacle of legal analysis and that Turley is comparatively dog food.
Are you so stupid as to beleive heavily armed police will not show up at the homes of innocent SWATTED people,
if only you could ban all guns ?
You thing that some hoaxster calling the police can not think of a lie to get someone swatted besides “hes got a gun” ?
” I miss Darren. Can we maybe restrict commentary to those who use their actual identity, instead of hiding behind “anonymous” whilst splattering us all with their verbal excrement?”
1. Darren may still be here. Someone or something (AI?) is occasionally nuking posts, sometimes for no apparent reason.
2. Exactly what did you have in mind to confirm that a poster is using his or her “actual identity”? Do you want the Professor to collect SS# and copies of drivers’ licenses? Sheesh!
Can we maybe restrict commentary to those who use their actual identity, instead of hiding behind “anonymous” whilst splattering us all with their verbal excrement?
====
With all due respect, isn’t that what the Internet was made for? Verbal Excrement and anonymous bomb throwing 🙂 Certainly makes for a more exciting, if not enlightened, conversation and forum.
I don’t think he even looks in here anymore.
Turley, you KNOW that “Above the Law” is NOT a “far-left gotcha site”–it is a mainstream legal blog
Gigi, you are an unrepentant serial pathological liar and dissembler who specifically comes here both to insult your host Professor Turley and the rest of us.
All you get in response to your lies and insinuations is mockery, jeering, and being called out as a sophomoric pathological liar. You change nobody’s mind. Nobody – you’re a complete and abject failure. Just like the rest of your life.
Clearly you have no other way of finding some sort of meaning in your pathetic, pointless existence.
Dennis McIntyre and you share the same personal psychiatric problems. I suggest you get married then both of you psychos will get the attention you crave while providing each other with emotional support.
Then both you will have somebody actually present to inflict your misery and rage on, rather than Professor Turley and the remainder of his guests.
OldAirborneDog-must have been a bad day today. They do happen. Consider though that if GiGi and McIntyre get together they could propagate and cover the earth with mindless copies of themselves.
GEB says: Consider though that if GiGi and McIntyre get together they could propagate and cover the earth with mindless copies of themselves.
Hmmmmm… well, I think the risk is small. First you’d have Dennis playing receiver, attempting to prove that men can indeed get pregnant as Gigi did her usual level best to prove the impossible.
Then, if they got over that hurdle and Dennis managed to figure out how to penetrate and impregnate Gigi’s creaky musty womb, any fetus would have to survive both of them obsessed with signaling their virtue as Woke Marxist Warriors by having a performative art late term elective birth control abortion.
Why would they propagate ? It violates their fatalist religion.
Here is an excerpt from the piece written by Joe Patrice, linked above, that capsulizes Patrice’s criticism of Turley trying to equate MAGAism with conservatism and why objectively wrong views of the law do not deserve equal time in law schools, and nor should law school faculties reflect such views:
“An astute observation. Law schools have predominantly liberal faculty the way physics departments are overwhelmingly heliocentrists. No one — outside of Texas maybe — demands that schools hire more Ptolemaic geocentrist professors willing to offer a sympathetic voice to students who think the ocean swallows the sun every night. We should hold legal training to the same standard.
Banzhaf, perhaps unintentionally, strikes at something important in the last sentence of his summary. “[T]ruth may be dying if students are afraid to say what they believe to be true for fear of being penalized.” The operative phrase is “believe to be true.” These aren’t firebrand academics taking their depth of experience and formulating a new model to break up the establishment… it’s a bunch of 20-somethings who want a cookie for believing in a truth at odds with reality.
Believe whatever you want. Go ahead and share it if you want. But when you get treated like a clown, consider — I mean really consider — that it might just be because you are in fact a clown.”
And, here is an observation I’ve mentioned before–you MAGAs are the ones who are angry, who engage in name-calling and insults, even though your candidate will take over the government and likely destroy it. Posts by me, Dennis, David and others are not angry in tone. What is the source of your rage? That we non-MAGAs won’t go away or shut up about Trump, his crimes, his failures, his misogyny, his xenophobia, his racism, his stupid tariffs, cuts to the social safety net and entitlements to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest, the lack of qualifications and conflicts for those he has nominated to cabinet positions, and the dire danger he and Project 2025 pose to our wellbeing as a country? You also rage about the alleged attacks on free speech, something Turley echoes, but don’t believe that it should apply here.
Translation: Those who disagree with me and the credentialed “experts” I agree with should be ignored, fired, condescended to, insulted, refused employment in areas where I might encounter them, and just generally treated like morons. Because I AM ALWAYS RIGHT!
Translation: “if MAGA media says Trump is a victim of “lawfare” then this claim deserves equal time to factual reports that he really did steal classified documents, lied about returning them, moved them around to prevent them from being returned, mentally declassified them, didn’t really try to get Raffensberger to crook the vote count in Georgia, that he really didn’t falsify business records and loan applications, really didn’t sexually assault E Jean Carroll, and really didn’t lie to his fans to get them to come to Washington to try to stop Pence from certifying Biden’s victory.” Alternatively, that Trump is somehow entitled to do whatever he wants with impunity.
It could only be “lawfare” if these things aren’t true. It’s just like Joe Patrice’s example of people who think that the sun sinks into the ocean—this subjective belief is nonsense and not deserving of being promoted in a university. So is the claim that Trump is a victim of “lawfare“. He did the things he is accused of doing and also deserves to be held accountable like anyone else would. Whether he did these things is not a matter of opinion.
The Executive (The President) has unilateral authority to classify or declassify any and everything he/she chooses. The fact that you are unfamiliar with the power of the Executive only points to your stupidity. Paying hush money is not a crime. Judges don’t set property values, and Trump did not sexually assault E Jean Carrol. And your head is firmly up your butt.
BTeboe: There is NO paper trial–which is required–so there was NO “mental declassification”. Trump stole classified documents, lied about returning them, and moved around boxes to prevent them from being returned. Here’s what “How Stuff Works” says about the declassification process: “The only official guidance on that seems to come from a 2020 federal appeals court decision, in which the judges noted that “declassification, even by the President, must follow established procedures.” However, the normal practice seems to be that the president records the declassification decision in an official memorandum.
Even Trump, who’s claimed that he could declassify documents merely by thinking about it, followed this practice Jan. 19, 2021, when he issued a memorandum declassifying certain documents related to the FBI’s investigation of links between his 2016 campaign and the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the election. (Trump did accept certain redactions proposed by the FBI.)”
So the issue isn’t whether a president can declassify–he can, but must follow procedures, as the federal court said. AND, there is a paper trial–it doesn’t exist for the papers Trump stole. Trump DID NOT declassify the papers he stole, and he shouldn’t get away with stealing them. Neither you nor I could get away with this. AND, it’s not a minor thing to steal classified documents and leave them laying around where anybody could get into them.
Paying hush money isn’t a crime, but falsifying business records to cover up the hush money IS a crime–and that’s what Trump was convicted of doing–misrepresenting payoffs to Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels as legal fees. Judges don’t set property values, but Trump lied about his 10,960 sq. ft. apartment being 33,000 sq. feet, to qualify to borrow more money than he would otherwise qualify for–and loan applications are submitted under oath. The actual dimensions of the apartment don’t require any expertise–Trump tripled the size because he lies about everything. And, a jury found Trump liable for sexually assaulting E. Jean Carroll. Maybe you don’t believe it–but a jury did, and Trump had the benefit of legal counsel.
So BTeboe-keep believing the slop MAGA media serves up–but it’s still slop.
Gigi,
The FL case never should have happened.
ALL presidents ever take documents with them when they leave – they are allowed to – whether classified or not.
The Biden administration was free to seek ACCESS to any documents Trump took with him – presuming they did not already have access – which it turns out that they illegally did, because when DoD was given responsibility for backing up Whitehouse documents, They kept copies in the DoD system – which is actual unconstitutional and illegal,
as the current administration is ALWAYS required to ask for and go to court to get the WH records of the prior administration.
The Biden administration was NOT free EVER to take possession of Trump WH Documents.
The PRA makes NARA the CUSTODIAN of whatever presidential records the outgoing president allows them.
It does NOT make NARA the OWNER of those records.
Every president OWNS the records of his own presidency (WH records). Classified or NOT.
Below is the HOLDING o fthe court in JW Vs. NARA
The Court will grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) because plaintiff’s
claim is not redressable. NARA does not have the authority to designate materials as
“Presidential records,” NARA does not have the tapes in question, and NARA lacks any right,
duty, or means to seize control of them. In other words, there has been no showing that a remedy
would be available to redress plaintiff’s alleged injury even if the Court agreed with plaintiff’s
characterization of the materials. Since plaintiff is completely unable to identify anything the
Court could order the agency to do that the agency has any power, much less, a mandatory duty,
to do, the case must be dismissed.
https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/JW-v-NARA-Clinton-Tapes-opinion-01834.pdf
Judicial Watch is MAGA–not trustworthy. I have an intimate friend that receives the swill they put out–it IS swill. All Judicial Watch does is use the FOIA to harass Democrats and beg for money from MAGAs to keep up the harassment. And former presidents become regular citizens when their term of office ends. They are not entitled to take classified documents with them. And, from 44 USC, Chapter 22:
§ 2202. Ownership of Presidential records
The United States shall reserve and retain complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records; and such records shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.
§ 2203. Management and custody of Presidential records
(a) Through the implementation of records management controls and other necessary actions, the President shall take all such steps as may be necessary to assure that the activities, deliberations, decisions, and policies that reflect the performance of the President’s constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties are adequately documented and that such records are preserved and maintained as Presidential records pursuant to the requirements of this section and other provisions of law.”
Gigi,
I cited JW V NARA below – to DOUBLY refute your claims.
That case which is the state of the law on presidential records since the PRA was passed,
was ignored by Patrice, and Smith and you.
It is not Trump or Turley or MAGA lawyers that are ignoring “objectively correct law” – it is YOU and those on the left.
I would note that JW V. NARA is the most recent of a long string of decision all finding the SAME THING.
The PRA MUST allow the president infinite discretion in deciding what WH records they keep or leave with NARA – otherwise the PRA is unconstitutional and the President FULLY owns ALL of his WH records – because that is what the constitution requires.
How does the constitution require that ? By delegating ALL Executive power to the president, and by delegating ALL national security power to the president.
You will note that there is no LAW regarding the handling of classified documents- that is ENTIRELY done by Executive order.
Why – because national security is an EXECUTIVE constitutional power.
Congress can not designate the process to classify documents – that is fully withing the powers of the current president.
To the extent the PRA even appears to try to limit the presidents control over the WH documents of their presidency – it would be unconstitutional. The courts have CONSISTENTLY found the PRA constitutional – they have done so by IGNORING the unconstitutional parts – limits on the presidents powers to decide how to handle their presidential records.
You rant about whether Trump can “mentally” declassify documents – he can’t, but ANY president can declassify anything merely by taking actions that would be illegal for anyone but the president.
The president can give classified information to Russian foreign minsters. (Trump)
He can announce it at a press conference (LBJ and Reagan)
And he can declassify it by sending it to Mar-A-Lago
That said – as JW vs NARA determined – it DOES NOT MATTER if the documents are classified or not.
If the president took them with him on the way out the door – they are HIS to do with as he pleases.
Including keeping them in his sock drawer.
So YES the classified documents case has been unconstitutional LAWFARE from the start.
And those engaged in it KNEW it.
And those supporting it EITHER KNEW they were lying, or were MORONS.
What they were NOT was “objectively correct”.
They were “objectively full of schiff”.
John Say: You don’t seem to understand what the JW v. NARA case was about–Judicial Watch was attempting to force the NARA to take possession of audiotapes created by a presidential historian who interviewed Bill Clinton for a book he was intending to write. The case was dismissed because the tapes were NOT presidential records and the NARA wouldn’t have the authority to declare the tapes to be presidential records. The author gave Bill Clinton a copy of his tapes. That’s all there was to it.
44 USC Chapter 22 (2) defines “presidential records”:
“The term “Presidential records” means documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, created or received by the President, the President’s immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the President whose function is to advise or assist the President, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President. Such term–
(A) includes any documentary materials relating to the political activities of the President or members of the President’s staff, but only if such activities relate to or have a direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President; but
(B) does not include any documentary materials that are (i) official records of an agency (as defined in section 552(e) of title 5, United States Code; (ii) personal records; (iii) stocks of publications and stationery; or (iv) extra copies of documents produced only for convenience of reference, when such copies are clearly so identified.”
The tapes, created by and which were the property of the author for purposes of research, had nothing to do with CARRYING OUT OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL STATORY OR OTHER OFFICIAL OR CEREMONIAL DUTIES OF THE PRESIDENT.
Here in PA Sen. Casey has only just ceased his efforts to “overturn” the results of the 2024 election.
To the best of my knowledge there is NOTHING that Casey did that was “illegal”.
At the same time Casey did almost everything that Trump did in 2020.
He fought hard – telling election officials to FIND MORE BALLOTS for him.
And some election officials ACTUALLY tried to do so ILLEGALLY – unlikely Trump.
I would further note that Casey was losing on election night by 44,000 votes – the same amount that Trump allegedly lost the 2020 election – though in casey’s case that was 44,000 votes in ONE state – Trump lost 3 States by a total of 44,000 votes.
I strongly suspect that Democrats ultimately FORCED Casey to concede – because day by day he was publicly proving that nothing Trump did in 2020 was illegal – because Casey was doing all the same things.
The entirety of the idiotic election claims against Trump went out the window long ago.
But time only makes those claims WORSE.
Casey is not being investigated, indicted or charged – he did nothing illegal – neither did Trump.
Somehow the biggest VIBE campaign ever lost in 2024 – when the basement campaign of Biden won in 2020.
What is different ?
Trump has very few more votes in 2024 than he has in 2020.
Had Harris gotten the same number of Votes as Biden – she would have won easily.
But she did not.
Why ?
Biden was NEVER a popular candidate.
Biden ran a piss poor campaign – Harris ran a much better campaign.
Why did Biden get 10M more votes than Harris ?
It does not matter what the answer is – it still one form of election fraud or another.
Trump’s accountant – not Trump recorded payments to a lawyer are legal expenses.
That is a perfectly legitimate means of recording those payments.
But lets presume these payments were for lawn mowers and therefore the recording was false.
That would NOT be a crime.
SCOTUS has long ago decided (consistent with Blacks) – that Fraud REQUIRES Real Harm.
That Fraud is a PROPERTY crime.
BTW this is ALSO why Enmoron is full off schiff.
The “crime” that Trump was “convicted” of in NYS was defeating Hillary in 2016 – and everyone knows that.
BTW – while it is very hard to predict what unbeleivably corrupt judges like Merchan will do,
He has not sentenced Trump – he has delayed sentencing indefinitely, and by law, no one is convicted until they are sentenced, and even then the conviction is REVERSED when the appeals courts throw the case out.
The Bragg case is going to be thrown out – the only question is WHEN.
Merchan has given Trump permission to file a motion to dismiss on immunity grounds.
While Merchan has REPEATEDLY an incorrectly rejected that in the past,
he did NOT have to give Trump permission to file ANOTHER motion to dismiss on grounds he already rejected,
I would give 50;50 odds Merchan dismisses.
There is no benefit to continuing the case.
If Merchan delays sentencing – Trump will be able to appeal,
If Merchan sentences Trump – Trump will be able to appeal.
Bragg/Merchan are absolutely losing any appeals – the only question is WHICH illegal actions of Merchan/bragg are used to toss the case.
I would bet Merchan writes a whiny oppinion chastizing Trump and SCOTUS and saying how great he is and how $hitty everyone else is – and dismisses the case.
Because if he does not dismiss an appeals court is going to write a DAMNING opinion of his conduct in this case.
As to E Jean Carroll – she is not credible, and the case should never have gone to trial.
it to will eventually be reversed on appeal.
It is lawfare to use the law as a weapon against those who have not violated it.
The FL case was lawfare – that is part of why it was dismissed.
The DC case was lawfare – and is being dismissed for exactly that reason.
The NY cases will be dismissed as lawfare soon enough.
The CO case was dismissed as lawfare.
Hundreds of cases against J6 defendants were dismissed as lawfare – and more will be tossed soon enough.
While we have not seen Final decisions on a FEW outstanding cases.
Trump has ultimately won every single case against him – because they are LAWFARE.
I would note that he has WON most of those cases 9-0 – all three left leaning justices voting to toss the case.
One of the reasons that “Above the law” and Patrice are “objectively wrong” – is that they are on the wrong side of so many decisions where the court was UNANIMOUS. Where even Sotomayor, Jackson and Kagan decided AGAINST “above the law”.
There is no such thing as “lawfare “. That is a MAGA media made-up word. For each of the criminal cases Trump was charged with, a grand jury indicted him— meaning that he was only charged after a grand jury found probable cause that his actions constituted the crimes he was charged with.
Trump hasn’t “won “ any cases yet— his lawyers filed interlocutory appeals for every order that went against him— and they lost each and every time. Judge Cannon was even chastised by the 11th Circuit for her stupid decisions. The endless appeals did manage to cause enough delays to ensure that Trump wouldn’t be brought to justice before the election. And THAT was a miscarriage of justice.
Jack Smith dismissed the cases he was handling ONLY because of DOJ policy—but that doesn’t change the fact that Trump committed the crimes he was indicted for. It doesn’t change the fact that Trump stole classified documents, lied about returning them and moved them around to prevent them from being confiscated. He lied about declassifying them too. Stealing our top secret documents is a very serious crime and Trump getting away with his theft and lies is very bad precedent. I predict that our allies will be very wary of sharing sensitive information in the future as a result because they know that Trump cannot be trusted and that he can get away with mishandling classified information.
And, I wouldn’t cite the current SCOTUS as a source for vindication of Trump— the public has the lowest opinion of the Court since there has been polling.
…criticism of Turley trying to equate MAGAism with conservatism and why objectively wrong views of the law do not deserve equal time in law schools
Gigi, you are still successfully running away from and escaping credibility, character and honesty chasing behind trying to catch up with you.
Your lying, dissembling, and hypocrisy worked so incredibly well in the last election that I encourage you to continue doing the same right up to the midterms and then the 2028 presidential election.
Speak your truths, Gigi, Fire Ho Of Democrat Lies.
You put a great deal of faith into a false dichotomy.
Gigi – Patrice is quite easy to disprove – multiple ways.
College Faculty – law school faculty have been notoriously CONSERVATIVE for hundreds of years – the rise of progressivism in education – particularly legal education is a recent pheonmena.
If the supermajority of progressives today is proof that left wing nut law is the same as heliocentrism in physics,
Then why was that ALSO not true for the centuries that conservatives totally dominated ?
Or from a different direction – it is a central tenant of leftism that there is no OBJECTIVE reality or truth.
While that is incorrect – it is correct that humans perception of reality MUST be SUBJECTIVE.
What the left gets completely wrong by rejecting objective reality is that the rejection of objective reality does not alter the FACT
that even if we can not know absolute truth – we can know relative truth.
Put differently – just because our perception of reality MUST be subjective, does not mean that all possible truths are equally valid,
or equally probable.
I can construct – with the aide of millenia of philosophers and legal scholars and “OBJECTIVELY” correct law – that completely rejects Patrice, progressivism, and is consistent with conservatism and particularly libertarianism
And I can do so starting from a SINGLE assumption – a SINGLE foundational principle,
“Humans have free will”
Accept that – and you can work your way through multiple millenia of the evolution of law and philosophy and reach something very close to modern conservative limited government law.
Reject the premise that humans have free will – and you have a total mess. Without free will – there is no right or wrong,
no guilt or innocence.
Next I will note – that you can even get to the same approximate place regarding law and constitutions and individual rights – ignoring philosophy and things like free will entirely. You can get to the Law and constitution that Patrice rejects purely through the process of evolution – what has worked historically and what has not, and build on top of that.
Those on the left think their nonsense about law, government, constitutions, human behavior are all entirely new and obviously correct.
But that is horseschiff. We have tried over the millennia myriads of different forms of law, government, ….
We arrived at the US constitution, limited govenrment, individual rights an individual liberty as a result of trial and error.
Lots of error. Statism does no work, communism does not work. Socialism does not work. Progressivism does not work.
These economic systems fail – some more than others. The legal and constitutional systems that derive from them – do not work.
The above are just three of the low hanging fruit proofs that Patrice is full of schiff.
While we are not at the end of the road regarding the evolution of law, and government – progressivism is absolutely a DEAD END.
permutations have been tried over and over – even before the French Revolution – they do not work.
Why did the american revolution work, while the french failed ?
Why did The UK prevail as a system of government, law, culture – over the french, but not the americans ?
Why did Napoleon do better than Robespierre, but worse than Burke ?
I can go on – but You, Patrice, the left, are ignorant of history, and are ignorant of multiple millenia of human thought that and trial and error that has failed every effort to go left, farther than we are.
Time and again, it is Patrice – and you, and the left, that have been proven to be clowns.
No one can force you into self reflection and self awareness.
But one of the most fundamental flaws with the modern left, is that there is no entitlement to FORCE anything on others that is not rooted in protecting individual rights.
“And, here is an observation I’ve mentioned before–you MAGAs are the ones who are angry, who engage in name-calling and insults, even though your candidate will take over the government and likely destroy it. Posts by me, Dennis, David and others are not angry in tone”
ROFL
Lets assume that MUCH of what you claim about “MAGA – Trump” is correct.
Lets assume that Trump deports every single illegal immigrant in this country and shuts down the border.
How will that destroy the country – that is a system that we had for much of the 20th century.
Lets assume that Trump impliments a total federal ban on abortion.
How will that destroy the country – that is what the US had for much of its existance.
That is what humanity had for much of its existance.
Lets assume that Trump is going to ban birth control, criminalize homosexuality and lock up homosexuals and trans.
How will that destroy the country – that is what the US – the world had for most of its existance.
Lets assume Trump eliminates income taxes, slashes federal spending and funds the federal govenrment from Tarrifs.
How will that destroy the country – that is what the US had prior to the 16th amendment.
Trump is NOT going to do any of these things – he is not talking about doing any of these things.
I would agree with you that most of the false claims you make regarding What Trump will do are BAD IDEAS.
But your claim that they would “destroy the country” is absolutely absurdly obviously false.
We have Been there before – all your “end of the world claims” – are things that were true in the past in the US,
at times when the country was growing and prosperous.
AS Harris claimed – “We are not going back” – to the 19th century or the early 20th, or to 1965, or even to 2008.
But if we actually did “the country would not be destroyed”.
The above is a “reductio ad absurdum” on Left Wing Nut arguments that “the country would be destoryed”.
Reductio ad asbsurdem is a perfectly valid logical technique for proving – or disproving and argument.
In a reduction ad absurdem argment – you ASSUME the argument you are trying to prove or disprove are all true and then you take them to their extremes and see if they still work.
This is a common form of argument that nearly ALWAYS works against left wing nut claims.
Trump is not going to do the things you claim – he is not even going to try to.
But if he DID – the country would not be destroyed.
The understanding of the majority of voters – AS WELL AS the millions of voters who stayed home, that this claim is FALSE is why you lost the election.
I would note that Trump has a mandate – not because he got 51% of the vote,
But because tens of millions of people chose NOT to vote. That meas they REJECTED your claim that Trump would destroy the country.
Those people who sat out the election are not Votes FOR Trump, but they are not votes against him either.
But claiming as a major part of your campaign that Trump would “destroy the country” – you made Not voting into a vote that YOU are lying.
There is no great rage from the right.
Though there is a small amount of anger that idiots like you have not only rejected facts, logic and reason, but also the will of the people you claim is critical.
It is likely that SOME of the lefts sacred cows will get gored by a Trump administration.
But the country will NOT be destroyed – that is false factually, logically and now democratically.
The 2024 election did not prove you wrong about your claims, but it absolutely proved that not merely a majority but a supremajority of people did not beleive you.
You ran the election on the claim that Trump would destroy the country. Not only did 51% of the country VOTE that you were wrong,
But 10’s of millions of others did not vote – which is ALSO a Vote that you are wrong.
You are not only calling all those who voted FOR Trump “garbage” – you are ineffect calling all who did not vote against Trump who could have “Garbage”.
Are people angry with you ?
Of course they are – you are stupid, you make fact free logic free garbage arguments.
And you do so over and over.
You pretend away proof that you are WRONG.
That makes people angry.
Are those who you have made angry “coming to get you” ? No.
Are they looking to censor you or violate your constitutional rights ? No.
Do you have any legitimate reason to fear those who are angry with you ? No.
Is this Trump administration that is purportedly going to destroy the country going to infringe on ANY of your actual rights ? No.
Can the same be said of You or those you would put in power ? No.
Gigi, YOU and yours are the threat – and that is what voters determined.
No one can or is trying to FORCE you to understand that. But it is still true.
The lack of consequences for YOUR bad judgement is because unlike you – those you hate care about your rights and freedom.
Surprised 😯 you were the subject of a swatting 🏡🏡🏡 incident…😯😯😯
Good news, Turley. Glad these guys were caught and you can put this behind you to the degree it’s possible.
Don’t agree with your opinion of Patrice and Above the Law though. His opinion on the causes behind swatting seem to be pretty insightful and I’m sure state and local police are already incorporating like sentiment into their modeling of the causes behind swatting.
Would be interesting to dig deep on the connections behind this pair as it seems like a pretty big op. Wonder if whatever group(s) they were involved with are also responsible for all the bomb threats called in to black polling places in swing states on election day?
Patrice doesnt even have a Wikipedia entry
He is also an insufferable beattchy bottom like you so there is that
🤡🍑
I’m never going to f#$k you. Ask old airborne puppy. I’m sure he’d love to get stinky with you how you like it.
Gravy Seal Team Tier 4 Airsoft Operator on scene. Bums and buggery are predictably the focus.
I don’t care if it is the successor of the KGB that catches people doing this. They need to be caught and punished severely enough to discourage others.
I am a bit surprised, though, that our DOJ has done anything meritorious. Good for them, assuming they aren’t just stealing credit from the work of others.
Draw and Quarter
Turley, you KNOW that “Above the Law” is NOT a “far-left gotcha site”–it is a mainstream legal blog that reports on all sorts of cases, trends, salary and compensation, civil rights, bar exam issues, arrests of attorneys, mergers and acquisitions, reproductive rights cases, Supreme Court cases, and sometimes, it is critical of you, especially Senior Editor Joe Patrice–his bio reads, in part: “Joe received a degree in Economics and Political Science from the University of Oregon and a J.D. from the NYU School of Law. From 2001, he worked as a litigator for both Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton and Lankler Siffert & Wohl, representing a variety of individuals, institutions, and foreign sovereigns in criminal and civil matters.” Just because you don’t like what Joe Patrice writes, does not make him or “Above the Law” a “far-left gotcha site”.
AND, BTW: you who read this blog SHOULD click on the link Turley provided above and read what Joe Patrice wrote–it is enlighteing.
The link merely states what regulars on here have known for years, Peter.
We asked 100 gay men why they’re single — Here’s what they told us
https://so.gay/life/we-asked-100-gay-men-why-theyre-single-heres-what-they-told-us/
Racial stereotypes make dating unpleasant
Unfortunately, some negative dating experiences are only shouldered by marginalized bodies. For example, @TJDIndustries said, “No one wants a Black bottom. Porn has truly ruined us with that BBC nonsense.” While we can’t deny the fact the concept of BBC has been tokenized by the gay and straight community alike, we urge you to put yourself out there and let gay men prove you wrong.
Put yourself out there, Svelaz / Wally / Sammy / Natasha-Gigi! Prove us wrong: someone out there is as batshlt crazy as you
Democrats need alien sperm. They require sperm banks to harvest it. These alien sperms are future Democrat voters.
Professor Turley: Dennis McIntyre was so focused on insulting you today that he forgot to give you his Dennis McIntyre Weekend Breaking News:
House Judiciary Committee Report: Biden-Harris Created Loophole Allowed Illegals With Arrest Warrants for Sex Trafficking To Be Flown Directly To The U.S.A.
https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/2024-11-20%20The%20Biden%20Harris%20Administration's%20CHNV%20Parole%20Program%20Two%20Years%20Later%20-%20A%20Fraud-Ridden,%20Unmitigated%20Disaster.pdf
The Biden-Harris Administration’s categorical parole program (CHNV), allowed alien sex traffickers with arrest warrants to bypass coming into the U.S. through the southern border to claim amnesty. Instead, this Administration paid for them to be directly flown from foreign nations into domestic airports. This results from what the administration defends as “legal pathways” around existing immigration and asylum law, created without Congressional authorization.
Illegal Aliens are directly let into the country “on commercial flights” to be then “granted parole” for up to two years by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Alejandro Mayorkas.
As of September 2024, more than 531,000 Illegal Aliens in total have been flown directly into the United States from foreign nations.
Aside from the rampant violation of immigration law and the Oaths of Office that both President Bribery Biden and Vice President Border Czar DEI Hire Harris took, and aside from the threat to national security, national sovereignty, the economy, and the personal safety of individual American citizens, I have one other question:
531,000 airline tickets to fly Illegal Aliens from all over the world over the border to drop them off in America is a LOT of airline flight tickets!
Let’s say they average around $500 apiece when some are coming from as far away as Europe and South Africa. That would be about $265 MILLION, minimum.
Bribery Biden and Border Czar Harris found that money somewhere without congressional authorization to give DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to purchase airline tickets to fly Illegal Aliens into the country.
Why couldn’t they have found that exact same pot of money to hire additional Border Patrol and ICE offers to secure the Southern border against Illegal Aliens and drugs killing 100,000 Americans every single year?
Ask your good friend Dennis if he can explain that to us.
Can “Lil ‘All The Way’ Bow Wow” explain that to us—why he refuses to provide his Army bona fides as he Steals the Valor of the Airborne, then proceeds to denigrate naval heroes?
Can the little yardbird gun bunny provide justification for why his military career ended when he was allowed to resign like Hunter Biden, instead of being court martialed after being caught molesting children on the base? It wasn’t OAD who reported you.
Or at least post what he claims is stolen valor?
Does your parole officer know you’re using your Mom’s computer to go online, cut like a marshmallow Airsoft Gravy Team Six Sniper?
* Yes, the Biden administration purposely did this. They hired and transported criminals with credentials to abuse, sell, traffick and murder American children.
What are you going to do about it?
Old Airborne Dog.. well Said.. I know for A FACT from inside DELTA AIRLINES sources that these folks were being/have been flown in on any and all available seats on DELTA AIRLINES..(and no doubt other airlines as well..) . shuttled to multiple Int’l departure points to fill all flights to get around coming/walking across the Borders.. these flights have been going on for some time – very quietly – not reporting to Congress.. etc… It’s mind boggling that there are Forces working inside and through the Fed. Govt. that are literally bringing in elements of destruction.. I hope Prof. Turley can have a look!
Someone should swat Putin.
* Putin intends to remain in power every single day until he dies, if he is physically able to.
It he voluntarily steps aside, he knows he will probably step right out of a window to his death.
In that case, the Ukrainians should enlist a large legion of anti-Putin Russians to help them march onto Moscow.
This legion can be funded through buymeacoffee.com
For my own humble part, I’m sorry you and your family were put through this, Professor Turley.
I’m wondering if this will be tried in D.C. If the jury is a candy box of D.C. Democrats, I’m not expecting much. What’s that you say? The Judge Jussie Smollett will be presiding?? SHAZAM!!
The Professor may need to keep some daylight on this issue.
I’m wondering if this will be tried in D.C.
Diogenes, as best one can tell from the DoJ public documents, these ‘foreign nationals’ are in the same category as Putin’s GRU agents that they announced they were indicting just over a month ago.
That is, they are foreign nationals who committed this crime while in their home countries of Serbia, Romania, and in the case of the GRU agents, Russia.
Unless there is an announcement that they are being held here in America on an ICE detention warrant, or an announcement that extradition proceedings have been initiated in Romania and Serbia, I doubt very much they will ever see the inside of an American courtroom.
We can hope that is wrong and they will stand trial in America.
But our DoJ has a long history of indicting foreign nationals and then being unable to bring them to justice here in America. Earlier examples include those charged with terrorism living in Canada, where we have clear extradition treaties, that were never successfully extradited here to stand trial and subsequent sentencing.
Which means that no Victim’s Rights’ compensation mechanism for Professor Turley and the 100+ other victims will ever come into play against these criminals.
Thanks for the info, Airborne 🙂
Thanks for the info, Airborne 🙂
It does raise an interesting legal discussion. We claim a right to indict foreign nationals as they have broken our laws while living outside of the USA as citizens of a foreign nation.
On the other hand, other nations (including allies like Great Britain) are talking about indicting American citizens for breaking THEIR laws while living here in the USA i.e. their ‘hate speech’ laws.
Legally, how do we square that circle?
“Legally, how do we square that circle?”
The best way to do that is to ensure that our laws (or, at minimum, any of those laws that we choose to use to indict foreign nationals who are on their own soil) only criminalize behavior that causes, is likely to cause, or threatens some kind of direct physical harm to an individual, and only recognize foreign claims against our citizens that are analogous.
Hurrah, great news. As ever, thank you for all you and your team do, Professor.
A candy box. ☺
“. . . to falsely report . . .”
Turley is being disingenuous and hypocritical.
He constantly claims that “the cure for bad speech is more speech.” Yet here he wants those spreading bad speech arrested and prosecuted. Those phone calls were merely disinformation. I thought Turley was against criminalizing that. Besides, those wrongly arrested were merely engaged in a heckler’s veto — which is also free speech. So much for Turley’s bona fides as a defender of 1A, and for his reputation as a Constitutional scholar.
This post is another pathetic attempt to whip up the rage of his MAGA supporters. And to plug his dopey book, which probably isn’t selling very well.
If you reply to this comment, I will simply repeat my conclusions. Or cut and run.
(I would have written that comment from Serbia/Romania, with Serbian/Romanian colloquialisms, but I couldn’t figure out how.)
@Anonymous/Sam: “Turley is being disingenuous and hypocritical. He constantly claims that “the cure for bad speech is more speech.” Yet here he wants those spreading bad speech arrested”
* We saw what you did there. Nice! Better than posted under the username Gigi/Anonymous.
@Sam
Sure, Gigonymous. Uh-huh. 🙄
Can anyone here see through the blinding warp of Sam’s mind? In optometric terms, his ‘refractive error’ is all but uncorrectable. Sad! A whole life of mental blindness.
He can see aliens on Uranus with his refracting telescope.
No, I cannot. I see his name and scroll down further.
You have nothing better to do with the time that God has allotted you to walk this Earth, than spew hateful rhetoric….I pity you in your smallness!
“You have nothing . . .”
Seriously? Some took my original comment seriously?!
The parenthetical comment didn’t give it away?
I can’t believe this needs to be said, but for the record: That original comment was a mockery of those commenters who post here for a single, slimy purpose: To smear JT.
Sam, you played the part too well! One could even say you were born to play that part! Ha!
In general, sarcasm in social media posts doesn’t go over well when it’s a near perfect counterfeit of the genuine article.
My apologies, nonetheless.
I read JT’s book, “The Indispensable Right”, and the “free speech” rights he describes are to be exercised without breaking any laws, including the ones broken in this case. Yes, speech is an element in hundreds or thousands of crimes on the books. Many misconstrue 1A as protecting speech in all cases — that is just ignorant and lacking in common sense. How could it be that calling the cops to go stop a home invasion at JT’s residence is covered?
It’s impressive what law enforcement did in this case. That said, we all know JT is a high-visibility persona nationally, and received more law enforcement attention than most citizens might count on if illegally harassed by foreigners.
Still, the message sent out to global infowarrior-vandals is: “You’re not beyond our reach”.
Sam says:November 24, 2024
“. . . to falsely report . . .”
Turley is being disingenuous and hypocritical. He constantly claims that “the cure for bad speech is more speech.” Yet here he wants those spreading bad speech arrested and prosecuted. Those phone calls were merely disinformation. I thought Turley was against criminalizing that. Besides, those wrongly arrested were merely engaged in a heckler’s veto — which is also free speech.
=====
Perry Mason Jr, there are eight (8) categories of speech that are not “protected”, and you seem to have a hard time understanding that. Alas, speech integral to criminal conduct is not protected. What’s next, are you going to claim that “Kiddie Porn” is also “protected free speech”??? Do us all a favor, read up on the 8 categories of unprotected speech, and then come back to play with the Big Boys.
“. . . you seem to have a hard time understanding that.”
And you seem to have a hard time understanding satire.
Yours,
Jonathan Swift, Sr.