Posted originally on the CTH on July 2, 2024 | Sundance
In a letter to Judge Merchan earlier today, New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg is asking for a postponement of sentencing.
Regardless of the corrupt Lawfare trial outcome, the Supreme Court ruling around presidential immunity has thrown a wrench into the former prosecution’s case.
Alvin Bragg used evidence, within the trial, that has been deemed by the Supreme court to be inadmissible. President Trump’s lawyers are filing a motion to overturn the judgement based on the SCOTUS ruling. Bragg now requests additional time to review the Lawfare consequences and construct his own legal strategy.
As pointed out by attorney Jeff Clark – […] “Bragg agrees that Trump has filed a motion to dismiss the New York charges in light of yesterday’s immunity ruling. The Manhattan DA needs until July 24 to respond.
Also, Bragg admits that the legal effect of Trump’s ruling + their requested extension meaning that Trump should not be sentenced in New York until the motion is resolved.
This means that if Bragg gets his extension (which he will), the earliest Judge Merchan could deny a motion to dismiss the case and reset sentencing would be July 25. And that would be only after studying the matter for a single day, which should be insufficient. And doesn’t even consider oral argument on the motion if that gets held.
The Republican Convention is from July 15-18, so Trump will not be sentenced before the Convention!
On balance of all factors, the earliest Trump gets sentenced is realistically now some day in August.
And in reality, the whole case should get tossed before then. (Source)
According to Politico, the sentencing has been delayed until September 18th.
NEW YORK — Donald Trump’s sentencing in his Manhattan criminal case has been delayed until Sept. 18 so that the former president can present new arguments that his conviction should be tossed out in light of Monday’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity.
The sentencing, which had been set for July 11, will now take place less than two months before Election Day. (link)
“if such is still necessary”…. lol
When you look at the issue through a Lawfare prism, things start to take on a different context. Perhaps one of the reasons Bragg is making this request for a delay is that the Lawfare team are now a little overwhelmed.
The SCOTUS immunity ruling means McCord, Weissmann, Eisen et al, have to restructure the strategy and instructions in 4 separate cases, simultaneously, involving Trump and the Supreme Court ruling.
All those legal motions, counter predictive responses, and legal arguments are now needed almost simultaneously. As a result, the Lawfare group needs more time.
The district attorneys (New York / Atlanta) and Special Counsel Jack Smith will not be asking for more time simply because Trump’s legal team are requesting it. The prosecution teams will likely be requesting time on behalf of Weissmann/Eisen et al, to be proactive with a new strategy and Lawfare approach.
In essence, the ever-present *strategic benefit* of scale, the collective Lawfare weight (4 venues) against the individual target Trump, has now become a strategic liability as an outcome of the SCOTUS ruling.
All four venues will need responsiveness simultaneously. Weissmann, Eisen, McCord, Berke, Goldman, etc will now be burning the midnight oil trying to catch up.
I anticipate far fewer appearances on MSNBC cable, because they will not have time.
Posted originally on Jun 27, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
QUESTION: Looking at the United States from Europe, what has been done to Trump seems political. Do you think Trump will be vindicated by the Supreme Court?
SK
ANSWER: I have often stated that New York City is a cesspool of corruption. The conviction of Trump and even the gag order imposed by this outrageous prosecutor pretend to be an “acting judge” who should be not just disbarred but should be thrown in prison for treason going against everything the Constitution stood for. He is not just a disgrace to the legal profession but to an American citizen. The outrageous Judge Juan Merchan is restricting Trump’s Free Speech and still interfering in everyone’s right to a fair election. He has lifted the Gag Order ahead of the debate but only concerning the witnesses against him. He has maintained the gag order against the Court, prosecutor, and the jurors.
The case is over. There is absolutely NO CONSTITUTIONAL authority for such a restriction on his free speech. In Florida, this questionable special prosecutor has also sought a gag order to prevent Trump from speaking about that case in the debate. This is NOT the America I grew up in, and it has shown the entire world that the American Justice system is disgusting, corrupt, and just as Thrasymachus warned more than 2,000 years ago – JUSTICE is always just the self-interest of those in power. I am so glad I did not become a lawyer, for I hate hypocrisy, and they would have summarily executed me long ago.
The Supreme Court has just handed down two fundamental decisions, Gonzalez v. Trevino and Erlinger v. United States, that CONFIRM that Trump’s conviction on these 34 counts should be thrown out. If the NY Court of Appeals refuses to do so, New York should be expelled as part of the United States and thrown out for good.
This guilty verdict on 34 counts of falsifying business records relating to a hush money payment made to adult film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 presidential election is so outrageous that if it were brought against Biden, I would say the same thing. I would love to see this fake judge put Trump in jail. The sentencing will be determined on July 11 by Judge Juan Merchan, just days before the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee from July 15-18, where he’s expected to accept the party’s nomination.
This is clearly election interference. Our model has been targeting a Panic Cycle during the week of the Republic Convention. While we see that wee as turning points in Europe, it does not appear to reflect a Panic Cycle, implying that this may be related more to domestic issues rather than international ones. I would love to see Judge Juan Merchan either imprison Trump or impose probation that interferes with his ability to campaign and travel throughout the nation. Often, probation restricts the freedom to travel.
New York City is a vile place and truly a cesspool of legal corruption. When I asked a New York lawyer why no banker has EVER been charged for blowing up the economy with the manipulations, he replied: “You don’t shit where you eat! Trump’s case has shown the world WHY you should not do business in New York City – EVER!!!!! Manhattan has become a legal cesspool where prosecutors routinely use the legal system to hunt down famous people for personal notoriety and attack political rivals to undermine your opponent.
Kara McGee was dismissed as a juror. She explained the questions she was asked to qualify as a juror. She explained that one of the questions they asked was: “Do you have opinions about the ability for a former sitting president to be tried in a court of law? I think the way people answered showed how they felt about the case,” she said. “The other one was: Do you have any opinions about legal limits for campaign finance donation amounts? Which I believe was another one that was kinda meant to gauge feelings about the particular case.”
This judge effectively ensured the jury would find Trump guilty and failed to instruct them that the jury has the ULTIMATE power to decide if the law is even Constitutionally valid. In 1735, a New York jury acquitted publisher John Peter Zenger of seditious libel in what the National Constitution Center correctly calls ” an early example of jury nullification .” Judge Juan Merchan falsely instructed that the jury lacked that power, thereby rendering its guilty verdict constitutionally invalid. Juries have always had the power to acquit against the claimed evidence, and instructing them otherwise violates both the Sixth Amendment and Due Process Clause of the 5th and 14th Amendments.
The jury instructions given by Acting Judge Merchan told the jurors that “if the People satisfy their burden of proof, you must find the defendant guilty.” This language is plainly unconstitutional and a violation of every principle behind the purpose of the jury. Compare this to the jury instructions in the Hunter Biden prosecution, where the judge told the jurors they “should” convict if the state carried its burden, not that they MUST. This illustrates how corrupt New York City really is and WHY you should not even have an account with anyone in New York City – there is no justice for all.
The most famous trial where a jury stood up refusing to find the defendant guilty in the face of a corrupt government was that of William Penn (1644-1718), the founder of Pennsylvania. Penn was the leader of the Quakers in London, and you can see why people fled to America, just as people I know who fled Eastern European communism and came to America remark how the United States is doing the very same thing to people that they fled from.
At this point, the judge became so enraged, as I would expect from Judge Juan Merchan, and sent the jury back to reconsider their verdict. When they returned with the same verdict, the court criticized the jury’s leader, Bushnell, and demanded “a verdict that the court will accept, and you shall be locked up without meat, drink, fire, and tobacco…We will have a verdict by the help of God or you will starve for it.”
After that, the jury was sent back three more times but returned with the same verdict. Finally, the jury refused to reconsider. The judge then fined each jury member forty marks and ordered them imprisoned until the fine was paid. Penn and Mead went to prison anyway, held in contempt for obeying the bailiff’s order that they put on their hats.
Also, look closely at the outrageous UNAMERICAN jury instruction given by Judge Juan Merchan, which allowed for a nonunanimous decision on the secondary crime that transformed a misdemeanor into a felony. The first thing you learn about criminal law is that a jury MUST find you guilty unanimously beyond a shadow of a doubt. This pretend prosecutor, who is only an acting judge, has rejected the very basic foundation of criminal law to ensure that Trump would be found guilty. If you answer such a question in law school as this judge did, you would NEVER graduate.
These two decisions, just rendered by the Supreme Court, further demonstrate that this Acting Judge is a total disgrace to the rule of law and should be disbarred.
Gonzalez v. Trevino
In Gonzalez v. Trevino, Sylvia Gonzalez was a city council member in Texas who claimed that her 2019 arrest on charges that she tampered with government records was in retaliation for her criticism of the city manager. The Supreme Court’s ruling granted Gonzalez another opportunity to pursue her retaliation claim in a lower court, stating that the lower court had an “overly cramped view” of a key precedent case. The criminal charges against Gonzales were thrown out before trial, unlike what this judge should have done in the Trump case.
This is Selective Prosecution, which Trump has argued and was summarily dismissed, even though no case like Bragg’s appears to have ever been brought before, which is the cornerstone of this argument. To establish Selective Prosecution requires a prosecution of only one defendant when there are others who are similarly situated, but are not facing prosecution. It is like driving 80 miles an hour in traffic, but you have a Ferrari, so the cop targets only you when everyone else is doing the same speed. This violated the Equal Protection Clause.
For example, in Wayte v US, 470 US 598, 608 (1985) and US v Steele 461 F2 1148, 1151-52 (9th Cir 1972), a defendant was selectively prosecuted for exercising 1st Amendment rights in opposition to the census, and the government failed to justify its selectivity. Trump was selectively prosecuted without question.
Erlinger v. United States
In Erlinger v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fifth and Sixth Amendments required a unanimous jury to determine beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant’s past offenses were committed on separate occasions. This case dealt with unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon with prior burglaries. The court held that a jury MUST decide this issue unanimously under a standard of beyond reasonable doubt. Under New York law, a jury must be unanimous on the existence of each and every element of the crime but not on every detail of how the crime was committed. This is dancing between the raindrops.
Now look at Acting Judge Merchan’s handling of the Trump case, where the jurors could disagree on key aspects of the crime yet still convict the defendant. Merchan’s jury instructions informed the jury that they needed to unanimously find Trump guilty of each of the 34 felony counts but did NOT need to be unanimous on the specific ways the law was allegedly broken. This meant the jurors did not need to unanimously agree that there was a crime and just declare that some secondary crime was involved.
These two decisions alone in Gonzales and Erlinger demonstrate that this Acting Judge violated the basic tenets of criminal law and the Constitution. This Erlinger case made it absolutely clear that for more serious punishment based on a prior crime of violence, a jury and not a judge should make that finding because a jury must find unanimously each and every element of an offense. Merchan permitted a non-unanimous finding in which the means were unlawful under 17-152, but that the jury find elements unanimously but need not be unanimous in findings of manners and means. This is a grey area.
I seriously doubt that Trump will be successful in appealing anything in the New York legal system. Constitutionally, I still believe that the verdict should eventually overturned. What was done to Trump is an INTERNATIONAL WARNING that the courts in New York are NEVER to be trusted!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I do not get here how this New York judge has not dismissed this case, and Bragg has no jurisdiction to prosecute a federal crime, even if it was. Why not charge Trump under Saudi Law and cut off his hands? No state can prosecute another’s laws. That is plain and simple. I would be filing in federal court for an injunction against New York, and since Trump is a Florida resident, he has the right to prosecute. I would also use the Civil Rights Act and name the Judge and Prosecutor for acting in violation of the Constitution lacking subject matter jurisdiction.
The entire world knows this is to interfere in this election, which in itself is a federal crime. Everyone in this country can file a federal court case to seek an injunction against this prosecution. What they are doing in New York is criminal under 18 USC 594 – “interfering with the right of such other person to vote… ”
Posted originally on Apr 18, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan is a seasoned jurist who is no stranger to Trump’s orbit. He has presided over the Trump Organization tax fraud trial, sentenced the former president’s close confidant Allen Weisselberg to prison over his role in the scheme, and overseen former Trump adviser Steve Bannon’s criminal fraud case. There is absolutely no question this judge is out of control, biased, and is orchestrating this trial to imprison Trump. He even expanded the gag order on Trump to protect his own daughter, who has admitted to having conversations with he father Ex Parte – totally illegal. Suppose I filed anything in the Supreme Court. Justice Sotomayor would instantly recuse herself because she was on an appeal I had and even disagreed with the government. The fact that she was in my case meant she would recuse herself. This judge is an international disgrace and should be removed from the branch – PERMANENTLY!
Moreover, this judge has abused his power, for this gag order is patently unconstitutional. The gag order is unconstitutional because you cannot prevent the defendant from telling the press that the two witnesses, Daniels and Cohen, are liars and have cut their deals with the prosecutor. Then, the issue of the judge’s daughter; if the judge’s daughter could be a basis for disqualification, using a gag order and then threatening to imprison Trump for comments is not just a restriction of free speech; it is in itself an obstruction of justice. This judge is conflicted by using his power for personal gain. The mere fact that he is having discussions with his daughter, who is anti-Trump, disqualifies this judge, and the appellate court or the Second Circuit Federal Appellate Court should suasponte, which is the Latin legal term that means “of one’s own accord,” since they have a legal requirement to SUPERVISE the court below. They should legally intervene and remove this judge forthwith.
When asked about the letter in a January 2018 interview on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” Daniels denied knowing where the letter, which appeared to have a signature different from her own, originated. But she later admitted in aMarch 2018 “60 Minutes” interview with Anderson Cooper that, under pressure, she did sign the letter denying the affair.
Here is the exchange with Cooper, where she called the letter a “lie.”
Cooper: So you signed and released a statement that said, “I am not denying this affair because I was paid in ‘hush money.’ I’m denying it because it never happened.” That’s a lie? Daniels: Yes. Cooper: If it was untruthful, why did you sign it? Daniels: Because they made it sound like I had no choice. Cooper: No one was putting a gun to your head. Daniels: Not physical violence, no. Cooper: You thought that there would be some sort of legal repercussion if you didn’t sign it? Daniels: Correct. As a matter of fact, the exact sentence used was, “They can make your life hell in many different ways.” Cooper: They being… Daniels: I’m not exactly sure who they were. I believe it to be Michael Cohen.
Here, lawyer Michael Avenatti desperately tried to attack Trump on anything because he was trying to make a name for himself. He also admitted he wanted to run for president against Trump in 2020. He was standing before the White House, calling Trump a liar. It turned out that Avenatti was convicted of defrauding Storm Daniels himself. The burning question is, did Trump’s corrupt lawyer, Cohen, pay money to Stormy Daniels that was really blackmail that her lawyer Avenatti instigated? Did the money end up in Avenatti’s pocket? This raises questions was Trump really the victim of a fraud by Avenatti?
Even former Attorney General Bill Bar, who is certainly no friend of Trump, has said that he believes the trial involving former President Donald Trump is an “abomination” and politicized. He appeared on Fox News, and when asked about this trial in New York City, Mr. Barr said that the case is “obviously political” and an “abomination,” noting that charges were brought years later in the case. Every legal profession I know, which includes anti-Trump views, is disgusted with this case, and it is such an abuse of process that it is destroying the entire image of the legal system of the nation. Judge Juan Merchan is out to get Trump at any cost and thinks because he is a judge, he is above the law himself.
A judge is supposed to recuse himself “in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” This law MUST be strengthened to include CRIMINAL proceedings automatically instigated if violated. That is the only way to have judges realize that they are NOT ABOVE THE LAW. This cannot be the Department of Justice, which takes orders from the current president. They are prosecuting Trump for having documents when both Biden and Hillary did the same. Democrats will NEVER prosecute Democrats. We desperately need what the Roman Public had – the Tribune of the Plebs (People), which could bring charges against anyone in government. This was supposed to be the Inspector General, but they have no power to charge anyone and are subordinate to the Department of Justice. This is why this trial will expose all the corruption in our legal system and seal the demise of the United States.
This is the post-Trump made, in which the Judge gaged Trump when, in fact, he is NOT ALLOWED to have ex parte communications without ANYONE ELSE advocating a certain outcome. This judge is turning this trial into what history will call the Trial that Killed the Republic.
Then, this judge is deliberately interfering in the 2024 election, ordering that Trump must be in court every day. So, if this drags out for months, the object is to prevent Trump from campaigning for president. That is NOT the standard rule demonstrating this judge is putting the entire country at risk and even his own family, for if this case breaks down the entire civil discord, no group of police will be able to protect him if we end up in civil war, which is increasingly becoming more likely. The entire purpose of the rule of law is to MAINTAIN civilization. When there is no rule of law, then anarchy prevails.
One of the dismissed jurors has spoken to the press about the questions they are asked. Kara McGee told the media after she was dismissed that it would be “very difficult for anyone really in this country to not come to this without prior opinions.” She added: “We all have prior opinions on the defendant unless you’ve been living in a card box.” She further explained that one of the questions they asked was: “Do you have opinions about the ability for a former sitting president to be tried in a court of law? I think the way people answered showed how they felt about the case,” she said. “The other one was: Do you have any opinions about legal limits for campaign finance donation amounts? Which I believe was another one that was kinda meant to gauge feelings about the particular case.”
Juries do not take their constitutional role as intended, and judges act as tyrants, for they are doing the very same thing that set the United States in motion. This judge is asking whether they will obey his command and fine Trump guilty, refusing to inform them that they have the CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY to judge the law itself and can refuse to apply it if it is morally just and fairly administered as applied by the prosecutor. You have Kara McGee’s statement as to what she was asked. Now, let’s put this in perspective so you can see that this judge is acting UNCONSTITUTIONALLY, for he is indeed going to find Trump guilty and will try to imprison him, tearing our country apart like some corrupt Banana Republic.
Congress can pass anything. That does not make it CONSTITUTIONAL. The government can pass a law that decrees you MUST kill your firstborn. ONLY when some prosecutor and judge attempt to enforce that law do you have STANDING to challenge it in a court – not before! In France, when a law is passed, the judiciary declares whether it is constitutional – BEFORE it is applied to anyone. In our system, the government gets to abuse us FIRST, and we have to stand up and say that is illegal. If you do not have the money for lawyers, you are guilty. Court-appointed lawyers have a virtual PERFECT 95%-99% rate of losing trials – that’s what they are there for. So, for this judge to refuse to tell the jurors that have the constitutional authority to reject this law as applied to Trump is in itself a violation of everything the United States fought a revolution for.
The most famous trial where a jury stood up refusing to find the defendant guilty in the face of a corrupt government was that of William Penn, the founder of Pennsylvania. Penn was the leader of the Quakers in London, and you can see why people fled to America. The sect was not recognized by the government and was forbidden to meet in any building for the purpose of worship. In 1670, William Penn held a worship service on a quiet street, which a peaceful group of fellow Quakers attended. Penn and another Quaker, William Mead, were arrested for disturbing the king’s peace and summoned to stand trial.
As the two men entered the courtroom, a bailiff ordered them to put their hats, which they had removed, back on their heads. When they complied, they were called forward and held in contempt of court for being in the courtroom with their hats on. Penn discovered that contempt of court is a personal prerogative of the judge and an infliction of punishment by a judge who becomes the legislator, jury, and sentencing judge.
Penn demanded to know what crime he was being charged with preaching – the cornerstone of Due Process. The judge refused to supply any information as to his crime and instead referred vaguely to common law. When Penn protested that he was entitled to a specific indictment (NOTICE), he was removed from the presence of the judge and jury and confined in an enclosed corner of the room known as the bale dock.
Penn could neither confront the witnesses who accused him of preaching to the Quakers nor ask them questions about their charges against him. Several witnesses testified that Penn had preached to a gathering, which included Mead, but one showed some hesitancy as to whether Mead had been present. The judge turned to Mead and questioned him directly. In effect, the judge became the prosecutor, as he asked Mead if he was guilty. Mead invoked the common-law privilege against self-incrimination, which provoked hostile comments from the judge. The court then sent Mead to join Penn in the bale dock out of the sight of the jury and witnesses.
Finally, after the testimony, the court concluded that the judge had instructed the jury to find the defendants guilty as charged, dictating what verdict he had expected. Penn tried to protest but was silenced and again sent out of the courtroom. The jury, for its part, proved sympathetic to the two defendants and refused the judge’s command to find the defendants guilty.
At this point, the judge became so enraged, as I would expect from Judge Juan Merchan, and sent the jury back to reconsider their verdict. When they returned with the same verdict, the court criticized the jury’s leader, Bushnell, and demanded “a verdict that the court will accept, and you shall be locked up without meat, drink, fire, and tobacco…We will have a verdict by the help of God or you will starve for it.”
After that, the jury was sent back three more times but returned with the same verdict. Finally, the jury refused to reconsider. The judge then fined each jury member forty marks and ordered them imprisoned until the fine was paid. Penn and Mead went to prison anyway, held in contempt for obeying the bailiff’s order that they put on their hats.
Later, the jury members won a writ of habeas corpus and were released from prison. Penn and Mead left England after their release from prison, having a taste of English justice, and sailed to America. (Earl Warren, “A Republic, If You Can Keep It”, p. 113-115). Thus, Pennsylvania was founded.
In 1895, in the case of Sparf v. United States written by Justice John Marshall Harlan, the United States Supreme Court held 5 to 4 that a trial judgehas no responsibility to inform the jury of the right to nullify laws. This decision, often cited, has led to a common practice by United States judges to penalize anyone who attempts to present a nullification argument to jurors and to declare a mistrial if such an argument has been presented to them, informing the jury of their Constitutional Right under We the People.
In some states, jurors are likely to be struck from the panel during voir dire if they will not agree to accept as correct the rulings and instructions of the law as provided by the judge. This illustrates that the very same powers of the judge in the case against William Penn are alive and well. This is what is taking place in New York right now by the very questions this judge is asking the jurors – will you find Trump guilty because I said he is?
In recent rulings, the courts have continued to prohibit informing juries about jury their CONSTITUTIONAL right to nullification. In a 1969 Fourth Circuit decision, U.S. v. Moylan (417 F.2d 1002), the Court affirmed the concept of jury nullification but upheld the court’s power to refuse to permit an instruction to the jury to this effect. The Moylan court wrote:
“If the jury feels the law is unjust, we recognize the undisputed power of the jury to acquit.” —4th Circuit Court of Appeals United States v. Moylan 1969
So, how can the government refuse to explain the right of the jury? This is the ultimate tyranny, depriving the jury of informing them that they are the CHECK AND BALANCE against corrupt prosecutions that are taking place right now! Disgracing the United States on the world stage. Judge Juan Merchan is destroying the United States just as the judge did in the case against William Penn. This is what it always comes down to: Justice = Just US.
The Democrats think that they can simply oppress Trump and the Republicans and rig the election to keep their agenda of Climate Change, reducing the population by 2 billion+, and waging World War III against Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea simultaneously while eliminating all paper money going to DIGITAL currencies to ensure you cannot pay that 16-year-old girl next door to watch the kids while you and your wife go to dinner. How about paying that enterprising young boy to shovel your driveway when Climate Change dumps three feet of snow on your house because of Global Warming? OMG – they are not paying taxes, which is why the government cannot balance the budget – it’s all your fault. As the data already shows, the 80,000 armed IRS agents target people under $200,000 because those above have accountants and lawyers.
This insane judge thought by requiring Trump to be in court every day for at least the next two months, he would end his campaign for president, preventing him from ordinarily scheduling a series of campaign speeches at fundraisers and rallies. This judge has also effectively protected Biden and the Democrats from any claim that he is afraid of debating Trump when he will not be allowed to leave New York City – the cesspool of the United States – not the Big Apple.
Even our foreign clients see it as a political trial. This judge has not just undermined the respect for the American legal system, but he has destroyed the image of the United States as the land of the free, home of the brave, and the promise of justice for all. This calls into question asking our young men to die on the battlefield for a Constitution and rights that the courts have been shredding since COVID. According to Gallup Polls, the confidence in our legal system in 2014 was only 47%, compared to Russia at 28%. In June 2022, the Gallup Poll reported that the CONFIDENCE in the Legam System collapsed to 25% – lower than in Russia in 2014.
Judge Juan Merchan should have dismissed this case, but he is so biased that they think that they can pull this off. He intends to sentence Trump to prison Trump, and this prosecutor already says it is time for “rich white guys” to go to prison. This judge has guaranteed that Trump will be using this trial as the center point of how bad the Swamp has become.
NOT one of our thousands of non-US institutions views this as a legitimate trial., even those who dislike Trump. You cannot do this in a nation that is supposed to be the beacon of liberty to the world when we also have more people in prison than Russia or China, even when China has 1.5 billion compared to our 300 million. Either Americans are the most corrupt people on the planet, or we have the most corrupt legal system. Trust me – it is the latter.
This trial will be the first to tear the United States apart at the seams. Once the rule of law collapses, NO NATION has ever survived as history stands as witness. The arrogance of this judge has been unimaginable since the trial of William Penn.
We can see what the computer is projecting. Out of six separate models, four all give this election to Trump. But two have unimaginable returns of 59% to 61%. This abuse of this judge will most likely swing the undecided to Trump because this is exposing how bad the legal system has become.
Then, look at the forecast for 2028. We are looking at a 78% v 19.2% on the first model, which has never been seen except for maybe George Washington. But the underlying response is even worse. The computer is showing a higher probability that the 2028 election will not even take place. It is rapidly approaching the time to turn the lights out on this failed experiment of a Republic.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America