New Hampshire shuts down gambit to block Trump from primary ballot, snubs DNC election calendar

quote:

The top election official in New Hampshire says he won't invoke the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution in order to block former President Donald Trump from the ballot in the state that holds the first primary in the Republican nominating calendar.

So an FBI guy who was part of the team to try to take down Donald Trump w false claims of "working w the Russians", then went ahead and actually did work for the Russians

https://www.foxnews.com/politi...lea-deal-2nd-dc-case

The former FBI official who played a role in the Trump-Russia probe and recently pleaded guilty to charges of conspiring with a Russian oligarch has asked a Washington, D.C., federal judge for more time to craft a plea deal in connection to a second, more serious indictment with charges that could land him behind bars for decades.

Last month, Charles McGonigal, the former head of the FBI’s counterintelligence division in New York, pleaded guilty in the Southern District of New York to a single count of conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and to commit money laundering in connection with his 2021 agreement to provide services to sanctioned Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska.

McGonigal was also slapped earlier this year with a nine-count indictment in the District of Columbia for allegedly requesting and concealing at least $225,000 in cash he allegedly received from a former Albanian intelligence official while working for the FBI and misleading the bureau about his travels abroad to meet with foreign nationals.

McGonigal's attorneys had asked the court in a Sept. 8 motion for a roughly weeklong delay "to provide the parties additional time to negotiate a potential resolution of this case in advance of the next status conference." Defense counsel agreed to have the time between Sept. 13-21 be excluded from the calculation of when a delay could violate his right to a speedy trial so that an agreement could be reached, adding that prosecutors were not opposed to the delay.

McGonigal was Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s counterintelligence division in New York from 2016 to 2018. He supervised investigations of Russian oligarchs, including Deripaska.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia later affirmed the sanctions against Deripaska, finding there was evidence he had acted as an agent of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

McGonigal could face a five-year prison term in connection to the New York case, and Judge Jennifer H. Rearden last month scheduled his sentencing for Dec. 14.

In Washington, D.C., McGonigal was indicted on the charge of falsification of records and documents, which carries a statutory maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. The nine-count indictment also included the charge of making false statements, which carries a statutory maximum sentence of five years in prison for each count. The charges also carry potential financial penalties.

During an Aug. 15 hearing in New York City, McGonigal said he was "deeply remorseful" for work he did in 2021 for the billionaire industrialist Deripaska, telling the judge he accepted over $17,000 to help Deripaska collect derogatory information about another Russian oligarch who was a business competitor.

McGonigal was also trying to help Deripaska get off the sanctions list, Assistant U.S. Attorney Rebecca Dell said, and was in negotiations along with co-conspirators to receive a fee of $650,000 to $3 million to hunt for electronic files revealing hidden assets of $500 million belonging to the oligarch's business rival.

McGonigal admitted Deripaska funneled the $17,500 payment he received through a bank in Cypress and a corporation in New Jersey before it was transferred into his bank account.

Shows how biased some courts are. Especially left run courts.

Explosive Testimony from Former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice at Disbarment Trial of Trump’s Attorney John Eastman

https://thestarnewsnetwork.com...torney-john-eastman/

The disbarment trial of Donald Trump’s attorney John Eastman is in its fourth week, and on Thursday the State Bar of California rested its case and Eastman’s attorney began putting on witnesses, beginning with former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman. Gableman was directed by the Wisconsin Legislature to conduct a minimal investigation of the 2020 election, and he revealed numerous instances where he believed the law was broken, and had election officials referred for prosecution.

Shortly after Gableman began testifying as Eastman’s first witness, the judge appeared to lose her temper at him. Gableman was discussing how he’d been appointed by Wisconsin Speaker of the House Robin Vos, and approved by the Wisconsin Assembly to serve as special counsel to investigate whether there was wrongdoing in the 2020 election. Gableman said it was “widely known” that Vos didn’t want a “deep” investigation, it was “not a serious effort.”

Carling objected to him stating it was “widely known” since it was hearsay. Although Roland has let in almost all hearsay favoring the California Bar so far, justifying it by stating the disciplinary court has extra exceptions for hearsay, she would not allow Gableman’s statement, and gave him a stern lecture. When Gableman inquired about the Rules of Evidence in that court, she looked upset and called for a break asking Eastman’s attorney to deal with him.

Miller asked Gableman about what violations of the law he found from his investigation. Gableman discussed how Wisconsin election officials from the Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC) ignored the law requiring bipartisan observers present when collecting votes from nursing homes and other assisted living facilities, and so the sheriff referred the election officials for criminal charges. Gableman said those officials said during a meeting that was videotaped that they knew they were breaking the law by telling the clerks to disregard the law and just mail the ballots to nursing home residents.

Other laws Gableman said he discovered were broken were related to “Zuckbucks,” money that Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg’s organization provided to five of Wisconsin’s largest cities, ostensibly to deal with voting during COVID-19. Zuckerberg’s Center for Tech & Civic Life (CTCL) provided $8.8 million to the cities, which Gableman said he refused to refer to as grants because he believed they were really employment contracts. He said the contracts required the cities to follow instructions provided by CTCL, which he believed was a violation of law for a private entity to tell the government what to do. If the cities didn’t comply, there was a “clawback provision,” which would penalize the cities almost $10 million.

The contracts behaved like employment contracts, he said, since the CTCL employees would go to the election clerks’ offices and work with them. There, they had access to information the public could not acquire anywhere near as well. They could see the voter rolls over time; whereas if the public wanted to see them, they would need to pay $12,500, wait four to five days, and then be provided a snapshot of one moment in time from the database. Gableman said this would not reveal to them whether voter registrations had been made active two weeks prior to the election, then changed back to inactive two weeks after the election, something that had become a concern.

Gableman was disturbed that the CTCL employees were able to determine if a voter was likely to vote for Trump or Biden by looking in the databases. They were allowed to see voters who had requested ballots but hadn’t returned them, then go chase them down to get their ballots. He said the CTCL employees were “embedded” in the clerks’ offices and “running the elections.”

He believed this was “election bribery,” since the CTCL paid the cities to reach out to register voters and solicit their ballots. The law states that you cannot give anything of value to solicit a ballot.

Gableman pointed out that Zuckerberg and his wife had publicly stated they wanted to defeat Trump. The pair hired progressive activist David Plouffe to run their operation. Plouffe had written a book on how to defeat Trump, where he said the election would be won dueling it out “block by block” in these types of big cities, Gableman said.

Gableman said votes were “illegally cast” that were deposited in drop boxes, since the drop boxes violated the law by not being placed near the clerks’ offices. Instead the clerks allowed the CTCL to dictate where they were placed. He said the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled they were illegal. Finally, Gableman said his investigation found that there were far more people registered to vote than were eligible; 4.5 million eligible voters, but over 7 million on the rolls.

The judge’s response to these revelations was to ask Gableman how this activity was any different from Republicans engaging in electioneering.

Thursday’s proceedings began with wrapping up the California bar’s case, as its attorney Duncan Carling finished his cross-examination of Eastman. He asked Eastman if the alternate slates of electors were valid, then could any private group of citizens submit slates to the vice president who would have to consider them? Eastman responded and said the difference is that in 2020, the slates were composed of electors “formally nominated by their own party,” not private people who chose themselves. He referenced a woman in Tennessee who submits her own private slate of electors regularly that gets ignored. Neither she nor her “slate” have been prosecuted or disciplined.

Carling tried multiple times to get Eastman to state that the vice president, serving as president of the senate, has the sole authority over accepting or rejecting electoral slates. Eastman repeatedly corrected him, stating that his position was more nuanced. In 1857, the vice president made the decision on his own without the assistance of Congress to accept a disputed electoral slate from Wisconsin, saying any objections were out of order. Eastman said the law is not clear whether Congress has a role too. Eastman believes the Electoral Count Act is probably unconstitutional since it gave Congress this authority, which may violate the 12th Amendment delegating it to the vice president.

At one point, Eastman referred to the vice president as “him,” and California Bar Disciplinary Judge Yvette Roland, who contributed to Democrats while sitting as a judge, corrected him and said “or her.”

Eastman said he believed electronic voting machines in Colorado’s Mesa County flipped the vote from Trump to Biden in the 2020 election. In Michigan’s Antrim County, where the machines also flipped the vote but it was treated as a mistake, he said it was unable to be determined whether it was intentional or not since the log files were deleted.

John David, an X user, tweeted, “Ever notice how often evidence, drives, documents, etc get lost, destroyed, cleaned, wiped like with a cloth and so forth? Seems to lean very heavily in favor of certain agencies and people too. One might at some point think it was happening on purpose.”

When asked whether there was intentional election fraud in Arizona, Eastman said it wasn’t allowed to be fully proven since a full investigation was never permitted. In Wisconsin, Eastman said there was “evidence of coordination in Wisconsin between election officials and Democratic Party officials.”

Eastman also said there was collusion between Pennsylvania election officials and the Democratic Party. He said the government gave advance warning to Democratic Party officials in advance that they would be breaking state law by allowing curing of ballots on Election Day. This allowed the Democratic Party to advertise for workers in advance, which violated law since state law said that information cannot be disclosed until the polls have closed, Eastman explained.

In both Pennsylvania and Georgia, he said bipartisan teams of observers were prohibited from going into nursing homes, which led to massive turnout from those nursing homes and fraud found there.

Eastman criticized former Attorney General Bill Barr’s claim that the election was secure. Barr said there was no fraud, Eastman said, but said nothing about the illegalities, “and precious little in the way of investigations that would give credibility to such a statement [denying fraud].”

Carling questioned Eastman about his speech at the J6 protest, where he said dead people voted. Eastman said he’d heard prior to the speech that there were large numbers of votes recorded by dead people in Georgia and Nevada.

Carling frequently asked questions of Eastman that were phrased in ways Eastman said were incorrect. For example, Carling referenced a Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals case where he said the court upheld the lower district court. Eastman, testifying from memory, said the appeals court affirmed in part and reversed in part, and Carling admitted Eastman was right.

Randy Miller, Eastman’s attorney, frequently objected to Carling asking Eastman about completely unrelated cases that took place long after his involvement in the 2020 election challenges, such as the Dominion lawsuit against Fox News. Miller said to allow the questioning to continue, it could go on forever asking Eastman about random cases that took place for years afterwards that had nothing whatsoever to do with him. The judge overruled his objections.

Eastman said he hadn’t followed the Dominion lawsuit closely, since he wasn’t involved in it, but said the problem with that case was counter evidence wasn’t presented, and he was surprised Fox didn’t fight it more.

Carling asked Eastman about the two lawsuits Trump brought in Georgia, Trump v. Raffensperger and Trump v. Kemp, which were “voluntarily dismissed.” Eastman explained that in the Raffensperger lawsuit, the judge didn’t bother scheduling it until after J6, so after that it was moot, too late. The other case had a similar situation making it moot.

At one point, Eastman said he was relying on the findings of an expert who found that the number of ballots massively increased overnight after the Wisconsin election. The mainstream media said it wasn’t a massive increase, citing “estimates” that were just slightly off by election officials. Eastman said his expert disagreed. Carling asked Eastman who the expert was, and Eastman said he preferred not to say since he’d told the expert he would leave his name out of the trial, but said he could tell the judge off the record. She refused to let him protect the expert, and required him to reveal his name, which was Dr. Eric Quinnell.

Later, Carling pointed out that Quinnell’s name was on one of the documents that Eastman had provided, acting as if that justified releasing his name regarding the Wisconsin incident.

As took place frequently during previous days of the trial, the judge allowed in a considerable amount of evidence that was unrelated to Eastman. She allowed Carling to play the entire speech that Rudy Giuliani gave at the J6 protest.

The trial is being livestreamed and is expected to continue through next week unless interrupted by the Georgia prosecution. Coverage of the earlier cross-examination of Eastman on Wednesday, which brought out many of the reasons judges dismissed election challenges in the 2020 election, is here.

^^^^
That’s a GOOD article! Thanks for posting.

Good article, yes...Frightening what's occurring in that courtroom due a judge that's unwilling (incapable?) to be impartial though. That article certainly identifies grounds for appeal, should Eastman not prevail, so there's that too.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/14...rial-date/index.html

Former President Donald Trump, along with 16 co-defendants, will not go to trial in October with two other defendants in the Georgia election subversion case but will move forward on their own schedule, with a trial date yet be announced, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee announced Thursday.

The two remaining co-defendants, Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell, sought speedy trials and are scheduled to begin in October.

McAfee’s order shuts down the effort by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to have all 19 defendants tried together in October.

“Fulton County DA Fani Willis’ politically motivated, wrongful attempt to deny President Trump due process of law by arguing that no severances should be granted has been summarily squashed by the court,” a spokesperson for Trump said. “Willis’ unjust rush to judgment in order to please her radical political base has simply failed.”

While McAfee didn’t set a trial date for Trump and 16 of his co-defendants, the timeline he sets out in a court order Thursday means they wouldn’t go on trial before at least December.

The new schedule laid out by the judge signals he wants to start hashing out pretrial disputes with the batch of 17 defendants by the end of the year. The judge is ordering discovery to start by October 6.

However, there is no set timeline yet for the trial for the 17 defendants nor is there one for resolving disputes over what evidence can be presented to the jury. McAfee ordered that other types of pretrial motions be filed by December 1, but he has not scheduled a hearing on those requests.

At the pace McAfee laid out, federal courts will have some time to address the efforts by some defendants in the case to move their prosecutions to federal court.

Chris Christie should be thanking his lucky stars that Trump will not be debating him.
Rod

^^^

They’re not Americans.

Well, those VP prospects were short lived.

************

SD Gov. Kristi Noem having affair with Trump aide Corey Lewandowski, sources say

https://nypost.com/2023/09/15/...yp&utm_medium=social

Boy! The DIRT these Leftist Pravda/TASS "news" outlets can dig up in the blink of an eye is just ASTOUNDING!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
...sources say

Uh huh

Trained poodles couldn't jump through hoops any faster than some of you. You should join the circus.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
SD Gov. Kristi Noem having affair with Trump aide Corey Lewandowski, sources say

Since the beginning of time, rumor and innuendo have been around, and most just to sell more newspapers, more viewership, more clicks, etc. This kind of stuff requires a high school mentality to take absolutely seriously.

Megyn Kelly Interviews President Donald Trump

Megyn Kelly is joined by former President Donald Trump to talk about the Biden impeachment inquiry, what we’re learning now about the potential for then-VP Biden corruption that Trump tried to bring up at the debate, whether Biden is too old to be president, birthright citizenship and the immigration crisis in America, why he didn’t fire Dr. Fauci, how Biden and DeSantis handled COVID, the success or failure of Operation Warp Speed and COVID vaccines, not getting enough credit for what did during the beginning of the pandemic, his stance on trans rights and how it’s evolved, his friendship with Caitlyn Jenner (and previously Bruce), trans in the military, whether he’d ban puberty blockers for kids, the details of his classified documents case and the Presidential Records Act, why he didn’t turn over documents after the subpoena, Hillary Clinton and the double standard, if he’s angry about the prosecutions, the real story behind the “DeSanctimonious” Ron DeSantis nickname, why he values loyalty above so much else, how Melania and Barron are doing, the personality traits about Melania that the media doesn’t understand, why he’s running for president and facing jail time instead of enjoying retirement, the way this country can come together, that big debate moment between Trump and Megyn, and more...

Jack Smith seeks gag order on Trump

On Friday afternoon, U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan unsealed filings revealing the government’s week-old request.

https://www.politico.com/news/...er-on-trump-00116366

Special counsel Jack Smith is asking a judge to issue a gag order against Donald Trump, prohibiting him from attacking prosecutors, the judge or potential witnesses who may testify in his federal criminal trial stemming from his effort to subvert the 2020 election.

“The defendant’s past conduct, including conduct that has taken place after and as a direct result of the indictment in this case, amply demonstrates the need for this order,” prosecutors wrote, adding that Trump’s past salvos had already resulted in harassment of potential witnesses.

On Friday afternoon, U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan unsealed filings revealing the government’s week-old request, arguing that Trump is undermining the fairness of the proceedings through “disparaging and inflammatory attacks” on prosecutors, witnesses and the judge in the case.

Given Trump’s penchant for bombastic public statements and for using his social media accounts to settle political scores, a clash like the one now playing out in front of Chutkan has seemed inevitable, particularly as the number of criminal cases Trump faces has risen to four.

Trump lashed out on his social media network Truth Social soon after news of the request broke, writing: “So, I’m campaigning for President against an incompetent person who has WEAPONIZED the DOJ & FBI to go after his Political Opponent, & I am not allowed to COMMENT? They Leak, Lie, & Sue, & they won’t allow me to SPEAK?”

While any gag order limits a defendant’s First Amendment rights, Trump’s situation is unique as he is mounting a campaign to return to the White House and is intent on using the criminal cases as part of his effort to energize his political base.

But in their new request, prosecutors say Trump’s posts amount to more than a mere breach of decorum because his public vitriol has a history of unleashing harassment by Trump followers. The prosecution specifically cited Trump’s attacks on his former cybersecurity aide Chris Krebs, Georgia election worker Ruby Freeman and former Georgia Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan as examples of figures who faced threats as a result of being singled out by the former president on social media.

Earlier Friday, a federal appeals court also unsealed records showing that the same team of prosecutors had fought in court to block Twitter from telling Trump about a pending search warrant — worrying that informing him could “precipitate violence” or enable him to attack and intimidate witnesses.

Taken together, the government’s filings over a period of several months present an extraordinary picture of a former president as a uniquely dangerous threat to the courts, the justice system and those who would align against him in his four criminal cases. They say he uses that platform — primarily Truth Social and TV interviews — to spread knowing lies about his critics and the court process in ways that stoke the fury of his followers, some of whom feel compelled to act in his name.

In the Chutkan filings, the Justice Department attorneys also pointed to Trump’s repeated incendiary attacks on Smith himself, another special counsel prosecutor Jay Bratt and on Chutkan. They accused Trump of spreading a “knowing lie” by accusing Bratt of meeting with President Joe Biden White House officials when he was in fact conducting a “routine” interview of a career military official stationed at the White House.

Prosecutors also repeatedly complained about Trump’s pointed criticism of the city that is home to those expected to decide his guilt or innocence in the case, Washington, D.C., and his public suggestions that any jury that is seated in the capital will be biased.

“No way I can get a fair trial, or even close to a fair trial, in Washington, D.C.,” Trump wrote on Truth Social last month. “I am calling for a federal takeover of this filthy and crime-ridden embarrassment to our nation. ... The federal takeover is very unpopular with potential area jurors, but necessary for greatness, & for all the world to see!”

Last month, at the first hearing Chutkan held in the case, the judge warned that Trump could face consequences if he sought to inflame passions related to the prosecution.

“The fact that he’s running a political campaign has to yield to the orderly administration of justice,” Chutkan told Trump lawyer John Lauro at the Aug. 11 hearing, which the defendant was excused from attending. “If that means he can’t say exactly what he wants to say about witnesses in this case, that’s how it has to be.”

“Even arguably ambiguous statements from parties or their counsel, if they can be reasonably interpreted to intimidate witnesses or to prejudice potential jurors, can threaten the process,” Chutkan added. “I will take whatever measures are necessary to safeguard the integrity of these proceedings.”

Earlier this week, Trump’s attorneys filed a motion asking Chutkan to step aside from the case, arguing that her past comments in other Jan. 6-related cases indicate she’d concluded Trump was guilty or at least deserved to be charged. Prosecutors are opposing the effort to recuse her.

Trump’s lawyers have asked her to rule on that issue before considering any other motion in the case.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
Well, those VP prospects were short lived.

************

SD Gov. Kristi Noem having affair with Trump aide Corey Lewandowski, sources say

https://nypost.com/2023/09/15/...yp&utm_medium=social

Not only that there is a video going around of my Congress person Lauren Boebert engaging in heavy petting in the Buell Theater before getting ejected. She also flipped the bird on the way out.

Just dripping with respect for the institution, her seat, the razor thin majority, her voters, and her kids.

Why do we expect politicians to behave any differently than the rest of the population?

They’ve demonstrated time and again that in most cases they’re simply a reflection of the general population yet we put them on pedestals.

Really, who cares who is fucking whom?

Here is my concern. The 3rd District of Colorado is not a safe seat for either party. It has shifted back and forth between parties for the last 100 years. Let's put aside who's fucking whom for a moment, and look at the situation.

Boebert has to win an election in a little over a year's time. She only won her last election by something like 500 votes. And, one of those winning votes was mine. It was very close. I've never seen a House member behave this way in public, and have it captured on video for all to see. This video is going to go viral. This video is going to be featured in campaign ads. Will it help her re-election? Or will it help hand the House back to the Democrats?

https://twitter.com/JudiciaryG.../1702778803037057503

FBI Agent Elvis Chan—a key player in the federal government’s censorship regime—was supposed to appear this morning for a transcribed interview before
@JudiciaryGOP and @Weaponization but refused to do so at the last minute .

Chan is the main link between the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force and Big Tech.

Internal Facebook docs subpoenaed by @JudiciaryGOP and @Weaponization show Chan LIED under oath during his deposition in the ongoing lawsuit against the Biden Admin for censoring Americans.

The FBI met over 30 times with Big Tech in the lead-up to the 2020 election, warning of a Russian “hack-and-leak” operation slated for October.

All the while the FBI had Hunter Biden’s laptop and knew it was real.

By refusing to appear voluntarily, the Committee had no choice but to use compulsory process.

Pursuant to a subpoena, Agent Chan must now appear for a deposition on Thursday, September 21, 2023.

Enough

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
Really, who cares who is fucking whom?

Oh, I don't know, their spouses maybe? Their children? Their constituents who'd rather not vote for an immature and immoral whore to represent them? Just a thought.

If their spouse can't trust them, then neither can you.