Judge Juan Merchan has openly targeted President Trump on behalf of the clients for the judge’s daughter Loren Merchan. Ms Merchan is president of Authentic Campaigns, a Chicago-based progressive political consulting firm who represents the interests of Democrat politicians.
NEW YORK – Donald Trump was held in contempt by Justice Juan Merchan Tuesday morning for social media posts and other statements the former president made that violated a gag order imposed in his Manhattan criminal case.
The judge ordered Trump to pay a $9,000 fine — $1,000 for each violation. And he warned Trump that additional violations could land him in jail.
“Defendant is hereby warned that the Court will not tolerate willful violations of its lawful orders and that if necessary and appropriate under the circumstances, it will impose an incarceratory punishment,” the judge wrote in an eight-page decision. (more)
What President Trump said this morning about the Israeli hostages held by Hamas is brutally honest and true.
It is always difficult to tell the hard thing to those who need to pretend not to know the truth. However, one of the great benefits of President Trump’s leadership both domestically and on the global stage is his willingness to say the honest thing consistently.
A newly released CNN poll [DATA HERE] shows President Trump with a 6-point advantage over Joe Biden and when third party candidates are included the lead widens to 9 points.
(Via CNN) – Donald Trump continues to hold an advantage over President Joe Biden as the campaign – and the former president’s criminal trial – move forward, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS. And in the coming rematch, opinions about the first term of each man vying for a second four years in the White House now appear to work in Trump’s favor, with most Americans saying that, looking back, Trump’s term as president was a success, while a broad majority says Biden’s has so far been a failure.
Trump’s support in the poll among registered voters holds steady at 49% in a head-to-head matchup against Biden, the same as in CNN’s last national poll on the race in January, while Biden’s stands at 43%, not significantly different from January’s 45%.
I’m catching up on perspectives from the talking head class about the ridiculous “hush money” legal case in New York City. As I watched the review by Jonathan Turley, I noticed the video caught someone on the livestream.
Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) is a disease that is highly contagious and often deadly in poultry, caused by highly pathogenic avian influenza A (H5) and A (H7) viruses; it is also known as bird or avian flu. The FDA has found that one in five samples of consumer milk contain inactive viral fragments of Bird Flu pathogens. Transmission origin unknown.
Most of the USA milk supply is pasteurized, a process which kills any pathogenic virus that might be present. So, the milk supply is safe. It is odd however, that Bird Flu is somehow being carried in dairy cows. Given the nature of how the FDA has previously handled Bovine Somatotrophin (BST), or growth hormone use in dairy cows, and given the nature of how the FDA botched the initial handling of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE, Mad Cow), some people are concerned.
From my perspective, this recent FDA report seems to be targeting the growing trend of raw milk sales and usage.
It has long been accepted that the FDA doesn’t like people who avoid adulterating their body with genetically modified food products from the friendship of Big Ag and Big Rx; it’s a financial issue. The FDA fully supports the genetic modification of food, the vaccine injections from Big Ag/Rx and the allowed use of animal growth hormones.
The food supply has long been considered an optimal pathway for vaccine delivery into the human body. Much like the fluoride addition to municipal water supplies, the opportunity to enhance food with vaccines or DNA modification targeting has long been a goal.
The issue of presidential immunity is being tested in the DC political Lawfare case against President Donald Trump.
As the Jack Smith prosecution claims President Trump tried to “overturn the results of the 2020 election,” the issue of presidential actions intended to secure & protect the legitimacy of election outcomes becomes a focus.
The legal counsel for President Trump has stated any action by the president to ensure election security falls within official acts, and is therefore subject to immunity from prosecution. The special counsel claims the act of reviewing an election outcome is a private benefit to the president and not part of presidential immunity.
The Supreme Court is now involved in determining whether the President of the United States has immunity from prosecution, or whether any/all future presidents can be prosecuted for their action while in office. Inside the debate is the larger question of whether the “bureaucratic state” controls the president, or whether the office of the president controls the executive branch bureaucratic state.
The leftists and communists agree with former AG Bill Barr, that institutions run the government, and the office of the President is simply a figurehead within it. In essence, the DC institutions are omnipotent and powerful, and the president is simply occupying space the deep state allows. That’s the core ramification within the immunity argument.
In this video, Justice Brett Kavanaugh asks several questions about limiting the immunity of the president and some of the ramifications that will surface for future presidents. WATCH:
Interestingly, at 2:30 of the video, Justice Kavanaugh notes the current Lawfare approach – crowdsourcing for prosecution angles with the DOJ, which was the same Lawfare approach used by the beach friends to attack Kavanaugh’s nomination. Judge Kavanaugh uses that hidden reference point – very subtlety – but its inclusion shows that he knows exactly what is taking place here.
I also like the part where the DOJ argues President Obama is not guilty of murder, via drone strike, because the type of murder created by Obama in that situation was “lawful murder.” Collateral killing via drone strike is considered by the DOJ to be: the lawful murder of another person with malice of forethought and specific intent to kill.
Gee, what could possibly go wrong with the DC administrative Deep State having the power to determine what is “lawful conduct” vs “unlawful conduct” by their political opposition? Oh wait, it’s done by DOJ statutory interpretation, lolol… now I feel better. Good grief, can people not see where this ends.
That said, here’s what the SCOTUS is going to do… I’m 95% certain of this.
[Oh, and Steve Bannon’s insufferable legal analysis, by Mike Davis, is GASLIGHTING. Davis is an idiot and totally dishonest legal mind (wants to be AG – God, help us), who only tells MAGA what they want to hear; so, I would suggest ignoring his claim that SCOTUS will rule support for Trump with absolute immunity. Mike Davis is totally wrong.]
If you have followed law and politics for any length of time, you have probably heard of “speaking indictments.” That’s where the prosecution will write an indictment or court motion with very granular -yet perhaps not pertinent- details of a case against a suspect that highlights a much bigger picture than a singular perspective against the individual defendant. The intent is to make the public aware of the details within a case by making them part of the court record.
In the Special Counsel Jack Smith constructed Lawfare case against Donald Trump, what is generally called “the documents case”, involving the raid on Mar-a-Lago, President Trump’s attorney, Christopher Kise, did something similar to a speaking indictment with an extensive court motion on January 16, 2024. The 68-page motion is a comprehensive “speaking motion” which outlines a great deal of the fraud and Lawfare manipulation by the special counsel. [SEE DOCUMENT HERE]
In response to the filing, using the pre-established legal narrative about needing to control “national security” information [SEE HERE], the Jack Smith team (essentially Lawfare operatives like Weissman, Eisen and McCord) redacted large portions of the Trump motion specifically to stop the public record from showing the outline. However, two days ago, April 22nd, Judge Aileen Cannon unsealed and more importantly ‘unredacted’ the motion.
Keep in mind, back in the beginning of the pre-trial discovery phase -in response to the filing by Trump- Jack Smith gave the judge the opinion of the DOJ [SEE HERE] toward discovery and documents. As noted, and summarized well by Julie Kelly:
To clear up any confusion as to what Special Counsel Jack Smith sought to conceal in classified documents case, this is what Smith told Judge Cannon in Feb 2024 in response to Trump’s motion to compel discovery from numerous govt agencies:
1) Defendants are not entitled to discovery of internal government correspondence and memoranda, or to documents that are otherwise privileged.
2) The Court Should Deny Defendants’ Requests for Evidence of ‘Improper Coordination with NARA’ and of ‘Bias and Investigative Misconduct.’
3) The Court Should Deny Defendants’ Requests for Evidence Related to Trump’s Security Clearance With The Department of Energy.
4) The Court Should Deny Defendants’ Requests for Evidence Related to Secure Facilities at President Trump’s Residences.
5) The Court Should Deny Defendants’ Requests for Production of Materials Concerning the Search of Mar-a-Lago.
AND FINALLY:
6) Defendants’ Request for Unredacted Discovery of Materials Should Be Denied.
This is not going to be a surprise for regular CTH readers; however, Politico is outlining how a group of Lawfare ideologues meet every Friday to discuss their constructed legal filings and the next week of attack angles against President Donald Trump.
In essence, the core group inside the meeting are what Christine Blasey-Ford called the “beach friends” when discussing who constructed the legal avenues for the ridiculous attack against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
As we have noted for the past several years, it’s this same group of Lawfare ideologues, mostly former DOJ administrators and lawyers, who are behind every anti-Trump effort. The primary trio is Mary McCord, Norm Eisen (left in red tie), and Andrew Weissmann.
These are the three members who write the briefs and court motions that Jack Smith then files.
Mary McCord worked in the DOJ-NSD to secure the first Title-1 warrant against the Trump campaign; then she created the Logan Act violation to use against Michael Flynn; then she went to work with Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler on both impeachment efforts; then McCord went to work for Bennie Thompson on the J6 committee; then she worked as the liaison between the J6 Committee and Fulton County DA Fani Willis, and now Mary McCord currently works for Jack Smith on the special counsel effort.
Politico outlines how Lawfare operative Norm Eisen organizes the weekly Lawfare meeting and lists the participants who also join in. Remember, Mary McCord, Norm Eisen and Andrew Weissmann are the primary Lawfare agents.
Via POLITICO – […] Every Friday, they meet on Zoom to hash out the latest twists and turns in the Trump legal saga — and intellectually stress-test the arguments facing Trump on his journey through the American legal system.
The meetings are off the record — a chance for the group’s members, many of whom are formally or loosely affiliated with different media outlets, to grapple with a seemingly endless array of novel legal issues before they hit the airwaves or take to print or digital outlets to weigh in with their thoughts.
The group’s host is Norman Eisen, a senior Obama administration official, longtime Trump critic and CNN legal analyst, who has been convening the group since 2022 as Trump’s legal woes ramped up. Eisen was also a key member of the team of lawyers assembled by House Democrats to handle Trump’s first impeachment.
This is more than a little interesting and aligns with my own research and discussions. House Speaker Mike Johnson was lobbied by former CIA Director Mike Pompeo and current officials from the CIA, DNI and Intelligence Community.
This effort, and his son starting at the Naval Academy, is what changed Johnson’s mind about allowing the U.S. intelligence community to have his full support in the IC war against the American people.
The story is shared by CNN, the official outlet for perspectives and viewpoints held by the U.S. State Dept (CIA), so keep the narrative origination in mind. Here are the key points as written in the article:
WASHINGTON – […] The speaker’s embrace of Ukraine aid represents a remarkable evolution for Johnson, who voted against funding for the country as a rank-and-file member. But almost immediately after securing the speaker’s gavel, sources say he began to hear directly from critical Republican national security voices – including Donald Trump’s former secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, who impressed upon him the urgent need to approve assistance for Ukraine in its fight against Russia’s invasion.
In March, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky lobbied the speaker directly. Within minutes of the House approving a new military aid package for Ukraine on Saturday, Zelensky offered his thanks to US lawmakers, and in particular to Johnson for his decision that “keeps history on the right track.”
And more recently, Johnson received a key intelligence briefing from CIA Director Bill Burns, who painted a picture of the dire situation on the battlefield in Ukraine and the global consequences of inaction, according to multiple sources with knowledge of the situation. The briefing left a lasting impression, and Johnson became increasingly convinced the fate of Western democracy was on his shoulders, sources close to him said.
This combative gaslighting from the US Senate about what FISA-702 does is off the proverbial charts. In this interview, Senator Lindsey Graham starts foaming at the mouth yelling about something that doesn’t even exist. This is nuts.
FISA-702 ONLY pertains to the private conversations of AMERICANS, not – I repeat – not any intercept or communication method that has to do with a foreigner or foreign adversary.
The only time FISA-702 applies is when an American person is captured in an intercept that has targeted a foreign person. Surveillance of foreign actors, foreign persons and intercepting communication of foreign entities does not require any FISA authority at all. Foreign actors do not have constitutional protection.
FISA-702 only applies when the intercept of a foreign person is connected to communication with an American person. In that specific scenario FISA-702 gives the U.S. government the authority to query the database of the American person.
However, the database search queries of Americans, people who have no contact with any foreign person, is the privacy aspect that has been abused by the intelligence apparatus. Senator Lindsey Graham comes unglued as he starts gaslighting on this issue. WATCH (prompted):
.
The Deep State supporters are so committed to keeping the unconstitutional surveillance system of the American people in place, they will lie and makeup any fictitious scenario imaginable to retain it. This is nonsense.
