Offensive Emails Among Businessmen, Donald Trump Jr. Spark Fight in Hedge Fund Case – WSJ

Skip to Main Content Explore Our Brands WSJ Barron’s MarketWatch IBD Offensive Emails Among Businessmen, Donald Trump Jr. Spark Fight in Hedge Fund Case Share Resize Listen (2 min) Subscribe Sign In SubscribeSign In English Edition Edition English中文 (Chinese)日本語 (Japanese) Print Edition Video Audio Latest Headlines More MoreOther Products from WSJBuy Side from WSJWSJ ShopWSJ Wine Latest World Topics Africa Americas Asia China Europe Middle East India Oceania Russia U.K. More Science Archaeology Biology Environment Physics Space & Astronomy World Video Business Topics Airlines Autos C-Suite Deals Earnings Energy & Oil Entrepreneurship Telecom Retail Hospitality Logistics Media C-Suite CFO Journal CIO Journal CMO Today Logistics Report Risk & Compliance WSJ Professional WSJ Pro Bankruptcy WSJ Pro Central Banking WSJ Pro Cybersecurity WSJ Pro Private Equity WSJ Pro Sustainable Business WSJ Pro Venture Capital More Heard on the Street Journal Reports Business Video Business Podcast U.S. Topics Climate & Environment Education Law College Rankings 2024 More U.S. Video What’s News Podcast Politics Topics Elections National Security Policy More Politics Video Economy Topics Central Banking Consumers Housing Jobs Trade Global WSJ Professional WSJ Pro Bankruptcy WSJ Pro Central Banking WSJ Pro Private Equity WSJ Pro Venture Capital More Capital Account Economic Forecasting Survey Economy Video Tech Topics AI Biotech Cybersecurity Personal Technology More Christopher Mims Joanna Stern Julie Jargon Nicole Nguyen CIO Journal The Future of Everything Tech Video Tech Podcast Finance Topics Banking Commodities & Futures Currencies Investing Regulation Stocks More Heard on the Street Greg Ip Jason Zweig Laura Saunders James Mackintosh CFO Journal Markets Video Your Money Briefing Podcast Market Data Market Data Home Companies U.S. Stocks Commodities Bonds & Rates Currencies Market Data Mutual Funds & ETFs Opinion Columnists Gerard Baker Sadanand Dhume Allysia Finley James Freeman William A. Galston Daniel Henninger Holman W. Jenkins Andy Kessler William McGurn Walter Russell Mead Peggy Noonan Mary Anastasia O’Grady Jason Riley Joseph Sternberg Kimberley A. Strassel More Editorials Commentary Future View Houses of Worship Cross Country Letters to the Editor The Weekend Interview Potomac Watch Podcast Foreign Edition Podcast Free Expression Podcast Opinion Video Notable & Quotable Arts & Culture Topics Books Film Fine Art Food & Cooking History Music Television Theater Reviews Architecture Review Art Reviews Film Reviews Television Reviews Theater Reviews Masterpiece Series Music Reviews Dance Reviews Opera Reviews Exhibition Reviews Cultural Commentary More WSJ Puzzles What To Watch Arts Calendar Lifestyle Topics Careers Cars Fitness Relationships Travel Workplace More On Wine Work & Life Carry On On The Clock Elizabeth Bernstein Turning Points WSJ Puzzles Recipes Real Estate Topics Commercial Real Estate Luxury Homes Personal Finance Topics Retirement Savings Credit Taxes Mortgages More Jason Zweig Laura Saunders James Mackintosh Health Topics Healthcare Pharma Wellness More Your Health Style Topics Beauty Design Fashion More Off Brand On Trend My Monday Morning Sports Topics Baseball Basketball Football Golf Hockey Olympics Soccer Tennis More Jason Gay English Edition EditionEnglish中文 (Chinese)日本語 (Japanese) Print Edition Video Audio Latest Headlines More MoreOther Products from WSJBuy Side from WSJWSJ ShopWSJ Wine Latest World Topics Africa Americas Asia China Europe Middle East India Oceania Russia U.K. More Science Archaeology Biology Environment Physics Space & Astronomy World Video Business Topics Airlines Autos C-Suite Deals Earnings Energy & Oil Entrepreneurship Telecom Retail Hospitality Logistics Media C-Suite CFO Journal CIO Journal CMO Today Logistics Report Risk & Compliance WSJ Professional WSJ Pro Bankruptcy WSJ Pro Central Banking WSJ Pro Cybersecurity WSJ Pro Private Equity WSJ Pro Sustainable Business WSJ Pro Venture Capital More Heard on the Street Journal Reports Business Video Business Podcast U.S. Topics Climate & Environment Education Law College Rankings 2024 More U.S. Video What’s News Podcast Politics Topics Elections National Security Policy More Politics Video Economy Topics Central Banking Consumers Housing Jobs Trade Global WSJ Professional WSJ Pro Bankruptcy WSJ Pro Central Banking WSJ Pro Private Equity WSJ Pro Venture Capital More Capital Account Economic Forecasting Survey Economy Video Tech Topics AI Biotech Cybersecurity Personal Technology More Christopher Mims Joanna Stern Julie Jargon Nicole Nguyen CIO Journal The Future of Everything Tech Video Tech Podcast Finance Topics Banking Commodities & Futures Currencies Investing Regulation Stocks More Heard on the Street Greg Ip Jason Zweig Laura Saunders James Mackintosh CFO Journal Markets Video Your Money Briefing Podcast Market Data Market Data Home Companies U.S. Stocks Commodities Bonds & Rates Currencies Market Data Mutual Funds & ETFs Opinion Columnists Gerard Baker Sadanand Dhume Allysia Finley James Freeman William A. Galston Daniel Henninger Holman W. Jenkins Andy Kessler William McGurn Walter Russell Mead Peggy Noonan Mary Anastasia O’Grady Jason Riley Joseph Sternberg Kimberley A. Strassel More Editorials Commentary Future View Houses of Worship Cross Country Letters to the Editor The Weekend Interview Potomac Watch Podcast Foreign Edition Podcast Free Expression Podcast Opinion Video Notable & Quotable Arts & Culture Topics Books Film Fine Art Food & Cooking History Music Television Theater Reviews Architecture Review Art Reviews Film Reviews Television Reviews Theater Reviews Masterpiece Series Music Reviews Dance Reviews Opera Reviews Exhibition Reviews Cultural Commentary More WSJ Puzzles What To Watch Arts Calendar Lifestyle Topics Careers Cars Fitness Relationships Travel Workplace More On Wine Work & Life Carry On On The Clock Elizabeth Bernstein Turning Points WSJ Puzzles Recipes Real Estate Topics Commercial Real Estate Luxury Homes Personal Finance Topics Retirement Savings Credit Taxes Mortgages More Jason Zweig Laura Saunders James Mackintosh Health Topics Healthcare Pharma Wellness More Your Health Style Topics Beauty Design Fashion More Off Brand On Trend My Monday Morning Sports Topics Baseball Basketball Football Golf Hockey Olympics Soccer Tennis More Jason Gay Offensive Emails Among Businessmen, Donald Trump Jr. Spark Fight in Hedge Fund Case Share Resize Listen (2 min) Trump’s Legal Woes 2020 Election CaseDocuments CaseGeorgia CaseInvestigation Timeline This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com. https://www.wsj.com/articles/offensive-emails-among-businessmen-donald-trump-jr-spark-fight-in-hedge-fund-case-f14fa05b U.S. Offensive Emails Among Businessmen, Donald Trump Jr. Spark Fight in Hedge Fund Case A judge will decide whether to release unredacted emails that included derogatory remarks about Jews and Mexicans By Corinne Ramey and James Fanelli Updated June 15, 2023 5:39 pm ET Share Resize Listen (2 min) Donald Trump Jr. at a rally held for his father in Ohio last year. Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images The Texas financier Gentry Beach has made no secret of having close ties to Donald Trump Jr., serving as a groomsman at his wedding, fundraising for his father and once boasting to a former boss about his friendship with the former president’s eldest son. Now Beach is seeking to keep the Trump name out of a long and bitter court fight with his former hedge-fund employer, litigation that has spawned a side battle over whether a judge should allow full public access to offensive emails exchanged among a group that included the two men and others who worked at prominent real-estate and financial firms. Copyright ©2023 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8 Continue reading your article with a WSJ subscription Subscribe Now Already a subscriber? Sign In What to Read Next Sponsored Offers TurboTax: Save up to $15 with TurboTax coupon 2023 The Motley Fool: Epic Bundle – 3x Expert Stock Recommendations H&R Block Tax: Get 20% off H&R Block tax software products Top Resume: Top Resume Coupon: 10% off professional resume writing eBay: eBay coupon: Get extra 10% off $50+ Groupon: Up to $50 off any order with Groupon promo code Most Popular news Most Popular opinion Most Popular Opinion Recommended Videos The Wall Street Journal English Edition EditionEnglish中文 (Chinese)日本語 (Japanese) Subscribe Now Sign In Back to Top « WSJ Membership Buy Side Exclusives Subscription Options Why Subscribe? Corporate Subscriptions WSJ Higher Education Program WSJ High School Program Public Library Program WSJ Live Commercial Partnerships Customer Service Customer Center Contact Us Cancel My Subscription Tools & Features Newsletters & Alerts Guides Topics My News RSS Feeds Video Center Watchlist Podcasts Visual Stories Ads Advertise Commercial Real Estate Ads Place a Classified Ad Sell Your Business Sell Your Home Recruitment & Career Ads Coupons Digital Self Service More About Us Content Partnerships Corrections Jobs at WSJ News Archive Register for Free Reprints & Licensing Buy Issues WSJ Shop WSJ Membership Benefits Customer Center Cancel My Subscription Legal Policies Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Podcasts Snapchat Google Play App Store Dow Jones Products Barron’s BigCharts Dow Jones Newswires Factiva Financial News Mansion Global MarketWatch Risk & Compliance Buy Side from WSJ WSJ Pro WSJ Video WSJ Wine Privacy Notice Cookie Notice Copyright Policy Data Policy Subscriber Agreement & Terms of Use Your Ad Choices Accessibility Copyright ©2023 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Back to Top « English Edition EditionEnglish中文 (Chinese)日本語 (Japanese) Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Podcasts Snapchat WSJ Membership Buy Side Exclusives Subscription Options Why Subscribe? Corporate Subscriptions WSJ Higher Education Program WSJ High School Program Public Library Program WSJ Live Commercial Partnerships Customer Service Customer Center Contact Us Cancel My Subscription Tools & Features Newsletters & Alerts Guides Topics My News RSS Feeds Video Center Watchlist Podcasts Visual Stories Ads Advertise Commercial Real Estate Ads Place a Classified Ad Sell Your Business Sell Your Home Recruitment & Career Ads Coupons Digital Self Service More About Us Content Partnerships Corrections Jobs at WSJ News Archive Register for Free Reprints & Licensing Buy Issues WSJ Shop WSJ Membership Benefits Customer Center Cancel My Subscription Legal Policies Google Play App Store Sign In Copyright ©2023 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Copyright ©2023 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com.

What? Donald Trump Jr. sent highly offensive, antisemitic, and racist messages? You don’t say.

[https://www.wsj.com/articles/offensive-emails-among-businessmen-donald-trump-jr-spark-fight-in-hedge-fund-case-f14fa05b]

Trump rejected lawyers’ efforts to avoid classified documents indictment – The Washington Post

One of Donald Trump’s new attorneys proposed an idea in the fall of 2022: The former president’s team could try to arrange a settlement with the Justice Department.

The attorney, Christopher Kise, wanted to quietly approach Justice to see if he could negotiate a settlement that would preclude charges, hoping Attorney General Merrick Garland and the department would want an exit ramp to avoid prosecuting a former president. Kise would hopefully “take the temperature down,” he told others, by promising a professional approach and the return of all documents.

But Trump was not interested after listening to other lawyers who urged a more pugilistic approach, so Kise never approached prosecutors, three people briefed on the matter said. A special counsel was appointed months later.

Kise, a former solicitor general of Florida who was paid $3 million upfront to join Trump’s team last year, declined to comment.

That quiet entreaty last fall was one of many occasions when lawyers and advisers sought to get Trump to take a more cooperative stance in a bid to avoid what happened Friday. The Justice Department unsealed an indictment including more than three dozen criminal counts against Trump for allegedly keeping and hiding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago Club in Florida.

Trump, 77, now faces the most legally perilous moment of his life playing out in a federal court — charges that could bring decades in prison. He pleaded not guilty in Miami on Tuesday and vowed to fight the charges.

“President Trump has consistently been in full compliance with the Presidential Records Act, which is the only law that applies to Presidents and their records,” Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement. “In the course of negotiations over the return of the documents, President Trump told the lead DOJ official, ‘anything you need from us, just let us know.’ Sadly, the weaponized DOJ rejected this offer of cooperation and conducted an unnecessary and unconstitutional raid on the President’s home in order to inflict maximum political damage on the leading presidential candidate.”

The PRA is not the only law applying to presidents and federal documents, as evidenced by the charges filed against Trump.

Since the National Archives first asked for the return of presidential documents in Trump’s possession in February 2021 and until a grand jury issued its indictment this month, Trump was repeatedly stubborn and eschewed opportunities to avoid criminal charges, according to people with knowledge of the case, many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to reveal internal details. They note that Trump was not charged for any documents he returned voluntarily.

Interviews with seven Trump advisers with knowledge of the probe indicate he misled his own advisers, telling them the boxes contained only newspaper clippings and clothes. He repeatedly refused to give the documents back, even when some of his longest-serving advisers warned of peril and some flew to Mar-a-Lago to beg him to return them.

When Trump returned 15 boxes early last year — leaving at least 64 more at Mar-a-Lago — he told his own advisers to put out statements to the National Archives and to the public that “everything” had been returned, The Washington Post has previously reported. But he quietly kept more than 100 classified documents.

Later, facing a grand jury subpoena, the indictment alleges the former president worked quietly with an aide to move boxes without telling his own lawyers, leading to a false attestation that every document had been returned.

“It was a totally unforced error,” said one person close to Trump who has been part of dozens of discussions about the documents. “We didn’t have to be here.”

Trump time and again rejected the advice from lawyers and advisers who urged him to cooperate and instead took the advice of Tom Fitton, the head of the conservative group Judicial Watch, and a range of others who told him he could legally keep the documents and should fight the Justice Department, advisers said. Trump would often cite Fitton to others, and Fitton told some of Trump’s lawyers that Trump could keep the documents, even as they disagreed, the advisers said.

In an interview Wednesday, Fitton said he dined with Trump on Monday night at his club, eating filet mignon with the former president one day before his first court appearance on the document charges. “I saw him last night; he’s in a good mood. He’s serious and ready to fight under the law.”

Fitton, who appeared before the grand jury and was questioned about his role in both the Mar-a-Lago documents case and the investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, acknowledged he gave the advice to Trump but declined to discuss the details of their conversations. He added that he read the indictment and did not believe it laid out illegal or obstructive conduct. Multiple witnesses said they were asked about Fitton in front of a grand jury and the role he played in Trump’s decisions.

1/6

“I think what is lacking is the lawyers saying, ‘I took this to be obstruction,’” said Fitton. “Where is the conspiracy? I don’t understand any of it. I think this is a trap. They had no business asking for the records … and they’ve manufactured an obstruction charge out of that. There are core constitutional issues that the indictment avoids, and the obstruction charge seems weak to me.”

Several other Trump advisers blamed Fitton for convincing Trump that he could keep the documents and repeatedly mentioning the “Clinton socks case” — a reference to tapes Bill Clinton stored in his sock drawer of his secret interviews with historian Taylor Branch that served as the basis of Branch’s 2009 book documenting the Clinton presidency.

Judicial Watch lost a lawsuit in 2012 that demanded the audio recordings be designated as presidential records and that the National Archives take custody of the recordings. A court opinion issued at the time stated that there was no legal mechanism for the Archives to force Clinton to turn over the recordings.

For his part, Fitton said Trump’s lawyers “should have been more aggressive in fighting the subpoenas and fighting for Trump.”

Trump’s unwillingness to give the documents back did not surprise those who knew him well. Former White House chief of staff John F. Kelly said that he was particularly unlikely to heed requests from people or agencies he disliked.

“He’s incapable of admitting wrongdoing. He wanted to keep it, and he says, ‘You’re not going to tell me what to do. I’m the smartest guy in the room,’” Kelly said Tuesday.

Other advisers said the FBI and National Archives wanting the documents so badly made Trump less likely to give them back.

Trump’s chances to avoid charges began in early 2021, according to current and former advisers. After Gary Stern, counsel at the National Archives, asked Trump’s team for the return of documents, some of his lawyers and advisers began advising him to return them. National Archives officials were privately baffled at what they viewed as inexplicably recalcitrant behavior and kept asking for answers to no avail.

In the fall of 2021, Alex Cannon, then a Trump attorney, urged the former president to return documents to the National Archives, repeatedly telling him that he was required to give them back, according to people familiar with the matter.

After months of talking to Trump and his staff, Cannon — referred to in the indictment as a “Trump Representative” — told Trump that the National Archives was threatening to go to Congress or to the Department of Justice if he did not return the documents, the people said.

“It’s mine,” Trump said, explaining why he did not want to give the materials back, according to people with knowledge of his comments.

That threat prompted Trump to eventually begin looking through some of his boxes — or “my papers” as he called them, according to text messages listed in the indictment sent by former assistant Molly Michael. He eventually returned 15 boxes of materials to the National Archives, in January 2022.

That was followed by Trump directing his lawyer and his spokesman to put out statements saying he had returned “everything” — which they declined to do. That episode became of interest to federal prosecutors, according to four people with knowledge of the matter.

After the National Archives in February found reams of classified material and disorganized boxes in February 2022, they referred the matter to the Justice Department for a potential investigation. Archives officials did not believe everything had been properly returned, The Post has reported.

They were right.

Trump had kept at least 64 boxes of documents, according to the indictment. Trump never believed that his home would be searched and thought that he would be able to keep the documents, two advisers said.

After being initially reluctant to be drawn into what they viewed as a dispute between the Archives and Trump, the Justice Department opened an investigation in April 2022 and sent a subpoena asking for all classified documents in May.

Meanwhile, Trump grew angry with his lawyers and chose new lawyers, bringing in Evan Corcoran to handle the matter at the recommendation of adviser Boris Epshteyn.

Shortly after the subpoena arrived, the indictment says, Corcoran and another lawyer met with Trump at Mar-a-Lago and told him he needed to comply. The indictment says Trump told the other lawyer not to return for the search of his property.

According to testimony Corcoran gave, he was encouraged by Trump to stonewall or not comply with the subpoena. Trump even suggested any “bad” documents could be plucked out of the file after Corcoran searched a storage room, according to the indictment.

“I really don’t want anybody looking through my boxes, I really don’t, I don’t want you looking through my boxes,” he said, according to Corcoran, as cited in the indictment. Trump also said, per the lawyer: “Well, what if we, what happens if we just don’t respond at all or don’t play ball with them?” and “Wouldn’t it be better if we just told them we don’t have anything there?”

But all the documents were not in the storage room, because the indictment alleges Trump and personal aide Walt Nauta moved some boxes without telling Corcoran. Nauta later helped pack some of the boxes to fly them from Mar-a-Lago to Bedminster, leading to a false attestation that everything had been returned, the indictment says.

A lawyer for Corcoran declined to comment on his testimony. A lawyer for Nauta, who is also charged in the indictment, declined to comment.

Kise, who originally urged a more cooperative approach, told others when he took the case that he believed that charges could be avoided. He began asking other advisers what happened during the subpoena process in an effort to understand why the Justice Department would take such an extraordinary step of searching the former president’s property.

Kise has largely been away from the documents case publicly in recent months as other lawyers pursued a more aggressive strategy, and Trump advisers say other lawyers badmouthed Kise to Trump.

In recent days, Kise was responsible for helping Trump find new lawyers in Florida — tapping his deep Rolodex in the state in a bid to find someone who’d be willing to work for Trump. In court on Tuesday in Miami, Kise was seated next to Trump as he was arraigned for 37 felony charges.

The latest: U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon overseeing Donald Trump’s classified documents case suggested that she might delay the planned scheduled, which includes a trial in May 2024.

The case: The criminal investigation looks into whether Trump took government secrets with him after he left the White House and obstructed a subsequent investigation. Trump has pleaded not guilty. Here’s what to know about the classified documents case.

The charges: Trump faces 40 separate charges in the documents case. Read the full text of the superseding indictment against Trump and our top takeaways from the indictment.

Can Trump still run for president? While it has never been attempted by a candidate from a major party before, Trump is allowed to run for president while under indictment in four separate cases — or even if he is convicted of a crime. Here’s how Trump’s indictment could impact the 2024 election.

@[100044274887410:2048:Donald J. Trump] rejected pleas from his D-level lawyers several times to quietly return the classified documents he stole, but instead opted to listen to the legal advice of not-a-lawyer @[2517459524978538:274:Tom Fitton] who runs the far-right group @[100064539227808:2048:Judicial Watch].

This is amazing because Judicial Watch was formed by Fitton to stop every probable policy of the @[100044322825129:2048:Barack Obama] administration, with occasional success, and transformed into a MAGA/QAnon/antivaxxer/anti-LGBTQ group. And now because of Tom Fitton, Donald Trump may spend the rest of his life in jail.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/14/trump-indictment-classified-documents-settlement/]

Biden orders DNC and reelect to remain silent about Trump’s indictment – POLITICO

Skip to Main Content POLITICO Politico Logo Congress Pro E&E News Search Search WASHINGTON & POLITICS Congress White House Elections Legal Magazine Foreign Affairs 2024 ELECTIONS News GOP Candidate Tracker STATE POLITICS & POLICY California Florida New Jersey New York GLOBAL POLITICS & POLICY Brussels Canada United Kingdom POLICY NEWS Agriculture Cannabis Cybersecurity Defense Education Energy & Environment Finance & Tax Health Care Immigration Labor Sustainability Technology Trade Transportation NEWSLETTERS Playbook Playbook PM West Wing Playbook POLITICO Nightly POLITICO Weekend The Recast Huddle All Newsletters COLUMNISTS Alex Burns John Harris Jonathan Martin Michael Schaffer Jack Shafer Rich Lowry SERIES & MORE Breaking News Alerts Podcasts Video The Fifty Women Rule Matt Wuerker Cartoons Cartoon Carousel POLITICO Live Upcoming Events Previous Events Follow us Twitter Instagram Facebook My Account Log In Log Out Trump Indictment Biden orders DNC and reelect to remain silent about Trump’s indictment Some allies see a missed opportunity by going quiet. While President Joe Biden has framed his stance as in line with longstanding tradition, it is not uncommon for presidents to occasionally weigh in on ongoing criminal investigations. | Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP Photo By Jonathan Lemire 06/13/2023 05:35 PM EDT Link Copied President Joe Biden and his top aides have taken a vow of silence on the federal indictment of his predecessor, Donald Trump — and have explicitly ordered the national Democratic Party and his reelection campaign to do the same. That directive was issued in recent days after Trump was hit with federal charges for his handling of classified documents after he left the White House, according to three people familiar with the instructions. But that decision has some Democrats and allies worried that Biden could miss a chance to underscore the seriousness of the national moment as well as deliver a political blow to his top White House rival. Biden declared at the start of his presidency that he would not discuss Department of Justice investigations, particularly those about the former president, and he remained tightlipped when Trump was arraigned Tuesday in a Florida courthouse. Some in his inner circle hope the decision will be revisited if next year’s general election looks like it could be a rematch with Trump, even if the legal fight has not been resolved by then. As the president’s advisers chart a court for the campaign to come, they are aware that continued silence about the charges facing Trump would deprive Biden’s reelection effort of a potent political weapon. The number of criminal cases Trump faces are growing and could soon include charges of election interference and inciting the Jan. 6 riot. Those acts make up much of Biden’s long standing case that Trump poses unique threats to American democracy, and there could eventually be a move to allow surrogates and leading Democrats, even if not the president himself, to squarely address the criminal charges. But Biden to this point has been explicit: The entities that the White House controls, which includes the reelection campaign and the Democratic National Committee, are not to publicly discuss any of the criminal investigations into Trump. Those closest to the president are deeply wary of any perception that Biden is trying to influence the investigations. “I have never once — not one single time — suggested to the Justice Department what they should do or not do, relative to bringing a charge or not bringing a charge,” Biden told reporters Thursday. “I’m honest.” Some left-leaning groups outside Biden’s control have already commissioned ads about Trump’s legal woes, which Democratic officials believe helps do the dirty work for them. And first lady Jill Biden did venture a public comment, bemoaning the Republicans standing by Trump in the face of the indictment. “My heart feels so broken by a lot of the headlines that we see on the news,” she told donors at a fundraiser Monday night in New York. “Like I just saw, when I was on my plane, it said 61 percent of Republicans are going to vote, they would vote for Trump.” “They don’t care about the indictment. So that’s a little shocking, I think,” she added. But those groups and the first lady have a more limited reach than the party’s political apparatuses and the president himself. Biden has privately told aides that he is disgusted by Trump’s behavior but is adhering to his promise that the Department of Justice would have independence from the White House. The DNC, meanwhile, has advised members of Congress seeking guidance on what to say that they should not comment on the Trump probes if they are speaking publicly in their role as Biden campaign surrogates. While Biden has framed his stance as in line with longstanding tradition, it is not uncommon for presidents to occasionally weigh in on ongoing criminal investigations. Biden has at times done so himself — including weighing in before the verdict was announced in the 2021 trial of the white Minneapolis police officer who killed George Floyd. Some people in Biden’s orbit believe that the moment calls for his imprimatur, outlining for the nation the gravity of a former president facing charges in a federal court. Others believe it would be political malpractice to not make Trump’s woes a campaign issue and privately said that they wish the president’s campaign would take on the issue directly. They argue that the charges connected to Trump’s alleged reckless mishandling of some of the United States’ top secrets shows that he is unfit for the job. And they believe that both the ongoing January 6 and Georgia election interference probes illuminate their central campaign arguments. “It’s a pretty easy argument to make,” said one senior Democrat not authorized to publicly discuss private conversations. “Vote for our guy, because the other guy is going to jail.” There is a possibility that the decision could be revisited next year, multiple people close to the process said this week. One option being bandied about is that while Biden would maintain his silence on the Trump investigations, other top Democrats and surrogates would take up the argument. But even that — which aides warn may not ever happen — would likely not occur for months, perhaps after a possible conviction, or after Trump has clinched the GOP nomination. And advisors acknowledge that Biden himself may need to weigh in at a moment when it would be impossible not to comment, like a potential general election debate against Trump. Some aides also think that if Trump were to be charged for his actions on Jan. 6, Biden would feel comfortable enough talking about the tragedy of that day without linking it to any crimes allegedly committed by his predecessor. Other Democrats believe the current silent treatment is the right approach — and don’t want to inadvertently get in the way of a bad Trump news cycle. “The Justice Department needs to be able to make its prosecutorial decisions independent of influence from any administration,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said to Politico on Tuesday. “Donald Trump tried to use the Justice Department as a political tool. Joe Biden has said he absolutely will not do that, and I respect that.” Those close to the president also acknowledge a particular sensitivity at the moment on matters related to the Department of Justice, which is believed to be nearing a charging decision in its investigation into Biden’s son. Hunter Biden is being probed for tax crimes and a potentially illegal purchase of a firearm. While the president has maintained his public silence on the case — other than to offer support for his son — he has privately expressed frustration at the length of the investigation and worries about the outcome of the probe, according to two people close to him. Latest News on the Trump Indictment Legal Jack Smith wants to tell jury about Trump’s earlier attempts to sow doubt about elections By Legal Bid to hold Trump accountable for Jan. 6 violence stalls at appeals court By and Legal Trump is fighting an uphill battle in his fraud trial. But it could be years before penalties kick in. By LEGAL How one judge is slowing down one of Trump’s biggest criminal cases By Q&A ‘Did Trump Change, or Did You?’: We Asked a Pro-Impeachment Republican Why He’d Back Trump By Previous Slide Next Slide While Biden has tried to maintain a distance from DOJ affairs, Republicans have been hammering home the talking point that he is using his Department of Justice to investigate his top political rival ahead of 2024. “The Biden Administration continues to egregiously weaponize the federal government against Joe Biden’s top political opponent,” said Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), a member of the House GOP leadership, at a House Republicans news conference Tuesday. “The unequal application of justice by Joe Biden’s DOJ must be stopped. There cannot be one set of rules if your last name is Biden or Clinton and another set of rules for everyone else.” Those supporting or working on Biden’s re-election ultimately believe they have other compelling arguments to make beyond pointing to Trump’s legal troubles. They believe the president’s week provides an advantageous split screen set nicely against the backdrop of chaos that has descended upon the Republican-controlled House after nearly a dozen far right members rebelled against Speaker Kevin McCarthy. The president will hit a lot of key 2024 issues, including civil rights, environmental causes, the GOP tax plan and gun regulations, as well as appear with Vice President Kamala Harris at a rally with union workers Saturday in Philadelphia. The White House, Biden campaign and the Democratic National Committee all, fittingly, declined to comment. Jennifer Haberkorn, Adam Cancryn and Holly Otterbein contributed to this report. Filed under: White House, Joe Biden, Joe Biden 2024, DNC, Department Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump 2024, Jill Biden, Legal, Trump Indictment POLITICO Link Copied About Us Advertising Breaking News Alerts Careers Credit Card Payments Digital Edition FAQ Feedback Headlines Photos POWERJobs Press Print Subscriptions Request A Correction Write For Us RSS Site Map Terms of Service Privacy Policy Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information and Opt Out of Targeted Advertising © 2023 POLITICO LLC

Napoleon Bonaparte famously said, “When you notice that an enemy is making an error, take care not to interfere with the enemy from completing it so you can take advantage at the right time.”

[https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/13/biden-dnc-trump-indictment-00101821]

Trump faces a maximum of 400 years in prison and a $9M fine

News Metro Page Six Sports NFL MLB NBA NHL College Football College Basketball Post Sports+ Sports Betting Business Personal Finance Opinion Entertainment TV Movies Music Celebrities Awards Theater Shopping Lifestyle Weird But True Health Fitness Health Care Medicine Men’s Health Women’s Health Mental Health Nutrition Sex & Relationships Viral Trends Human Interest Parenting Fashion & Beauty Food & Drink Travel Real Estate Media Tech Astrology Video Photos Visual Stories Sub Menu 1 Today’s Paper Covers Columnists Horoscopes Crosswords & Games Sports Odds Podcasts Careers Sub menu 2 Email Newsletters Official Store Home Delivery Tips Menu Facebook Twitter Flipboard WhatsApp Email trending now Skip to main content Megyn Kelly reveals what Chris Christie told her during heated… Melania Trump wants husband Donald to tap Tucker Carlson for VP:… Internet sleuths connecting Shohei Ohtani to one team News Trump faces a maximum of 400 years in prison and a $9M fine over federal indictment By Victor Nava Published June 9, 2023, 10:27 p.m. ET The 49-page indictment against former President Donald Trump unsealed on Friday revealed that the ex-commander in chief potentially faces hundreds of years behind bars and millions in fines for his alleged mishandling of classified documents. The 76-year-old has been accused by special counsel Jack Smith of violating seven different federal laws among the 37 separate charges in the indictment. There are numerous sentencing possibilities, but if Trump is handed the maximum penalty for each count and the judge orders the penalties to be served consecutively, he would be looking at 400 years in prison and would be subject to a fine of $9,250,000. Advertisement 3 Trump faces a maximum of 400 years in prison if found guilty of the 37 charges in the indictment. AFP via Getty Images Below is a breakdown of the charges prosecutors will attempt to convince a jury that Trump is guilty of and the maximum penalties he is facing for each count. Counts 1-31: Willful retention of national defense information Trump faces a maximum punishment of 10 years in prison, a maximum supervised release period of three years and a $250,000 fine for each count of willful retention of national defense information. Advertisement Under the law, the information doesn’t have to be classified to be illegally retained. 3 Under the law the information doesn’t have to be classified to be illegally retained. AFP via Getty Images Count 32: Conspiracy to obstruct justice Trump faces a maximum punishment of 20 years in prison, a maximum supervised release period of three years and a $250,000 fine for the conspiracy to obstruct justice charge. Count 33: Withholding a document or record Advertisement Trump faces a maximum punishment of 20 years in prison, a maximum supervised release period of three years, and a $250,000 fine for the withholding a document or record charge. Count 34: Corruptly concealing a document or record Trump faces a maximum punishment of 20 years in prison, a maximum supervised release period of three years, and a $250,000 fine for the corruptly concealing a document or record charge. Count 35: Concealing a document in a federal investigation Trump faces a maximum punishment of 20 years in prison, a maximum supervised release period of three years, and a $250,000 fine for the concealing a document in a federal investigation charge. Count 36: Scheme to conceal Advertisement Trump faces a maximum punishment of 5 years in prison, a maximum supervised release period of three years, and a $250,000 fine for the scheme to conceal charge. 3 Trump has denied any wrongdoing. AP What do you think? Post a comment. Count 37: False statements and representations Advertisement Trump faces a maximum punishment of five years in prison, a maximum supervised release period of three years, and a $250,000 fine for the false statements and representations charge. Smith notes in the indictment that the potential penalties for each count do not include “restitution, special assessments, parole terms, or forfeitures that may be applicable.” The former president has vehemently denied any wrongdoing. Share this: Filed under classified documents , donald trump , justice department , trump indictment , 6/9/23 Load more… {{#isDisplay}} {{/isDisplay}}{{#isAniviewVideo}} {{/isAniviewVideo}}{{#isSRVideo}} {{/isSRVideo}} trending now Megyn Kelly reveals what Chris Christie told her during heated off-air confrontation at GOP debate: ‘He was pissed’ ‘One down’: UPenn reportedly asking president to step down Friday over outrage at antisemitism testimony Nine-year-old sends dad to prison after catching six-minute bloody beating of mom on video Internet sleuths connecting Shohei Ohtani to one team Melania Trump wants husband Donald to tap Tucker Carlson for VP: report Georgia high school baseball star brain-dead after teammate accidentally hits him with bat during practice https://nypost.com/2023/06/09/trump-faces-a-maximum-of-400-years-in-prison-and-a-9m-fine/?utm_source=url_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons Copy the URL to share Post Sports+ Email Newsletters Mobile Apps Contact Us Tips Facebook Twitter Instagram LinkedIn Email YouTube © 2023 NYP Holdings, Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information/Opt-Out Exit mobile version

Sounds good to me.

[https://nypost.com/2023/06/09/trump-faces-a-maximum-of-400-years-in-prison-and-a-9m-fine/amp/]

Rose Montoya exposes breasts during White House Pride party after meeting Biden

News Metro Page Six Sports NFL MLB NBA NHL College Football College Basketball Post Sports+ Sports Betting Business Personal Finance Opinion Entertainment TV Movies Music Celebrities Awards Theater Shopping Lifestyle Weird But True Health Fitness Health Care Medicine Men’s Health Women’s Health Mental Health Nutrition Sex & Relationships Viral Trends Human Interest Parenting Fashion & Beauty Food & Drink Travel Real Estate Media Tech Astrology Video Photos Visual Stories Sub Menu 1 Today’s Paper Covers Columnists Horoscopes Crosswords & Games Sports Odds Podcasts Careers Sub menu 2 Email Newsletters Official Store Home Delivery Tips Menu Facebook Twitter Flipboard WhatsApp Email trending now Skip to main content Megyn Kelly reveals what Chris Christie told her during heated… Melania Trump wants husband Donald to tap Tucker Carlson for VP:… Internet sleuths connecting Shohei Ohtani to one team News Trans model Rose Montoya goes topless during White House Pride party after meeting Biden By Richard Pollina and Jesse O’Neill Published June 13, 2023 Updated June 13, 2023, 3:51 p.m. ET More On: transgender Republican debate splits over transgender kid surgeries: ‘Mutilating these minors’ Parents claim daughter, 11, was forced to sleep in bed with transgender student on school trip Riley Gaines fires back at ‘misogynist’ ‘Squad’ Dem who wanted swimmer’s ‘transphobic’ remarks stricken from Title IX hearing record AOC claims ‘all’ underage women will face ‘genital examinations’ if biological men barred from female sports A transgender model and activist is under fire for popping off her top at the White House and cupping her breasts moments after shaking hands with President Biden — with critics blasting it as an “international embarrassment.” Advertisement Rose Montoya, 27, who was among the lengthy list of guests invited to celebrate Pride at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Saturday, was recorded pulling down her dress and cupping her exposed breasts in front of the Truman Balcony with the Pride flag hanging in the background. “No, this isn’t another hookers-n-blow photo from Hunter’s laptop, it was the Pride party on the White House lawn two days ago hosted by Joe,” radio host Dana Loesch tweeted. Former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, who was convicted of tax fraud and lying to White House officials and served four years in prison before being pardoned by former President Trump, slammed Biden aides for allowing the stunt to happen on White House grounds. Advertisement “OK, so who is running the f***ing White House and allowing this deviant garbage to go on right outside the oval office?” Kerik said. 7 Rose Montoya, a transgender woman, is seen with her top down, covering her breasts with her hands in front of the White House. Instagram/@therosemontoya “We know it’s not @JoeBiden- this dude has no idea where he is. So who is it? Who is the cause of this international embarrassment?” the city’s former top cop asked. Advertisement Montoya shared the racy footage Monday to Instagram along with a spliced-together video of the event, where the president and first lady Jill Biden delivered speeches to the hundreds of invitees in attendance. “Are we topless at the White House?” the person recording said in the video. 7 Before pulling down her top, the activist shook hands with Biden. Instagram/@therosemontoya 7 Biden called some of the members he met in the LGBTQ+ community some of the “bravest” citizens during his speech. Instagram/@therosemontoya Advertisement see also Who is Rose Montoya, the trans influencer who went topless at the White House? Also in the clips, the Idaho-born model was seen getting the opportunity to meet the president and first lady. “It is an honor. Trans rights are human rights,” Montoya said to Biden as they shook hands. Advertisement Footage also showed the speech delivered by the 80-year-old president, who said the members of the LGBTQ+ community were “some of the bravest and most inspiring people” he has “ever known.” Following uproar from conservatives, who Montoya says are trying to use her clip as an example that the transgender community “grooms” young people, the model made a response video, pointing out that being topless is not against the law in Washington, DC. 7 First lady Jill Biden also briefly met with the transgender model. Instagram/@therosemontoya 7 Montoya made a response video to call out the critics trying to label her a “groomer” for pulling down her top at the White House. Instagram/@therosemontoya Advertisement 7 Biden is seen mistakenly taking a video of Montoya and others which was meant to be a photo. Instagram/@therosemontoya “Going topless in DC is legal, and I fully support the movement to free the nipples,” she said. “Why is my chest now deemed inappropriate or illegal when I show it off? However, before coming out as trans, it was not.” “All you’re doing is affirming I’m a woman,” she clapped back at the haters. Advertisement Montoya — who began her transition in 2015 — says she purposely covered her nipples to “play it safe” with “zero intention of trying to be vulgar” and that she was “simply living in joy. Living my truth and existing in my body.” “Happy Pride. Free the nipple,” she says as she concludes her response video. 7 A Pride flag hangs in between two American flags from the balcony of the White House during a Pride celebration on the South Lawn, hosted by President Biden, on June 10, 2023. REUTERS Advertisement To be considered public nudity, one must expose the female breast below the top of the nipple without full “opaque coverage,” according to the law on obscenity in the District of Columbia. Montoya wasn’t the only one to face criticism over the Pride celebration. Prominent military veterans have accused the Biden administration of diminishing the American flag by placing a Pride banner at the center of a display. Advertisement “No flag should be flown at equal level to the American flag,” said Army veteran and US Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.), who called the placement of the flag “shameful.” “The flag of the United States of America should be at the center and at the highest point of the group when a number of flags of states or localities or pennants of societies are grouped and displayed from staffs,” according to the U.S. flag code. “You would think the White House knows this,” Chad Robichaux, a Marine veteran, told The Post in a statement. “They do, they just don’t care.” Advertisement The stunt ultimately got Montoya rebuked by and banned from the White House. “This behavior is inappropriate and disrespectful for any event at the White House,” a White House spokesperson told The Post. “It is not reflective of the event we hosted to celebrate LGBTQI+ families or the other hundreds of guests who were in attendance. Individuals in the video will not be invited to future events.” Share this: Filed under jill biden , joe biden , pride , transgender , washington dc , white house , 6/13/23 trending now Megyn Kelly reveals what Chris Christie told her during heated off-air confrontation at GOP debate: ‘He was pissed’ ‘One down’: UPenn reportedly asking president to step down Friday over outrage at antisemitism testimony Nine-year-old sends dad to prison after catching six-minute bloody beating of mom on video Internet sleuths connecting Shohei Ohtani to one team Melania Trump wants husband Donald to tap Tucker Carlson for VP: report Georgia high school baseball star brain-dead after teammate accidentally hits him with bat during practice https://nypost.com/2023/06/13/rose-montoya-exposes-breasts-during-white-house-pride-party-after-meeting-biden/?utm_source=url_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons Copy the URL to share Post Sports+ Email Newsletters Mobile Apps Contact Us Tips Facebook Twitter Instagram LinkedIn Email YouTube © 2023 NYP Holdings, Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information/Opt-Out Exit mobile version

CONSERVATIVES: I just watched @[100044171722408:2048:Matt Walsh]’s documentary “What Is A Woman” and now I will argue until I am red in the face that’s a dude!!!

ALSO CONSERVATIVES: Oh no that woman just showed her breasts!!!!

[https://nypost.com/2023/06/13/rose-montoya-exposes-breasts-during-white-house-pride-party-after-meeting-biden/amp/]

Trump’s Authoritarian Shadow Looms Over CPAC Speech

Donald Trump’s speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) was a masterclass in grievance politics,laced with thinly veiled attacks on potential 2024 rivals like Ron DeSantis and punctuated by authoritarian rhetoric that has become his hallmark. While the former president extolled his own record and promised retribution against his “enemies,” the event served as a stark reminder of the concerning authoritarian streak that runs through Trump’s political persona.

One of the most striking aspects of Trump’s speech was his demonization of political opponents. He labeled them “lunatics and maniacs,” vowed their “reign is over” if he returns to the White House, and even cast himself as a vengeful “warrior” and “retribution” for those wronged. This language echoes past attacks on the media, the judiciary, and even fellow Republicans who dare to disagree with him. It’s a tactic straight out of the authoritarian playbook, aiming to dehumanize opponents and consolidate power by fostering fear and division.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Trump’s policy proposals also raise red flags. His call for “direct election” of school principals reeks of populist pandering, potentially undermining educational autonomy and accountability. His repeated attacks on investigations into his conduct, including the classified documents case and the Georgia election probe, smack of authoritarian attempts to silence dissent and obstruct accountability. These proposals and attacks chip away at the core principles of a healthy democracy, where checks and balances are essential to prevent the concentration of power in the hands of any one individual.

Perhaps the most chilling aspect of Trump’s speech was his apocalyptic framing of the current political landscape. He repeatedly painted America as on the brink of collapse, with 2024 being the “final battle” in a zero-sum struggle against unnamed forces. This rhetoric of existential threat is a common thread in authoritarian regimes, used to justify extraordinary measures and consolidate control. It’s a dangerous path that undermines democratic norms and fosters an atmosphere of fear and paranoia.

While Trump’s CPAC speech may have resonated with his ardent base, it offered a glimpse into a future where democratic institutions are under siege and dissent is met with retribution. His authoritarian rhetoric and policy proposals are not mere talking points; they represent a real threat to American democracy and its core values. Recognizing and understanding this threat is crucial to safeguarding our republic in the years to come.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna78785

Media

https://www.c-span.org/video/?526456-1/president-trump-speaks-cpac

Trump’s Baseless Election Contest in Georgia Undermines Democracy

Donald Trump’s campaign has filed an election contest in Georgia, seeking to undermine the results of the November 3, 2020 presidential election. This legal maneuver comes despite the absence of credible evidence supporting his claims of widespread voter fraud. In a troubling display of defiance against democratic norms, Trump’s campaign alleges that tens of thousands of illegal votes were counted, a claim that has been repeatedly debunked by numerous sources.

Ray S. Smith III, the lead counsel for the Trump campaign, echoed the unfounded narrative of election irregularities, stating that the Georgia Secretary of State orchestrated an ineffective election process. This rhetoric not only seeks to delegitimize the election but also stirs public distrust in the electoral system, a dangerous precedent for American democracy.

Accompanying the lawsuit are affidavits from Georgia residents, which Trump’s team claims support their allegations. However, many of these affidavits lack the necessary scrutiny and verification required to substantiate such serious accusations. Claims of voter fraud, including those involving underage voters and individuals casting ballots from out-of-state addresses, have been thoroughly examined and dismissed by election officials.

In the face of overwhelming evidence confirming the legitimacy of the election results, Trump’s insistence on pursuing this course of action has raised alarms about his commitment to democratic principles. Instead of accepting the will of the voters, he continues to rally his supporters around baseless conspiracies that threaten to erode trust in future elections.

This latest move is part of a broader strategy by Trump and his allies to overturn a free and fair election. The implications of this lawsuit extend beyond Georgia, as it reflects a national trend among some Republicans to challenge the integrity of the electoral process. Such actions not only undermine the democratic foundation of the United States but also set a troubling precedent for future political contests.

(h/t: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/trump-campaign-press-release-trump-campaign-files-election-contest-georgia)

William Barr’s Misleading Claims on Voter Fraud Undermine Democracy

Attorney General William Barr has recently echoed the baseless claims of voter fraud and mail-in voting irregularities that have been propagated by President Donald Trump. His misleading assertions have alarmed civil rights advocates who are concerned about the potential erosion of public confidence in the electoral process. Barr’s statements, which include unfounded fears about widespread fraud and foreign interference in mail-in voting, have been thoroughly debunked by election experts. The rhetoric not only mirrors Trump’s unfounded allegations but also jeopardizes the integrity of the Justice Department’s role in protecting voting rights.

In a disconcerting interview, Barr claimed that mail-in voting would lead to the loss of a ‘secret vote’ and suggested that postal workers could be bribed to commit election fraud. This assertion is fundamentally flawed; mail-in ballots are secured through identity verification processes that prevent such misconduct. Experts have pointed out that ballots are tracked and audited to ensure their legitimacy, thus nullifying Barr’s claims of rampant fraud.

Furthermore, Barr’s suggestion that foreign entities could counterfeit mail ballots is equally unfounded. Numerous safeguards are in place to protect the integrity of American elections, including specific paper stock for ballots and signature verification processes. Experts have overwhelmingly dismissed the idea that foreign powers could easily infiltrate the voting system, emphasizing that such operations would be complex and easily detectable.

Additionally, Barr’s claim that the U.S. has not previously engaged in widespread mail voting ignores the reality that several states have successfully conducted elections primarily through mail for years without significant issues. Misleading statements about the reliability of voter rolls and the prevalence of fraud undermine the progress made in expanding voting access, particularly during a pandemic.

The damage done by Barr’s rhetoric is compounded by the fact that it aligns with disinformation campaigns previously launched by foreign adversaries aimed at destabilizing U.S. democracy. As civil rights advocates rally against these baseless claims, they stress the importance of maintaining public trust in the electoral system, which is currently threatened by the Attorney General’s unfounded assertions.

(h/t: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1240144)

Trump’s ’12 More Years’ Rallying Cry Threatens Democracy and Normalizes Authoritarianism

Donald Trump is openly priming his supporters about circumventing the two-term limit on the presidency, rallying his supporters at a recent event in Wisconsin to chant “12 more years.” This repeated rhetoric during campaign events raises alarms about the democratic principles he is undermining. Trump’s comments prompt a cheer from his followers, reflecting a troubling trend of normalizing an authoritarian mindset within the Republican Party.

At a rally in Muskegon, Michigan, Trump transitioned from the standard “four more years” chant to suggesting his supporters embrace the unthinkable “12 more years,” an idea he found amusing. He remarked, “You really drive them crazy if you say ’12 more years,'” revealing a disturbing glee in challenging democratic norms. The crowd responded eagerly, which underscores the concerning shift in his base’s acceptance of anti-democratic sentiments and their call for a leader who disregards constitutional limitations.

Trump further speculated about remaining in power by saying, “We’ll be here for four years, and then if we decide to go for an extra four or eight or something.” This statement insinuates a casual disregard for the democratic process. Rather than affirming his commitment to respect electoral outcomes, Trump instead deflects criticism by labeling it as media exaggeration, thereby fostering a culture where loyalty to the man supersedes loyalty to democratic values.

His implicit threats to remain beyond terms add weight to a history steeped in authoritarian rhetoric. Trump has repeatedly flirted with the idea of not accepting the election results, often proclaiming that a fair election is contingent on his perspective of its honesty. His skepticism of electoral integrity feeds into a broader narrative of disinformation that defines his tenure, fueling further distrust among the electorate.

As Trump gains momentum within the Republican Party, the ramifications of his statements arm those who wish to undermine democratic principles. The normalization of fascist ideologies and rhetoric in his campaign reflects a dangerous shift toward authoritarianism, requiring vigilance from those committed to preserving democracy against such blatant assaults.

(h/t: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/trump-stay-in-power-term-limits-chant-12-more-years.html)

Trump Returns to White House, Downplays COVID-19 Threat

President Donald Trump was discharged from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center and returned to the White House on the evening of October 5, 2020, after receiving treatment for COVID-19. Upon his arrival, he displayed a sense of optimism, pumping his fist and giving a thumbs-up to reporters, while also removing his mask. Trump’s physician confirmed that he would continue his treatment at the White House, despite the ongoing nature of his care.

In a video message posted on Twitter, Trump urged the American public not to fear the coronavirus, stating, “Don’t let it dominate your life. We have developed, under the Trump Administration, some really great drugs & knowledge.” This statement comes as the U.S. death toll from COVID-19 surpassed 210,000, raising concerns about the implications of his remarks amidst a public health crisis.

Trump’s medical team had previously indicated that he was given a steroid, dexamethasone, and was undergoing treatment with remdesivir. While they affirmed that he was ready to return to the White House, they did not provide specifics regarding his lung scans or when he last tested negative for the virus.

The president’s health history during his COVID-19 diagnosis has been marked by inconsistencies between official medical briefings and statements from White House officials, leading to questions about transparency. Despite his recent hospitalization, Trump expressed eagerness to resume campaigning, stating he would be back on the trail soon.

(h/t: https://www.npr.org/sections/latest-updates-trump-covid-19-results/2020/10/05/920412187/trump-says-he-will-leave-walter-reed-medical-center-monday-night)

1 43 44 45 46 47 285