Category: Donald Trump

Dems react to Trump indictment with glee — and anxiety

Posted on (Updated by Mike Lillis

House Democrats reacted with mixed emotions this week to the historic indictment of former President Trump, with some cheering the move with bald jubilation and others approaching much more cautiously ahead of Trump’s expected arraignment on Tuesday. 

While both camps are united behind the central premise that no one in America is above the law, the tonal contrast highlights both the toxic nature of Trump’s relationship with his congressional rivals and the Democrats’ deep-seeded anxiety that the indictment will only invigorate his conservative base and make him a more formidable force in the race for the White House next year.

Fueling that divide is the nature of the case being brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D), which centers around Trump’s role in providing hush payments to an adult film actress more than six years ago — a salacious saga divorced from the more serious allegations facing the former president, which relate to his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

On one side of the divide are Democrats who cheered Bragg’s decision with evident glee. That group is composed largely of liberal and minority lawmakers, including members of the far-left “squad,” who have long accused Trump of being a racist and are now relishing an indictment they view as karmic justice. 

“Grand Jury votes to indict Trump!” tweeted Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), one of three Muslim lawmakers in Congress who has been a frequent target of Islamophobic Trump attacks. 

“It’s time that we ensure Trump is banned from running for any public office again,” echoed Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.).

Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) shared in the celebration, saying the indictment is “one of many steps” toward eliminating Trump as a threat to fair elections.

“I will always believe that this twice-impeached former president is a threat to our democracy,” he tweeted.  

Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) tweeted a short clip of a crowd of women giving a standing ovation. 

And Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.) responded to Trump’s indictment with a single word: “Good.”  

The celebratory mood is not being shared — at least not publicly — by a long list of other Democratic lawmakers, who are treading more carefully into the explosive debate. Those voices, which include members of Democratic leadership, have been no less critical of Trump over his political career, but are taking pains not to jump to conclusions before seeing the charges — which remain under seal — or reach a verdict before a jury does.

“This is not a moment to celebrate. This is a terrible moment for the country. But no one is above the law,” Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) said on Twitter. “Those lock her up chants that people were chanting like hyenas in a stadium around the country were never funny, perhaps they now understand why.”

There are also lingering anxieties that Trump, the current frontrunner in the early field seeking the GOP presidential nomination, will get a boost from Bragg’s decision, as Republicans — even some of Trump’s 2024 rivals — race to defend the former president from what they consider a politically motivated witch hunt designed solely to damage his presidential prospects.

Shedding a no-holds-barred approach to Trump in the past, many Democrats have adopted a neutral tone in response to the indictment, keeping a distance from the judicial process to let the wheels of the courts grind away. 

“No one is above the law, and everyone has the right to a trial to prove innocence,” Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the former Speaker who was a target of the pro-Trump mob on Jan. 6, said in a brief and subdued statement. “Hopefully, the former President will peacefully respect the system, which grants him that right.”

“In America we believe in the rule of law,” echoed Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), a fierce Trump critic. “We should wait to hear from the grand jury before jumping to conclusions.”

Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.), who was among the managers of Trump’s first impeachment, called it “a somber day for our nation.” 

And House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) adopted the same muted tone, characterizing it as “a serious moment” for the country. 

“A jury of Donald Trump’s peers will now determine his legal fate,” Jeffries tweeted.  

Trump’s GOP allies, meanwhile, have rallied in his defense, characterizing the indictment — the first against any president, sitting or former — as a blatant “weaponization” of government by Democrats to take down a political rival. 

“It's Trump derangement,” Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) said Thursday evening as he was leaving his Capitol Hill office. “It's an illness of hatred that just — it shouldn't be in American politics.”

Wilson said House Republicans will move “immediately” to uncover the details of Bragg's probe, and he has confidence that GOP investigators — notably Rep. Bryan Steil (R-Wis.), chairman of the Administration Committee — will demonstrate that Bragg’s prosecution has been politically motivated from the start.

“We're going to find out, from the inside, as to their correspondence and communications,” he said.

Bragg’s case revolves around a $130,000 hush payment made by Michael Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, to the adult actress Stormy Daniels just before the 2016 election in return for her silence about an alleged affair with Trump a decade earlier — an affair Trump denies. 

A Manhattan grand jury voted Thursday to indict Trump, who is expected to be arraigned in New York on Tuesday. The specific charges remain unknown, sealed until Trump’s appearance, but reports from CNN and NBC indicate he will face around 30 counts related to business fraud.  

Not all of Trump’s critics cheered the arrival of the indictment this week. 

Trump is also facing a series of separate criminal investigations into his conduct, including his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results and the discovery of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, his resort-residence in South Florida. And some Democrats have hoped that the Justice Department, which is investigating Trump on several fronts, would have moved more quickly on those other cases to lend more gravity to their underlying charge that Trump is unfit to serve as president for another term. 

Those voices fear that Bragg’s case, by coming first, will only bolster the argument from Trump and his allies that Democrats are pursuing “frivolous” cases designed solely to damage Trump politically. 

“After inciting an insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, pressuring local officials to overturn the 2020 election, receiving financial kickbacks from foreign powers, and numerous other crimes during his presidency, it’s embarrassing and infuriating that the first indictment against Trump is about ... Stormy Daniels,” Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said in a statement.

“The January 6th Select Committee and bold leaders like Jamie Raskin did their job,” he continued. “It’s time for Merrick Garland and the Justice Department to do theirs.”

Amid the emotional debate, some lawmakers are urging restraint by pointing out an obvious hole in the discussion: No one weighing in knows what charges await Trump next week. 

“Just a reminder,” said Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), “that there is no rule that you have to express your opinion before reading the indictment.”

Mask Off Moment: Pelosi Shredded After Suggesting Trump Needs to ‘Prove Innocence’ at Trial

Posted on by Rusty Weiss

The presumption of innocence is a fundamental tenet of the justice system in the United States. At least, it was.

The phrase “innocent until proven guilty” is something every American has heard uttered throughout their lifetime. It is a legal principle that puts the burden of proof on the prosecution to prove that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

As with many fundamental norms in the justice system, Democrats eschew such basic rights when it comes to their political opponents.

Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), in responding to the indictment against Donald Trump, ripped that mask off and suggested the former President must now “prove innocence.”

“The Grand Jury has acted upon the facts and the law,” Pelosi said in a statement.

“No one is above the law, and everyone has the right to a trial to prove innocence. Hopefully, the former President will peacefully respect the system, which grants him that right.”

Read that again – Trump now has a “right to a trial to prove innocence.” That’s not how that works, you ignorant buffoon.

RELATED: President Donald Trump Indicted by Manhattan Grand Jury

Pelosi Statement on Trump Indictment Leads to Ridicule

Sometimes it’s difficult to even know where to begin when a dyed-in-the-wool liberal lunatic makes such a ridiculous comment.

Fortunately, we don’t have to worry about that, since Pelosi was roundly condemned on social media for her remarks about the Trump indictment.

Attorney Eric Matheny kicked things off by stating the very, very obvious.

“Defendants in America don’t prove their innocence,” he wrote.

Author Alex Berenson was torn between being impressed that an elderly woman is seemingly writing her own tweets and full-blown panic that the same woman, a lawmaker, “has no idea how the law works.”

“The last time Americans had to ‘prove their innocence,’ we were governed by the British,” tweeted comedian Tim Young.

The political pundit known as the ‘Redheaded Libertarian’ spat fire at Pelosi in a smoking hot tweet.

“This is the most anti-American vomit that has ever exited your commie mouth,” she said.

I mean … maybe? Pelosi has a long and storied history with vomiting anti-American, pro-commie gibberish so, there’s that.

Pelosi’s Tweet Gets a Fact Check

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s tweet about Trump needing to “prove innocence” in regard to the indictment was slapped with a Community Notes disclaimer by Twitter.

“Ms. Pelosi mistakenly says that Trump can prove his innocence at trial,” the added context reads. “Law in the US assumes the innocence of a defendant and the prosecution must prove guilt for a conviction.”

Twitter commentators know that basic fact. One of the most powerful Democrat lawmakers in the land? Not so much.

But where did anyone get the idea that Pelosi was “mistaken”? 

This isn’t the first time prominent Democrats have struggled with the basic concept of the presumption of innocence.

Senator Cory Booker (D-Sparta), during the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, suggested he be replaced “whether he’s innocent or guilty” of fabricated sexual assault allegations.

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-Golden Corral) at around the same time said Kavanaugh is “not entitled to those (due process and the presumption of innocence).”

Representative Eric Swalwell (D-Fang Fang) claimed that when the former President’s White House opted not to play the impeachment game by refusing to send documents and witnesses to mount a defense against the televised circus, this was an admission of guilt.

“We can only conclude that you’re guilty,” Swalwell stated.

“In America, innocent men do not hide and conceal evidence,” he added. “They are forthcoming and they want to cooperate and the president is acting like a very guilty person right now.”

The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution enshrines the concept that someone is “innocent until proven guilty.”

The clause regarding self-incrimination was designed to prevent the accused from being forced to testify against themselves, leaving the burden of proving that a person has committed a crime to the government.

And Democrats across the board want to reverse that.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Mask Off Moment: Pelosi Shredded After Suggesting Trump Needs to ‘Prove Innocence’ at Trial appeared first on The Political Insider.

Democrats hail, Republicans blast Trump indictment

Posted on (Updated by Mychael Schnell

The indictment of former President Trump by a Manhattan grand jury rocked Capitol Hill on Thursday, with Democrats hailing the decision and Republicans blasting what they described as a political witch hunt.

“The indictment of a former president is unprecedented. But so too is the unlawful conduct in which Trump has been engaged,” tweeted Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who served as lead impeachment manager during Trump’s first impeachment trial. “A nation of laws must hold the rich and powerful accountable, even when they hold high office. Especially when they do. To do otherwise is not democracy.”

Some Democrats, including House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), expressed their excitement on Twitter.

“SO Trump finally got indicted! I predicted he would and I predicted that Stormy Daniels would get him! Sometimes justice works!” Waters said.

Others stressed letting the legal process play out and that "no one is above the law."

"There should be no outside political influence, intimidation or interference in the case,” Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said. "I encourage both Mr. Trump’s critics and supporters to let the process proceed peacefully and according to the law.”

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) tweeted that “No one is above the law, and everyone has the right to a trial to prove innocence. Hopefully, the former President will peacefully respect the system, which grants him that right.”

“We must allow the judicial process to continue unimpeded and free from any form of political interference or intimidation," said Democratic Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.).

Republicans, meanwhile, jumped to criticize Bragg, with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) pledging to “hold Alvin Bragg and his unprecedented abuse of power to account” for “this injustice.”

“Alvin Bragg has irreparably damaged our country in an attempt to interfere in our Presidential election,” McCarthy tweeted. “As he routinely frees violent criminals to terrorize the public, he weaponized our sacred system of justice against President Donald Trump.”

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chair of the House Judiciary Committee and an ally of Trump, summed up the Republican reaction in a one-word tweet: “Outrageous.” And Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) — the chair of the Senate GOP campaign arm — called the indictment “a political prosecution.”

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), chair of the Senate GOP Conference, called the indictment a “politically-motivated prosecution by a far-left activist.”

“If it was anyone other than President Trump, a case like this would never be brought. Instead of ordering political hit jobs, New York prosecutors should focus on getting violent criminals off the streets,” Barrasso said in a statement.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) similarly called the indictment a “sham” and accused Democrats of “weaponizing government to attack their political opponents.” Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), chair of the House Republican Conference and the only member of House GOP leadership to endorse Trump, called the move “unprecedented election interference” and “a dark day for America,” adding that it would fuel support for Trump in 2024.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) took a more aggressive approach, seeking revenge.

“Our side chants ‘lock her up’ and their side is going to get a mug shot based on a witch hunt. It’s time to change that. Gloves are off,” Greene tweeted.

The Manhattan grand jury voted on Thursday to indict Trump on criminal charges stemming from his role in organizing a hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election, a source familiar with the proceedings confirmed to The Hill. The specific charges, however, remain unknown.

The indictment marks the culmination of a winding investigation by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D), and the end of a days-long waiting game that began when Trump publicly predicted he would be indicted in the case last week.

A trio of House Republican committee chairs sent a letter to Bragg last week — after Trump’s social media announcement — demanding that he sit for a transcribed interview about his investigation. The lawmakers also asked that Bragg provide documents and communications regarding the probe.

Jordan — who also chairs the Judiciary’s Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government — expanded the congressional investigation into Bragg days later, requesting testimony from two prosecutors who resigned from the Manhattan case because of disagreements with Bragg.

"It's Trump derangement," Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) said leaving his Capitol Hill office Thursday evening. "It's an illness of hatred that just — it shouldn't be in American politics. I don't feel that way toward anybody."

Wilson said House Republicans will move "immediately" to uncover the details of Bragg's probe, and he has confidence that GOP investigators — notably Rep. Bryan Steil (R-Wis.), chairman of the Administration Committee who signed the letter to Bragg last week — will demonstrate that Bragg's prosecution has been politically motivated from the start.

"We're going to find out, from the inside, as to their correspondence and communications," he said.

Democrats, meanwhile,

Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.), who served as an impeachment manager during Trump’s first impeachment, said Thursday was “a somber day for our nation.”

“Former President Trump’s indictment reminds us that no one is above the law and that we are all afforded due process and equal protection under the law,” he added on Twitter.

Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) tweeted that the New York indictment “is only the beginning of being held accountable for his crimes.”

“Trump attempted to illegally overturn election results in Georgia and worked to incite the insurrection at the Capitol, both in an effort to overthrow our government to advance his fascist cause,” Bowman said, calling for Trump to be banned from running for public office again.

Trump is also the subject of investigations by the Fulton County, Georgia district attorney’s office — which is looking into his efforts to influence the outcome of the 2020 presidential election — and the Justice Department, which is probing the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol and the mishandling of classified documents.

Attorney General Merrick Garland in November appointed a social counsel to oversee the Justice Department investigations related to Trump.

At least one lawmaker took a softer approach to the news that Trump had been indicted on Thursday, noting that the Manhattan grand jury has not formally announced its decision to charge Trump in the matter.

“Just a reminder that there is no rule that you have to express your opinion before reading the indictment,” Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) wrote on Twitter.

Mike Lillis and Al Weaver contributed. Updated at 8:20 p.m.

Trump Has the Perfect Job in Mind for MAGA Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene

Posted on by Guest Contributor

By Dr. Derek Ellerman

One complaint you’ll never hear about Donald Trump is that he doesn’t have any good ideas. 

Sure, you’ll definitely hear that his execution isn’t always perfect, and you’ll definitely hear that some of the people he chooses to accomplish those ideas leave much to be desired. (Hello, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, and Nikki Haley!)

But the man most certainly has many good ideas. And he just dropped a great one: 

(Shoutout to Citizen Free Press for the above video!)

RELATED: Trump Demands January 6th Prisoners Let Go, House Select Committee Prosecuted After Tucker Carlson Releases Bombshell Videos

MTG for Senate! 

At his campaign rally in Waco, Texas over the weekend (also an excellent idea, as the crime against women and children that took place there 30 years ago still has not been prosecuted), Trump wondered aloud if MAGA Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia should run for the Senate in Georgia. 

It took long enough, but Trump finally endorsed someone for Georgia Senate who is actually worth voting for. 

I’m not going to get into the question of “electability” here. 

“We have to vote for Empty Suit Candidate because they can win” has no power here. 

Whether or not someone “can win” depends on many factors, first and foremost their campaign operation. But crucially, whether or not a candidate can win is a question that comes only after the question of whether or not they should win.

Should they win because they have the correct ideas and positions? If the answer is yes, let’s hit the trail. 

If the answer is no, because they’re a big-spending warmonger who will do whatever Mitch McConnell tells them to do, then it doesn’t matter if they “can win.” 

So let’s start with that first and most important question. 

RELATED: MSNBC’s Joy Reid Livid Over Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Oversight Committee Assignment, Compares MTG to Jefferson Davis

MTG: Get Rid of the RINOs

At the rally in Waco, MTG went after McConnell and Lindsey Graham:

OK, we’re off to a good start. She knows who the empty suits are. 

Is she committed to doing the right thing, even if it’s unpopular? 

Let’s check: 

Alright, we’re off and running now! 

Only one thing could derail this train. Where is MTG on the singularly most important topic?

Now we’re cooking with gas! 

The truth is, Ukraine, in addition to being the most important subject at the moment, also provides the world’s easiest litmus test for our politicians. 

Should the people currently conducting an illegal war in Syria continue to unnecessarily provoke a nuclear power by taking money from Americans and giving it to a corrupt authoritarian?

Or should our politicians, who have rung up over $30 trillion in debt, actually put America and the American people first? 

Like I said, easiest litmus test. MTG passes with flying colors. How many other Republicans can say the same? 

Now let me be clear, I don’t think MTG is going to run for the Senate, and I don’t think she should risk her House seat at the current time, given how “voting” currently works in Georgia. 

But the difference between people like you and I and the grifters who latch on to establishment politicians for a big payday is that you and I ask the right question first. 

Can she win? I’m not sure. 

Should she win? No doubt about it. 

POLL: Should Marjorie Taylor Greene run for Senate?

By voting, you agree to receive email communication from The Political Insider. Click HERE for more information.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Trump Has the Perfect Job in Mind for MAGA Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene appeared first on The Political Insider.

Schiff criticizes lagging Justice probe of Trump

Posted on (Updated by Lauren Sforza

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) criticized the Justice Department Thursday for not moving quick enough into its investigation of former President Trump regarding his attempts at overturning the the results of the 2020 election.

"I do share the concern that the Justice Department should have moved on this case — if they are going to move on it — a long time ago," he told CNN's Kaitlan Collins on "CNN This Morning."

"The Justice Department has moved very slowly," he added.

Collins asked the California Democrat whether he shared the same concerns as others who have said the New York grand jury investigation of Trump's involvement in a hush money payment "does not have the same merits" as other cases Trump is facing.

Schiff, who led Trump's first impeachment trials, said that while the Justice Department moved quickly when it came to investigating the rioters who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, the department is at least a year away from investigating Trump's efforts to overturn the election.

"And for that reason, you have other prosecutions now that are going forward first, but I certainly think that the Justice Department should have pursued this with far more urgency," he said.

Schiff said that the investigation into Trump keeping classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida is being met with urgency, but he reiterated that the "most serious" charges around Trump's involvement in Jan. 6 should have been probed by the Justice Department "a long time ago."

Trump is facing a slew of investigations since leaving office. The Manhattan grand jury could possibly indict Trump in the coming days regarding his alleged involvement in a hush money payment made to adult film star Stormy Daniels to cover up an alleged affair.

Trump is also being investigated by the Justice Department after officials found a plethora of classified documents at his private residence in Mar-a-Lago.

Schiff criticizes lagging Justice probe of Trump

Posted on (Updated by Lauren Sforza

CORRECTION: Schiff offered the remarks Wednesday on "CNN Primetime." A previous version of this story included incorrect information.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) criticized the Justice Department Wednesday for not moving quick enough into its investigation of former President Trump regarding his attempts at overturning the results of the 2020 election.

"I do share the concern that the Justice Department should have moved on this case — if they are going to move on it — a long time ago," he told CNN's Kaitlan Collins on "CNN Primetime."

"The Justice Department has moved very slowly," he added.

Collins asked the California Democrat whether he shared the same concerns as others who have said the New York grand jury investigation of Trump's involvement in a hush money payment "does not have the same merits" as other cases Trump is facing.

Schiff, who led Trump's first impeachment trials, said that while the Justice Department moved quickly when it came to investigating the rioters who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, the department is at least a year away from investigating Trump's efforts to overturn the election.

"And for that reason, you have other prosecutions now that are going forward first, but I certainly think that the Justice Department should have pursued this with far more urgency," he said.

Schiff said that the investigation into Trump keeping classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida is being met with urgency, but he reiterated that the "most serious" charges around Trump's involvement in Jan. 6 should have been probed by the Justice Department "a long time ago."

Trump is facing a slew of investigations since leaving office. The Manhattan grand jury could possibly indict Trump in the coming days regarding his alleged involvement in a hush money payment made to adult film star Stormy Daniels to cover up an alleged affair.

Trump is also being investigated by the Justice Department after officials found a plethora of classified documents at his private residence in Mar-a-Lago.

Biden’s strategy on Trump indictment? Get out of the way 

Posted on (Updated by Jordain Carney

If former President Trump is indicted this week, the White House is expected to employ a simple strategy: Get out of the way.  

As a Trump indictment over the alleged Stormy Daniels hush-money scheme looms from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, the White House has publicly been mum.  

Privately, aides and allies said that was an intentional strategy to let the news speak for itself while pointing to the importance of accountability and rule of law.  

“The White House doesn’t have to do much here,” said one Biden ally who is close to the president’s team. “They need to acknowledge that it’s a serious legal matter and then leave it up to the courts.”  

Allies to President Biden say they are aware that Trump’s team will inevitably turn the indictment into a political issue, suggesting that Bragg, a Democrat with connections to the president, is conducting another "witch hunt.”  

Indeed, Trump and his supporters have already been doing so, and their effort went into hyperdrive on Saturday when the former president claimed to his followers on Truth Social that he expected to be arrested on Tuesday.  

On Sunday, Trump took to the social media platform again and accused Biden of having “stuffed” the district attorney’s office that is probing the case with officials from Department of Justice. 

“Biden wants to pretend he has nothing to do with the Manhattan D.A.’s Assault on Democracy when, in fact, he has ‘stuffed’ the D.A.’s Office with Department of Injustice people, including one top DOJ operative from D.C,” Trump wrote on the site without mentioning to whom he was referring.   

He also took aim at Bragg, who he said is “taking his orders from D.C.”  

Democrats say Biden should not feel compelled to “get in the mud,” as one major Democratic donor put it. 

The president can create a contrast with Trump by keeping his head down as the news around the indictment ensues.  

“It’s the right thing to do, the opposite of what Trump would have done, and presents the split screen of Trump’s crimes with Biden delivering for the American people,” said Democratic strategist Josh Schwerin. “There is nothing Trump wants more than to have more reason to falsely claim that his legal troubles are a political attack rather than the rule of law.”  

At the White House briefing on Monday, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre refrained from speaking about Trump’s case, citing “an ongoing investigation.  

“We do not comment on any ongoing investigations from here,” Jean-Pierre said. “We’ve been very consistent on that.”  

Ultimately, Democrats and Biden’s team hope the get-out-of-way strategy will accomplish another goal: It will divide Republicans ahead of a pivotal GOP primary race, in which Trump faces competition from Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is expected to run for the White House, and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, who is already in the race. 

Former Vice President Mike Pence and others are also expected to join the GOP primary.   

“Republicans are going to be split — some will defend Trump, others will seek his base without embracing him,” said Basil Smikle, the former executive director of the New York State Democratic Party who serves as the director of the Public Policy Program at Hunter College. “Both present a good foil for Democrats and Biden.”  

So far, Republicans have walked a fine line on the possible impeachment.  

On Monday, DeSantis held a press conference where he attacked Bragg, calling him a “Soros-funded prosecutor” while accusing him of “weaponizing” the Manhattan district attorney’s office.  

But at the same time, the governor, who did not mention Trump by name, slapped the former president when he said he doesn’t “know what goes into paying hush money to a porn star to secure silence over some type of alleged affair.” 

“I can’t speak to that,” DeSantis added pointedly.  

Democrats expect that tone to continue from the Florida governor — and other Republican rivals — as the presidential race heats up.  

In that scenario, they say, Biden comes out on top.  

“It makes the GOP nomination battle more contentious, which is good for Biden,” said Democratic strategist Brad Bannon.  

In addition, Bannon argued Trump’s potential indictment and trial could galvanize Republicans behind Trump, “who is a lesser threat to Biden than a candidate like DeSantis.”  

While allies expect Biden to largely take a do-nothing approach on the potential indictment, allies cautioned that the strategy could change if protests turn violent, as they did during the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. 

“They’re not going to talk about it unless they have to talk about it,” the ally said.  

House Republicans seek testimony from Manhattan DA on Trump hush money probe

Posted on (Updated by Rebecca Beitsch

A trio of Republican House chairmen are demanding testimony from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D) ahead of his potential prosecution of former President Trump in connection with hush money payments made ahead of the 2016 election.

The letter to Bragg comes after Trump claimed over the weekend that he could be arrested as soon as Tuesday and asked his supporters to prepare to protest on his behalf.

It also comes before Bragg has officially made any decision on charging Trump with a crime, and raised concerns among Democrats who said the GOP was inappropriately interfering with the investigation.

The GOP lawmakers cited Trump’s announced bid for office in 2024 in asking for documents and communication about the probe. They said Bragg should sit for an interview “as soon as possible.”

“Your actions will erode confidence in the evenhanded application of justice and unalterably interfere in the course of the 2024 presidential election,” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) wrote in the letter, which was also signed by Chairmen James Comer (R-Ky.) and Bryan Steil (R-Wis.), who lead the Oversight and Administration committees.

“In light of the serious consequences of your actions, we expect that you will testify about what plainly appears to be a politically motivated prosecutorial decision,” Jordan continued.

Bragg’s office did not immediately respond to request for comment.

The move alarmed Democrats even before the letter was officially sent.

“Defending Trump is not a legitimate legislative purpose for Congress to investigate a state district attorney,” Rep. Daniel Goldman (N.Y.), who before joining Congress worked as a counsel to Democrats in Trump’s first impeachment, wrote on Twitter.

“Congress has no jurisdiction to investigate the Manhattan DA, which receives no federal funding nor has any other federal nexus,” Goldman added.

The letter follows the House GOP's recent creation of a subcommittee on the “weaponization” of the government. That panel has the power to oversee “ongoing criminal investigations.”

“Using a congressional committee to bully a state DA sounds like...the weaponization of the federal government,” House Judiciary Committee ranking member Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) wrote on Twitter.

The letter says Bragg’s probe “requires congressional scrutiny about how public safety funds appropriated by Congress are implemented by local law-enforcement agencies.”

Bragg’s investigation is focused on Trump’s role in directing a $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels, who was prepared to go public with a story she had a sexual relationship with Trump, an affair he denies.

Former Trump fixer Michael Cohen arranged the payment, was reimbursed by Trump for the work as legal expenses and failed to disclose it in campaign finance records. He ultimately pleaded guilty and served jail time for his involvement in arranging the payments, something he said he did at the direction of Trump.

The letter runs through what the lawmakers see as a host of issues with a potential case, including the credibility of Cohen.

Bragg reignited the investigation into the matter, which was previously pursued by his predecessor Cyrus Vance, who explored the payment as part of a broader probe before ultimately suspending the probe over concerns with the strength of the case. Bragg has taken up a more narrow focus.

Still, the authors seized on that point, calling it a “zombie” case. They also questioned whether any charges would fit within the statute of limitations, which for New York felonies runs five years. That timeline can be extended, however, when a defendant has consistently lived out of state.

“The inference from the totality of these facts is that your impending indictment is motivated by political calculations,” the lawmakers wrote.

“The facts of this matter have not changed since 2018 and no new witnesses have emerged.”

Updated at 1:08 p.m.

Tucker Carlson’s Jan. 6 footage sparks bipartisan outrage

Posted on (Updated by Emily Brooks

Fox News host Tucker Carlson whipped up a firestorm Tuesday on Capitol Hill, sparking bipartisan backlash and igniting tensions with Capitol Police by downplaying the Jan. 6 Capitol riot on his prime-time program as “mostly peaceful chaos.”

His show divided Republicans, with a number of GOP senators ripping his portrayal of the incursion at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Capitol Police Chief J. Thomas Manger, who rarely offers opinions on political issues, said the Monday night show was filled with “offensive and misleading conclusions about the Jan. 6 attack.”

“The program conveniently cherry-picked from the calmer moments of our 41,000 hours of video. The commentary fails to provide context about the chaos and violence that happened before or during these less tense moments,” Manger wrote in a memo to lawmakers.

“Those of you who contributed to the effort to allow this country’s legislative process to continue know firsthand what actually happened.” 

The segment was the first of two installments planned for this week relying on security footage granted to Carlson by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.). Carlson was expected to air more clips from the footage during his show on Tuesday evening. 

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) issued a scathing rebuke of Carlson and Fox on Tuesday, holding up a copy of the memo and saying he wanted to associate himself “with the opinion of the chief of the Capitol police about what happened on Jan. 6.” 

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) holds up a letter from U.S. Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger during a media availability following the weekly policy luncheon on Tuesday, March 7, 2023. McConnell supports Manger’s view against the released video footage to Fox News’ Tucker Carlson of the Jan.6 attack on the Capitol. (Greg Nash)

“It was a mistake, in my view, [for] Fox News to depict this in a way completely at variance with what our chief law enforcement official in the Capitol” described, McConnell said.

It’s an unusual position for the host of one of Fox’s most-watched programs, who, while often a magnet for the ire of the left, seldom gets such direct criticism from those on the right. 

Carlson, who has previously criticized McCarthy on his show, suggested at the start of the year that the new House Speaker release all Jan. 6 security footage in order to win support from detractors threatening to block his path to the gavel. McCarthy later gave Carlson exclusive first access to the footage, but has denied that release came as a result of negotiations for the Speakership.

Though McCarthy and other Republicans said last week that footage released for broadcast would be subject to a Capitol Police security review, and Carlson said as much on his show, Capitol Police said it saw just one of the several clips that Carlson aired on Monday: An interior door that Carlson said was blurred as a result of security concerns.

“We repeatedly requested that any clips be shown to us first for a security review,” Capitol Police told The Hill on Monday. “So far we have only been given the ability to preview a single clip out of the multiple clips that aired.”

A senior GOP aide with knowledge of the process of releasing the footage said the Capitol Police provided a list of what would be considered security sensitive, and only one clip that Carlson wanted to air met that standard, which Capitol Police then cleared.

The same camera angle was released without any blur on the door during the 2021 impeachment of former President Trump.

“We worked with the Capitol Police to identify any security-sensitive footage and made sure it wasn’t released,” McCarthy spokesman Mark Bednar said in a statement.

A representative for Fox News declined to comment on Tuesday. 

A number of lawmakers offered pointed and direct criticism of Carlson’s first use of the footage.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), meanwhile, told multiple news outlets said that Carlson’s show on the Jan. 6 footage was “bullshit.” 

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) told CNN: “To somehow put that in the same category as a permitted peaceful protest is just a lie.”

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

Sen. Kevin Cramer is among the Republicans that have criticized Tucker Carlson airing Jan. 6 footage. (Greg Nash)

Carlson at the same time won plaudits from other Republicans who have similarly criticized and downplayed the attack. 

“When will judges begin applying justice equally? Doesn’t look like “thousands of armed insurrectionists” to me,” Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said in a tweet after thanking McCarthy and Carlson for showing the footage.

“I've seen enough. Release all J6 political prisoners now,” Rep. Mike Collins (R-Ga.) said in a tweet as Carlson’s show aired.

Trump also weighed in on the footage, praising Carlson and McCarthy over its publication and calling the tapes the Fox host played for his audience “irrefutable.”  

Carlson aired the footage after being granted access to the trove of security tapes by McCarthy, prompting outrage from Democrats and pundits who raised concerns that the tapes could threaten Capitol security procedures and amplify conspiracy theories.

Former President Trump

Former President Trump speaks during the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) at the Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center in National Harbor, Md. (Greg Nash)

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on the Senate floor on Tuesday called Carlson’s show “one of the most shameful hours we’ve seen on cable television,” saying he was “furious” with both Carlson and McCarthy. He called on Fox News and its owner Rupert Murdoch to tell Carlson to not run more footage on Tuesday evening. 

“Speaker McCarthy has played a treacherous, treacherous game in catering to the far right,” Schumer said.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who was one of the members on the Jan. 6 committee, is among those who have raised security concerns over the release of the footage, noting it could be used to map the Capitol and the evacuation path of lawmakers.

He called Carlson’s show and conspiracies about Jan. 6 pushed through his documentary a “central part of the GOP agenda and playbook as they try to get Donald Trump elected to the White House again.”

“They didn't even apparently honor their agreement with the Capitol Police to provide the clips in advance. So there can be some attempt to contextualize whatever silly potshots they're taking,” he told The Hill.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.)

Rep. Jamie Raskin (Annabelle Gordon)

“The absurd part is they act like their fragmented and disoriented potshots from Capitol security footage are the only documentary record of what happened. There are thousands and thousands of hours that have already been published – not just security footage – but also [by] media that were present and insurrectionists themselves. The whole world was watching and everyone knows exactly what happened. They are involved in a fraudulent enterprise here,” he added. 

Among the unfounded theories Carlson floated in his Monday program were suggestions that federal agents helped incite the violence, though he stopped short of providing evidence to prove it. He also cast doubt on the circumstances surrounding the death of Capitol police officer Brian Sicknick.

It was something Manger deemed “the most disturbing accusation from last night” in asserting his death “had nothing to do with heroic actions on Jan. 6.”  

“The department maintains, as anyone with common sense would, that had Officer Sicknick not fought valiantly for hours on the day he was violently assaulted, Officer Sicknick would not have died the next day,” the chief said.

The top-rated host last year produced and published a multi-part documentary series dubbed “Patriot Purge,” which purported to tell an alternative story of the attack and features at least one subject who suggests the event may have been a “false flag” operation. 

The publication of the tapes also comes as Carlson specifically and Fox more generally are taking intense heat from critics over revelations the company’s top executives and talent embraced and discussed Trump’s false claims about the 2020 election on air but privately cast doubt on them. 

“They believed the election they had just voted in had been unfairly conducted,” Carlson said Monday of the people who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6. “They were right. In retrospect, it is clear the 2020 election was a grave betrayal of American democracy, given the facts that have since emerged about that election,” he said. “No honest person can deny it. Yet the beneficiaries of that election continue to lie about what is now obvious.” 

Manger dismissed those conclusions in his Tuesday letter.

“TV commentary will not record the truth of our history books,” he wrote in his letter. “The Justice system will. Truth and justice are on our side.” 

Alexander Bolton contributed.

Three key Trump figures intersect two Justice Department probes 

Posted on (Updated by Rebecca Beitsch

Three key figures connected to former President Trump are at the intersection of two accelerating Justice Department probes seen as the most viable pathways for a prosecution of the former president.    

Special counsel Jack Smith is overseeing what began as two entirely separate cases: the mishandling of classified records at Mar-a-Lago and the effort to influence the 2020 election that culminated in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.      

Several Trump World figures straddle both events, providing prosecutors with what experts say is a potent opportunity to advance both investigations.      

Alex Cannon, Christina Bobb and Kash Patel played different roles in the two sagas, but each has been sought by the Justice Department in the documents dispute and has also been called in by the special House committee, now disbanded, that investigated the Jan. 6 riot.    

Cannon, a longtime Trump Organization employee, was pulled into campaign efforts to assess allegations of voter fraud and then served as a liaison for Trump with the National Archives as officials there pushed for the recovery of presidential records.  

Bobb, a lawyer for Trump’s 2024 campaign, aided in the Trump 2020 campaign’s post-election lawsuits. She later shifted to doing legal work for Trump that culminated in her signing a statement asserting classified records stored at Mar-a-Lago had been returned.   

Patel was chief of staff to the secretary of Defense as the Pentagon was grappling with Jan. 6. Trump also named Patel as one of his representatives to the National Archives upon leaving office, and he was later one of Trump’s chief surrogates in pushing claims that the former president declassified the records discovered in his Florida home.  

It’s unclear whether any of the trio faces significant legal exposure, but their unique positions could be valuable for Smith, who is racing forward with both cases. In recent weeks, Smith has subpoenaed former Vice President Mike Pence and former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, while securing another batch of materials from Mar-a-Lago.  

“Typically, you don't have two separate investigations and two separate sets of possible crimes to work with as you're negotiating. Smith does have that here,” said Norm Eisen, a counsel for Democrats during Trump’s first impeachment who has penned analyses of both cases.     

“For him, it's like a two-for-one sale. If he cuts a cooperation deal with some of these individuals, he can advance multiple cases at the same time,” Eisen added.     

Patel was granted immunity by a judge and compelled to answer questions in the Mar-a-Lago case after being previously subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury and repeatedly pleading the Fifth. Bobb has also spoken with prosecutors in relation to the case and testified before a grand jury. And the Justice Department is seeking to speak to Cannon about his dealings with the National Archives, The New York Times reported. 

“I think that is a potential fruitful avenue for the Justice Department in these cases,” said Barbara McQuade, a former U.S. attorney under President Obama. “Their overlap in the two cases is very interesting, because you could use criminal exposure in one case to flip them in the other case.” 

Attorneys for Cannon and Bobb did not respond to multiple requests for comment for this story, while a spokesperson for Patel declined to comment. The Trump campaign also did not respond to request for comment.  

To be clear, other figures also may have insight into the two probes, including Meadows and former deputy White House counsel Patrick Philbin. Former White House attorney Eric Herschmann is also reported to have warned Trump about holding records at Mar-a-Lago.     

Still, the trove of transcripts released by the House Jan. 6 committee offers a window into three figures who, despite diverging paths, became central in the Mar-a-Lago probe. 

Bobb and Patel, who now serves on the board of Trump’s social media enterprise, remain deeply enmeshed with the former president.      

Cannon was most recently employed by Michael Best, a law firm that in December severed its ties with several Trump-connected attorneys, including Stefan Passantino, who represented former aides before the Jan. 6 panel. The firm also allowed contracts with Cannon and former Trump deputy campaign manager Justin Clark to lapse, Bloomberg News reported. 

The firm did not respond to a request for comment.   

Cannon, who was initially hired to work on contracts for the Trump Organization, expressed hesitation during interviews with the Jan. 6 panel about being pulled into working on fraud issues for the campaign as the pandemic brought hotel operations to a trickle.    

“I believe that the only reason I was asked to do this is because others didn't want to. I have no particular experience with election law or anything. I do vendor contracts,” he told the committee.     

When asked if he found that work undesirable, he responded, “I'm sitting here right now. Yes, it's undesirable.”      

The conversations show Cannon was tasked with evaluating a number of claims from “crazy people,” as he once described it, as well as other claims that dead people may have voted — something he was unable to verify given limitations in voter databases.  

He ultimately relayed those concerns to Pence, recounting to the committee in what would become a brief appearance in a hearing that “I was not personally finding anything sufficient to alter the results of the election.”      

It was a stance that caught the eye of former Trump adviser Peter Navarro.  

“Mr. Navarro accused me of being an agent of the deep state working … against the president. And I never took another phone call from Mr. Navarro,” Cannon said.     

Bobb, in contrast, made clear in her interview that she believed there was suspicious activity on Election Day that merited review.     

Once a reporter for the far-right One America News, Bobb had come to the network after working as an attorney, including during stints with the Marine Corps. She would later get a master of laws degree from Georgetown University, joining the Trump administration at the Department of Homeland Security after graduation.      

While working as a One America News employee, she volunteered her time to the Trump campaign immediately after the election. The arrangement was approved by the network, though the campaign required her to sign a nondisclosure agreement.     

“There was plenty of evidence to be concerned about fraud,” she said, even if the legal team wasn’t prepared to launch a case on the first day following the election. 

“I volunteered and I wanted to look into it because I was concerned about the integrity of my vote, of the country. I think that's why we all got involved. So I don't want you to take my statement and say, Christina Bobb said that in the beginning the legal team knew there was no fraud. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying there was plenty of reason to believe there could be fraud.”

Bobb was present in the “war room” at the Willard Hotel on Jan. 6 and was listening in to Trump’s call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger — a discussion she told the panel was “unremarkable.”    

The Jan. 6 committee transcripts indicate Cannon and Bobb had no interaction throughout the litigation process, with Bobb saying they did not connect until after President Biden was sworn in. Bobb told investigators she didn’t speak with Cannon until later, adding nothing more when investigators asked if it was on an unrelated matter.     

Bobb’s role with Trump on the Mar-a-Lago documents picked up where Cannon left off.     

In February 2022, Cannon declined Trump’s request to sign a statement indicating all classified material at Mar-a-Lago had been returned because he wasn’t sure the statement was true, according to reporting from The Washington Post.      

Bobb would join the team later, agreeing to sign a declaration given to the Justice Department in June attesting that all sensitive government documents had been returned — with the stipulation that her attestation was “based upon the information that has been provided to me.”     

“The contrast between the two as lawyers speaks volumes,” said Josh Stanton, an attorney with Perry Guha who contributed to a model prosecution memo for the Mar-a-Lago case.  

“Alex Cannon refus[es] to sign a certification that everything had been turned over where he wasn't able to do himself the diligent work to actually independently verify that, whereas Christina Bobb is in a position where she's told to sign the certification, and is told that that's correct, then just goes ahead and signs it anyway,” he said.  

“Whether or not you could actually make out, say, criminal charges against Christina Bobb for signing that certification … it certainly puts her ethically, as a lawyer, in really hot water,” he added.     

Patel, who spoke to the Jan. 6 committee after being subpoenaed, began his deposition with an opening statement expressing frustration that the panel did not think he would be cooperative with its investigation.     

Patel later answered questions during a lengthy interview after noting privilege concerns, but investigators at times seemed baffled by details the former high-ranking Defense Department official could not remember. Patel struggled to recall specifics about some conversations with Trump and demurred when asked about reported plans near the end of the Trump presidency to install him as head of the CIA.    

“I know you guys try to think this is improbable, but I was in one of those positions for a two-year period of time, approximately, where I had many conversations with the president impacting things that I would only read about or watch in movies,” he said.      

“So, after a certain period of time, they tend to stack up and you just do the mission,” Patel added.     

Patel largely sidestepped questions on whether Trump should have done more to stop the chaos on Jan. 6, but spoke at length about the process for securing assistance from the National Guard and Trump’s approval for the use of as many as 20,000 troops that day.     

The committee panned Trump’s inaction as dereliction of duty, and Stanton said Patel’s comments could forecast a response should Trump or others face culpability for Jan. 6.  

“Some of the most powerful testimony in the hearings themselves was the sort of hours Trump seemed not to act. And so I think he's previewing what they're going to say, which is, ‘Oh, no, I actually did authorize 10,000 or 20,000 National Guard members to be able to respond,’” he said.

In the Mar-a-Lago probe, Patel repeatedly asserted his Fifth Amendment rights during his first appearance before a grand jury.     

“Trump declassified whole sets of materials in anticipation of leaving government that he thought the American public should have the right to read themselves,” Patel told Breitbart News in May.     

“The White House counsel failed to generate the paperwork to change the classification markings, but that doesn’t mean the information wasn’t declassified,” Patel said. “I was there with President Trump when he said ‘We are declassifying this information.'”     

Trump’s attorneys have not directly backed that claim, though it would not be a bulletproof defense should he face Espionage Act charges, as the law deals with those who mishandle “national defense information.”

The special counsel appears to be ratcheting up the probes in recent weeks, even seeking to pierce the attorney-client privilege of Evan Corcoran, one of Trump’s attorneys in the document dispute, arguing his legal advice may have been given in furtherance of a crime.

It’s a move observers say should give warning to other attorneys involved in the probe.     

“Any lawyer associated with Donald Trump is at great risk,” Eisen said. “I mean, he's like a neutron bomb for the legal profession.”