MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Rudy Giuliani’

Welcome to the World of ‘Novel Legal Theories’ | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on April 11, 2023

The “crimes” under the RICO statute are essentially fictitious, created to enable federal authorities to avoid the state courts in which accused “mobsters” traditionally had been prosecuted. Because reputed “mob” figures were being acquitted in state courts—often in the face of overwhelming evidence of guilt—the government created a new set of “derivative crimes,” a class of offenses that by definition are derived from other criminal acts.

One unique aspect of Trump’s case is that state prosecutors are deriving their charges from federal criminal statutes instead of the other way around, but the particulars of this case are especially troubling, given the politics involved and the fact that Trump was never charged with breaking federal campaign law, much less convicted of it. In order for Bragg to gain a conviction, jurors will have to conclude that Trump broke federal law, something that they are not legally entitled to do, given that lawbreaking never was demonstrated in federal court. To put it another way, New York jurors are being asked to declare Trump guilty of a crime for which he never was charged.

Better him than you…right? Until it is you.

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/welcome-to-the-world-of-novel-legal-theories/

by William Anderson

1000w q95

When Rudy Giuliani was pursuing his infamous Wall Street prosecutions in the 1980s, his aides admitted that they were indicting people on “novel legal theories” that had not been used before. A Giuliani lieutenant bragged to a group of law students that prosecutors in his office:

were guilty of criminalizing technical offenses…Many of the prosecution theories we used were novel. Many of the statutes that we charged under…hadn’t been charged as crimes before…We’re looking to find the next areas of conduct that meets any sort of statutory definition of what criminal conduct is.

At that time, federal prosecutors were going after people like investment banker Michael Milken, but even they would have stopped at indicting a former president. That day is gone, however, and today we have Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg following what John Cassidy of The New Yorker calls a “novel effort” to combine both state and federal laws to create what clearly is a bill of attainder to convict Donald Trump of a crime. Even if the courts rule against Trump and permit the charges to stand—and it is certain that Trump and Bragg will litigate the charges all the way to the Supreme Court themselves—that does not change the fact that Bragg has cobbled a number of statutes together to create something the U.S. Constitution forbids: a bill of attainder.

Although the indictment is still sealed at this writing, the gist of the charges is as follows: (A) Donald Trump, who was running for president, authorized payment of $130,000 to a woman known as Stormy Daniels to keep her quiet about an affair between them, with Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen making the payments; (B) he listed the payments as a campaign finance expense and Cohen pleaded guilty to federal campaign fraud; (C) the Trump Company reimbursed Cohen for the payments and claimed them as a legal expense.

Bragg is alleging that Trump approved these payments while breaking federal campaign law, which makes them a felony (under New York law, simply falsifying business records is a misdemeanor). Writes attorney and New York Times columnist David French:

So how can Trump be prosecuted? If Bragg can prove that, contrary to New York State law, Trump falsified records when the “intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof,” he can prove that Trump committed a felony, and a felony not only carries stiffer penalties; it has a five-year statute of limitations.

He continues:

But what is the other crime that can convert a charge of records falsification to a felony? Most likely prosecutors will rely on an allegation of violating federal campaign finance law, specifically the claim that the hush money payments to Daniels were illegal campaign contributions. But this is also not a simple case to make: The prosecution may claim that state campaign finance laws apply to Trump, and his payments thus violated New York law, but remember we’re talking about a presidential election. A federal statute expressly states that the relevant campaign finance laws “supersede and pre-empt any provision of state law with respect to election to federal office.” This law represents a formidable barrier to prosecuting Trump under state campaign finance laws, and there is no obvious path around it.

This is a problem because during the infamous “Russiagate” investigations, special prosecutors looked at this situation and concluded that the facts were too sketchy to charge Trump with breaking federal campaign laws. However, Bragg will be calling for a state jury to conclude that Trump actually did break federal law—something a state jury should not be doing. Because Trump was never charged with breaking campaign laws, there is now no legal way to claim he broke them.

Bragg’s entire case hinges upon this point, which is why French—who clearly despises Trump and would rejoice if he were convicted of something—advised against bringing state criminal charges in the first place. He writes:

It’s no wonder that even Bragg’s aggressive former prosecutor Mark Pomerantz was concerned that the Daniels case was, as The New York Times reported, “too risky under New York law.” A Reuters article described the legal theories supporting a prosecution for the Daniels payments as “untested.” A January New York Times story also accurately called the theories “largely untested.”

While one can condemn Trump for the reckless behavior that brought about this situation in the first place, I would argue that Bragg’s behavior is much more reckless, given that he is cobbling state and federal statutes together to target a political figure roundly hated by the Democrats. Bragg is using criminal law for political purposes, and while such actions have a sorry history going back to the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration’s hounding of critics of the New Deal, including former Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon, they have no place under the rule of law.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board (unlike The New York Times editorial board, which prattled on about Trump “not being above the law”) recognized the greater danger of unleashing what it called a “Pandora’s box” that has “political ramifications that are unpredictable and probably destructive.” This indictment, unfortunately, is politically popular with Democrats (and some never-Trump Republicans), and the usual brakes that accompany political processes have been discarded in the hopes that the Great Orange Whale will see the inside of a prison cell.

While Trump and his supporters will rightly argue that Bragg is manipulating the law in a special way to go after one person, this case highlights greater abuses of the law attributable to what Candice E. Jackson and I labeled almost twenty years ago as “derivative crimes.” Under a “derivative crime” regime, which makes up the bulk of federal criminal statutes, a “crime” such as “racketeering” is not defined as a specific act, but rather is derived from other actions that may either be actual crimes or acts that someone might call criminal but do not break any laws.

For example, Jackson and I described the RICO statutes in our 2004 Independent Review paper:

The “crimes” under the RICO statute are essentially fictitious, created to enable federal authorities to avoid the state courts in which accused “mobsters” traditionally had been prosecuted. Because reputed “mob” figures were being acquitted in state courts—often in the face of overwhelming evidence of guilt—the government created a new set of “derivative crimes,” a class of offenses that by definition are derived from other criminal acts.

One does not “racketeer” anyone. Instead, the government permits federal prosecutors to present evidence of lawbreaking elsewhere, but the defendants are not charged with those crimes (such as extortion, murder, and robbery). Instead, they are charged with racketeering, which is derived from those other alleged actions. With derivative crimes, federal prosecutors were able to win cases against alleged organized crime figures such as John Gotti, who was convicted in federal court of…racketeering.

While the U.S. Constitution forbids passage of bills of attainder, clever prosecutors find other ways of implementing them by piecing together various statutes to form criminal charges that are specifically aimed at one person.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Narrative Soup | Kunstler

Posted by M. C. on June 26, 2021

As “Joe Biden” fades altogether from the scene, the country will have to grapple with the real problems it faces, not hobgoblins of racism, misogyny, white supremacy but how to cope with a dwindling energy supply and a falling standard of living, and how to remain civilized. We’re doing a good job of destroying the institutions that make civilization possible, especially law and the courts.

https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/narrative-soup/

James Howard Kunstler

A major premise of my 2005 book, The Long Emergency, was that government at the highest level would become increasingly ineffectual and impotent as the melodrama of national collapse plays out. So, there was no small irony that the floundering political elites would settle on the pathetic figure of “Joe Biden” to symbolically head a foundering government. They picked the very embodiment of collapse to usher in collapse, and that is why “Joe Biden” appears to be nothing more than an usher, somebody whose only duty, say, at a funeral, is to show the more important attendees to their places before the ominous casket.

Nobody believes that he is in charge of the executive branch, or even in charge of himself, as he shuffles stiffly out to the podium with eyes gone all slitty to do the one thing his minders have trained him to do: read a teleprompter. Surely the leaders over in Europe were uncomfortably bemused by his recent appearance among them, as if the USA sent a ghost from the bygone 20th century to spook our allies into mindfulness of self-preservation — message: the great power that rescued you in two world wars is gone, and you are on your own now.

The collapse is universal, though, playing out globally in different flavors of culture and economy, but well underway, for Europe, too, and eventually even China. It’s a collapse of modernity and the techno-industrial horse it rode in on. The extreme political narcissists of the day, intoxicated with messianic fantasies, would like to retail a Great Reset in a desperate effort to prevent modernity from becoming yesterday’s tomorrow. But it only seems to amount to an obsessive-compulsive wish to push everybody around and herd populations into controllable corrals that, some suspect, are just a prelude to a not-far-off global Auschwitz. “You will own nothing and you will be happy” is about as reassuring as “work will make you free.”

The USA, with its more anarchic ethos, can only offer laughable rationales for its failures on the disorderly way to bankruptcy and breakdown. Naturally, the folks in-charge are terrified of any challenge to their unconvincing rule. The election audit underway in Arizona is driving them up a tree. The latest desperate gambit is the New York State court system’s move to suspend Rudy Giuliani’s law license as a sort of warning to anyone else who would try to cast doubt on the ironclad rectitude of the recent election.

The New York court’s Attorney Grievance Committee states:

….there is uncontroverted evidence that the respondent [Giuliani] communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to the courts, lawmakers, and the public at large in his capacity as a lawyer for former president Donald J. Trump and the Trump campaign in connection with Trump’s failed effort at reelection in 2020.  These false statements were made to improperly bolster respondent’s narrative that, due to widespread voter fraud, victory in the 2020 presidential election was stolen from his client.”

Notice the assertion that contesting the vote is necessarily proscribed, and that any argument to that end is in the service of a false “narrative,” which is necessarily inadmissible. Since when is it against the rules to have a point-of-view? Especially a legal point-of-view about legal matters, in courts of law and in the public arena? Now, it happens that a number of state courts dismissed cases brought by Mr. Giuliani, without bothering to entertain any evidence, most particularly affidavits Mr. Giuliani proffered detailing voting irregularities. The courts didn’t want to hear it. If that is proof of anything, it may only be of corruption in the state courts. Has anyone noticed that the grievance committee is manufacturing a narrative of its own, very possibly a false one?

In fact, there is one legal review of the 2020 balloting currently underway in Arizona, at the order of the Arizona State Senate, as it should be because, according to the US constitution, elections are a prerogative of the fifty states’ legislatures. It’s not “a narrative.” It’s as official as can be, and they have every right to do it, and there’s a fair chance that it will uncover both ballot fraud and voting machine fraud. I suppose all that seems “baseless” if you refuse to look. Also, this week a judge in Georgia approved a process to unseal roughly 145,000 mail-in ballots in Fulton County (the Atlanta metro region) to inspect them for fraud. The ruling stems from a lawsuit against the county that alleges evidence of fraudulent ballots and improper counting. “Joe Biden” won the state by a mere 12,000 votes.

Other states, notably Pennsylvania, are taking action toward their own 2020 vote audits, and through the proper legislative channels. The “incontrovertible evidence” of a fair and honest election is the fraud at issue. There are only assertions that it would be wrong to even look for it, and it’s hard to imagine a weaker argument. So, the politburo behind “Joe Biden” is running scared. The New York court’s action against Mr. Giuliani is just a peevish act of political desperation aimed at disabling a legal adversary. That and Attorney General Merrick Garland’s threat to shut down the Arizona audit on specious “civil rights” grounds are just attempts to create distractions for a regime that begins to apprehend it is whirling around the drain.

As “Joe Biden” fades altogether from the scene, the country will have to grapple with the real problems it faces, not hobgoblins of racism, misogyny, white supremacy but how to cope with a dwindling energy supply and a falling standard of living, and how to remain civilized. We’re doing a good job of destroying the institutions that make civilization possible, especially law and the courts.

A major premise of my 2005 book, The Long Emergency, was that government at the highest level would become increasingly ineffectual and impotent as the melodrama of national collapse plays out. So, there was no small irony that the floundering political elites would settle on the pathetic figure of “Joe Biden” to symbolically head a foundering government. They picked the very embodiment of collapse to usher in collapse, and that is why “Joe Biden” appears to be nothing more than an usher, somebody whose only duty, say, at a funeral, is to show the more important attendees to their places before the ominous casket.

Nobody believes that he is in charge of the executive branch, or even in charge of himself, as he shuffles stiffly out to the podium with eyes gone all slitty to do the one thing his minders have trained him to do: read a teleprompter. Surely the leaders over in Europe were uncomfortably bemused by his recent appearance among them, as if the USA sent a ghost from the bygone 20th century to spook our allies into mindfulness of self-preservation — message: the great power that rescued you in two world wars is gone, and you are on your own now.

The collapse is universal, though, playing out globally in different flavors of culture and economy, but well underway, for Europe, too, and eventually even China. It’s a collapse of modernity and the techno-industrial horse it rode in on. The extreme political narcissists of the day, intoxicated with messianic fantasies, would like to retail a Great Reset in a desperate effort to prevent modernity from becoming yesterday’s tomorrow. But it only seems to amount to an obsessive-compulsive wish to push everybody around and herd populations into controllable corrals that, some suspect, are just a prelude to a not-far-off global Auschwitz. “You will own nothing and you will be happy” is about as reassuring as “work will make you free.”

The USA, with its more anarchic ethos, can only offer laughable rationales for its failures on the disorderly way to bankruptcy and breakdown. Naturally, the folks in-charge are terrified of any challenge to their unconvincing rule. The election audit underway in Arizona is driving them up a tree. The latest desperate gambit is the New York State court system’s move to suspend Rudy Giuliani’s law license as a sort of warning to anyone else who would try to cast doubt on the ironclad rectitude of the recent election.

The New York court’s Attorney Grievance Committee states:

….there is uncontroverted evidence that the respondent [Giuliani] communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to the courts, lawmakers, and the public at large in his capacity as a lawyer for former president Donald J. Trump and the Trump campaign in connection with Trump’s failed effort at reelection in 2020.  These false statements were made to improperly bolster respondent’s narrative that, due to widespread voter fraud, victory in the 2020 presidential election was stolen from his client.”

Notice the assertion that contesting the vote is necessarily proscribed, and that any argument to that end is in the service of a false “narrative,” which is necessarily inadmissible. Since when is it against the rules to have a point-of-view? Especially a legal point-of-view about legal matters, in courts of law and in the public arena? Now, it happens that a number of state courts dismissed cases brought by Mr. Giuliani, without bothering to entertain any evidence, most particularly affidavits Mr. Giuliani proffered detailing voting irregularities. The courts didn’t want to hear it. If that is proof of anything, it may only be of corruption in the state courts. Has anyone noticed that the grievance committee is manufacturing a narrative of its own, very possibly a false one?

In fact, there is one legal review of the 2020 balloting currently underway in Arizona, at the order of the Arizona State Senate, as it should be because, according to the US constitution, elections are a prerogative of the fifty states’ legislatures. It’s not “a narrative.” It’s as official as can be, and they have every right to do it, and there’s a fair chance that it will uncover both ballot fraud and voting machine fraud. I suppose all that seems “baseless” if you refuse to look. Also, this week a judge in Georgia approved a process to unseal roughly 145,000 mail-in ballots in Fulton County (the Atlanta metro region) to inspect them for fraud. The ruling stems from a lawsuit against the county that alleges evidence of fraudulent ballots and improper counting. “Joe Biden” won the state by a mere 12,000 votes.

Other states, notably Pennsylvania, are taking action toward their own 2020 vote audits, and through the proper legislative channels. The “incontrovertible evidence” of a fair and honest election is the fraud at issue. There are only assertions that it would be wrong to even look for it, and it’s hard to imagine a weaker argument. So, the politburo behind “Joe Biden” is running scared. The New York court’s action against Mr. Giuliani is just a peevish act of political desperation aimed at disabling a legal adversary. That and Attorney General Merrick Garland’s threat to shut down the Arizona audit on specious “civil rights” grounds are just attempts to create distractions for a regime that begins to apprehend it is whirling around the drain.

As “Joe Biden” fades altogether from the scene, the country will have to grapple with the real problems it faces, not hobgoblins of racism, misogyny, white supremacy but how to cope with a dwindling energy supply and a falling standard of living, and how to remain civilized. We’re doing a good job of destroying the institutions that make civilization possible, especially law and the courts.


Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

The Truth Is Surely Baseless | Kunstler

Posted by M. C. on May 8, 2021

The urgent problem: how to squash the Arizona vote audit by branding it as an outlaw action, even though it was ordered under law by the Arizona State Senate. Having failed to stop it so far using the Swamp’s Lawfare cadres in the Arizona courts, the DOJ has called in its Civil Rights Division to get’er done, pretending that it will be an offense against people-of-color if auditors seek to know whether write-in votes correspond to actual addresses, and other particulars of election procedure that may have been violated.

Of course, the Arizona business is only one leak in a giant dike of official deceit built-up over the years to keep any truth from deluging the DC lowlands.

https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/the-truth-is-surely-baseless/

James Howard Kunstler

MADDOW: … I think we should see this as the Justice Department putting these whack jobs in Arizona, forgive me, on notice, that what they`re doing is something they`re not going to be allowed to do for very much longer.

O`DONNELL: I think ‘whack jobs’ is now in The New York Times style sheet for describing what`s happening in Arizona.

— MSNBC 5/5/21

What you’re seeing now with the DC establishment are desperate moves to keep the suspicious and yet more pissed-off public from understanding the government crime spree of the past five years that started with the Obama gang using the Department of Justice to disable and terminate Donald Trump and the threat he represented to the network of special privilege and money known as the Swamp, which has managed to put a deep-fake president in office as a last resort to protect itself.

The urgent problem: how to squash the Arizona vote audit by branding it as an outlaw action, even though it was ordered under law by the Arizona State Senate. Having failed to stop it so far using the Swamp’s Lawfare cadres in the Arizona courts, the DOJ has called in its Civil Rights Division to get’er done, pretending that it will be an offense against people-of-color if auditors seek to know whether write-in votes correspond to actual addresses, and other particulars of election procedure that may have been violated.

Of course, the Arizona business is only one leak in a giant dike of official deceit built-up over the years to keep any truth from deluging the DC lowlands. Other leaks are springing in New Hampshire and Michigan, with a wormhole opening up in Georgia. It will be interesting to see if cable TV news can keep painting the truth as something against the public interest. As many times as they style election fraud “a conspiracy theory” and “baseless,” the public relations arm of the Democratic Party still has a hard slog convincing at least 80-million Americans that a detailed review of a contested vote is a bad thing.

Meanwhile, other breaches in the dike threaten to flood the low-lying Swamp zone with existential threats. The DOJ, the FBI, and other agencies are so saturated in crime that the only feasible damage control they can do is to haplessly commit more crimes against the common decency of the republic to cover up their old crimes. Hence, the seizure of Rudy Giuliani’s phones and computers in a 6 a.m. raid last week, leading to the incriminating disclosure that the FBI secretly accessed Giuliani’s iCloud account to spy on his correspondence with Mr. Trump in the fall of 2019 during the first impeachment preliminaries. Are you kidding me? Who gave the order for that? To violate basic attorney-client privilege during a legal proceeding of the highest order? And what was behind the Giuliani raid?

Among other things, the horror show of corruption in Ukraine, starring (but not limited to) Joe and Hunter Biden in their ceaseless quest for grift, but also featuring many of the origins of the RussiaGate hoax and its spin-offs, plus the involvement of State Department personnel such as Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and deputy George Kent, double-plus the shady activities of George Soros and his Atlantic Council in seditious activity working hand-in-hand with the CIA’s “whistleblower” (Eric Ciaramella) to damage Mr. Trump — who was impeached for simply inquiring about what was going on in Ukraine.

Mr. Giuliani had to conduct his own investigation into all that for the obvious reason that the usual US agencies who would ordinarily investigate official misconduct were actually perpetrating it: the DOJ, FBI, CIA, and State Department. And who, at the DOJ now, might be behind the current effort to neutralize Mr. Giuliani? Try Lisa Monaco, the new Deputy Attorney General, formerly one of Barack Obama’s chief White House fixers — i.e., an attorney detailed to shutting down investigations and covering the tracks left by questionable operations — and a protégé of former CIA Director John Brennan. Is the weak and pliable AG Merrick Garland fronting for her running the DOJ now? Joe Biden is going to need a whole lot of fixin’. And, is Lisa Monaco actually still reporting to Barack Obama? He can also probably use a fix or two. Who knows what’s coming down the pike? Just maybe a loaded semi driven by the nearly forgotten John Durham?

MSNBC might have made an unforced error on Wednesday scripting 10 o’clock troll Lawrence O’Donnell to diss former AG William Barr — some jive about Mr. Barr trying to mess with Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s efforts back in 2018 to nail Mr. Trump on an obstruction of justice rap. Is this the time to piss-off Mr. Barr? You have to wonder. Is it possible that the FBI concealed its possession of the Hunter Biden laptop from Mr. Barr during those 2019 days of impeachment, when Mr. Trump was attempting to mount a defense for making a phone call to Ukraine? Who might be responsible for hiding that, if it were so? By the way, it was Mr. Barr who, just before resigning in late 2020, made John Durham a Special Counsel, whose work — whatever that might be, maybe nothing at all, maybe something consequential, nobody knows — can’t be blocked by Merrick Garland (or Lisa Monaco).

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Joe Biden Campaign Demands Media Censor Rudy Giuliani

Posted by M. C. on September 30, 2019

We write to demand that in service to the fact, you no longer book Rudy Giuliani…

That ugly odor you smell is desperation.

https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/09/29/joe-biden-campaign-demands-media-censor-rudy-giuliani/

by Joel B. Pollak

The presidential campaign of former Vice President Joe Biden sent a letter to every major television network, demanding that they keep former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani off the air.

The letter was reported by New York Times media reporter Michael Grynbaum:

The letter states, in part (original emphasis):

We are writing today with grave concern that you continue to book Rudy Giuliani on your air to spread false, debunked conspiracy theories on behalf of Donald Trump. While you often fat check his statements in real time during your discussions, that is no longer enough. By giving him your air time, you are allowing him to introduce increasingly unhinged, unfounded and desperate lies into the national conversation.

We write to demand that in service to the fact, you no longer book Rudy Giuliani, a surrogate for Donald Trump who has demonstrated that he will knowingly and willingly lie in order to advance his own narrative.

(The Biden campaign itself has been known to lie: the former vice president continues to repeat the Charlottesville “very fine people” hoax after being confronted about it at the Iowa State Fair by Breitbart News, for example.)

The statement goes on to claim that Giuliani’s claims about potential corruption by Hunter Biden in Ukraine are “completely baseless.”

Giuliani serves as a personal lawyer for President Donald Trump, and has been involved in investigating Hunter Biden’s overseas business interests, which he developed while his father was in office…

Be seeing you

60 Years of Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 | Interesting ...

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

The White House once labeled them terrorists. Now it calls them Iran’s next government

Posted by M. C. on August 10, 2019

We support 9/11 perps Saudi Arabia and Al Qaeda. We grease the path for neo-nazis in Ukraine. We handed over Yugoslavia to Muslims that kicked out the Christians they didn’t kill.

Consistent in their inconsistency.

https://outline.com/VWgbnk

Jonathan Harounoff

With high-profile supporters like John Bolton and Rudy Giuliani, the Mujahedeen Khalq — or MEK — is being touted as a viable alternative to the ayatollahs. But many question these Iranian dissidents’ intentions for their homeland

As tensions between the United States and Iran continue to escalate, many in President Donald Trump’s inner circle have called for swift regime change in Tehran — pledging support for a dissident Iranian opposition group currently headquartered in, of all places, rural Albania.

Despite its checkered history and only recent delisting as a terrorist organization, Mujahedeen Khalq — known as MEK — has garnered glowing endorsements from international policymakers who have described the group as a viable and democratic alternative to the “ayatollah regime.”

The MEK is not the only source of Iranian opposition to the Islamic Republic, of course. In recent years, Reza Pahlavi — the exiled crown prince of Iran’s final monarch — has also emerged as a leading secular and democratic opponent to the regime in Tehran. Pahlavi has called for nonviolent resistance and, in February 2019, launched an initiative called the Phoenix Project of Iran. According to the National Interest, this is “designed to bring the various strains of the opposition closer to a common vision for a post-clerical Iran.”

However, Pahlavi enjoys nowhere near as much U.S. support as the MEK. Ilan Berman, senior vice president of the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington, argues that this could be because while there are many opposition elements critical of the regime, the MEK is the only one to view itself as a viable alternative.

Last month, as the United States and Iran seemed to be edging closer to a full-on conflict, the MEK hosted a five-day conference at its Albanian base, which is known as Ashraf 3.

Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, was the keynote speaker and was joined by other high-ranking luminaries, including former Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman, Canada’s former Prime Minister Stephen Harper and British Conservative lawmaker Matthew Offord.

In a rousing speech, Giuliani lauded the MEK as a “government in exile” and a “group that we can support. It’s a group we should stop maligning and it’s a group that should make us comfortable having regime change.”…

Be seeing you

10 Bush-Bin Laden Connections That Raised A Few Eyebrows ...

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Michael Cohen’s lawyer has done real damage to the case against Trump

Posted by M. C. on August 28, 2018

Cohen was supposed to be the guy flipping on Trump and telling investigators everything he knows about the skeletons in Trump’s closet. This episode has to make everyone involved wonder whether his claims are all they’re made out to be.

“Flipping” out. Flipping the truth.

Cohen should have taken the Clinton doctorate level coarse on creative lying.

https://www.newstimes.com/news/article/Michael-Cohen-s-lawyer-has-done-real-damage-to-13185791.php

Aaron Blake

One of the most bizarre aspects of the investigations engulfing the Trump administration is the lawyers involved. Here we have a presidency on the line, and this is Trump’s team? The top legal spokesmen for each side are . . . Rudy Giuliani and Lanny Davis!?

Up until this point, though, Giuliani was the Great Contradictor and Davis was merely a colorful character. Now that has changed in a big way.

In a new interview with The Washington Post’s Tom Hamburger and Rosalind S. Helderman, Davis is backing off two massive claims he made in recent weeks, including that former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen has told people he witnessed President Donald Trump being informed of Donald Trump Jr.’s 2016 Trump Tower meeting with a Russian lawyer before it happened.

“I should have been more clear – including with you – that I could not independently confirm what happened,” Davis said, adding: “I regret my error.”

Davis also backed off his claim that Cohen has information suggesting that Trump knew in advance about Russian hacking of Democrats’ emails in 2016.

“I am not sure,” he said. “There’s a possibility that is the case. But I am not sure.” Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »