Category Archives: Donald Trump

America's democracy crisis will not end anytime soon. Donald Trump and his acolytes in the Republican-fascist party continue to incite acts of right-wing violence, including terrorism, on a nationwide scale as part of their plan to end American democracy and replace it with authoritarianism and one-party rule.

The Big Lie continues to spread across the United States. A majority of Republicans now subscribe to the repeatedly disproven theory that the 2020 Election was somehow illegitimate, that Trump is the "real" president and Joe Biden is a pretender and usurper. "MAGA" is American neofascism; it hasfully conquered the Republican Party.

Even President Biden who is committed to political moderation and remains eager to find "unity" with "traditional" Republicans for the good of the country is finally issuing public warnings that today's Republican Party and the MAGA movement are basically enemy agents working to undermine America from within.

This moment of crisis demands bold, immediate leadership and collective action, not just from Biden and other leading Democrats but from rank-and file-Americans as well. But the urgency of stopping Trump and his forces is hamstrung by how the rule of law in a democracy operates slowly and justice often takes a very long time if it ever does arrive.

Will Donald Trump eventually be prosecuted, convicted and then imprisoned for his apparent high crimes, which may include violating the Espionage Act? Attorney and author Kenneth Foard McCallion believes that the answer is probably no.

McCallion is a former Justice Department prosecutor who also worked for the New York State Attorney General's office as a prosecutor on Trump racketeering cases. As an assistant U.S. attorney and special assistant U.S. attorney, he focused on international fraud and counterintelligence cases that often involved Russian organized crime.

McCallion is also the author of several books, including "Profiles in Cowardice in the Trump Era" and "Treason & Betrayal: The Rise and Fall of Individual-1."

In this wide-ranging conversation, he offers his view that Donald Trump, along with his inner circle and his businesses, operate like an organized crime family. McCallion saysthese attributes and behavior help to explain Trump's affinity for foreign demagogues and other corrupt elements, including Eastern European and Russian criminal organizations.

McCallion reflects on his personal experience prosecuting Trump and his organizations, and the challenges of going up against a man he describes as a likely sociopath and a skilled pathological liar.

McCallionexplains the approach that Merrick Garland and the Department of Justice will likely take in prosecuting Trump for the government documents he stored at Mar-a-Lago and the events of Jan. 6. Any such prosecution will require both overwhelming irrefutable evidence and a simple and direct story to tell a jury about Trump's misdeeds. McCallion also says that contrary to some media reports, Trump can definitely still be prosecuted even if he announces he is running for president.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

Toward the end of this conversation, McCallion outlines a likely scenario for the final disposition of such a prosecution. He believes that Trump may be brought down by a litany of civil lawsuits that will cripple him financially, not by a high-profile criminal case in which the former president is "perp-walked" in handcuffs and then sent to prison.

This conversation has been edited for clarity and length.

How are you feeling, given everything that's happening? With your expertise and experience, how do you process all these events? What are you seeing?

The next book I'm working on is actually titled "Civil War II," but the ending is yet to be written. Over the last few weeks, I've been shocked at the extent of what we are learning about the Espionage Act and the hiding of secret government documents by Trump at Mar-a-Lago.

Why did he do that? I don't know.But I do believe that kind of hubris, and that inability to really let go of the mantel of the presidency, may in the end be his undoing. Trump has certainly left himself open for being prosecuted for serious crimes related to espionage and various other things.

That kind of hubris, and that inability to really let go of the mantel of the presidency, may in the end be Donald Trump's undoing.

There are encouraging signs. I was quite delighted that a friend and former mentor of mine, Raymond Dearie, who is a retired district judge from the Eastern District of New York, where I was in the U.S. attorney's office, will most likely be the special master [reviewing the Mar-a-Lago documents]. I was worried that the Justice Department and the attorney general had dozed off and napped for several months, but it appears they are hard at work now.

The Jan. 6 committee really gave the Department of Justice a lot of impetus and momentum. There are also good indications that justice may actually be done with the New York attorney general's [civil] case, and perhaps the Manhattan DA's [criminal] case too.

Is there actually anything shocking about any of the things Trump and his allies have done? Donald Trump has been a public criminal for decades. Jan. 6 was in many ways a predictable event and was announced beforehand.My point of view is pretty simple. We know who Donald Trump is. There is a long pattern of his evil behavior. What is "shocking" about any of this? He is utterly predictable.

Those of us who know Donald Trump also understand that he is probably beyond reformation and may actually be psychopathic. However, I think it's important to say that Donald Trump's behavior and presidency, and what he continues to do, has been a shock to the democratic system. We cannot lose the capacity to be outraged at Trump's behavior. We need to have that sense of outrage in order to protect the country's democratic institutions, which are under attack right now.

Where are the consequences for Donald Trump and his apparent criminal acts and other wrongdoing?

I do believe that the Justice Department probably should have moved much faster with the Mar-a-Lago documents, given that we are entering an election season. However, we need to uphold the principle that no man is above the law no matter what time of year it may be, political happenings or not.

It's never a convenient season for the rich and powerful to be held accountable. It's almost a perfect storm at this point between the Department of Justice investigation, the New York attorney general's investigation and various civil suits against Trump. The pot is boiling now in several different respects. One or more of these investigations will almost certainly lead to the undoing of the Trump Organization.

There is also significant personal liability for Donald Trump for the obstruction of justice and for a long list of crimes that are now being investigated. Attorney General Garland and the Justice Department really have to follow through this investigation to its logical conclusion. The evidence is overwhelming. Any honest prosecutor is not going to want to say, "I pulled my punches," or, "I let Donald Trump go just because he's the former president."

You have a lot of experience with Donald Trump. You faced him and his organization as a prosecutor. When you saw his candidacy in 2016 and then saw him win the election, what were you most afraid of?

I worked with the organized crime section of the Justice Department when I went up against Donald Trumpand his lawyer, Roy Cohn.We were primarily investigating labor racketeering, involving unions that were dominated by various organized crime families, including the Teamsters and others. In our investigation, we found that Donald Trump and some other developers used their connections with organized crime to get immunity from strikes by entering into corrupt contracts promising "no-show" jobs, for example. These corrupt contracts gave Trump and others a competitive advantage.

It quickly occurred to us, and I think it's apparent to all of us now, that Trump and his organization are just another organized crime family. They try to maintain the code of silence, but that hasn't been entirely successful. There is a complete disregard for the law. In terms of fraudulent intent, even if they could have made money honestly, Trump and his people like many organized crime-controlled companies try to cut corners.

It quickly occurred to us [in the DOJ], and I think it's apparent to all of us now, that Trump and his organization are just another organized crime family.

They take advantage of their connections with organized crime and their connections with corrupt foreign leaders, such as Putin. Russian organized crime always had a very close connection with the Trump organization. After Trump's casinos in Atlantic City went under and the banks started pulling back their financing, Trump and his organization and his development projects have been financed through shady money from Eastern Europe and Russia, from the oligarchs.

They have been Trump's lifeblood for his financing. His worldview has always been oriented towards the countries where oligarchs and dirty money are prevalent. Donald Trump was dead set on attempting to convert the United States into a replica, to some extent, of the antidemocratic, authoritarian, oligarchical systems we see in Hungary, Russia and various other parts of Eastern Europe.

Given your experience with Trump, what did the news media and the American public fail to understand about this man? Or perhaps, what were they afraid to acknowledge?

Many people naively thought that Trump, despite his outlandish behavior, was just being hyperbolic and not seriously intentioned. What they didn't realize is that Trump bought into his own nonsensical worldview. Millions of adoring people worship Donald Trump as he has said, he really could walk down Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and his followers would still love him.

Did Trump really believe that the election was stolen from him in 2020? The frightening thing is that Trump has not only convinced many of his followers of that, he has probably convinced himself of that, which makes him the most dangerous kind of dictator or autocrat. He has lost all sense of any ability to pull back from the brink. Donald Trump is not restrained by any of the guardrails of our normal democratic processes. He and Steve Bannon and the rest of that inner circle have brought the United States to somewhere quite different than this country's ever been before.

But in the end, I do believe that the pendulum will swing back, much as it did with, for example, Sen. Joe McCarthy in the 1950s with his Red scare. I truly think the wheel will turn and we're not going to go over the cliff.

Where does that hope and belief come from? Trump has escaped responsibility for decades.

Trumphas lost all sense of any ability to pull back from the brink. He is not restrained by any of the guardrails of our normal democratic processes.

As bad as things are now, and as divided as the country is, there have been other times in our past where we have faced great difficulties. Yet somehow we survived the turmoil and the storms and got to a better place. I think it's a constant struggle. We are in the midst of one of those fundamental struggles, with Trump and his movement and the assault on democracy and the rule of law.

As you said, Merrick Garland could have moved earlier. I'm one of the people who wondered what the hell he was waiting for: Lock him up! Help me understand what the law requires, versus what political expediency demands.

The Department of Justice has to be thorough here. When I was with the Department of Justice, as a young prosecutor, I'd be anxious to bring organized crime figures to trial. But like Trump, many heads of crime families delegate the dirty work to other people. So to nail Trump and hold him responsible beyond a reasonable doubt, you really don't want to leave anything to chance. You need overwhelming evidence.

I think we're really getting to the point where we have that critical mass, especially after the Mar-a-Lago search and the documents obtained there. That was a fumble by Trump on the five-yard line. He might well have gotten away with not facing a criminal indictment for all he had done before that, but he had the audacity and the hubris to take top secret government documents with him after leaving office.

People of ambition and of monumental ego, like Donald Trump, have blind spots. Trump is bringing himself down. What I really fear is that a smarter Trump-like figure, maybe like Ron DeSantis, could actually do a lot more damage than Donald Trump.

In my view, Trump is a criminal genius. When you go up against somebody like that in court, how do you prepare?

When I did my cases, it was much like building a brick house. You have to do it from the foundation up, but there's always a moment when a prosecutor has butterflies in his stomach. When you have to cross-examine a Trump-like figure or the head of an organized crime family or someone of that type more generally, there is anxiety even when you have overwhelming evidence against them

Remember, these people are pathological liars. I'm sure that Donald Trump, if he was given a polygraph, would pass with flying colors. It's a matter of experience, plus a natural sociopathic ability to lie.

Trump's had a lot of experience with lying and the courts. He has some pretty good counsel, but I think over the next few months that most of the documents taken from Mar-a-Lago are going to be turned back over to the Justice Department. We'll see the wheels of justice continue at that point. Letitia James, the attorney general in New York, will get a very solid result against the Trump Organization, as will the DA in Manhattan, Alvin Bragg. Those cases are not against Trump personally, but against his organization. His chief lieutenants will be brought down and face very substantial fines for their economic and financial sleight of hand.

What do you think the approach to prosecuting Trump will be? The evidence seems overwhelming, but nothing's decided until you're in court.

It has to be laid out very simply for the jurors. It's basically two plus two equals four. You have Trump with these documents, some of them in a basement, but some of these top-secret documents were found by the FBI next to his passport in a private part of his desk. These documents were close to him every day. Trump certainly had knowledge and awareness of the documents; he knew they were top secret. He knew they had been taken from the White House. I think that you would just put it to a jury that you don't leave your common sense and good reason at the door when you are sworn in as a juror.

It's basically two plus two equals four. ...Trump certainly had knowledge and awareness of the documents; he knew they were top secret. He knew they had been taken from the White House.

We spend our entire lives evaluating people, separating truths from falsehoods and connecting the dots. It's much the same way that organized crime figures were brought down. Al Capone, for example, was put in prison not for the many murders he committed, but for tax fraud. With Trump, it will be the same thing. It's a very simple story you can tell. With top secret documents, the story tells itself.

What do you think Trump was doing with the top secret and other highly classified documents?

Actually, on this point, I give Trump somewhat the benefit of the doubt. I think his ego would not let him leave all the trappings of power back in the White House. In his mind, he had to take something. Now, did he foreclose the issue of selling the documents for money if necessary, or using them for political purposes? Those avenues were available to him as well, but I doubt Trump had a clear-cut plan. He knew they were top secret documents and he took them. It is not a requirement that the prosecution establish his intent, other than an intent and a willfulness to keep top secret documents out of the government archives and in his own personal possession. Mar-a-Lago is a place that is crawling with potential spies, Chinese and otherwise.

Donald Trump engaged in a flagrant violation of his national duty. That willfulness and intent and recklessness is, I believe, sufficient for a criminal conviction.

So how do you approach finding a jury where you won't have one person who is going to nullify in Trump's favor. That's the practical problem. Is it possible to find an honest jury that is not tainted by Trumpists?

In jury selection, I always tell a client: You're never going to get the jury that you want, but you want a jury that's going to call the balls and strikes the way they really are. You don't want jurors who are dead set against you and supporting the opposition. Through your jury challenges, you can just weed out those people as best you can. You have to keep in mind that a lot of people underestimate jurors. For example, in the Paul Manafort trial some of those jurors were actually predisposed to be favorable to Donald Trump's worldview. Yet they found that Paul Manafort had violated the law on several counts and should be held liable under the criminal laws.

The jury system is a risky one. It's somewhat of a mystery, even to me, with all my decades of experience. But by and large, the guilty are convicted and the innocent can go free in our system, with some notable exceptions of course. Some jurors are reached by external forces, organized crime, political or otherwise. But by and large, I think the system is more or less equitable. It will be a great day for the justice system when Trump and some of his chief lieutenants are held accountable.

How do you explain to the average person what a RICO case is? How would you approach that type of prosecution in the case of Trump?

The racketeering laws are extremely flexible. It is much like describing an organized crime family that has a certain structure. The person at the top is calling the shots and the other members may not know what each of the others are doing. However, they subscribe to and agree with the overarching principles and goals of the organized crime family. In this case, that is to keep Donald Trump and his minions in power, to hold onto the White House through means fair and foul primarily foul. Trump and his minions reject the basic norms of democracy.

They've used mail and wire fraud and engaged in various other violations of federal and state law over an extended period of time as well. That is really the informal definition of a racketeering conspiracy. Trump and his minions have engaged in that behavior.

But I think that Garland and the Justice Department may well steer clear of an extremely complex RICO-type case and just go with some very pointed, targeted violations. These violations are clear: espionage and various other laws. There are the facts and evidence to support racketeering and conspiracy charges. But the problem is that the more you complexify a case, the more likely it is to run on for weeks. Jurors are human beings; you can start losing some of them.

In my opinion, the Garland Justice Department learned a lot from the Jan. 6 committee hearings. It's probably going to follow that more simplified, direct, powerful route in bringing its prosecutions.

What can the Department of Justice prove conclusively about Donald Trump in order to hold him criminally accountable? It is easy to list all of Trump's acts of perfidy, immortality and wrongdoing, but that may not be enough to prosecute and convict him. It may all be wrong, but is it clearly illegal?

I think the Justice Department is going to focus on two scenarios. One will be the events leading up to Jan. 6. The coordinating and fundraising, the attack on the Capitol, the attempted election subversion and related happenings. The Justice Department has built a pretty strong case that Trump was the lead instigator of that demonstration and the assault on Congress. The other focus will be on the Espionage Act and related charges regarding the documents at Mar-a-Lago.

What does the Department of Justice do if and when Trump announces that he is running for president? Do they have to hold off for another four years if he wins?

It is conceivable that Donald Trump might do some time. But I would not put the odds on him being handcuffed and perp-walked, with the press photographing him.

If the Department of Justice gets an indictment, it should happen sometime later this year. They wouldn't do it in the window from now to November, the political season, but maybe the end of this year or early next year. One of the things people don't realize, and maybe Trump doesn't realize, is that once he declares for the presidency he will not have the Republican National Committee and other groups paying for his legal defense at that particular point. Trump is an extremely cheap individual who will have to pay out of pocket for millions of dollars in legal fees.

The Justice Department will not stop or pause, except for the political season in the midterms. They will not stand down just because Trump is a presidential candidate. Whether he is a presidential candidate or not, Trump and his supporters are still going to say it's a political prosecution.

The best defense for Trump is to attack the prosecutors. The prosecutors have to take a few punches and be vilified in the press, as they were after the Mar-a-Lago search. Although he waited too long, Merrick Garland did hold a press conference, as well he should have. The Justice Department is not a punching bag. It's entitled to protect itself and its reputation.

Many observers are claiming that if Trump announces his candidacy, the Department of Justice will not proceed with prosecuting him because of some type of informal rule or guideline. Garland and the DOJ will pause everything at that point, and perhaps drop it entirely, because to prosecute a presidential candidate would look too "political."

Absolutely not. If they did such a thing, they would be violating their oaths and professional ethics. The rest of the country would be wondering why there's one set of laws for us and another set of law for Trump and his kind.

What happens if Donald Trump is prosecuted and not convicted? What are the next steps, as a legal matter?

I can see the O.J. Simpson scenario playing out here. O.J. beat the criminal rap, but he was done in by the civil cases. Although there's a focus on the Department of Justice investigation, there are a host of civil cases out there against Trump. Trump will be involved in litigation for years, whether or not he beats a criminal rap.

Many people with public platforms keep proclaiming that Donald Trump is going to jail. That it's inevitable and we are eventually going to see Trump do a perp walk.Is he going to jail, in any version of this universe? What are the real range of practical or realistic consequences for him?

If I were a betting man, I would not put the odds on Donald Trump being handcuffed and perp-walked with the press photographing him on the way to a jail cell. The Justice Department has to pursue the investigation to an indictment and then prosecute it. As you know, not every case reaches trial. There is always the possibility of plea deals. Yes, it is conceivable that Donald Trump might do some time. But it's more likely that there would be some sort of plea deal to some of these offenses, in order for Trump to avoid a jail sentence. Trump would have to allow himself to actually admit guilt for some of these crimes.

In the real world, yes, some of the guilty do escape justice. But with the focus on Trump and the evidence that's available, I believe there will be a day of reckoning. Exactly what the consequences are after that is anybody's guess.

Here is my best-case scenario. Donald Trump takes a plea offer. There are some fines and he agrees to not run for public office again. But he then continues to be a public menace, agitating for right-wing terrorism, threatening democracy, repeating Jan. 6 and inciting other unrest. But what message is sent if the Department of Justice makes a deal with him? If Trump is not convicted and put in jail, what does that mean for the future of the country?

Keeping Trump from the White House again is a real benefit to the country. He'd have to agree to that in any plea deal. Trump would have to explicitly promise not to run for public office again. Will he continue to agitate and attempt to grab press headlines? Of course, but the Republican Party and his followers, at some point, have to move on. Donald Trump has had his moment. In the end, the country will get past Donald Trump.

Read more

about the endless Trump drama

Read more from the original source:

Former federal prosecutor: A "day of reckoning" is coming for Trump but he's not going to jail - Salon

The line between imagination and delusion is thin, as Donald Trumps initial reaction to an FBI search at Mar-a-Lago in August demonstrated. In the first days afterward, the former president saw the search as a political gift, not a blow: a chance to rally his base, put would-be challengers like Ron DeSantis in their place, and reconsolidate his eroding position as the leader of the Republican Party.

Over time, it has become clear that the FBI finding reams of top-secret documents at his club is not, in fact, a boon to Trump. Even with the presidential-records investigation slowed down by a sympathetic judge, the probe has exacted costs both political and monetary, including a $3 million prepayment to a lawyer aware of Trumps tendency to stiff people who provide services. Nearly every Trump adviser youve ever heard of, plus a few you havent, has been subpoenaed by the Justice Department in an investigation into election subversion, and the House committee looking into the same matter will return to public hearings later this month. The New York attorney general just rejected a settlement offer in an investigation into Trumps business.

David A. Graham: Trump opened Pandoras prosecutorial box

No single strategy can handle the range of problems Trump faces. With some clever forum-shopping, he managed to get the FBI investigation into the hands of a judge whom he appointed late in his termshe was confirmed after the 2020 electionand whose rulings have baffled and appalled legal experts. But this is a stalling tactic, not a solution, and not every judge draw will be so lucky. A second strategy is to cry political persecution, which is good at rallying the minority of the population who already stands behind him but unlikely to win over those who dont, especially because the claims are so unpersuasive.

This brings us to a third gambit: threats. If the people pursuing these criminal investigations into his conduct dont back off, he warns, someonenot him, mind youmight do something dangerous. In this heads-I-win, tails-you-lose logic, the justice system can either exempt Trump from the rule of law or risk someone destroying it by other means. Nice democracy youve got here. Shame if someone tried to make it great again, again.

In an interview yesterday, the conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, a Trump critic turned flatterer, asked whether being criminally indicted would dissuade Trump from running for president in 2024. Trump took the answer in a dark direction.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Donald Trumps mafia mind-set

I dont think the people of the United States would stand for it, he said. I think if it happened, I think youd have problems in this country the likes of which perhaps weve never seen before. I dont think the people of the United States would stand for it.

The implication was clear enough that Hewitt felt the need to throw Trump a preemptive lifeline: You know that the legacy media will say youre attempting to incite violence with that statement.

Thats not inciting, Trump replied. Im just saying what my opinion is. I dont think the people of this country would stand for it.

But theres no need to believe hes merely making an analytical judgment. Anyone else can see as clearly as Hewitt what Trump is doing. As The Atlantics editor in chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, has noted, Trump commonly uses this mob-boss-derived method: He speaks in fluent innuendo and implication, making his desires clear while leaving himself just enough vagueness to be able to smirkingly deny it.

Read: The lurking menace of a Trump rally

Like a Mafia dons warnings, this Dons warnings serve as a kind of intimidation, trying to make authorities who care a great deal about the government, civil peace, and the reputations of their agencies (as Attorney General Merrick Garland clearly does) wonder whether its really worth enforcing the law against this particular would-be defendant.

These threats might also actually occasion violence. By now, everyoneTrump, Hewitt, you, mehas seen this happen. Sometimes, the violence comes from mentally disturbed individuals who think theyre doing what Trump wants, such as Cesar Sayoc, who sent bombs to Trump critics shortly before the 2018 midterms, or Ricky Walter Shiffer, who was killed after attempting to attack an FBI office in Cincinnati just days after the Mar-a-Lago search.

Other times, the violence comes from Trump backers who simply listen to what he says: the kinds of people who slugged protesters at campaign rallies after he waxed nostalgic for the good old days of rough treatment and offered to pay legal bills, or who stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021, after Trump called on them to fight like hell.

If there was a time when Trump didnt know how people would respond when he makes these veiled threats, it has passed. He understands now, and does it anyway. His persistence also helps show why his claims that his exhortations on January 6 were not incitement are not to be believed.

This very real menace also makes Trumps threats ultimately self-defeating. When he speaks this wayor when he embraces QAnon, or whatever fringe view he happens to be espousing at the momentit riles up his backers, but it also drives away voters he needs to be a viable political force. This means the threats are unlikely to be Trumps salvation, even as they could inflict real harm on American democracy. He seems not to care.

See the rest here:

Trump's Threats of Violence - The Atlantic

By Leesa K. Donner*

Impeached twice, investigated by the New York StateAttorney General, and raided by the FBI but the American establishment cannot understand the unwavering political power of Donald Trump. The popularity of Orange Man Bad vexes them. They whine about his continued prominence and cannot fathom why Trump remains standing after the many knock-out punches that should have dropped him to the mat. Perhaps it is because these people do not understand Mr. Trump or what makes his steadfast following tick.

It is almost as if they do not believe they won in 2020. Every day since that fateful election,Donald J. Trumphas graced the front pages of the legacy media almost without exception. Two years later and with midterms rapidly approaching, the Liz Cheney wing of the Republican party remains perplexed. In aNew York Timescolumn recently, Never-Trumper David Brooks marveled at the continued political strength of the former president:

One of the stunning facts of the age is the continued prominence of Donald Trump. His candidates did well in the G.O.P. primaries this year. He won more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. Hisfavorability ratingswithin his party have been high and basically unchanged since late 2016. In a range of polls, some have actually shown Trump leading President Biden in a race for re-election in 2024.

Then, as the left (among whom Brooks must be counted) lurched uncontrollably into the truth. His prominence is astounding because, over the past seven years, the American establishment has spent enormous amounts of energy trying to discredit him,Brookswhined.

In a rare display of rational thinking, Brooks outlined the many strategies employed by the establishment to take Trump out: This included, but was not limited to, the immorality tactic, various impeachment schemes, and the so-called exposure ploy, which were designed to unmask him as a terrible human being. Frustrated and nonplussed by the inadequacy of these efforts, the thought occurs to Brooks, and likely others, that The barrage has probably solidified Trumps hold on his party.

He got that right.

Joe Biden& Company appear to have settled upon the strategy of damning the entire lot of Trumpists. By going after the electorate (an unusual approach to be sure), the establishment hopes to marginalize the Trump advocate. The idea is to corner the pro-Trump crowd, and make them appear radical, which is why words like white supremacist, semi-fascist, and UltraMAGAare being tossed around ad infinitum.

Why employ such a divisive tactic? Because it is designed to persuade the folks who live in the political center. Brooks even admitted as much. The job was to peel away independents and those Republicans offended by and exhausted by his antics, he wrote. However, trying to make everyone who supports Mr. Trump into a lunatic has a downside, as is evident by this story shared byThe New York Timescolumnist:

This week, I talked with a Republican who was incensed by Bidens approach. He is an 82-year-old migr from Russia who is thinking of supporting Ron DeSantis in the 2024 primaries because he has less baggage. His parents were killed by the Nazis in World War II. And now Bidens callingmea fascist?! he fumed.

One wonders if the president and his party satraps have become so insular, they cannot recognize the strategy of making Trump supporters out to be an archetypal anti-Christ is not working. Much like the elderly migr mentioned above, it may actually be backfiring.

And so, it appears MAGA man and his millions of followers have gotten into their heads, and the establishment is utterly exasperated. The Never-Trump elite may be frustrated that they have not been able to rid the earth of Orange Man Bad, but they continue to search almost without pause for an answer. It is if they are locked inside a political maze without entrance or exit. Perhaps they are so confounded because taking the time to understand the average Trump supporter is beneath them. It is class politics to the core a concept which Donald Trump has fundamentally turned on its head. Although the Shakespearean provenance is disputed, this quote aptly describes the situation: Love me or hate me, both are in my favorIf you love me, Ill always be in your heartIf you hate me, Ill always be in your mind.

*About the author: Leesa K. Donner is Editor-in-Chief of LibertyNation.com. A widely published columnist, Leesa previously worked in the broadcast news industry as a television news anchor, reporter, and producer at NBC, CBS and Fox affiliates in Charlotte, Pittsburgh, and Washington, DC. She is the author of Free At Last: A Life-Changing Journey through the Gospel of Luke.

Source: This article was published by Liberty Nation

See more here:

Never Trumpers Frustrated And Whining Over Donald Trump OpEd - Eurasia Review

We all remember Sept. 11, 2001. An attack caused by hate, ignorance and fear of American democracy was fomented and planned by one man, Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda.

We all remember Jan. 6, 2021. An insurrection caused by hate, ignorance and fear of American democracy was fomented and planned by one man, Donald Trump, a Republican.

Barack Obama ordered bin Laden killed for his crimes against America.

Joe Biden ordered al-Zawahiri (Osama bin Ladens No. 2) killed for his crimes against America.

Trump, a Republican, is being investigated for his potential crimes against America including top secret government records taken and improperly stored in his house, electoral interference in Georgia, the Jan. 6 Insurrection, and his business dealings.

On Aug. 28, Republican U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham stated publicly there will be riots in the streets if Trump is prosecuted.

Behaviors have consequences.

No man or woman is above the law, including Trump.

Had Trump accepted his attorney generals proclamation that Trump lost the 2020 presidential election, Trump could be playing golf contentedly. Recently, Trump spent his time in a deposition pleading the Fifth Amendment over 400 times so as not to incriminate himself.

Are more Trump depositions coming? Is a Trump prosecution coming? Are riots in the streets coming?

Solution? Elect Democrats Susan Wild and Tom Malinowski to Congress to maintain the Constitution I took an oath upon enlistment to support and defend against foreign and domestic enemies.

Reggie Regrut is U.S. Army Reserve veteran who lives in Phillipsburg.

Visit link:

Elect Democrats to thwart the threat to democracy from Donald Trump | Letter - lehighvalleylive.com

A SPAC set to take former President Donald Trumps new media company public could be facing another setback. Heres the latest.

What Happened: A shareholder vote for SPAC Digital World Acquisition Corporation DWAC was delayed to October after failing to generate enough votes to extend the vote on a merger with Trump Media & Technology Group.

The SPAC failed to pay proxy firm Saratoga Proxy Consulting which helped solicit votes from public shareholders. The amount owed is said to be six figures.

Digital World Acquisition Corporation CEO Patrick Orlando told Saratoga Proxy Consulting it did not have money to pay the consulting bill, according to a report from the Financial Times.

A new proxy firm called Alliance Advisors has been hired to help share information on the merger vote, now delayed until October.

The SPAC is actively seeking shareholder approval to extend the merger vote date for one year to September 2023.

Around 40% of public shareholders of Digital World Acquisition voted in favor of the merger vote extension. A 65% vote in favor is required to approve the extension of the merger deadline.

The current shareholder deadline to vote on the merger vote extension is Oct. 10, 2022.

The SPAC can extend its deadline to March 8, 2023 without shareholder approval. If the merger extension to September 2023 is not approved, the company would have to complete the merger by March 8, 2023 or liquidate its assets.

Related Link: Donald Trump Themed Alternative Investments To DWAC: 3 Stocks And 1 ETF To Watch

Why Its Important: The latest report of the SPAC having no money available to pay the proxy firm comes on the heels of another company linked to providing work for Trump Media & Technology Group not being paid.

Truth Social, a social media platform owned by Trump Media & Technology Group, stopped making payments to its web-hosting provider. Fox Business Network reported that RightForge claimed Truth Social was $1.6 million behind in payments to the company.

Among the risk factors in the SPAC merger agreement were mentions of the previous history of bankruptcies by companies linked to Trump. The SPAC said, there can be no assurances that TMTG will not also become bankrupt.

An investigation in 2016 by USA Today highlighted numerous lawsuits filed against Trump and his company over not being paid for their work. The report also found violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act against Trump-affiliated companies.

Trump brushed off the report at the time.

Lets say that they do a job thats not good, or a job that they didnt finish, or a job that was way late. Ill deduct from their contract, absolutely, Trump said. Thats what the country should be doing.

Truth Social is currently available on Apple Inc AAPL devices via the iOS store. The app saw a surge in downloads after the FBI raid at Mar-a-Lago. The app is taking pre-orders for devices that use the Android operating system, owned by Alphabet Inc GOOGGOOGL. Google has denied the company from being added over concerns of a lack of content moderation.

The report also comes as Digital World Acquisition executives like Orlando could make hundreds of millions of dollars if the merger goes through and face potential losses if the merger is not approved.

DWAC Price Action: Digital World Acquisition shares are down 3.2% to $22.67on Monday, versus a 52-week range of $9.84 to $175.

Photo: Courtesy ofGage Skidmoreon flickr

See the article here:

Deadbeat SPAC: Donald Trump's Social Network Isn't Paying Its Bills. Is This The Final Setback? - Digital World Acq (NASDAQ:DWAC) - Benzinga

Former president Donald Trump speaks to supporters at a rally to support local candidates at the Mohegan Sun Arena on September 03, 2022 in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Donald Trump has again claimed the FBI planted evidence at Mar-a-Lago.

It's a claim his lawyers have not made in court appearances.

Trump has offered shifting defences in response to the August 8 raid.

Donald Trump has made fresh claims that the FBI planted evidence in the August 8 search of his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida an argument notably absent in legal filings by his attorneys.

The former US president repeated the claim in a posting on his Truth Social network Thursday, after the Justice Department demanded that a federal judge reinstate access to hundreds on classified documents the FBI retrieved in its recent search of his Palm Beach residence.

The judge, Aileen Cannon, had on Monday suspended access to the documents until an independent official had reviewed them.

"They leak, lie, plant fake evidence, allow the spying on my campaign, deceive the FISA Court, RAID and Break-Into my home, lose documents, and then they ask me, as the 45th President of the United States, to trust them," wrote Trump.

He also referenced his longstanding, and unfounded, claim that hostile FBI officials had conspired to smear him over his ties to Russia during his presidency.

In an earlier message he praised Cannon, whom he appointed, as "brilliant and courageous."

Trump has previously claimed the FBI planted evidence in the immediate aftermath of the raid, though has not specified what they planted or offered evidence to back his claim.

He has repeatedly suggested the FBI is part of a political plot against him, describing the agency as "monsters" at a rally last Saturday.

But in response to a recent picture released by the DOJ taken during the raid, showing piles of folders with classified markings in Mar-a-Lago, Trump did not deny the folders were in his possession but said the photo had been set up to make him look bad.

The 45th president's defences are different to those his attorneys are offering in court, where false claims of law enforcement misconduct can attract penalties. His lawyers have focussed on claims that many of the documents taken by the FBI are protected under privilege rules, and were successful in arguing for an independent official to review them on this basis.

Story continues

They have also argued that many of the documents were declassified by Trump before leaving office, but no evidence has emerged to substantiate that claim.

The DOJ has requested that Abbott grant it access to the classified documents by September 15, or it will file an appeal.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Read more:

Donald Trump revives claims the FBI planted evidence in Mar-a-Lago raid ...

WASHINGTON (AP) The discovery of hundreds of classified records at Donald Trumps home has thrust U.S. intelligence agencies into a familiar and uncomfortable role as the foil of a former president who demanded they support his agenda and at times accused officers of treason.

While the FBI conducts a criminal investigation, the office that leads the intelligence community is also conducting a review currently on pause pending a court order of the damage that would result from disclosure of the documents found at the Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida.

The investigation comes at a perilous time in American politics, with increasing threats to law enforcement and election workers and as a growing swath of officials assail the FBI and spread baseless theories of voter fraud. Theres already a wide range of speculation about what was in the documents, with some Democrats pointing to reporting about possible nuclear secrets while some Trump allies suggesting the case is a benign argument about storage.

So far, the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence has proceeded cautiously, issuing no public statements and declining to answer questions about the reviews structure or how long it will take.

A look at whats known and expected:

NOT A FORMAL DAMAGE ASSESSMENT

According to the government, the documents seized at Mar-a-Lago and papers the Republican former president had turned over previously included highly sensitive Special Access Program designations as well as markings for intelligence derived from secret human sources and electronic signals programs. Those forms of intelligence are often produced by the CIA or the National Security Agency, and the underlying sources can take years to develop.

The ODNI review will try to determine the possible damage if the secrets in those documents were to be exposed. It has not said if its investigating whether documents already have been exposed.

Avril Haines, the director of national intelligence, confirmed the review in a letter to the chairpersons of two House committees. Haines letter says the ODNI will lead a classification review of relevant materials, including those recovered during the search. Experts say that could include non-classified papers with notes written on them that might reference classified information.

Haines letter also says her office will lead an assessment of the potential risk to national security that would result from the disclosure of the relevant documents.

Thats different from a formal damage assessment that intelligence agencies have carried out after high-profile breaches like the disclosures of programs by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden.

Damage assessments have specific requirements under intelligence community guidelines published online, including an estimate of actual or potential damage to U.S. national security, the identification of specific weaknesses or vulnerabilities and detailed, actionable recommendations to prevent future occurrences.

Under those guidelines, the National Counterintelligence and Security Center, a subsidiary within the ODNI, would lead a damage assessment. The center is led by acting Director Michael Orlando as President Joe Biden has not yet nominated a chief counterintelligence executive.

Its unknown whether the intelligence review will include interviewing witnesses. Haines letter says the ODNI will coordinate with the Justice Department to ensure its assessment does not unduly interfere with the criminal investigation.

For now, the Justice Department has said the ODNI review is paused after a federal judge barred the use of records seized at Mar-a-Lago in a criminal investigation. Uncertainty regarding the bounds of the Courts order and its implications for the activities of the FBI has caused the Intelligence Community, in consultation with DOJ, to pause temporarily this critically important work, attorneys for the government said in a court filing.

THE ANSWERS COULD BE UNSATISFYING

The results may not come for weeks or months, and full findings will likely remain classified.

Lawmakers in both parties are calling for briefings from the intelligence community. None is known to have been scheduled.

Former officials note that its often difficult for agencies to diagnose specific damage from an actual or potential breach. Given the political climate and the unprecedented nature of evaluating a former president, the ODNI is widely expected to be limited and precise in what it says publicly and privately to Congress.

But reviews like the one underway often help top officials and lawmakers better understand vulnerabilities and how to manage risk going forward, said Timothy Bergreen, a former Democratic majority staff director for the House Intelligence Committee.

No healthy organization or society can exist without comprehensive review of its mistakes, Bergreen said. Thats always been a democracys big advantage over authoritarians.

AN OFFICE CREATED AFTER SEPT. 11

Lesser known than many of the agencies it oversees, the ODNI was created in the reorganization of the intelligence community after the Sept. 11 attacks. Amid revelations that the FBI and the CIA did not share critical information with each other, the ODNI was intended to oversee the 18-member intelligence community and integrate the different streams of collection and analysis produced by different agencies.

The ODNI supervises the drafting of the Presidents Daily Brief, the distillation of top American intelligence provided to Biden and top advisers daily. Haines is the presidents principal intelligence adviser and often briefs Biden in the Oval Office along with other national security leaders.

Trump went through three directors of national intelligence in his last year, part of his long-running battles with the intelligence community.

Some of his top officials were accused of selectively declassifying information for political purposes. And before, during and after his time in office, Trump has accused intelligence officials of selectively leaking material to undermine him or not being sufficiently loyal.

He was incensed by the long-running investigations into allegations of Russian influence on his 2016 campaign, calling them the greatest political CRIME in American History. And he excoriated the person who spoke to a whistleblower about his pressuring Ukraine for derogatory information, saying that person was close to a spy who could have committed treason.

Under Biden, Haines and other top officials have been involved in declassifying information about Russias war plans against Ukraine. They have also faced questioning about overly optimistic assessments of Afghanistan prior to the fall of Kabul.

Michael Allen, a former Republican majority staff director of the House Intelligence Committee, said the ODNI is uniquely positioned to handle such a closely watched review.

This, I think, is one of the reasons why you have a DNI, to coordinate across the wide and disparate community of intelligence agencies, said Allen, author of Blinking Red, a history of the post-Sept. 11 intelligence reforms. This is their bread and butter.

Visit link:

EXPLAINER: The intel review of documents at Trump's estate - The Associated Press - en Espaol

Trump deserves credit for marketing his Twitter account to its Everestian heights. Hes always known how to play to the crowds, titillate them and leave them wanting more. During his first campaign and presidency, even a garden-variety Trump tweet could convulse newsrooms. But that was a function of his front-runner status and later his place in the Oval Office. He drew an enormous audience not because he was Donald Trump tweeting but because he was the tweeting president. The power of the office endowed his tweets with muscle that could move financial markets, bury political careers, inspire death threats against his enemies and make the press snap to attention. But exiled to Mar-a-Lago and denied his social media accounts rendered him just another celebrity squeaking noises from a tiny soapbox. When his profile shrank, he became easier to ignore.

Even so, why didnt the tens of millions of the 89 million who followed him on Twitter or the 74 million who voted for him in 2020 make more of an effort to visit his new address? Blame it on the network effect. If you already have a Twitter account, it takes just a millisecond to click and add another persons feed to your account. But downloading a new app just to follow a single somebody takes mental energy, especially if there arent many other accounts on the app you wish to follow. Trump out of office proved to be as boring as Trump in office was disruptive. Everything were learning about Trumps inability to convene a large-scale audience on Truth Social we learned in miniature from the failure of his mid-2021 blog, which he killed after 29 days. Like most media figures, Trump needs the boost of the network effect provided by Twitter (or CNN or Fox News Channel) to build a mass audience. All by his lonesome, hes just a political carny on a lightly trafficked midway shouting invitations to his freak show.

Plenty of Trumps followers were either agnostic about his tweets or politically hostile to them. Many followed him just to stay in the know or for the hate clicks.

This is not to say you cant build a good business serving mostly Trumpians or mostly conservatives or mostly liberals. But such narrowcasting comes at the expense of winning the largest potential customer base. Twitter wisely places no political litmus tests, real or implied, between aspiring account-holders and an account as long as they promise not to spew bilge from their perch. Everybody is accepted. By appearing exclusionary, Truth Social resigned itself to marginal appeal.

Nothing about Truth Socials disastrous beginnings should surprise us. Donald Trump has proved himself again and again to be a wreck of an entrepreneur. Steaks, his university, water, an airline, casinos, the USFL, a mortgage company, vodka the list reads like a guide on how not to succeed in business. Associating Trump with a new venture has become a business death wish.

Trump is still the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024 and could well wind up in the White House (assuming hes not behind bars). But theres also evidence that Trump has simply exhausted the Trump meme he invented. Trumps deranged outrage style once contained real entertainment value which explains why moderates and liberals followed him on Twitter even if they wouldnt vote for him. But in his post-presidency and especially in the weeks following the Mar-a-Lago search and investigation, the show has gone stale. Vainly, he has sought to top himself by sharing QAnon-related material on Truth Social, denouncing the FBI like a madman trapped in a bunker, and calling for his reinstatement as the rightful winner of the 2020 election. Hes become a carnival geek biting the heads off of snakes, which can be a fabulous show the first couple of times you see it, but after that, meh. Could todays Trump devise enough fresh outrage to produce even a brief TikTok?

Are there any geek shows left? Send updates to [emailprotected]. No new email alert subscriptions are being honored at this time. My Twitter feed has not yet been canceled. RSS is my sort of social media.

View original post here:

Opinion | What the Truth Social Flop Says About Trump - POLITICO

In Tennessee in June, he asked a crowd: Would anybody like me to run for president? Then in Nevada in July he remarked: We have a president who ran twice, won twice and may have to do it a third time. Can you believe it?

In Pennsylvania earlier this month, he vowed that in 2024, most importantly, we are going to take back our magnificent White House.

Donald Trump former US president and architect of the big lie that he was robbed of victory in the 2020 election by electoral fraudsters is now finding fresh political utility in the big tease.

For more than a year he has tiptoed up to the line of declaring his candidacy for the White House in 2024 but never quite crossed it. It is a rare show of self-discipline from a man notorious for saying the quiet part out loud.

It is also a strategy that yields benefits. The coyness about his intentions ensures a steady stream of coverage for his rallies and keeps potential Republican primary rivals guessing. He avoids a conflict with party leaders who fear that an official Trump candidacy would overshadow their midterm elections campaign. And it keeps money flowing to his Save America political action committee, which has raised more than $100m since it was formed after the 2020 election.

Hes an attention whore and everything always has to be about Donald, said the Democratic National Committee adviser Kurt Bardella. He has to make himself the centre of the universe so he goes out there and plays this little flirtatious will he, wont he? card and its just designed to continue to keep that conversation going.

Its also designed to try to keep his would-be competitors like Ron DeSantis or Mike Pence or Mike Pompeo at bay.

When Trump suffered a crushing defeat to Joe Biden in the 2020 race, many observers expected him to follow the example of previous one-term presidents such as Jimmy Carter and George HW Bush, accept that his political career was over and contemplate a presidential library and museum.

But Trump has never done anything by the book. He pushed the big lie that culminated in his supporters deadly attack on the Capitol on January 6 2021. Six months later he resumed his raucous campaign rallies with an event in Ohio, and he has since held a further 20 in locations that include Alaska, Florida, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wyoming.

At every one of them supporters have thronged in expectation that this might be the day that Trump declares he is staging a great political comeback and running for president again. Invariably he drops a hint or two in that direction, generating headlines that he is floating or teasing a run, but he never makes it explicit.

The closest he came was not an adoring rally but when pressed by a journalist from New York Magazine over what would factor into his decision. Trump replied: Well, in my own mind, Ive already made that decision, so nothing factors in any more. In my own mind, Ive already made that decision.

But one factor, perhaps, does give him pause. If and when Trump formally declares, he will trigger Federal Election Commission requirements about financial disclosures and limits on how much money he can raise from individual donors. The 76-year-olds reticence may ultimately be about financial rather than political expediency.

Henry Olsen of the Ethics and Public Policy Center thinktank in Washington, said, Its a matter of federal law: once one says one is a candidate for the presidency, certain attachments take place with respect to what you can and cant spend money on and with respect to any committees organised.

This is why candidates typically announce an exploratory rather than campaign committee, added Olsen, a senior fellow at his organisation.

Presumably Trump has been briefed on this to the point where he knows that hes not going to come close enough to crossing that line to give people the ability to argue that hes now a candidate and that means he cant do this or that or the other thing with his money.

Although Trump often revels in his reputation of being undisciplined, Olsen said, he can be disciplined when he thinks that being disciplined is in his interest and hes doing that now.

The same financial rules would apply to any would-be Republican primary challenger, making any official declarations from them similarly unlikely. Contenders include Florida governor DeSantis, former vice-president Pence, Virginia governor Glenn Youngkin and senators Tom Cotton of Arkansas, Ted Cruz of Texas, Rick Scott of Florida and Tim Scott of South Carolina.

Bardella, a former Republican congressional aide, added: Even if Trump knows right now that hes not going to run, he will make it look like he is as long as he possibly can because that keeps him at the forefront of the conversation. The minute he were to not run, the attention would be immediately focused to the others and he obviously wants to avoid that as much as possible.

The one thing we know about Donald Trump is he does not want to share the spotlight with anybody and in the past has fired people in his orbit who have flown too close to the sun like Steve Bannon.

The big tease plays out against the backdrop of multiple criminal investigations into Trump and his associates. The justice department is investigating his possession of classified material reportedly including information on a foreign countrys nuclear capabilities at his Mar-a-Lago home in Florida.

The FBI search of Mar-a-Lago had a rallying effect on Trumps supporters and led to a surge of donations. But the gravity of the case, combined with the damaging revelations of the congressional January 6 committee, make Republicans anxious that Trumps looming presence could upend their hopes in Novembers midterms by galvanising Democrats and deterring moderates.

Biden last week began taking a more gloves off approach to calling out Trump and Maga Republicans as a fundamental threat to democracy. Two in three independent voters say they do not want Trump to run in 2024, according to a poll from NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist.

It is possible, however, that should Trumps legal perils reach a critical point of no return, that will be the spur for him to declare his candidacy and make the bogus claim to his supporters that he is the victim of a politically motivated persecution.

The Center for Politics at the University of Virginias director, Larry Sabato, said: He believes incorrectly that, if hes a formal candidate, that will somehow protect him from legal charges. It will not. Weve had quite a number of candidates in American history who got into legal troubles so I dont know why he thinks that. Somebody probably said something to him once and he never let it go.

But Sabato also admitted: Nobody knows. He is very likely to run again but I can see scenarios in which he wouldnt. He said himself, lets see how my health is. He hasnt had the best diet in the world and doesnt look to me to be in particularly good shape.

Read the original:

Will he, wont he? Trumps big tease keeps 2024 election rivals guessing - The Guardian US

Donald Trumps non-stop drive to paint the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago to recover classified documents as a political witch hunt is drawing rebukes from ex-justice department and FBI officials who warn such attacks can spur violence and pose a real threat to the physical safety of law enforcement.

But the concerns have not deterred Republican House minority leader Kevin McCarthy and other Trump allies from making inflammatory remarks echoing the former US president.

The unrelenting attacks by Trump and loyalists such as McCarthy, senator Lindsey Graham, Steve Bannon and false conspiracy theorist Alex Jones against law enforcement have continued despite strong evidence that Trump kept hundreds of classified documents illegally.

Before the 8 August raid, Trump and his attorneys stonewalled FBI and US National Archives requests for the return of all classified documents and did not fully comply with a grand jury subpoena in a criminal probe of Trumps hoarding of government documents.

The FBI search of Trumps Mar-a-Lago home and club recovered 33 boxes with over 100 classified documents, adding to the 200 classified records Trump had earlier returned in response to multiple federal requests.

Trumps high decibel attacks on law enforcement officials for trying to recover large quantities of classified documents including some that reportedly had foreign nuclear secrets was palpable in Pennsylvania recently when Trump at a political rally branded the FBI and justice department political monsters and labelled president Joe Biden an enemy of the state.

The day before in Pennsylvania, to coincide with a major Biden speech about threats to democracy posed by Trump and some of his allies, McCarthy mimicked Trumps high decibel attacks on the court-approved FBI raid by calling it an assault on democracy.

Former law enforcement officials and scholars warn that using such conspiratorial rhetoric impugning the motives and actions of justice department and the FBI runs the risk of inciting threats of violence and actual attacks, fears that have already been proven warranted.

Consider Trump supporter Ricky Shiffer, who posted angry messages about the Mar-a-Lago raid on Trump Social, and then on 12 August armed himself with an assault rifle and attacked an FBI office in Cincinnati. After fleeing the scene he was hunted down and killed by police.

In another sign of potential violence, federal judge Bruce Reinhart in Florida, who had approved the FBI warrant to search Mar-a-Lago, reportedly received death threats after his name was cited in press accounts.

I have been dealing with law enforcement and the criminal justice system for close to 40 years. I have never seen the type or virulence of attacks being made every day against the FBI, DoJ lawyers, and judges, former justice department inspector general Michael Bromwich told the Guardian. Its a chorus led by Trump but that includes elected officials at every level. It is dangerous and unacceptable.

Bromwich added: Its one thing for professional rabble rousers, liars, and nihilists such as Bannon and Jones to attack law enforcement and DoJ in the way that they have since the search; its quite another for so-called respectable political figures such as McCarthy and Graham to do so. Their recent actions and words reflect that theirs is a politics detached from facts and principle.

Similarly, Chuck Rosenberg, a former US attorney for the sastern district of Virginia and ex-chief of staff to former FBI director James Comey, told the Guardian: The attacks on federal law enforcement are sickening and reckless.

To historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat, who has studied authoritarian leaders and wrote the book Strongmen, Trumps attacks on the FBI and justice department and his retention of classified documents are consistent with his authoritarian leadership style

Its very typical of authoritarians to claim that theyre the victims and that there are witch hunts against them, Ben-Ghiat told the Guardian.

Trumps furious assaults on law enforcement also targeted the National Archives and Records Administration, causing a notable uptick in threats against the agency, according to sources quoted by the Washington Post.

No NARA official involved in negotiating the return of presidential records from Mar-a-Lago would have acted with any motive other than to ensure the safe return of all of the presidential records back into the custody of the government, said Jason R Baron, the former director of litigation at the US National Archives. It is unfortunate that some would impugn the motives of NARA staff in simply doing their job.

The frenzied attacks on law enforcement began almost immediately after the raid and included some especially rabid Trump supporters.

Former White House adviser Bannon, who has been convicted on two counts of criminal contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena from the House January 6 panel, made unsupported claims to conspiracy monger Jones on Infowars that the FBI planted evidence against Trump during the Mar-a-Lago raid, and that the deep state is planning to kill Trump.

I do not think its beyond this administrative state and their deep state apparatus to actually try to work on the assassination of President Trump, said Bannon, who on 8 September was charged by New York prosecutors with fraud, money laundering and conspiracy involving his role in a private fundraising scheme to fund constructing the US-Mexico border wall.

Right before he left office, Trump pardoned Bannon who had been indicted on similar federal charges involving fraud and the border wall.

Graham provoked heavy criticism for making the suggestion in a Fox News interview that the FBI raid and investigation would lead to riots in the street, if charges were filed against Trump.

After critics noted Grahams comments could fuel violence, Graham doubled down a week later saying he was just trying to state the obvious.

In a twist, some veteran justice department prosecutors point out that predictions of violence can potentially be criminal.

The risk is that predictions of violence can easily become threats of violence bordering on extortion, former justice department prosecutor Paul Rosenzweig told the Guardian. Explicitly calling for violence against the government can, in context, become criminal. When Trump loyalists like Bannon and Graham seem to cross that line, they are risking criminal prosecution.

On another front, even some former close allies of Trump say that his shifting and hard edged attacks on law enforcement look desperate and dont pass the smell test.

William Barr, Trumps former attorney general who formerly was a close ally, told Fox News on 2 September he didnt see any reason why classified documents were at Mar-a-Lago once Trump left office.

People say this was unprecedented, Barr told Fox News But its also unprecedented for a president to take all this classified information and put them in a country club, okay?

To historian Ben-Ghiat, the fact that Trump had those classified documents and they were mixed in with golf balls and family photos is very typical of authoritarian type leaders who dont recognize any divides between public and private. Everything is theirs to trade, to sell and to use as leverage.

For Bromwich, the attacks on law enforcement by Trump and his ardent allies is unprecedented and very dangerous.

For those of us who have spent time with federal law enforcement personnel, the idea that they are members of the deep state or doing the bidding of the radical left is ridiculous. In my experience, the majority are conservative and Republican. Whatever their politics, they dont let their political views affect their work.

The search of Mar-a-Lago was indeed unprecedented. It was preceded by an unprecedented and colossal theft of government property by the former president.

See more here:

Trumps increasing tirade against FBI and DoJ endangering lives of officials - The Guardian US