Category Archives: Trump

Vallejo Times-Herald Editor trashes Trump & commends Kamala

[BenIndy comment: Wow! Times-Herald editor Jack Bungart doesn’t hold back. A good read, funny, snarky, true. And on the front page!]

Kamala and the Great Comeuppance

Jack Bungart

Vallejo Times-Herald, By Jack Bungart Sept 14, 2024

And so it came to this. Nine years after escorting his Pre-Nup Lottery winner down that escalator and into our collective gag reflexes, and just months separated from having a glorious evening of his standard lie-spewing overshadowed by Father Time taking out his first opponent in a TKO, Donald Trump finally met his match.

Or his mismatch, as it were.

That wasn’t a debate in Philadelphia Tuesday night. It was a Comeuppance for the Ages, nearly a decade in the making. A roasted pig if you will, more delicious than any household pet could ever be.

Vice President Kamala Harris at the Philadelphia debate with Donald Trump, Sept 10, 2024

Kamala Harris, just months ago another meandering vice president on a long, undistinguished list of them, did a greater service to her country than she could possibly do in that Oval Office she took a giant step toward occupying.

Welcome to the New World Order. If you ever wanted rock-solid proof this country needs a female president — this female president — this was it.

Remember Harris the ineffective campaigner and anonymous vice president? That is so late June Joe Biden. Forget her. She no longer exists.

This Harris, soaring on the wings of momentum, rolling in fresh campaign cash and basking in surging poll numbers, did what so many before her — both Republican and Democrat — had failed to do. She took the bully out behind the woodshed and kicked his ass.

This long overdue, national TV takedown/exposure of Trump was beautiful in its ruthless simplicity. Hit him where he hurts. Not on his plans for the country. He has none, and he quite frankly doesn’t care. Hit him where his malignant narcissism and toxic, fragile ego live.

Start with, say, crowd sizes. Only a shallow, undisciplined fool whose next policy idea will be his first one would bother with the bait, and ladies and gentlemen, this is that fool. Then, smile, chuckle, and stay out of the way while the clown melts down into an orange pool of drivel and felonies.

You know those 63-7 football blowouts where the incredulous announcer says “Bob, this was actually worse than the final score indicates”?

This was that. But worse than the sports cliche indicates.

Worse yet for Trump were the rules. No props of any kind were allowed on stage, meaning he couldn’t drive home his point of Super-Duper MAGA Patriotism without an American Flag to, well, hump. No fans in Flyover Country proclaiming, “Honey, get over here. You say he don’t love our country because he belittles our military, but just look at him make sweet love to that flag!”

As the rout rolled on, Trump became utterly undone, undressed of any pretense of being a man capable of looking out for anything or anyone other than himself. Gone too was the pretense of Trump being a serious candidate worthy of serious consideration outside of that cult he oversees.

This had nothing to do with Republican or Democrat. It never does with Trump.

This is about a befuddled fool not just losing a debate, but losing his way. This was a man who didn’t just deserve to lose, but a man who had to lose.

Perhaps now, finally, we can rid ourselves of this insistence on trying to normalize a man who is so clearly the least intelligent man — and the worst human being — to ever run for the presidency.

Sorry, but when you are sordid enough to keep a straight face while name dropping Viktor Orbán as a character reference, you have got to go. And if you are attempting to actually make a serious case for this soulless sap, you need to check yourself.

Almost mercifully, it finally ended, but not before Trump came up with one last preposterous claim, noting that he was, in fact, “a leader” on the issue of fertility. Nonsense. Everyone knows that’s Nick Cannon.

From there, it was “off to the spin room!” … said no debate winner in political history.

It was in a spin room in Pennsylvania that Trump found his state of denial. Giddy with the pretend spoils of his make-believe victory, Trump rattled off the fictional evidence: “We won in all the polls: 90-10, 81-11 73-9 …” he said, taking a break from his new hobby of memorizing random statistics and fake numbers to make a mental note to put together plans for when the World Series Champion Chicago White Sox and Super Bowl champion Carolina Panthers visit the White House in February.

OK, so maybe he didn’t win. Undaunted, with his MAGA rattle and binky in tow, Trump quickly pivoted to the Battle Cry of the Loser: They cheated me!

The problem, claimed Trump and his handlers at Fox, was those darn ABC moderators and their facts! “It was 3-on-1” they whined, in unison.

Nonsense. This was weak, even for a small, little man like Trump who still can’t fully admit he lost four years ago. For you MAGA folks at home unfamiliar with the concept, this was called journalism. You want to simply throw crap against the wall and make stuff up? You will get checked. It’s called fact-checking. Or in this case, lie-checking.

And no, you don’t fact-check Harris on her flip-flop on fracking. That issue is addressed in the question, which she answered. The fact that she didn’t answer it well doesn’t make it the same as her opponent simply making stuff up — like murdered babies and rigged elections — again.

Did Harris answer every question? Of course she didn’t. I’m sorry, was this your first debate?

And did Trump talk longer than Harris — 5 minutes or so? Of course. See above.

This wasn’t about bias — not even close. It was the chickens coming home to roost for a decade of thousands upon thousands of ridiculous lies Donald Trump has skated on far too often. And it was beautiful. Not for any of those tired, old Democrat vs. Republican stuff, either.

For the truth.

They’re going to check on the truth? This, the evening’s big loser thought, won’t stand. Why, it could even catch on. Donald Trump shares no stage with the truth. Not now, not ever.

This — and that fragile ego — is the reason Captain Bone Spurs is ducking a rematch like it’s Vietnam.

Still …

Trump may be down. He may be missing Joe Biden more than he previously thought possible. He may have no concept of a plan to deal with this woman who is so clearly smarter, sharper, and younger than him.

But he is hardly out. Not as long as there are the archaic Electoral College and the confused, common sense-challenged, attention-starved species known as the undecided voter out there.

Plus, Trump had to be thinking, things could hardly get worse …

Hold my microphone, said one Taylor Swift.

And there it is. Now it’s a Miss-Match.

— Jack F.K. Bungart is the Executive Editor of the Vallejo Times-Herald and the Vacaville Reporter.


More:

Donald Trump found guilty of hush-money plot to influence 2016 election

[Note from BenIndy: The latest verdict against Trump buoys the hope that justice will be served, and elevates the principle that no individual, regardless of status, is above the law.]

Donald Trump sits in the court in New York on 21 May 2024. | Mark Peterson / EPA.

Trump found guilty on all 34 counts of falsifying business records in first criminal trial against a US president

Guardian, by Hugo Lowell and Victoria Bekiempis, May 30, 2024

Donald Trump has been found guilty of all 34 counts of falsifying business records in a criminal hush-money scheme to influence the outcome of the 2016 election.

The verdict came after a jury deliberated for less than twelve hours in the unprecedented first criminal trial against a US president. It marks a perilous political moment for Trump, the presumptive nominee for the Republican nomination, whose poll numbers have remained unchanged throughout the trial but could tank at any moment.

Trump was convicted by a jury of 12 New Yorkers of felony falsification of business records, which makes it a crime for a person to make or cause false entries in records with the intent to commit a second crime.

In Trump’s case, the Manhattan district attorney’s office alleged Trump falsely recorded the reimbursements he made to his former lawyer Michael Cohen, who paid the adult film star Stormy Daniels $130,000 for her silence about her affair with Trump, as “legal expenses”.

The prosecution alleged the falsifications were made to conceal Trump’s violation of New York state election law, which makes it a crime to promote the election of any person to office through unlawful means.

Prosecutors argued in part that those unlawful means were the $130,000 payment to Daniels, which was in effect an illegal campaign contribution, because it was done solely for the benefit of his 2016 campaign and exceeded the $2,700 individual contribution cap.

The Manhattan district attorney’s office called 20 witnesses who, over the course of four weeks, gave evidence of how Trump plotted with the tabloid mogul David Pecker and Cohen to bury accounts of affairs with Daniels and the Playboy model Karen McDougal.

The witnesses – some friendly to Trump, others openly hostile – said Trump’s worry over the Daniels story intensified after the October 2016 release of the infamous Access Hollywood tape, in which Trump was caught on a hot mic bragging about sexual assault.

The recording featured Trump boasting about being able to grab women “by the pussy” without their consent because he was famous. Trial witnesses testified the Trump campaign worried that his efforts to dismiss the tape as “locker room talk” would fail if more boorish behavior came to light.

When the Daniels story threatened to become widely known weeks before the 2016 election, Cohen moved into action and paid Daniels $130,000 to buy the exclusive rights to her story – in order to suppress its publication.

After the 2016 election, prosecutors argued, Cohen worked out an illicit repayment plan in which he would be paid $420,000, an inflated sum that “grossed up” for tax reasons the $130,000 and other items Cohen billed.

The trial saw prosecutors elicit testimony from Cohen, Daniels and a parade of Trump’s confidants and employees, as they sought to establish that Trump concealed the alleged payoff scheme in an effort to ensure he would not lose support from female voters.

Cohen proved to be perhaps the most legally consequential witness for the prosecution, as he recounted how he used a home equity loan to raise the $130,000 he then wired to Daniels’ lawyer through a shell company. Cohen did so in the belief that Trump would reimburse him, he testified.

In January 2017, Cohen said, he discussed with Trump and the former Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg about being repaid for the $130,000, an overdue bonus and other expenses he incurred doing work that benefited the Trump 2016 campaign.

Cohen produced 11 invoices seeking payment pursuant to a legal “retainer” that did not exist, according to Cohen, which led to 11 checks being cut to Cohen and the Trump Organization recording 12 entries for “legal expense” on its general ledger – totaling 34 instances of alleged falsifications.

Cohen, who was the final witness for the prosecution, said that Trump was furious when he learned that Daniels was on the verge of going public – not least because Cohen had previously worked with Daniels’ lawyer Keith Davidson, in 2011, to remove the affair story from a gossip website.

“Just take care of it,” Cohen recalled Trump saying. “This was a disaster, a fucking disaster. Women will hate me.”

“Would you have made that payment to Stormy Daniels without getting a sign-off from Mr Trump?” prosecutor Susan Hoffinger asked Cohen.

“No, because everything required Mr Trump’s sign-off. And on top of that, I wanted the money back,” Cohen said.

Cohen said that he filed bogus invoices for legal services to cover up the reimbursements, and repeatedly said that Trump was the force behind the Daniels plot. He carried out the payoff “to ensure that the story would not come out, would not affect Mr Trump’s chances of becoming president of the United States”.

In a watershed moment, Cohen told jurors these repayments started not long after an 8 February 2017 meeting with Trump in the Oval Office, where they talked about money. Cohen hadn’t been repaid anything for the payoff.

“So, I was sitting with President Trump and he asked me if I was OK, he asked me if I needed money, and I said: ‘No, all good’,” Cohen told jurors. “He said, ‘All right, just make sure you deal with Allen.’”

“Allen” referenced Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organization’s chief financial officer at the time, who was recently incarcerated for lying at Trump’s recent civil fraud trial. Weisselberg had previously pleaded guilty to tax crimes, for which he was also jailed.

Cohen submitted $35,000 invoices for each month, listing the bill as for legal services. He said it was actually for “the reimbursement, to me, of the hush-money fee along with [another expense] and the bonus”.

Hoffinger went through every invoice and pay document and asked Cohen whether it was for legal services – or false. Cohen repeatedly said that the descriptions of invoices and payments in emails and business documents were, in fact, false.

“What I was doing was at the direction of and benefit of Mr Trump,” Cohen said at one point, among the many times he directly implicated Trump. “Everything required Mr Trump’s sign-off.”

Daniels provided stunning testimony that undermined Trump’s denials that they had sex following a celebrity golf event in Lake Tahoe nearly two decades ago. After rejecting Trump’s invitation to dinner, Daniels decided to go at the advice of a colleague, who said: “It’ll make a great story.”

Daniels said that she went to Trump’s hotel room, and they decided to chat before grabbing something to eat. He asked over and over about her work as an adult film actor, repeatedly asking her questions such as: “What about testing? Do you worry about STDs?” Had she been tested?

“Yes, of course, and I volunteered it as well,” Daniels said. “He asked me, oh, well, have you ever had a bad test? I said: ‘Nope, I can show you my entire record.’”

Trump started to show photos to Daniels at one point, including one of Melania, about which she commented that his wife was “very beautiful” – but allegedly added she should not worry about Melania because “we don’t even sleep in the same room”.

They spoke about Trump’s show, The Apprentice, and Daniels remarked there would be no way she would make it on TV given her line of work.

“You remind me of my daughter, she is smart and blonde and beautiful and people underestimate her as well,” Daniels remembered Trump saying.

Daniels excused herself for the restroom, which was through a bedroom. When she came out, Trump was on the bed, in his underwear and a T-shirt.

“At first I was just startled, like a jump scare,” Daniels said. “I just thought: oh my God, what did I misread to get here? The intention is pretty clear if someone’s stripped down to their underwear and on the bed.”

Daniels tried to leave but he stood between her and the door, albeit “not in a threatening manner”, she said.

“He said, I thought we were getting somewhere. I thought you were serious about what you wanted, if you want to get out of that trailer park … ” Daniels testified. “I was offended, because I never lived in a trailer park.” Daniels said they had sex.

The description of the hotel room encounter was uncomfortable and cringe-inducing testimony, one of the prosecutors suggested in closing arguments. But that was precisely why Trump was so desperate to suppress the story – and conceal that he had done so.

“This scheme, cooked up by these men, at this time, could very well be what got President Trump elected,” the prosecutor Joshua Steinglass said.

Seth Meyers: Trump Summary

This 90-second video is almost funny…

‘Grifters and sycophants’: the radicals who would fill key posts if Trump is re-elected

Controversial former Trump aide Stephen Miller’s legal group is seeking lawyers with total fealty to ex-president

The Guardian, by Peter Stone, 8 Dec 2023

As Donald Trump and his allies start plotting another presidency, an emerging priority is to find hard-right lawyers who display total fealty to Trump, as a way to enhance his power and seek “retribution” against political foes.

Stocking a future administration with more ideological lawyers loyal to Trump in key posts at the justice department, other agencies and the White House is alarming to former DoJ officials and analysts who say such plans endanger the rule of law.

Trump’s former senior adviser Stephen Miller, president of the Maga-allied legal group America First Legal, is playing a key role in seeking lawyers fully in sync with Trump’s radical agenda to expand his power and curb some major agencies. His search is for those with unswerving loyalty to Trump, who could back Trump’s increasingly authoritarian talk about plans to “weaponize” the DoJ against critics, including some he has labeled as “vermin”.

Miller is well known in Maga circles for his loyalty to Trump and the hard-line anti-immigration policies he helped craft for Trump’s presidency. Notably, Trump has vowed to make those policies even more draconian if he is the GOP nominee and wins again.

Such an advisory role for Miller squares with Trump’s desire for a tougher brand of lawyer who will not try to obstruct him, as some top administration lawyers did in late 2020 over his false claims about election fraud.

“Trump doesn’t care about the rule of law or the quality of the criminal justice system. He only cares about fealty to him.” – Former Trump White House lawyer Ty Cobb

“They’re looking for lawyers who worship Trump and will do his bidding,” Ty Cobb, a former White House lawyer during the Trump years and former justice department official, said. “Trump is looking to Miller to pick people who will be more loyal to Trump than the rule of law.”

Cobb added that “Trump trusts Miller greatly”, although Miller is not a lawyer.“Trump doesn’t care about the rule of law or the quality of the criminal justice system,” Cobb said. “He only cares about fealty to him.”

Miller’s legal group, which raked in a hefty $44m dollars in 2022, also has a board seat with Project 2025, a sprawling effort led by the Heritage Foundation and dozens of other conservative groups to map policy plans for a second Trump term – or another GOP presidency if Trump is not the nominee.

Project 2025 includes schemes to curb the justice department, the FBI and other agencies, giving Trump more power to seek revenge – as he has pledged to do in campaign speeches and Truth Social posts – against critics in both parties, which could benefit from conservative lawyers’ sign-offs, but which justice department veterans warn would undermine the legal system.

It seems that they are looking for lawyers who will do whatever Trump wants them to do, and that is the antithesis of implementing the rule of law,” Donald Ayer, a former deputy attorney general under George HW Bush, said.

“When you consider the number of lawyers who became Trump’s severe critics after joining the first Trump administration and participating in a lot of questionable actions, selection for a new administration will have to exclude pretty much anyone who has any inclination to defend our legal system or question the president asserting absolute authority.”

Ayer’s analysis is underscored by Trump’s 2020 anger at top lawyers such as the then attorney general William Barr, the then White House counsel Pat Cipollone and others, who pushed back on Trump for his false claims that he lost to Biden due to fraud.

Trump has cited Barr – one of several former top lawyers and officials who later became critics – as someone he would press the justice department to launch inquiries against, according to the Washington Post.

The former president, who faces 91 criminal charges in four jurisdictions including 17 involving his aggressive efforts to overturn his 2020 election defeat, has also threatened to appoint a special prosecutor to “go after” Biden and his family.

Donald Trump scowling into camera. Getty Images

Trump has attacked the prosecutions against him as political witch-hunts, arguing they give him the right if he wins the presidency again to use the justice department and FBI as tools to attack his opponents.

Trump’s retribution agenda was partly revealed on Tuesday at a Fox News town hall, when he slyly said if he was elected again he would not be a dictator “except for day one”.

To help facilitate Trump’s agenda, Miller plus the former Trump aide John McEntee, who started as Trump’s personal aide and then became a key adviser in 2020, have reportedly been working with others at Project 2025 to identify tougher pro-Trump lawyers.

Besides Miller’s group, numerous conservative groups have board seats on Project 2025 including the Center for Renewing America, a thinktank run by the former Trump budget director Russ Vought. The center employs Jeffrey Clark, a former justice department official who pushed false information about voting fraud in 2020 as part of Trump’s efforts to overturn his election loss. Clark has written a paper that Vought’s center published titled The US Justice Department Is Not Independent.

However, Clark and several other former Trump lawyers are now facing major legal headaches after aiding Trump’s efforts to block Biden’s victory, which could complicate Miller’s hunt for new diehard Trump lawyers.

“This is a search for people with situational ethics.” – Timothy Naftali of Columbia University

Clark and other key conservative lawyers including Rudy Giuliani and John Eastman have been charged by the Fulton county, Georgia, district attorney, Fani Willis, in a sprawling racketeering case against Trump and 18 others for seeking to thwart Biden’s Georgia victory. Other Trump legal advisers who were charged, including Kenneth Chesebro, Sidney Powell and Jenna Ellis, have struck plea deals with Willis.

Some experts foresee real dangers to democracy in Miller’s search for lawyers who would back Trump’s emerging far-right agenda.

“This is a search for people with situational ethics,” Timothy Naftali, a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs, said.

“They’re trying to screen out people who have higher loyalties to the US constitution. It’s likely they’re looking for people whose higher loyalty is to Donald Trump,” he said. “They’re trying to find lawyers who believe in dictatorship. You have to wonder what kind of people in good conscience could sign up for a Trump revenge tour. This appears to be a casting call for an American political horror movie.”

If Trump wins, some of the lawyers who may be candidates for key posts according to the New York Times include a few who work at either Miller’s group or have worked for Texas’s attorney general, Ken Paxton, a close Trump and Miller ally who has faced several ethics and criminal inquiries.

Miller and his legal center did not respond to a request for comment for this story.

Miller’s lawyer search could benefit from his group’s contacts in Maga circles and rapid growth. When America First Legal was launched in 2021, it soon garnered $1.3m from the Maga-allied Conservative Partnership Institute, where Trump’s ex-chief of staff Mark Meadows is a senior official. Meadows and Vought have both served on the board of Miller’s group.

America First Legal’s deep pockets have helped fund an array of lawsuits against the Biden administration, states targeting immigration policies and what Miller has labeled “the equity cult”. Just last month, America First Legal filed a brief opposing the limited gag order placed on Trump by a federal judge overseeing special counsel Jack Smith’s four-count criminal indictment of Trump for election subversion.

More broadly, the mission statement of Miller’s America First Legal reveals its ideological compatibility with Trump’s authoritarian-leaning agenda, of which hard-right lawyers would be assets in implementing should Trump get another term.

“Our security, our liberty, our sovereignty, and our most fundamental rights and values are being systematically dismantled by an unholy alliance of corrupt special interests, big tech titans, the fake news media, and liberal Washington politicians,” the mission statement reads.

Given Miller’s strong ties to Trump, some GOP congressional veterans are alarmed by his search for more ideological lawyers who would not question Trump’s emerging authoritarian agenda.

“They’re looking for grifters and sycophants like Jeffrey Clark and Ken Paxton,” said the former House member Charlie Dent.

In Dent’s eyes, these kinds of lawyers would “do whatever they’re told. This is absolutely dangerous.”