Tag: alvin bragg
The Only Promise Todd Blanche Can Honestly Make Is More Dishonesty

The Only Promise Todd Blanche Can Honestly Make Is More Dishonesty

Todd Blanche was Donald Trump's personal attorney, so it was natural that when he was elevated to attorney general, a journalist asked whether he would "pledge that the Justice Department will always act independently of the White House?"

The correct answer to such a question is obvious: The Justice Department and I are committed to the impartial administration of justice. We will always make prosecution decisions based solely upon the facts and the law after a fair evaluation of the evidence.

But Blanche said something a little different:

"No, I'm not going to pledge that. And no attorney general should ever pledge that. The president, I mean, if I were to pledge I will be independent of the White House, what that means is that if President Trump says, 'I want the Department of Justice to go after every violent criminal in this country,' which is what he has said, what you're saying to me is I should say, 'No, sir, I'm not going to do it.'"

What jumps out first about Blanche's answer is the blithe refusal even to mouth (however disingenuously) the expected platitude. This is the Trumpian way. They don't just break the rules behind closed doors; they shatter the rules in broad daylight. It's not enough, for example, that the Trump Justice Department is denying resources to the team that investigates and prosecutes foreign corrupt practices; Trump issued an executive order pausing all such prosecutions. So it's not news that Trump's new attorney general will fail to seek impartial justice, but the refusal to even feign regard for impartial justice is new.

The substance of Blanche's justification is also fatuous. Pledging to act independently of the White House doesn't mean acting in every instance in direct opposition to the president. That's absurd and it's not what independence requires. Nor could the president order the attorney general to "go after every violent criminal in this country," since more than 98% of violent crimes are state offenses, not federal ones, and in any case the combined forces of the state and federal governments don't have the resources to go after every violent criminal.

So much for deflection. The coffee-spitting moment came later, when Blanche was asked whether he would carry out an order that "crossed a legal or ethical line" and he proclaimed, "The president will never ask me to do something unethical or legal — or illegal. He never has. He never will."

Let's let the Freudian slip pass, but in fact the president had demanded that the Justice Department do something unethical that very week — namely, reconsider the decision to drop spurious vandalism charges against David Hearn. Jeanine Pirro's own motion to the court acknowledged that the original indictment was based upon false information provided by the Department of the Interior.

Nevertheless, Trump fumed that Pirro had "choked." This week, we learned that she was convening a special grand jury for some unknown purpose. If I were Hearn, I'd keep my lawyer close.

And that perversion of justice is only a ripple in the flood of plainly politicized acts and forbearances by this administration. This is a president who sent a DM to his attorney general demanding the prosecution of his political opponents. It's hard to think of how you could more comprehensively upend the idea of blind justice.

Trump's apologists do have a valid point when they note that the Manhattan district attorney's case against Trump in the Stormy Daniels case was also a form of lawfare. I said at the time that the case was flimsy and almost certainly would never have been brought if Trump were not the target. Trump's flagrant lawbreaking did present a quandary: How do you hold him responsible for his crimes without unintentionally validating the idea in the minds of his supporters that all justice is corruptly motivated?

There are no easy answers. Still, the Bragg prosecution was a local case, not the federal government seeking to punish a political foe. Ditto for the civil case Letitia James brought. At the federal level, Attorney General Merrick Garland was actually extremely reluctant to pursue federal charges against Trump despite the gravity of his conduct before and on January 6. It was only after Trump announced his reelection bid that Garland felt compelled to appoint a special prosecutor (precisely to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest).

Nor is it the case that President Joe Biden's administration used the Justice Department to settle political scores. To repeat, Garland was widely criticized for moving slowly against Trump's obvious lawbreaking in the Mar-a-Lago documents case as well as the January 6 insurrection. One can understand his hesitation.

One administration prosecuting another opens the possibility of a dangerous tit-for-tat, but whatever your view about the wisdom of going slow against Trump, it's preposterous to "whatabout" this. Under Garland's leadership, the department brought indictments against Rep. Henry Cuellar, Sen. Bob Menendez, Rep. T.J. Cox, Illinois Speaker Michael Madigan, Mayor Eric Adams (and we know how that turned out when Trump returned), Mayor Andrew Gillum, and Hunter Biden — all Democrats.

Trump's second-term Department of Justice, by contrast, has been a nonstop cavalcade of corruption, featuring blatantly political prosecutions, attempted prosecutions or investigations of Jerome Powell, Lisa Cook, Mark Kelly, Miles Taylor, Christopher Krebs, James Comey, "sandwich guy," Adam Schiff, Letitia James, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, Alex Padilla, John Brennan, John Bolton, Sean Dunn, Ras Baraka, Jacob Frey, anti-ICE protesters in Minnesota including the widow of Renee Good, and many more.

Biden made poor decisions in pardoning his family at the end, but that was trivial compared with the mass pardons for the January 6 criminals, the pardons for cronies, donors, other corrupt public figures, the firings of any official who participated in the January 6 or Mar-a-Lago investigations, the kid-glove treatment for Ghislaine Maxwell, and of course, the putrid attempt to create a $1.7 billion slush fund for so-called victims of lawfare along with a get-out-of-jail-free card for Trump and his insatiable family regarding past tax evasion.

The aptly named Blanche (because he should, but doesn't, blush) was along for all of it. He personally visited Maxwell in prison and has yet to provide an explanation for that highly unusual visit, nor for her promotion to a more comfortable prison. He was at the Department of Justice as 3,400 lawyers resigned in protest rather than engage in the kinds of unethical and unprofessional conduct Pam Bondi and Blanche were demanding. He has defended with a straight face James Comey's indictment for threatening the president with an Instagram photo of seashells.

This ethical flexibility was enough to make even some Republican senators hesitate about confirming him. But in the end, all but Collins and Murkowski voted yes, presumably because they fear that if it's not Blanche it will be someone even worse. Thus does Trump extort his party — by threatening to get even dirtier.

But this tactic only succeeds because of learned helplessness by Republican office holders. In fact, when Trump gets pushback, he backs down. Ask Iran. Or consider the first utterly horrific attorney general candidate he proposed, Matt Gaetz. Enough Republicans balked that Trump withdrew his name. He didn't nominate someone even worse after that (admittedly a tall order). He went with Pam Bondi, a smidge less awful.

It seems the tactic of standing up to Trump is just crazy enough to work. But, no, the GOP has not learned that lesson. They've chosen spinelessness instead, and even after a decade of this, I still cannot understand why.

Mona Charen is policy editor of The Bulwark and host of the "Beg to Differ" podcast. Her new book, Hard Right: The GOP's Drift Toward Extremism, is available now.

Reprinted with permission from Creators


Alvin Bragg

New York Prosecutors Won't Oppose Stay On Trump Sentencing

Consequences for President-elect Donald Trump’s guilty conviction in a New York state case will be years away, as prosecutors signaled they will not oppose suspending the case while the incoming 47th president carries out his four years in the Oval Office.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg wrote Tuesday that he will fight Trump’s request to toss the case altogether. But Bragg said he will not get in the way of a stay, or pause, on the proceedings.

“Given the need to balance competing constitutional interests, consideration must be given to various non-dismissal options that may address any concerns raised by the pendency of a post-trial criminal proceeding during the presidency, such as deferral of all remaining criminal proceedings until after the end of Defendant’s upcoming presidential term,” Bragg wrote in a memo that had been due Tuesday to New York Judge Juan Merchan.

Bragg requested that motions be due December 9. Trump still has a criminal sentencing date on the calendar for November 26, unless Merchan orders otherwise.

Trump spokesman Steven Cheung declared “a total and definitive victory” in a statement issued shortly after Bragg’s letter became public.

“The Manhattan DA has conceded that this Witch Hunt cannot continue. The lawless case is now stayed, and President Trump’s legal team is moving to get it dismissed once and for all,” said Cheung.

History-Making Conviction

Trump, the first former president to become a convicted felon, was found guilty in May of 34 felonies for falsifying business records related to paying off porn star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 presidential election to hide a decade-old sexual encounter with her at a Lake Tahoe golf club.

The likely delay of Trump’s sentencing while he serves as president brings to a close, if temporarily, the only one of Trump’s criminal cases that went to trial.

The case, brought by Bragg’s office, was among four criminal cases the then-former president faced as he campaigned to again occupy the Oval Office. Trump also faced several civil lawsuits and now stares down roughly half a billion dollars in damages for committing fraud, defamation and sexual abuse.

As Trump readies to take the oath of office in just two months, Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith’s office is also winding down its two federal cases against Trump, as the department does not prosecute sitting presidents.

The federal cases include fraud and obstruction charges stemming from Trump’s actions to undermine his 2020 election loss, which culminated in a violent attack by his supporters on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

The other case, appealed by Smith after a federal judge tossed it, revolved around charges that the then-former president unlawfully took and stockpiled classified documents at his Florida Mar-a-Lago estate upon leaving the White House.

Not The First Delay In New York

Each of the 34 class E felonies Trump is convicted of carries a penalty of up to four years, according to the New York penal code.

Trump’s sentencing date was twice delayed. Merchan granted Trump’s request in September to delay the criminal sentencing until after November’s presidential election.

Merchan had already delayed Trump’s initial July sentencing date following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision ordering that former presidents are immune from criminal charges for core constitutional duties, and presumed immune for other actions while in office. The court’s opinion also brought into question what types of evidence can be admitted in criminal cases against former presidents.

Trump asked Merchan to “set aside” the guilty verdict almost immediately after the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling. Merchan has yet to rule on the motion.

New York prosecutors and Trump’s defense team on Nov. 12 jointly asked Merchan to delay all proceedings while the prosecutors decide if and how their case would proceed following Trump’s election victory.

Originally published in Arizona Mirror, a division of the nonprofit news network States Newsroom.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Alvin Bragg

'We'll Kill You All': MAGA Goons Post Disturbing Threats To Alvin Bragg

The office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has been inundated with death threats following former President Donald Trump's 34 felony convictions, according to new reporting.

NBC News reported Friday that in the last three months alone, there have been dozens of death threats made against Bragg, his family and his staff, according to the New York Police Department (NYPD). And since April, the DA's office has forwarded more than 500 threatening phone calls and letters to the NYPD. At least two bomb threats were phoned in to the residences of two people involved with the case on the first day of Trump's New York criminal trial.

NYPD Sergeant Nicholas Pistilli noted that some of the threats contained overtly violent messaging like "we will kill you all," "you are dead," "your life is done" and "RIP," among others. Pistilli also said Bragg's office received "a post showing sniper shots on people involved in this case or a family member of such a person, and a post disclosing the home address of a DA Office employee."

MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace also pointed out that some of the death threats are racist in nature, as Bragg is Black. One threat sent to Bragg's office showed an image of Bragg's neck in a noose, along with a threatening message. In a Friday segment, legal analyst Lisa Rubin told Wallace that when she spoke with investigators, they confirmed to her that some of the threats were so graphic in nature that they were unwilling to share them with reporters.

"The universe of threats to Alvin Bragg, and the people around him working with him are far larger in all likelihood than that which we can know," she said. "As bad as the images are that I saw today, and had to describe for you and our colleagues, I want us all to pause and think about: If those are the ones that they chose to share with us, imagine what else is out there that we haven't seen."

"These are just so upsetting to everyone who has seen them and everyone who has lived with them," Rubin said.

While Trump has been convicted on all counts in the original indictment, the gag order Judge Juan Merchan imposed has remained in place. The former president's legal team unsuccessfully argued to have it lifted, suggesting Trump is chomping at the bit to get back to attacking the groups protected by the order like jurors, witnesses, court staff and their families.

The gag order will stay in place until Trump is sentenced on July 11, and the ex-president is still banned from attacking jurors, court staff and family members of both. However, Bragg has agreed that the gag order can be lifted for witnesses, allowing Trump to attack his former attorney Michael Cohen and adult film star and director Stormy Daniels.

"Now that the jury has delivered a verdict, however, the compelling interest in protecting the witnesses’ ability to testify without interference is no longer present," Bragg's office told NBC. "The relevant balancing of interests has thus shifted from the time that this Court issued the orders restricting defendant’s extrajudicial statements."

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Felon: Will Trump's Conviction Break The Authoritarian Spell?

Felon: Will Trump's Conviction Break The Authoritarian Spell?

It only took a jury a day and a half to decide that Donald Trump, former President of the United States, was guilty on all counts. He will wear the convicted felon label on his back forever, no matter what happens in November. A jury of seven men and five women voted guilty on all 34 counts against him. He will be sentenced July 11. The penalty includes prison time. He likely won’t go, and in the unlikely event that he does, Never Trump conservative lawyer George Conway told me the Constitution would likely be read to require that any state holding him open the cell door if he is elected in November.

But the verdict is another historic landmark in the long list of awful firsts that the MAGA cult leader has inflicted on our country since he rode down the golden elevator in the summer of 2015, enthralling first the media and then a swath of America.

The first of those horrors is the separation of millions of Americans from faith in the law and process of democracy. In the hour after the verdict, on Xitter, on Fox, on rightwing platforms and channels, MAGAs were blind with rage, spitting accusations. It’s a measure of the success of this one man’s assault on American institutions - “fake news"!” “Deep State!” “Rigged against me!” - that untold millions will refuse to accept the fairness of the trial. His people are so unplugged from our commonweal that they are willing to believe the Manhattan DA works for a Hungarian billionaire whose name the rabid right made synonymous with their own invisible donor-monster the Koch family. They are willing to believe that a sitting judge who spends his days in a cold, smelly courtroom at 100 Centre Street, and the men and women of the jury who did their civic duty in the same room and listened to all the evidence, were just pawns of Joe Biden and the Democrats.

Utter lunacy. Sadly, we’re used to it.

One of the rabble outside the courtroom was caught on camera threatening to go inside the courtroom and trash the place. AR 15 memes flooded the platforms. The sophisticates on social media flung profanity, the Overton window of civil political discourse long ago smashed by their Dear Leader.

“Bullshit!” Donny Jr. tweeted. “This Trump show trial is Bullsh!t,” wrote the soigné former Nixon aide, Monica Crowley.

Brother Eric, who squirmed in the courtroom through Stormy Daniels’ description of his father’s seduction technique, fumed at the outrage that a man could become a felon for just “a 130k NDA”!

Trained lawyer and TV personality Megyn Kelly, personally and obscenely trashed by Trump for asking him hard questions during a 2016 debate "(“she’s got blood coming out of her wherever!”) whined to her three million followers that “The country is disgraced” (yes, the rest of us noticed that, but back in November 2016).

Like so many Trumpers, Kelly also issued an implied warning, “They will rue the day they unleashed this lawfare to corrupt a presidential election.”

Rue the day. We’ll get you back. You’ll regret it. Threats, promises of violence, pictures of automatic weapons, bloodlust vengeance. All of it projected from their own Dear Leader and back out onto regular Americans just trying to make sense of it all.

Many MAGAs are now using the banana word. David Sacks, a grotesquely pro-Trump Silicon Valley billionaire, wrote, “There is now only one issue in this election: whether the American people will stand for the USA becoming a banana republic.”

The charitable view here is that Sacks is mainlining K with Elon and failed to notice that America went full banana republic on a summer night in 2016 when Gen. Michael Flynn led thousands of Republican delegates at the nominating convention in Cleveland in a chant of “Lock Her Up.” That Gen. Flynn ultimately got convicted himself (alas, not locked up) only proves the point, especially as he roams free today, another Trump pardonee like Steve Bannon, despoiling the political landscape and spewing conspiracy theories to low-information Q-Anon zombies.

Flynn’s rant and the crowd’s chant were unprecedented in American politics back then. It was shocking to witness the beginning of the idea of using the law for vengeance against one’s political opponents. In office, Trump tried to get his DOJ to manifest the authoritarian dream. But the “adults in the room” still clung to the mores of another era, and resisted, or quit.

The next administration will be vetted for people who won’t have those reservations. There may be none of them left.

Let’s be clear: the 91 criminal indictments against Trump are not “politically motivated.” Dozens of his minions in Arizona, Michigan and Georgia in the fake elector and January 6 conspiracy schemes have been turning like pancakes, or going bankrupt fighting a losing fight. He is recorded bragging about purloined classified national secrets.

Trump only still skates, he only still walks free right now because, contrary to the persecuted image he wants to project of “fighting The Man,” like the angry little guys who think he speaks for them, he is, in fact, The Man.

The New York judge and prosecutors bent over backwards allowing Defendant Trump to behave in ways that would have had any other accused individual locked up pre trial. Trump walks free with money in the bank even though he has already been convicted in a massive civil fraud trial, and of sexual abuse and forcible touching and then lying about it, in another civil case. Prosecutors have reams of evidence against him in the three criminal cases in two other states, cases that only thanks to the delay machinations of his lawyers and the horrifying ineptitude and bias of one of the judges, will not be decided before November 5.

Judging from the outpouring of anger at the conviction, his felonious status will not move his true fans. As historian Ruth Ben Ghiat wrote in her excellent book about modern dictators, from Putin to Xi, to Orban and Trump today and Mussolini and Hitler before them, the criminality of an authoritarian leader can be an essential element in his (always his, by the way, women need not apply) appeal.

“The strongman’s rogue nature also draws people to him. He proclaims law and order rule, yet enables lawlessness. This paradox becomes official policy, as government evolves into a criminal enterprise, Hitler’s Germany being one example and Putin’s Russia another. Millions around the world have found it intoxicating to be able to commit criminal acts with impunity… the thrill of transgression mixed with the comfort of submitting to his power turns the everyday into the exceptional, endowing life with energy, purpose, and drama.”

Trump was right about one thing in his surly first words to the public as a convicted felon, outside the courtroom, with his chagrined loser lawyer standing by (surely Todd Blanche was expecting to hear the L word from his belligerent client in the black SUV in short order).

The real verdict, the convicted defendant said, will be rendered on November 5. Right.

Will a majority of voters cling to the felonious leader’s fantasy that every institution and civil servant in America is utterly corrupted by “the left” and “Soros” and out to get him? Will they show up to vote having lost every iota of faith they ever had in the commonweal, in the possibility that their fellow Americans do the right thing in courtrooms and on juries and in the news media, believing that every non MAGA election worker, Capitol police officer, prosecutor, or New York state judge is engaged in a systematic conspiracy against Donald Trump?

The great question after today is whether the red F now stamped on Trump’s back, not unlike the Nixon tattoo on his fellow convicted felon Roger Stone’s back, will dampen the enthusiasm of any on-the-fence, decent, right-leaning voters still cued in to the possibility of the decency of our institutions after eight years of being persistently propagandized to abandon that faith.

Are there any left? Helloooo! Are you out there? Paying attention?

If so, you don’t have to vote for Biden. We will forgive you if you just stay home on Election Day and leave the man to his ignominious fate.

Reprinted with permission from American Political Freakshow

Nina Burleigh is a a journalist, author, and documentary producer. She is the author of seven books including most recently Virus: Vaccinations, the CDC, and the Hijacking of America's Response to the Pandemic and an adjunct professor at New York University's Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Trending

World