Why Even Bother With The Oath?

On Monday, Jonathan Turley posted an article about the ongoing trial of President Trump that is taking place in New York. No one with any knowledge of the law can take this trial seriously.

The headline reads:

A Disbarred, Serial Perjurer Walks into a Court and Asks to Take an Oath…Seriously, No Joke

The article reports:

A disbarred, serial perjurer walks into a courtroom and asks to take an oath . . . No, seriously, this is not a joke. Michael Cohen will soon appear in a Manhattan courtroom in what is sure to be one of the most bizarre moments in legal history.

Cohen nearly comprises the prosecution’s entire case against former President Donald Trump under a criminal theory that still has many of us baffled. It is not clear what crime Trump was supposedly trying to conceal by making “hush-money” payments to former porn actress Stormy Daniels.

What is clear is that none of the witnesses called in recent weeks has had any direct involvement with Trump on the payments.

The witnesses had a lot to say about Cohen, and most of it was not good. They described an unprofessional, self-proclaimed “fix-it man” who created a shell corporation to buy out Daniels with his own money. The money was later paid back by Trump after the election, with other legal expenses.

So Cohen will now make the pitch to the jury that they should put his former client in jail for following his own legal advice.

This would be difficult even for a competent and ethical lawyer. For Cohen, it is utter insanity. But Bragg is betting on a New York jury looking no further than the identity of the defendant to convict.

Cohen has an impressive history of lies and exaggerations that may be unparalleled. Just weeks ago, another judge denounced him as a serial perjurer who was still gaming the system.

This is not the defendant, mind you, but Alvin Bragg’s star witness.

The article concludes:

Under New York law, the oath administered by the court is supposed “to awaken the conscience and impress the mind of the witness in accordance with that witness’s religious or ethical beliefs.”

Before the bailiff administers the oath to Cohen, Judge Juan Merchan may have to warn spectators in the courtroom not to laugh. For anyone familiar with Cohen, it will sound like the ultimate punchline to a bad joke.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. This is a lawsuit created and tried by the equivalent of the three stooges.

Why Hasn’t This Case Been Thrown Out Of Court?

On Friday, Just the News posted an article about the classified documents trial of President Trump.

The article reports:

In a stunning admission, Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team is admitting that key evidence in former President Donald Trump’s classified documents criminal case was altered or manipulated since it was seized by the FBI, and that prosecutors misled the court about it for a period of time.

Legal experts told Just the News the revelation could prove to be a serious problem for prosecutors and a violation of court rules to preserve evidence in the state it was seized.

In a new filing Friday, Smith’s team said that the order of documents in some of the boxes of memos that were seized by the FBI from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate was altered or jumbled, leaving two different chronologies: one that was digitally scanned and another the physical order in the boxes.

“Since the boxes were seized and stored, appropriate personnel have had access to the boxes for several reasons, including to comply with orders issued by this Court in the civil proceedings noted above, for investigative purposes, and to facilitate the defendants’ review of the boxes,” Smith’s team wrote in a new court filing to U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon.

The article concludes:

The alteration of evidence has been an issue in earlier political scandals and prosecutions in Washington.

Erasure of an 18 1/2 minute segment of Richard Nixon’s White House tapes became a very important aspect of the Watergate scandal.

The Iran-Contra scandal exploded during the Reagan years with the revelation that documents were shredded before they could be obtained by investigators.

The Hillary Clinton classified email scandal became more complicated in 2015 with the revelation that her team used a “Bleach Bit” program to erase emails on her secret computer server, and had email devices destroyed. 

In the above cases, one can assume that the government was not directly involved in the alteration of evidence. In the case of President Trump, I strongly suspect that the government was the party that altered the evidence. It should also be noted that Hillary Clinton was never charged for destroying cell phones or erasing emails on her computer. President Trump realized that charging her would tear the country apart and chose not to do it. Unfortunately, the never-Trumpers in our government don’t really care what they are doing to the American justice system or the country.

In Case You Doubted “The Plan”

On Wednesday, The Daily Signal posted an article about some of the information being given to the people who are illegally crossing our southern border.

The article reports:

The “vote for President Biden” flyers found at a center for migrants in Mexico constitute foreign meddling in U.S. elections, congressional Republicans say. 

Amid the ongoing crisis of illegal immigration at the southern border, the lawmakers decried flyers posted at the migrant services center near Brownsville, Texas, that tell illegal aliens: “Reminder to vote for President Biden when you are in the United States.”

“Joe Biden has sacrificed our nation’s safety and security in his pursuit to get as many people here as possible. Why? Because he believes these are future Democrat voters,” Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., told The Daily Signal. 

“This is election interference orchestrated at the highest levels. We have to get our hands around this—Americans have to have complete confidence in their elections,” Marshall said. “Any NGO receiving federal funds and pushing illegal get-out-the-vote efforts for Joe Biden should be stripped of their funding immediately.”

Translated from Spanish, The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project notes, the flyers posted at the nongovernmental organization Resource Center Matamoros in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas say: “Reminder to vote for President Biden when you are in the United States. We need another four years of his term to stay open.” 

“Democrats want permanent power and they are willing to import a new electorate to get it,” Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind., told The Daily Signal in a written statement after his office was asked about the flyers. 

The article concludes:

The discovery of the “vote for Biden” flyers in Mexico is more evidence of the need for voter ID laws, Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, said.

“Like Iowa, every state in the union should require IDs and proof of citizenship in order to vote,” Ernst told The Daily Signal. “American elections are for Americans, not whoever manages to show up at Joe Biden’s open border. We must secure election integrity and secure the border.”

The pro-Biden flyers, discovered by Muckraker and shared with the Oversight Project, were found throughout Resource Center Matamoros, including on the walls of portable toilets, a video shows. 

The city of Matamoros in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas borders Brownsville, where Biden spoke in February about the crisis of illegal immigration at the southern border that has grown since he became president in January 2021.

Federal law bans foreign nationals, or non-U.S. citizens, from voting in federal elections. On Friday, former President Donald Trump endorsed proposed legislation by House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., that would require proof of citizenship to vote in U.S. elections.

It is long past time to make sure that the people who vote in our elections are the people who are legally entitled to vote in our elections. Any illegal vote cancels out the vote of a legal voter.

Jonathan Turley Comments On The Hearings

On Tuesday, Red State posted an article about the hearings yesterday in the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee. The article included some interesting comments by Jonathan Turley, a professor at George Washington University Law School.

The article reports:

While Republicans continued to stress the two-tiered justice system in the case of Biden’s classified documents vs. those of Donald Trump, Democrats continually tried to put words in Hur’s mouth that neither he nor his report said. 

So how bad were the Democrats? George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley said the Democrats’ questioning of Hur “seemed almost to border on the delusional.”

During an appearance on Fox News’s “America Reports,” Turley gave a perfect example.

Well, I thought the Republicans did a particularly good job today. Often the Democrats are way ahead in framing of hearings, but at points the Democrats seemed almost a border on the delusional. 

When you had Hur say ‘I did not exonerate the president’ and then Democrats would say ‘OK, so you exonerated the president’ and he would say ‘No, I didn’t’ and they would say ‘Thank you for that, with that exoneration.’ 

So for a lot of people watching, they probably kept on having to sort of reverse and see if they missed something here.

The thing to remember when Democrat politicians play this kind of nonsensical game is that they’re playing solely to their base — low-information voters who don’t give a damn about the facts. 

The article also notes:

Turley continued:

The fact is that Hur tried over and over again to distinguish between his findings, which is that he was not confident he could convict if he did bring any charges, and the statement of Democrats that the president was cleared.

Like most people who aren’t Democrats, Turley remains shocked that no charges were brought against Biden, particularly given the charges against Trump.

But out of this hearing, it came really some quite shocking observations. I mean, at the end, you’re sort of still wondering why he wasn’t charged, including Hur saying ‘Look, we have audio tape of the president referring to the fact that he found classified evidence in his basement.’ Well, okay, that seems like full knowledge. But he kept on coming back to the fact that I think a jury might have been persuaded that this is a nice, elderly man with a faulty memory.

There have been four people that I am aware of in the past few years that have been charged with mishandling classified information. Two of them have had very few consequences–Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. When does this tell us about our justice system?

Misconduct In A Trump Trial? Say It Isn’t So!

Newsweek (of all places) posted an article on Wednesday about Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. It seems as if this lady has no qualms about misappropriating funds, lying, and other crimes that she routinely charges others with.

The article reports:

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis paid the chief prosecutor in former President Donald Trump‘s election fraud trial out of her seized property fund for the first three months he was hired, a defense lawyer has claimed in court documents and before a Georgia Senate committee.

Ashleigh Merchant, attorney for co-defendant Michael Roman, a Trump 2020 campaign staffer, said in court documents that Nathan Wade’s first three months of work as a special prosecutor were paid from the district attorney’s seized property fund before he was paid from a general fund.

She reiterated that claim before a Georgia Senate Special Investigations Committee hearing on Wednesday and added an accusation that other special prosecutors were initially paid from the seized property fund.

A Fulton County District Attorney’s Office spokesman vehemently denied to Newsweek on Wednesday that Wade had been paid from the seized property fund.

Willis and Wade testified in February that they were previously in a relationship but insist that relationship began after Willis hired him to oversee the prosecution of Trump and his co-accused, who were indicted for allegedly trying to overthrow the Georgia result of the 2020 presidential election.

The pair denied in their testimony that they had tried to cover up their relationship until Wade was hired to prosecute the Trump case.

Her denials don’t seem to be working very well as more evidence continues to appear.

The article notes:

Newsweek emailed two attorneys in Willis’ office for comment on Tuesday. Newsweek also sent an email to Wade and an attorney for Donald Trump for comment on Tuesday.

Invoices disclosed by Willis’ office show that from November 1, 2021, to December 31st, 2023, Wade earned $653,881 in total for the case.

For his monthly invoices to Willis, Wade’s title is listed as “the Anti-Corruption Special Prosecutor.”

Wade’s monthly invoices increased to over $30,000 a month in 2022 and have mostly stayed at that level since.

Recent invoices obtained by Roman’s defense team through an open records request show that, for July 2023, Willis paid Wade $35,250 at $250 an hour.

That includes a “team meeting, drafting” that accounts for 33 hours of work, which totaled $8,250, and “team argument and prep” for 32 hours which totaled $8,000.

“Travel out of state and interview witness” lasted 18 hours for a total of $4,500.

Wade earned $35,000 in August 2023; $34,250 in September; $37,000 in October. That dropped to $16,000 in November for a July-November average of $31,500.

Remember when the A-Team used to come into a town and clear out all the bad guys? I think they need to visit Fulton County.

 

Does America Have A Justice System?

On Thursday, The Epoch Times reported that Special Counsel Robert Hur has announced that President Biden will not be charged for mishandling classified documents. I suppose it would be petty to point out that as a Senator or a private citizen he was not entitled to have those documents in his personal possession, but I guess that really doesn’t matter.

The article reports:

Among the reasons stated for not pressing charges was that Biden would present to the jury ‘as sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.’

I would like to point out that this elderly man with a poor memory is President of the United States. I also question the ‘well-meaning’ part.

The article continues:

“Our investigation uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen,” Mr. Hur wrote in a 388-page report to Attorney General Merrick Garland.

The materials, stated the report, included “marked classified documents about military and foreign policy in Afghanistan, and notebooks containing Mr. Biden’s handwritten entries about issues of national security and foreign policy implicating sensitive intelligence sources and methods.” The FBI collected these items during a search of President Biden’s Wilmington, Delaware, residence last year.

This is  unbelievable. President Trump’s house gets searched, and he gets charged while President Biden (because he is essentially considered a senile old man) gets away scot free. They searched Baron Trump’s room. Shouldn’t someone have searched Hunter Biden’s room?

I don’t know how (or if) we recover from the banana republic we have become.

 

Settled Science?

First of all there is no such thing as ‘settled science.’ The scientific method calls for constant questioning and re-evaluating. Second, if something is declared settled science, you can be sure that someone with a potential financial gain is promoting it (sorry for my cynicism).

On Sunday, WattsUpWithThat reported that the idea of net zero carbon is based on insufficient date. Wow. We are crippling some of the world’s major economies based on insufficient data.

The article quotes and article from The Telegraph posted on Saturday:

Britain’s climate watchdog has privately admitted that a number of its key net zero recommendations may have relied on insufficient data, it has been claimed.

Sir Chris Llewellyn Smith, who led a recent Royal Society study on future energy supply, said that the Climate Change Committee only “looked at a single year” of data showing the number of windy days in a year when it made pronouncements on the extent to which the UK could rely on wind and solar farms to meet net zero.

“They have conceded privately that that was a mistake,” Sir Chris said in a presentation seen by this newspaper. In contrast, the Royal Society review examined 37 years worth of weather data.

Last week Sir Chris, an emeritus professor and former director of energy research at Oxford University, said that the remarks to which he was referring were made by Chris Stark, the Climate Change Committee’s chief executive. He said: “Might be best to say that Chris Stark conceded that my comment that the CCC relied on modelling that only uses a single year of weather data … is ‘an entirely valid criticism’.”

The CCC said that Sir Chris’s comments, in a presentation given in a personal capacity in October, following the publication of his review, related solely to a particular report it published last year on how to deliver “a reliable decarbonised power system”.

The article at WattsUpWithThat concludes:

It is now clear that Parliament authorised Net Zero without any proper assessment, whether financial or energy, and the whole Net Zero legislation must now be suspended until a full independent assessment is carried out.

In addition, the whole of the CC should now be disbanded. Unfortunately it is still required by law, but it should now be staffed by truly independent members, with a remit to prioritise energy security and cost/benefit goals. The ideological pursuit of Net Zero must not override the wellbeing of the British public, put its energy security at risk or make the public worse off.

But the current and past members of the CCC who have overseen this attempt to bamboozle and defraud the public must be held to account, and excluded from any further influence over the country’s energy policy, or indeed on any issue of public policy.

So why are we even thinking about doing some of the things we are doing to bring down carbon?

While Everyone Was Talking About Jeffrey Epstein…

While everyone was focused on Jeffrey Epstein, President Trump released a summary report of the election fraud that took place in 2020. This is a summary of the evidence that would have been revealed in court had any court agreed to hear the evidence. Unfortunately, our American courts declined to hear any evidence of election fraud in 2020. The evidence was never refuted–it was simply never heard. Why is this important? It is important because it is going to happen again in 2024 unless someone is held accountable.

This is the link to the report:

https://cdn.nucleusfiles.com/e0/e04e630c-63ff-4bdb-9652-e0be3598b5d4/summary20of20election20fraud20in20the20swing20states.pdf

The states mentioned in the report are Georgia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Michigan. Certain districts in these states were carefully chosen to use mules, ballot harvesting, and simple fraud to steal the election. The report is very interesting reading.

2024 Is Going To Be An Interesting Year

Will 2024 be the year when Americans get their total freedoms back? I hope so. The Internet is heavily censored now–the research I used to be able to do in about 30 minutes now takes about an hour and a half due to censorship. I like my gas stove and my gasoline car. I would also rather eat beef than bugs.

On December 30th, Sharyl Attkisson posted an article at The Epoch Times about the continuing effort to silence President Trump. The problem is that President Trump is saying things that agree with the ideas of a majority of the American people.

The article reports:

Donald Trump has been slandered and libeled thousands of times.

Each time a news reporter, media commentator, or judge refers to Trump as an “insurrectionist,” or claims he’s guilty of “insurrection,” it’s another blatant case of defamation. Same with the other Jan. 6 attendees and participants.

Insurrection is a serious federal crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison under Title 18 U.S. Code 2383. Even with Trump’s enemies in charge at the Department of Justice and other law enforcement bodies, and with all of the scheming and operations they’ve mounted against him, nobody has convicted him of “insurrection.” Under our system of governing, no judge or election authority has the power to unilaterally accuse and convict any American of a crime, let alone with the accused denied any opportunity to present a defense or to appeal.

Yet that’s just what’s happening when courts and officials in Maine and Colorado remove President Trump from presidential election primary ballots for “insurrection.” It’s the ultimate defamation. And many are supporting it because, well, they don’t like President Trump.

Looking at the evidence today, it’s reasonable to hypothesize that, among all the other conspiracies President Trump’s enemies devised, they also conspired in advance to set up his Jan. 6, 2021, rally and the U.S. Capitol breach that followed as an “insurrection” that could serve as their insurance policy to provide grounds to keep him from ever running for president again.

The article concludes:

The real meaning of what’s being done to President Trump is this: They think he’s going to win. He’s like Christmas, and his enemies are like the Grinch. Despite the impeachments, improper wiretapping, censorship, intel agency conspiracies, criminal charges, civil lawsuits, and turncoats operating against him on the inside—President Trump’s popularity has increased. They haven’t stopped him from coming to the fore in 2024. He came! He came without Twitter. He came without Facebook. He came without Snapchat or Discord or Stripe. Somehow or other, he came just the same!

Pulling President Trump off ballots is the establishment’s latest attempt to censor a candidate that they clearly believe will win—if the people are left to decide. We’ve reached a dangerous and scary point when so many are willing to look the other way because their preferred candidate isn’t the one under attack.

To end where we began—President Trump potentially has actionable defamation claims against all those who continue to label him an insurrectionist. That includes judges on the Colorado Supreme Court and Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows. But that’s likely not a battle he could win. The 2024 race? That’s another matter.

Follow The Money

On Friday, CNBC reported that the U.S. government has decided not to pursue further charges against FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried.

The article reports:

  • Prosecutors have decided against pursuing a second trial against disgraced FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried.
  • In a note to Judge Lewis Kaplan on Friday, the U.S. government said that much of the evidence that would have been presented had already been submitted during the first trial.
  • In November, following a month’s worth of testimony from nearly 20 witnesses, a jury found the former FTX chief executive guilty of all seven criminal counts against him.

The article notes:

The second trial, which had been slated to start in March, addressed an additional set of criminal counts, including conspiracy to bribe foreign officials, conspiracy to commit bank fraud, conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business and substantive securities fraud and commodities fraud. 

Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, wrote in the letter to the Court that “a second trial would not affect the United States Sentencing Guidelines range for the defendant, because the Court can already consider all of this conduct as relevant conduct when sentencing him for the counts that he was found guilty of at the initial trial.”

I suppose it is just an incredible coincidence that after Sam Bankman-Fried donated $100 million in stolen customer funds to US politicians, the US Government announced they’re dropping six charges against SBF and will not prosecute him for a political campaign finance violation. Any guesses on what the second trial would reveal about campaign finance violations and the people who received funds illegally?

 

As The Evidence Mounts

As the evidence mounts that the Biden family had very large inexplicable sources of income during Joe Biden’s political career, the family, the media, and the Democrat party are struggling to explain exactly what was going on. On Thursday, The Hill posted an article with the latest explanation/justification.

The article, by Jonathan Turley, explains:

As the House of Representatives goes into high gear in its impeachment proceedings (and possible contempt resolution against Hunter Biden), the Biden family legal problems continue to mount. In one week, it was revealed that President Biden’s brother James was caught on an FBI audiotape in a corruption investigation, while Ashley Biden, the president’s daughter, is now also facing demands for unpaid taxes.

James Biden is expected to appear before the House for questioning in the coming weeks. The appearance may solidify a new line of defense for the Bidens: that they are harmless grifters.

After years of denying influence peddling with the help of an obligating media, even some Democrats are now admitting that Hunter and his uncles have been selling influence. Biden associates confirmed that Joe Biden was the brand that they were peddling to foreign clients, who paid millions to the family.

The article also notes:

The greater problem facing the White House is that roughly 70 percent of voters (including 40 percent of Democrats) believes that President Biden acted illegally or unethically, or both. Even Hunter’s friend Archer said that the president’s denials of knowledge were “categorically false.” Other witnesses, such as Tony Bobulinski, have stated under oath that they personally spoke to Joe Biden about these dealings.

This is likely why defenders are now failing back on the claim that the Bidens may have been grifting, but not actually selling out. It was an act put on for corrupt marks wanting to buy an advantage. That is why the Biden team immediately said that James Biden took $100,000 but then did nothing to deliver his brother.

It is becoming very obvious that Joe Biden is not the model of an honest office-holder. However, since almost all of these actions were done when he was Vice-President, I don’t see their relevance to impeachment. I haven’t seen any actual evidence that he is currently crooked. Admittedly, you can draw that conclusion based on his past actions, but that really isn’t good enough. The Democrats made impeachment a joke. The Republicans need to avoid doing the same thing.

It May Be A While Before This Is Reported In The Mainstream Media–If Ever

On Wednesday, News Addicts reported the following:

Italy’s top health official is under criminal investigation for mass murder for his actions during the pandemic that allegedly resulted in the nation’s soaring Covid vaccine-related deaths.

Roberto Speranza served as the Italian Health Minister between September 2019 and October 2022, overseeing the pandemic and the Covid vaccine rollout.

However, evidence has now emerged to suggest that Speranza knew that the Covid mRNA shots were dangerous to public health but concealed the information and pushed the national rollout anyway.

Speranza is under investigation for mass homicide after emails reveal that from the very start of the vaccinations, he knew the shots were killing people and gave orders to local health authorities to conceal deaths and serious side effects.

According to investigators, he covered up the information in order to reassure Italian citizens that the injections were “safe and effective” and to not jeopardize the vaccination campaign.

“He knew the shots were killing people and gave orders to local health authorities to conceal deaths and serious side effects,” according to Vigilant News.

You can debate whether or not the shots actually worked–it seems as if the CDC had to change to definition of ‘vaccine’ to call the Covid shot a vaccine, so there have been questions all along. However, the problem is hiding information from the public that the public needed in order to make an informed decision as to whether or not to get the shot. There are a lot of stories coming out about people harmed by the vaccine, but there are also a lot of people who took the vaccine seemingly without having a problem.

Again, the problem is the withholding of information from the public. The public has a right to know about possible side effects of any drug or medical procedure they are asked to take.

Hopefully This Will Uncover The Truth

On July 10, 2016, Seth Rich was murdered in Washington, D.C. He was shot twice in the back. The police dismissed it as a botched robbery, but there are some legitimate questions regarding his death.

On Wednesday, The Gateway Pundit posted the following headline:

BIG NEWS: Federal Judge Orders FBI to Hand Over Evidence in Former DNC Employee Seth Rich’s Murder Case within 14 Days

It was rumored at the time that Seth Rich was the source for the information about the Democrat Party posted at Wikileaks. Julian Paul Assange, the founder of Wikileaks has been in prison for four years after being removed from Ecuador’s London embassy and arrested by British police.

The article reports:

Clevenger (Attorney Ty Clevenger) has been attempting to get to the bottom of who supplied the DNC and Podesta emails to the DNC for several years now.  This was always the key to the Russia collusion nightmare.  If Russia didn’t supply emails to WikiLeaks (the FBI has never asked WikiLeaks who supplied the emails by the way) then the Russia collusion story was built on a lie.

After years of denying they had anything related to Seth Rich, the FBI and DOJ were caught lying over and over again.  In September, a judge finally demanded the FBI and DOJ provide all they had in regard to Seth Rich and the FBI responded requesting another 66 years before releasing the information.

Now, a Federal Judge has just ruled the FBI must hand over evidence regarding former DNC employee Seth Rich’s murder.
The article concludes:

The lack of details regarding Rich’s death has left many people puzzled.

According to authorities, Rich died from a “botched” robbery attempt, and his murderer has never been found.

In recent years, it has been reported by outlets that Rich made himself a target after he allegedly leaked DNC emails to WikiLeaks before his sudden death.

Previously, the FBI prevented a FOIA request relating to Rich’s death.

 

 

Keeping Elections Honest

On Wednesday, The Connecticut Examiner posted an article about the results of a Bridgeport, Connecticut, primary election being overturned by a judge due to voter fraud.

The article reports:

A judge ruled on Wednesday to overturn the city’s Democratic primary election, initially won by incumbent Mayor Joe Ganim, following claims of absentee ballot fraud by his opponent, John Gomes.

After two weeks of evidentiary hearings for Gomes’s absentee ballot fraud lawsuit, Judge William Clark ordered a new Democratic primary based on 180 pieces of evidence presented by Gomes’s legal counsel.

In the 37-page ruling, Clark said the video footage presented by Bill Bloss – Gomes’s attorney – was particularly alarming.

“Mr. Ganim was also correct to be ‘shocked’ at what he saw on the video clips in evidence that were shown to him while he was on the witness stand,” Clark wrote. “The videos are shocking to the court and should be shocking to all the parties.

Ganim was one the many city officials called to the Fairfield Judicial District Superior Courthouse for questioning, along with Wanda Geter-Pataky, vice chair of the Bridgeport Democratic Town Committee and operations specialist for the city, and Eneida Martinez, a former City Council member accused by Gomes of stuffing ballot dropboxes.

At the witness stand, Ganim told the court he was “shocked” by an 18-minute video – subpoenaed by Gomes from Bridgeport police – that appeared to show 12 instances of Geter-Pataky either depositing stacks of ballots herself or handing ballots to others from behind her reception desk, and four instances of Martinez dropping off ballots.

Asked about the footage during the hearings, both Geter-Pataky and Martinez asserted their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination . Ganim, who appeared to win the primary by 250 votes after a count of absentee ballots, denied any involvement in the alleged fraud.

There needs to be serious consequences for voter fraud. That is the only way that it will be stopped. This was a primary election where the Democrat party wanted to make sure their candidate won. Is there any doubt that they would do this is a major election?

When You Don’t Have The Evidence, Make It Up!

I haven’t written a lot about the impeachment farce currently going on in Washington because, frankly, I don’t think it is worth my time. It won’t change anyone’s mind or opinion about Donald Trump, and if the truth is told, it will probably damage the Democrat party. It seems as if the evidence the House Impeachment Managers have been presenting is not all accurate. Videos are edited, quotes are edited, and even Tweets are shown in a way that is misleading.

Just the News posted an article yesterday about one incident.

The article reports:

The author of a tweet introduced by Democrats at the Senate impeachment trial said Thursday her statement “we are bringing the Calvary” was a clear reference to a prayer vigil organized by churchgoers supporting Trump and not a call for military-like violence at the Capitol riot as portrayed by Rep. Eric Swalwell.

Jennifer Lynn Lawrence also said she believes the California Democrat and House impeachment manager falsified her tweet, adding a blue check mark to the version he introduced at the trial suggesting she was a verified Twitter user with more clout when in fact her Twitter account never had a blue check and has never been verified.

“I noticed when they put my tweet on the screen that all of a sudden my tweet had a blue checkmark next to it,” she said during an interview on the John Solomon Reports podcast. “… This way, if he entered that into congressional testimony, it’s a verified account, and it has, it could be applicable in law. Secondly, he wanted to show that my Twitter account had more gravitas than it actually did. He wanted to show that the president was trying to use me to bring in the cavalry.”

The person who introduced the Tweet as evidence evidently was not up on his/her spelling:

Lawrence, a Christian conservative activist and former Breitbart writer, said her tweet on Jan. 3 carefully chose the religious word “Calvary” — which means a public display of Christ’s crucifixion — as a reference to a prayer vigil they were hosting in Washington, and Swalwell distorted it to convey she was organizing a military cavalry, which is spelled differently and means a military brigade on horses.

That seems like a significant distinction.

The article concudes:

Lawrence’s account was backed up by a Christian church pastor, Brian Gibson, who was accompanying Lawrence and other activists on their trip to Washington at the time she wrote the tweet.

“I was sitting on the bus, and I saw Calvary come through,” Gibson told Just the News. “I went back to them, and specifically said, ‘Hey, guys, you spelt Calvary wrong, right?’ This is what I do for a living. I’m a preacher of the gospel. I’m a theology major, so that jumped off the page at me, and words matter, and I want them to be correct. And she said, ‘No pastor, I meant it. We meant to write Calvary like that. Because we were standing up for God, preaching the gospel. We have you ministers here that are going to be praying and leading people to Christ. And so that’s what that’s what we mean.”

Gibson, a religious freedom advocate, said he believes Swalwell badly served the trial, the country and Lawrence by falsely interpreting her meaning without checking,

“We’ve all learned a lesson in due diligence here, giving someone the benefit of the doubt,” he said. “And I think what we’re seeing, John, is a political witch hunt, where people have not crossed their t’s, dotted their i’s. And it’s the wrong way for some of our highest elected officials in the land to behave themselves. So I’m praying for Jennifer, I’m praying for everybody that has been put in harm’s way by this reckless behavior.”

I suspect the Swalwell was not the only Democrat who bought into the various lies included in the highly edited evidence brought forth in the trial.