29 posts from Friday, March 24, 2023

- What is your response to Bragg's response to you? You're breaching his sovereignty. - Well, they're saying we're interfering. How about they're interfering with a federal election? Remember, Maria, the Justice Department wasn't gonna bring this case. The previous district attorney, Cy Vance, wasn't going to bring this case, didn't bring this case. And even Alvin Bragg himself, when he first gets elected, said there's no way I'd bring this case. I can't put Michael Cohen on the witness stand. I can't have this guy who lied to Congress six times, who went to prison for lying. I can't bring this case. And then all of a sudden, he changes his mind. And what was the intervening event? President Trump announces he's running for president, and he's leading in every single poll. So I think that's what changed his mind, in addition to the two guys we want to talk to, Mr. Pomerance, Mr. Dunn, who were his assistants, and resigned when Alvin Bragg said he wasn't gonna bring the case, threw a pitch to fit, got the left all fired up, and now it looks like he is going to bring this case forward. So we want to talk to Mr. Pomerance, Mr. Dunn, find out exactly what was going on here. And we want the documents and communications. After all, federal money goes to this district attorney's office, and we're talking about the most important federal election we have, election for president of the United States.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

This is politicized, weaponized law enforcement by the Democrats, whether it's Jack Smith, Garland Special Counsel, Alvin Brad, the Manhattan DA, George Soros funded, Fannie Willis in Fulton County, Georgia. This is a coordinated Democrat effort to take out President Trump. And it's once again, Teflon Don's going to fight this back, fight these off, and it's backfiring on the Democrats.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Oh, it's disturbing to me. It's disturbing to every New Yorker, and importantly, it's disturbing to every American. If you look at polling, Kimberly, the vast majority of the American people see right through this. They understand that this is a politically motivated prosecution. This is a non-case. There's a reason why the Department of Justice, why the Southern District of New York, never took this case up, because there's no there there. It was what was considered, even by the Washington Post and the New York Times, a zombie case, meaning that there was no possibility to move it forward, because there was no evidence, and there was no crime committed. So it's the, as I said, the definition of political persecution doing Joe Biden's bidding. And at the same time, you have someone sitting in the White House who is compromised by China,

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

It is very obvious, it is very clear, it's transparent, Alvin Bragg had every intention of indicting Donald J. Trump this week, but for the second straight day, grand jury proceedings were canceled today. Now, Bragg is now telling Reuters that it was former President Donald Trump that created a false expectation of arrest. It was never actually going to happen according to Bragg, it seems. Really, after a multi-year investigation, the formation of a grand jury, the DA's meeting with law enforcement to coordinate an impending arrest of a former president, and we're supposed to believe that somehow Donald Trump created the false expectation of arrest. Now, the New York Times, they reported, of course, Pulitzer Prize winning group that they are, based on fake news, anyway, they reported that criminal charges against Trump were likely on March the 9th, that's when they first did it. Remember Maggie Haberman, a Pulitzer Prize winner for a story she got wrong in the Russian hoax? She was all over fake news CNN saying, "Yeah, it looks like it's going to happen." Well, that story was out nine days before Donald Trump even mentioned it on Truth Social, his platform. So I don't think it was Donald Trump that created the expectation, it was actually Bragg, the media mob, and his office probably leaking to the New York Times and probably others. And now it looks like Bragg is having trouble delivering on his campaign promise. He promised during the campaign that he would go after one man, Donald Trump, one company, the Trump organization, one family, the Trump family. And as most of you know by now, the DA's entire case relied on the testimony of a serial liar and a convicted felon by the name of Michael Cohen, and this week for the very first time the grand jury actually heard the truth about Cohen from somebody who's not a serial liar, who's not an ex-con, but we heard from his former legal advisor right here on this show, Bob Costello, and he blows Michael Cohen's story right out of the water. Take a look. What do you have on Donald Trump? And that's when he started with the same litany that he root used for the rest of the two hours. I swear to God, Bob, I don't have anything on Donald Trump. But the point is, when somebody is really thinking of committing suicide, and you're offering them a legal way out of this, if he had any information about Donald Trump, that would have been the one time, even for a serial liar like Michael Cohen, to fess up and say, "Well, I know this or that, because I want to save my own hide." But he didn't do that. Michael Cohen, who, as I said before, was pacing back and forth, would suddenly stop in the middle of whatever he was talking about and turn and point his finger at us and say, "I want you guys to understand, I will do whatever the F I have to do. I will never spend a day in jail." He said that at least 10 to 20 times during that two-hour period. It was a bizarre mantra, but it made it clear to us that Michael Cohen was saying, "I will die, cheat, steal, shoot someone. I will never spend a day in jail." Wow. Powerful testimony. That happened this week. Now, Cohen said to Costello, "Many times I have nothing on Donald Trump." And not only did Costello destroy the credibility of the state's star witness, Cohen, but Cohen himself completely contradicts the state's case. Look at this newly uncovered document. This is from 2018. This is from Michael Cohen's own lawyer to the FEC, quote, "In a private transaction in 2016 before the U.S. presidential election, Mr. Cohen used his own personal funds to facilitate a payment of $130,000 to Ms. Stephanie Clifford. Neither the Trump organization or the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford." So, is Cohen lying under oath now or during that statement to the FEC? Now, of course, at the very center of the case is a completely legal, what's called an NDA, over an alleged affair from 2007. There is zero evidence whatsoever that the Trump campaign paid for this NDA. As a matter of fact, Cohen says they did not. There's no evidence they played a role in the NDA. In fact, there's no evidence that the affair in question ever took place. People can believe what they want, but there's no evidence of it. According to the Washington Post, of all places, Stormy Daniels denied the affair multiple times, including in writing on January 30th, 2018. This is a letter that was obtained by TMZ. Take a look at your screen. Quote, "I am not denying this affair because I was paid, quote, hush money. I am denying this affair because it never happened." Even Stormy Daniels' former lawyer, JustinInNews.com, John Solomon, Breaking Tonight, Michael Alvanati, he's in prison, but he's tweeting in prison. I can't figure that one out, but he's tweeted out that many critical pieces of evidence have yet to see the light of day will be very damaging to the prosecution. So let me get this straight. The DA in Manhattan, Alvin Bragg, dedicated thousands of hours, millions of tax dollars to a case surrounding a legal NDA over an alleged affair from 2007 that both parties deny based on allegations from a serial liar convicted felon, Michael Cohn, who is hell-bent on getting revenge against his former boss. Now, a low-level felony that is so weak, so convoluted, and possibly even outside the statute of limitations that a grand jury in deep blue New York City might very well and seems to be rejecting it. Now keep in mind, you can indict a ham sandwich in a grand jury. You don't need a unanimous verdict, and only the prosecution gets to present evidence. In other words, the defense gets zero opportunity to even speak to the grand jury, let alone present any evidence that they have. And it appears that Bragg has failed to pass that very, very, very low bar. In this case, it seems he can't indict a ham sandwich. Now this is humiliating, sorry, can't resist, this is humiliating for the DA's office and infuriating for the people of New York. Bragg wasted precious time and resources over a political hit job that probably won't ever see the light of day while very real criminals, violent criminals, are roaming the streets of New York City every day.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

I am officially running for president of the United States but he actually win No freaking way. Which republican candidate has the best chance of winning the general election? Donald Trump There's not gonna be a president Donald Trump. Trump will not be president. Trump will never be elected president United States You're not gonna be president. A man who will never be president of the United States Donald Trump is not going to be president of the United States. Take it to the bank. He will never be president Donald Trump is not going to become president of the United States She's at plus 19. Do you think the tapes made a difference? Of course! They made all the difference. This race is over Hillary Clinton has raised more than double Donald Trump vastly outspending him. The presidency at about 89% for Hillary Clinton Your analytical model has never been wrong. Now projects Hillary Clinton to win presidential election 100% chance. Do you still think she has a 100% chance of winning the election? I do! And what would Donald Trump have to do to turn things around? Prayer and hope for a Festivus miracle This is CNN's coverage of election night in America. The fight for the presidency We don't care. Okay, have Kentucky. Who cares? No, we don't care about Indiana. Don't care. Indiana with West Virginia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Mississippi, South Carolina, Alabama, Kansas, Nebraska and Wyoming with its vote North Dakota and South Dakota, Texas Up and down the middle of the country. All red. Arkansas, Louisiana, the state of Montana, Missouri It was at 80% an hour ago for Clinton. What is it now? 68% Okay, God damn it, I'm nervous. Oh, hold, hold, hold. Ohio, gone. Okay, yeah, I don't see a fucking landslide here. I don't see it at all North Carolina God damn it, if we need Florida, are you shitting me? Florida It is fucking panic time Georgia Donald Trump, now the favorite to win the presidency Iowa New York Times now has it at 95% chance Utah And still win, but in order to do so, she has to win Wisconsin Wisconsin God damn it Fuck Arizona Alaska Pennsylvania Michigan What a night

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

There is a passion for this to happen on the left. But you argue, rightfully so, this is against the Constitution of our country. - I have never seen a case in my 60 years of practice which has so many holes in it. Start with the statute of limitations. It's seven years before he committed the crime. The New York State statute says the only exception for that is if his whereabouts were unknown. I have to tell you, even Bragg could have found him. He was in the White House. He's the easiest-- (audience clapping) And you went out to New York. Well, there are photographs of him. At his house on the street, he was not continuously out of New York. I don't see how you can twist and turn to make the statute of limitations disappear. And then you have all the other. How many holes are there? Shall I count the ways to count to quote the poet? I have never seen a weaker case. And in the end, I really do think Bragg is worried about his own bar card. I think he's worried that if he brings this case and he uses a witness who he has to know is lying, there are gonna be investigations of him and there should be investigations. He holds an office that was held by Bob Morgenthau, Frank Hogan, some of the great prosecutors in history, and he is disgracing that office by bringing this case. So I hope he comes to his senses, doesn't bring this case. In my book, Get Trump, you know, I named the book. I didn't make up the name. This, the name was made up by Letitia James and by Bragg. They were the ones who campaigned on the promise of Get Trump. - That's not justice, isn't it, Professor? It's not justice. Greg, let me bring you in. And I'm asking you to speculate on this, but the grand jury not showing up today, why did that happen? And reports of chaos in Bragg's office. I believe they probably are true. That's my guess. I don't know for sure. - Yeah, I think it is true. And, you know, of course, the mainstream media, which spent the last several days salivating over an imminent Trump indictment today, was crestfallen when they found out, wait a minute, all of a sudden, the grand jury proceedings have come to a halt. I think a couple of things are happening here, Sean. You put your finger on one of them. And that is that there is a revolt in the district attorney's office, dissension in the ranks. Top senior experienced prosecutors are angry about this. They see it for what it is, a politically motivated witch hunt, a convoluted Looney Tunes legal theory that has no merit. Bragg contorted the law, twisted the evidence because he hates Donald Trump. But I think the other thing that is afoot here is the grand jury itself. Alan put his finger on it last night when we were talking about it. You know, I think all of a sudden the grand jurors, after Bob Costello's testimony on Monday, are saying to themselves, wait a minute, are we getting snoockered in sandbag by Alan Bragg? Costello comes in here and says, Michael Cohen, who Bragg's relying on, is the biggest liar in the world, a prodigious, inveterate liar who cannot be trusted. And also, I think they were probably taken aback by the fact that Bragg appears to have been hiding hundreds of documents and emails from them. That's exculpatory evidence. And they have a right to see that. And so it doesn't surprise me the reports that he's having trouble convincing now the grand jurors to indict.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.