Legal Insurrection

McConnell Rejects Schumer’s Call for New Witnesses

Published by Papa Giorgio

LEGAL INSURRECTION quoting Axios:

“We don’t create impeachments, Mr. President. We judge them. 

“The House chose this road. It is their duty to investigate. It’s their duty to meet the very high bar for undoing a national election. As Speaker Pelosi herself once said, it is the House’s obligation to, quote, ‘build an ironclad case to act.’

“If they fail, they fail. It is not the Senate’s job to leap into the breach and search desperately for ways to get to guilty. That would hardly be impartial justice.”

— Sen. McConnell

Alan Dershowitz and Joe DiGenova Discuss Mueller Investigation

Published by Papa Giorgio

(Via the LAST REFUGE) Alan Dershowitz and Joe diGenova appeared tonight on Sean Hannity to discuss the ramifications to the political FBI raid on Michael Cohen’s office and residence along with the ongoing Special Counsel Robert Mueller investigation. Additionally, they discussed fired FBI Director James Comey and current Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

LEGAL INSURRECTION uses the NYT commentary to note what is being given up:

There isn’t much of a pretense anymore that the Mueller investigation is about alleged Russian campaign collusion.

Maybe it started out about collusion, but it veered off course within a couple of months, when Mueller decided that Paul Manafort needed to be investigated for conduct many years ago having nothing to do with the campaign, or even Russia. Rod Rosenstein created the paperwork in early August 2017 to retroactively expand Mueller’s investigation and justify Mueller conduct that already had taken place.

The raid on Trump personal attorney Michael Cohen’s law office by the U.S. Attorney’s office in the Southern District of New York, was at the referral of Mueller, and signed off by Rosenstein. That raid was a frontal assault on Trump’s business and personal history.

If reporting is accurate, the records seized concerned not just payments to Stormy Daniels, but also the Access Hollywood tape revealed during the campaign. It’s fair to assume that a wide range of records going beyond those salacious topics were grabbed by the FBI, including Trump’s other personal and business dealings over a long period of time.

The seizure of Cohen’s records surely goes more directly to taking down Trump for conduct unrelated to the campaign much less Russian collusion.

The NY Times Editorial Board is honest about the goal, The Law Is Coming, Mr. Trump:

Mr. Trump has spent his career in the company of developers and celebrities, and also of grifters, cons, sharks, goons and crooks. He cuts corners, he lies, he cheats, he brags about it, and for the most part, he’s gotten away with it, protected by threats of litigation, hush money and his own bravado. Those methods may be proving to have their limits when they are applied from the Oval Office. Though Republican leaders in Congress still keep a cowardly silence, Mr. Trump now has real reason to be afraid. A raid on a lawyer’s office doesn’t happen every day; it means that multiple government officials, and a federal judge, had reason to believe they’d find evidence of a crime there and that they didn’t trust the lawyer not to destroy that evidence….

Mr. Trump also railed against the authorities who, he said, “broke into” Mr. Cohen’s office. “Attorney-client privilege is dead!” the president tweeted early Tuesday morning, during what was presumably his executive time. He was wrong. The privilege is one of the most sacrosanct in the American legal system, but it does not protect communications in furtherance of a crime. Anyway, one might ask, if this is all a big witch hunt and Mr. Trump has nothing illegal or untoward to hide, why does he care about the privilege in the first place?

That last highlighted sentence is very instructive. Would the NY Times Editorial Board be willing to give up its attorney-client privilege in litigation against the NY Times? If the NY Times has  nothing illegal or untoward to hide, why would it care about the privilege in the first place?……..

Behind The Crazy Headlines Trump Is Winning!

Published by Papa Giorgio

We’re back to the media cycle of a Trump

“bombshell” every 2-3 days to create a permanent

crisis news effect. But it’s all noise.

– L E G A L  I N S U R R E C T I O N –

All the fervor of hatred — really just people emoting on Trumps personality and how they don’t like it — is helping the conservative agenda win, in bigger leaps and bounds since Reagan. Keep it up Dems, you are helping us! Everyone will be talking about Steve Bannon. Good.

Rush Limbaugh reads some points made in this article by a left leaning columnist at Politico, warning his compatriots that the MSM and comedy shows railing on Trump’s buttons, hair, and other Tweets and misspoken points… much is being passed. Here is the article headline and link:

  • 55 Ways Donald Trump Structurally Changed America in 2017: These are the concrete actions his administration has taken to alter how the country works. (NEW YORK MAGAZINE)
  • 138 Things Trump Did This Year While You Weren’t Looking: Behind the crazy headlines, more conservative priorities got pushed through than most people realize. An exhaustive list of what really happened to the government in 2017. (POLITICO)

Veteran Kevin Tully Delivers A Stirring Defense Of The Second Amendment

Published by Papa Giorgio

Via Legal Insurrection (LI)

Meet Kevin Tully – Vet who passionately defended 2nd Amendment at anti-gun event

This past Sunday, at an anti-gun forum in the Chicago suburbs, veteran Kevin Tully stood up and delivered a defense of the Second amendments, and why men like him choose to go to war to defend those and other inalienable rights protected by our Bill of Rights.

The video has gone viral, as people have rallied around the impassioned defense offered by Tully:

Now, the thing I would like you to answer, sir. And I did go to war for this country….

And I went to war for your ability to have the First Amendment, to say what you stood up there and said today, to write what you want to write in your newspaper, and have whatever opinion you want to have. You can practice whatever religious freedoms you want. I would like you to answer the question, since you just said that one of the rights that I went to war over to defend, that is inalienable, to every American citizen. If this discussion was going on, about your First Amendment rights, would you still have the same opinion that we don’t need that any more either….

The threat of tyranny, today, is no less than at the turn of the century in 1900, in 1800, or in 1700!