For independent global news, visit Democracy Now!
For a newsletter about the history behind today’s politics, subscribe to Heather Cox Richardson’s newsletter, Letters from an American.
Monday, 1 April 2024:
Gag Order Against Trump Is Expanded to Bar Attacks on Judge’s Family. Donald Trump had in recent days targeted the daughter of Juan Merchan, the judge overseeing his criminal trial in Manhattan, in blistering social media posts. The New York Times, Jesse McKinley, Ben Protess, and William K. Rashbaum, Monday, 1 April 2024: “The New York judge overseeing Donald J. Trump’s criminal trial later this month expanded a gag order on Monday to bar the former president from attacking the judge’s family members, who in recent days have become the target of Mr. Trump’s abuse. Justice Juan M. Merchan last week issued an order prohibiting Mr. Trump from attacking witnesses, prosecutors, jurors and court staff, as well as their relatives. That order, however, did not cover Justice Merchan himself or the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, who brought the criminal case against the former president. And although the ruling issued on Monday still does not apply to the judge or the district attorney, Justice Merchan, granting a request from Mr. Bragg’s office, amended the gag order so that it does now cover their families. In his ruling, the judge cited recent attacks against his daughter, and rejected Mr. Trump’s argument that his statements were ‘core political speech.’ ‘This pattern of attacking family members of presiding jurists and attorneys assigned to his cases serves no legitimate purpose,’ Justice Merchan wrote. ‘It merely injects fear in those assigned or called to participate in the proceedings, that not only they, but their family members as well, are ‘fair game’ for defendant’s vitriol.’ Mr. Bragg’s office had asked the judge to clarify that their relatives were included, calling such protection ‘amply warranted.’ Noting Mr. Trump’s track record of issuing ‘threatening and alarming remarks,’ Mr. Bragg’s office warned of ‘the harms that those family members have suffered.’” See also, Trump ramps up attacks on judges, sparking concerns as criminal trial nears. The judge overseeing the criminal trial that will start April 15 issued an expanded gag order late Monday in response to some of the former president’s rhetoric. The Washington Post, Marianne LeVine, Clara Ence Morse, and Shayna Jacobs, Monday, 1 April 2024: “Former president Donald Trump is ramping up efforts to disparage judges overseeing his criminal and civil cases — reprising a long-standing strategy as a high-profile trial draws near and prompting growing concerns from legal experts and an an expanded gag order late Monday. The presumptive Republican presidential nominee’s approach, part of a broader election-year attempt to portray the judicial system as weaponized against him, was evident in a slew of attacks over the weekend. Such broadsides, which Trump has often lobbed without evidence for his claims, have raised worries about the safety of judges and threaten to undermine faith in the court system, some legal experts said Monday. Trump’s personal attacks against the daughter of the New York judge overseeing a hush money case prompted the judge to expand an existing gag order to include his family and the district attorney’s family.” See also, Judge expands gag order in Trump hush money case to include family members of the court, CNN Politics, Kara Scannell, Lauren del Valle, and Jeremy Herb, Monday, 1 April 2024: “The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s criminal hush money trial expanded a recently imposed gag order to include family members of the court and family members of the Manhattan district attorney, according to a late Monday ruling. In the ruling, which comes after Trump leveled comments against Judge Juan Merchan’s daughter in recent days, the judge issued a warning that Trump’s rhetoric threatens to instill fear in those who might be involved in the proceedings for their loved ones. ‘The average observer, must now, after hearing defendant’s recent attacks, draw the conclusion that if they become involved in these proceedings, even tangentially, they should worry not only for themselves, but for their loved ones as well,’ Merchan wrote. ‘Such concerns will undoubtedly interfere with the fair administration of justice and constitutes a direct attack on the Rule of Law itself.’ ‘It is no longer just a mere possibility or a reasonable likelihood that there exists a threat to the integrity of the judicial proceedings. The threat is very real. Admonitions are not enough, nor is reliance on self-restraint,’ he said.”
Trump Gets Bond Deal to Ward Off $454 Million Judgment, for Now. The guarantee means that New York’s attorney general will not be able to pursue Donald Trump’s assets and bank accounts until Mr. Trump’s appeals are settled. The New York Times, Ben Protess, Monday, 1 April 2024: “Former President Donald J. Trump averted a financial disaster on Monday, reaching a deal that will spare him from paying a $454 million judgment in his civil fraud case while he appeals the penalty. The lifeline came in the form of a bond that will prevent New York’s attorney general, who brought the lawsuit that led to the judgment, from collecting the $454 million until Mr. Trump’s appeal is resolved. The attorney general, Letitia James, accused Mr. Trump of fraudulently inflating his net worth by as much as $2 billion, and a judge ruled in her favor. Mr. Trump secured the bond after an appeals court last week granted his request to lower the bond amount, setting it at $175 million and staving off a financial crisis for Mr. Trump. He otherwise would have had to post a bond for the full $454 million, which his lawyers declared a ‘practical impossibility.’ Had he failed to do so, Ms. James could have frozen his bank accounts.” See also, Trump posts $175M bond to keep New York authorities from seizing his property, The Washington Post, Shayna Jacobs, Monday, 1 April 2024: “Donald Trump posted a $175 million bond on Monday to prevent New York authorities from seizing his assets, including properties such as Trump Tower, pending appeal of a civil fraud judgment against him of nearly a half-billion dollars. The former president’s posting of the bond was necessary to keep New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) from initiating legal steps to take over his properties. The bond arrangement was made with Knight Specialty Insurance Company, according to a court document. After a 10-week trial late last year, New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron found Trump, the Trump Organization, Trump’s adult sons and two former executives liable in February for using illegal tactics to knowingly cheat business partners to increase the company’s profits and savings.” See also, Donald Trump has posted a $175 million bond to avert asset seizure as he appeals New York fraud penalty, Associated Press, Michael R. Sisak and Jennifer Peltz, Monday, 1 April 2024: “Donald Trump posted a $175 million bond on Monday in his New York civil fraud case, halting collection of the more than $454 million he owes and preventing the state from seizing his assets to satisfy the debt while he appeals, according to a court filing. A New York appellate court had given the former president 10 days to put up the money after a panel of judges agreed last month to slash the amount needed to stop the clock on enforcement. The bond Trump is posting with the court now is essentially a placeholder, meant to guarantee payment if the judgment is upheld. If that happens, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee will have to pay the state the whole sum, which grows with daily interest. If Trump wins, he won’t have to pay the state anything and will get back the money he has put up now.”
The Church of Trump: How He’s Infusing Christianity Into His Movement. Ending many of his rallies with a churchlike ritual and casting his prosecutions as persecution, the former president is demanding–and receiving–new levels of devotion from Republicans. The New York Times, Michael C. Bender, Monday, 1 April 2024: “Long known for his improvised and volatile stage performances, former President Donald J. Trump now tends to finish his rallies on a solemn note. Soft, reflective music fills the venue as a hush falls over the crowd. Mr. Trump’s tone turns reverent and somber, prompting some supporters to bow their heads or close their eyes. Others raise open palms in the air or murmur as if in prayer. In this moment, Mr. Trump’s audience is his congregation, and the former president their pastor as he delivers a roughly 15-minute finale that evokes an evangelical altar call, the emotional tradition that concludes some Christian services in which attendees come forward to commit to their savior. ‘The great silent majority is rising like never before and under our leadership,’ he recites from a teleprompter in a typical version of the script. ‘We will pray to God for our strength and for our liberty. We will pray for God and we will pray with God. We are one movement, one people, one family and one glorious nation under God.’ The meditative ritual might appear incongruent with the raucous epicenter of the nation’s conservative movement, but Mr. Trump’s political creed stands as one of the starkest examples of his effort to transform the Republican Party into a kind of Church of Trump. His insistence on absolute devotion and fealty can be seen at every level of the party, from Congress to the Republican National Committee to rank-and-file voters. Mr. Trump’s ability to turn his supporters’ passion into piety is crucial to understanding how he remains the undisputed Republican leader despite guiding his party to repeated political failures and while facing dozens of felony charges in four criminal cases. His success at portraying those prosecutions as persecutions — and warning, without merit, that his followers could be targeted next — has fueled enthusiasm for his candidacy and placed him, once again, in a position to capture the White House.”
Continue reading Aftermath of the Trump Administration, April 2024:
Florida Court Allows 6-Week Abortion Ban, but Voters Will Get to Weigh In. The Florida Supreme Court found that the State Constitution’s privacy protections do not extend to abortion. But it also allowed a ballot question on whether to expand abortion access. The New York Times, Patricia Mazzei, Monday, 1 April 2024: “The Florida Supreme Court overturned decades of legal precedent on Monday in ruling that the State Constitution’s privacy protections do not extend to abortion, effectively allowing Florida to ban the procedure after six weeks of pregnancy. But in a separate decision released at the same time, the justices allowed Florida voters to decide this fall whether to expand abortion access. The court ruled 4 to 3 that a proposed constitutional amendment that would guarantee the right to abortion ‘before viability,’ usually around 24 weeks, could go on the November ballot.” See also, Florida Supreme Court allows one of the nation’s strictest abortion bans to take effect. The high court simultaneously ruled that a referendum enshrining abortion rights can go on the November ballot. The Washington Post, Caroline Kitchener, Lori Rozsa, and Beth Reinhard, Monday, 1 April 2024: “Florida’s conservative Supreme Court ruled Monday that the state’s constitution does not protect abortion rights, allowing one of the country’s strictest and most far-reaching abortion bans to take effect May 1. But in a separate decision, the high court also ruled that an amendment to enshrine abortion rights in the state’s constitution can go on the November ballot, for a vote that could undo the ban in a matter of months. Together, the two rulings will ensure that abortion is a major issue in Florida during the presidential election — with Floridians experiencing the realities of a six-week abortion ban for six months before they have the opportunity to cast a vote on the issue.” See also, Florida Supreme Court upholds state’s 15-week abortion ban, but voters will soon have a say, Associated Press, Brendan Farrington, Monday, 1 April 2024: “The Florida Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for the state to ban abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant, while also giving voters a chance to remove restrictions in November. The court, which was reshaped by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, ruled 6-1 to uphold the state’s ban on most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, meaning a ban on six weeks could soon take effect. But under a separate 4-3 ruling, the court allowed a ballot measure to go to voters that would enshrine abortion rights in Florida’s constitution. The court’s decisions could be pivotal in the presidential race and congressional contests this year by driving abortion-rights supporters to the polls. Since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022, voters in every state with an abortion-related ballot measure have favored the side backed by abortion rights supporters. The 15-week ban, signed by DeSantis in 2022, has been enforced while it was challenged in court. The six-week ban, passed by the Legislature last year, was written so that it would not take effect until a month after the 2022 law was upheld.”
Tuesday, 2 April 2024:
Trump Again Invokes ‘Blood Bath’ and Dehumanizes Migrants in Border Remarks. The former president has tried to stoke fear around immigration and border security throughout his 2024 campaign, as he has done in the past. The New York Times, Michael Gold and Anjali Huynh, Tuesday, 2 April 2024: “Former President Donald J. Trump again cast President Biden’s immigration record in violent and ominous terms on Tuesday, accusing him in two speeches in battleground states of creating a ‘border blood bath’ and once more using dehumanizing language to describe some migrants entering the country illegally. In a speech in Grand Rapids, Mich., Mr. Trump, flanked by law enforcement officers, reiterated his baseless claim that other countries were sending ‘prisoners, murderers, drug dealers, mental patients and terrorists, the worst they have’ to the United States. Immigration officials have said that most of the people crossing the border are members of vulnerable families escaping poverty and violence. Mr. Trump also used his speech, which lasted roughly 45 minutes, to defend his use of dehumanizing language to refer to immigrants accused of crimes. After referring to the man who the authorities say killed a 22-year-old nursing student in Georgia in February, Mr. Trump said: ‘Democrats said please don’t call them “animals.” I said, no, they’re not humans, they’re animals.’ Mr. Trump drew attention last month when, while discussing the U.S. auto industry, he predicted a ‘blood bath for the country’ should he lose in November. After critics accused him of stoking violence, Mr. Trump and his allies pointed back to Mr. Biden, insisting he was responsible for a ‘blood bath’ because of his immigration policies.” See also, Trump accuses Biden of causing a border ‘bloodbath’ as he escalates his immigration rhetoric, Associated Press, Joey Cappelletti, Jill Colvin, and Adriana Gomez Licon, Tuesday, 2 April 2024: “Donald Trump accused President Joe Biden of unleashing a ‘bloodbath’ at the U.S.-Mexico border Tuesday, escalating his inflammatory rhetoric as he campaigned in two Midwestern swing states likely to be critical to the outcome of the 2024 election. Trump, who has accused migrants of ‘poisoning the blood of the country’ and vowed to launch the largest domestic deportation operation in the nation’s history if he wins a second term, said Biden was allowing a ‘bloodbath’ that was ‘destroying the country.’ In Michigan, he referred to people in the U.S. illegally who are suspected of committing crimes as ‘animals,’ using dehumanizing language that those who study extremism have warned increases the risk of violence.”
Wednesday, 3 April 2024:
Judge Juan Merchan Won’t Delay Trump’s Manhattan Criminal Trial to Wait for Immunity Ruling. The former president has asked the judge to push back his Manhattan criminal trial, slated to begin April 15, until after the Supreme Court decides whether he is immune from prosecution. The New York Times, Ben Protess and William K. Rashbaum, Wednesday, 3 April 2024: “The judge overseeing Donald J. Trump’s criminal case in Manhattan rejected his last-ditch bid to delay a trial beyond April 15, removing on Wednesday one of the final obstacles to the first prosecution of a former American president. Mr. Trump, who is accused of covering up a sex scandal surrounding the 2016 presidential campaign, had asked the judge to delay the trial until after the Supreme Court rules on whether he is immune from prosecution over official acts he took while president. That issue arose in another of his criminal cases, and the Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments this month, but might not rule until June. The judge in the Manhattan case, Juan M. Merchan, ruled that his trial did not need to wait for the Supreme Court. He denied Mr. Trump’s effort as ‘untimely,’ ruling that he had failed to request the delay by a legal deadline. The judge said the request’s timing — just weeks before the trial was set to start — also raised ‘real questions about the sincerity and actual purpose of the motion.’ He added: ‘The circumstances, viewed as a whole, test this court’s credulity.'” See also, Judge rejects Donald Trump’s request to delay hush-money trial until Supreme court rules on immunity, Associated Press, Michael R. Sisak, Wednesday, 3 April 2024: “A judge on Wednesday rejected Donald Trump’s bid to delay his April 15 hush money criminal trial until the Supreme Court rules on presidential immunity claims he raised in another of his criminal cases — spurning another of the former president’s ploys to put off the historic trial. Several more are pending. Manhattan Judge Juan M. Merchan declared the request untimely, ruling that Trump’s lawyers had ‘myriad opportunities’ to raise the immunity issue before they finally did so last month, well after a deadline for pretrial motions had already passed. The timing of the defense’s March 7 filing ‘raises real questions about the sincerity and actual purpose of the motion,’ Merchan wrote in a six-page decision.”
Frustrated Federal Prosecutors Ask Trump Documents Judge Aileen Cannon to Act on Key Claim. The push for a quick decision on one of the former president’s most far-fetched claims is an unusual and risky move in a case Cannon has allowed to become bogged down. The New York Times, Alan Feuer, Wednesday, 3 April 2024: “In an open display of frustration, federal prosecutors on Tuesday night told the judge overseeing former President Donald J. Trump’s classified documents case that a ‘fundamentally flawed’ order she had issued was causing delays and asked her to quickly resolve a critical dispute about one of Mr. Trump’s defenses — leaving them time to appeal if needed. The unusual and risky move by the prosecutors, contained in a 24-page filing, signaled their mounting impatience with the judge, Aileen M. Cannon, who has allowed the case to become bogged down in a logjam of unresolved issues and curious procedural requests. It was the most directly prosecutors have confronted Judge Cannon’s legal reasoning and unhurried pace, which have called into question whether a trial will take place before the election in November even though both sides say they could be ready for one by summer. In their filing, prosecutors in the office of the special counsel, Jack Smith, all but begged Judge Cannon to move the case along and make a binding decision about one of Mr. Trump’s most brazen claims: that he cannot be prosecuted for having taken home a trove of national security documents after leaving office because he transformed them into his own personal property under a law known as the Presidential Records Act. The prosecutors derided that assertion as one ‘not based on any facts,’ adding that it was a ‘justification that was concocted more than a year after’ Mr. Trump left the White House. ‘It would be pure fiction,’ the prosecutors wrote, ‘to suggest that highly classified documents created by members of the intelligence community and military and presented to the president of the United States during his term in office were purely private.'” See also, Trump special counsel Jack Smith fires back at Judge Aileen Cannon’s order that could disrupt the case. Smith says Cannon’s legal premise on the Presidential Records Act ‘is wrong,’ and he urges her to rule in classified documents case so he can appeal. The Washington Post, Perry Stein and Devlin Barrett, Wednesday, 3 April 2024: “Special counsel Jack Smith warned the judge overseeing Trump’s classified documents case that she is pursuing a legal premise that ‘is wrong’ and said he would probably appeal to a higher court if she rules that a federal records law can protect the former president from prosecution. In a late-night legal filing Tuesday, Smith’s office pushed back hard against an unusual instruction from U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon — one that veteran national security lawyers and former judges have said badly misinterprets the Presidential Records Act and laws related to classified documents. Smith’s filing represents the most stark and high-stakes confrontation yet between the judge and the prosecutor, illustrating the extent to which a ruling by Cannon that legitimizes the PRA as a defense could eviscerate the historic case, one of four Trump is facing as he again runs for president. The special counsel repeatedly said that he probably would appeal such a ruling, potentially delaying the classified documents trial well beyond November’s presidential election.” See also, Prosecutors in Trump’s classified documents case sharply rebuke Judge Aileen Cannon’s unusual and ‘flawed’ order, Associated Press, Eric Tucker, Wednesday, 3 April 2024: “Federal prosecutors chided the judge presiding over former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case in Florida, warning her off potential jury instructions that they said rest on a ‘fundamentally flawed legal premise.’ In an unusual order, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon had asked prosecutors and defense lawyers to formulate proposed jury instructions for most of the charges even though it remains unclear when the case might reach trial. She asked the lawyers to respond to two different scenarios in which she appeared to accept the Republican ex-president’s argument that he was entitled under a statute known as the Presidential Records Act to retain the sensitive documents he is now charged with possessing. The order surprised legal experts and alarmed special counsel Jack Smith’s team, which said in a filing late Tuesday that the 1978 law — which requires presidents to return presidential records to the government upon leaving office but permits them to retain purely personal ones — has no relevance in a case concerning highly classified documents like the ones Trump is alleged to have stored at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida. Those records, prosecutors said, were clearly not personal and there is no evidence Trump ever designated them as such. They said that the suggestion he did so was ‘invented’ only after it became public that he had taken with him to Mar-a-Lago after his presidency boxes of records from the White House and that none of the witnesses they interviewed in the investigation support his argument.”
Exclusive: Trump Media saved in 2022 by Russian-American under criminal investigation, Trump’s social media company went public relying partly on loans from trust managed by person of interest to prosecutors. The Guardian, Hugo Lowell, Wednesday, 3 April 2024: “Donald Trump’s social media company Trump Media managed to go public last week only after it had been kept afloat in 2022 by emergency loans provided in part by a Russian-American businessman under scrutiny in a federal insider-trading and money-laundering investigation. The former US president stands to gain billions of dollars – his stake is currently valued at about $4bn – from the merger between Trump Media and Technology Group and the blank-check company Digital World Acquisition Corporation, which took the parent company of Truth Social public. But Trump Media almost did not make it to the merger after regulators opened a securities investigation into the merger in 2021 and caused the company to burn through cash at an extraordinary rate as it waited to get the green light for its stock market debut.”
What I Saw Working at The National Enquirer During Donald Trump’s Rise. Inside the notorious ‘catch and kill’ campaign that now stands at the heart of the former president’s legal trial. The New York Times Magazine, Lachlan Cartwright, Wednesday, 3 April 2024: “On Tuesday, April 4, 2023, I was outside Manhattan criminal court. It was a sunny spring day, and the Secret Service and the Police Department had blocked off the streets with barricades. The sidewalks were clogged with news crews from around the world. Supporters of Donald Trump roamed a pen that was set up to house them. Eventually, the former president was rushed out of the courthouse after being charged by Alvin Bragg, the district attorney of Manhattan, with 34 counts of falsifying business records. His convoy departed to cheers from fans. I pulled up the indictment and the statement of facts on my iPhone. At the center of the case is the accusation that Trump took part in a scheme to turn The National Enquirer and its sister publications into an arm of his 2016 presidential campaign. The documents detailed three ‘hush money’ payments made to a series of individuals to guarantee their silence about potentially damaging stories in the months before the election. Because this was done with the goal of helping his election chances, the case implied, these payments amounted to a form of illegal, undisclosed campaign spending. And, Bragg argued, because Trump created paperwork to make the payments seem like regular legal expenses, that amounted to a criminal effort at a coverup. Trump has denied the charges against him. The documents rattled off a number of seedy stories that would have been right at home in a venerable supermarket tabloid, had they actually been published. The subjects were anonymized but recognizable to anyone who had followed the story of Trump’s entanglement with The Enquirer. His affair with the porn star Stormy Daniels, of course, was the heart of it. There was also Karen McDougal, the Playboy Playmate of the Year in 1998, whose affair with Trump was similarly made to disappear, the payments for the rights to her story made to look like fees for writing a fitness column and appearing on magazine covers. (Trump has denied involvement with both women.) There were others that were lesser known, too, like Dino Sajudin, a former Trump World Tower doorman who claimed that Trump had a love child with one of the building’s employees; the story was never published, and Sajudin was paid $30,000 to keep quiet about it. For me, reading the indictment was like stepping through the looking glass, because it described a three-year period in my own professional life, one that I have come to deeply regret.”
Thursday, 4 April 2024:
Judge Aileen Cannon Rejects Trump Dismissal Effort in Classified Documents Case. Cannon ruled that the former president cannot escape prosecution by arguing that the Presidential Records Act allowed him to claim secret government material as his own property. The New York Times, Alan Feuer, Thursday, 4 April 2024: “A federal judge on Thursday rejected for now one of former President Donald J. Trump’s central efforts to dismiss charges that he had mishandled classified documents after leaving office. The judge, Aileen M. Cannon, ruled that Mr. Trump could not escape prosecution by arguing that he had converted the highly sensitive records he took from the White House into his personal property under a law known as the Presidential Records Act. In a terse three-page order, Judge Cannon said that the statute, which was put in place after the Watergate scandal to ensure that most records from a president’s time in office remained in the possession of the government, ‘does not provide a pretrial basis to dismiss’ the case. The decision was a victory of sorts for the special counsel, Jack Smith, who has persistently argued that the Presidential Records Act should have nothing to do with the criminal prosecution of a former president accused of removing national security documents from the White House and then obstructing efforts to retrieve them.” See also, Judge Aileen Cannon shoots down Trump’s presidential records act claim. Cannon also took aim at special counsel Jack Smith, suggesting his recent filing was ‘unprecedented and unjust.’ The Washington Post, Devlin Barrett and Perry Stein, Thursday, 4 April 2024: “U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon on Thursday rejected Donald Trump’s bid to have his charges of mishandling classified documents dismissed on the grounds that a federal records law protected him from prosecution. The judge also defended her handling of the issue, which had surprised legal experts and rankled prosecutors. Trump’s defense team argued that the Presidential Records Act (PRA) took priority over the Espionage Act when it came to highly classified documents that went to his private residence in Florida after his presidency. On Thursday, Cannon shot down that argument, saying the PRA ‘does not provide a pre-trial basis to dismiss’ either the mishandling charges or the related obstruction charges against Trump. By defusing a looming confrontation with prosecutors, Cannon’s ruling may clear a path for her to decide a host of other unresolved pretrial issues, including the most basic question of when the trial will be held. The dispute over the possible relevance of the PRA to this case had led some legal experts to worry that there was little chance the case would go to trial this year.” See also, Judge rejects Trump request to dismiss classified documents prosecution, Associated Press, Eric Tucker, Thursday, 4 April 2024: “A federal judge refused Thursday to throw out the classified documents prosecution of Donald Trump, turning aside defense arguments that a decades-old law permitted the former president to retain the sensitive records after he left office. Lawyers for Trump had cited a 1978 statute known as the Presidential Records Act in demanding that the case, one of four against the presumptive Republican nominee, be tossed out before trial. That law requires presidents upon leaving office to turn over presidential records to the federal government but permits them to retain purely personal papers. Trump’s lawyers have said he designated the records as personal, making them his own property, and that that decision can not be second-guessed in court. Prosecutors on special counsel Jack Smith’s team countered that the law had no relevance to a case concerning the mishandling of classified documents and said the files Trump is alleged to have hoarded at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida were unquestionably presidential records, not personal ones, and therefore had to be returned to the government when Trump left the White House. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who heard arguments on the dispute last month, permitted the case to proceed in a three-page order that rejected the Trump team claims. She wrote that the indictment makes ‘no reference to the Presidential Records Act’ nor does it ‘rely on that statute for purposes of stating an offense.’ The act, she said, ‘does not provide a pre-trial basis to dismiss’ the case.”
Georgia Judge Scott McAfee of Fulton county Superior Court Rejects Effort to Dismiss Trump Case on Free Speech Grounds. The defense had argued that some of the charges were based on statements Donald Trump and his co-defendants made in 2020 that were constitutionally protected. The New York Times, Richard Fausset and Danny Hakim, Thursday, 4 April 2024: “A judge in Atlanta on Thursday rejected an effort by former President Donald J. Trump and his co-defendants to have the Georgia criminal case against them dismissed on grounds that it was based on comments that were protected by the First Amendment. The case charges Mr. Trump and 14 of his supporters with taking part in a conspiracy to overturn his 2020 election loss in Georgia. Defense lawyers had argued that some of the charges were based on statements the co-defendants had made in a political context, which they said was constitutionally protected speech…. But the ruling on Thursday from Judge Scott McAfee, of Fulton County Superior Court, noted that ‘free speech — including political speech — is not without restriction. Even core political speech addressing matters of public concern is not impenetrable from prosecution if allegedly used to further criminal activity,’ Judge McAfee wrote.” See also, Judge Scott McAfee rejects Trump’s bid to dismiss Georgia case on free speech claim, The Washington Post, Holly Bailey, Thursday, 4 April 2024: “An Atlanta-area judge upheld criminal charges against former president Donald Trump and others in the Georgia election interference case, rejecting arguments from Trump and his co-defendants that the indictment criminalizes speech protected by the First Amendment. Trump and 14 others were indicted last August and accused of illegally conspiring to overturn Trump’s 2020 election loss in Georgia. Attorneys for Trump and others moved to dismiss the case, claiming the charges were based on statements that they argued were ‘core value political discourse’ and constitutionally protected speech. But in a 14-page ruling Thursday, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee disagreed, finding that alleged speech ‘in furtherance of criminal activity’ is not protected by the First Amendment. ‘Even core political speech addressing matters of public concern is not impenetrable from prosecution if allegedly used to further criminal activity,’ McAfee wrote…. But McAfee did leave open the possibility that Trump and others could raise similar arguments ‘at the appropriate time after the establishment of a factual record.'” See also, Judge Scott McAfee rejects Trump’s First Amendment challenge to indictment in Georgia election case, Associated Press, Kate Brumback, Thursday, 4 April 2024: “The judge overseeing the Georgia election interference case against Donald Trump and others rejected on Thursday arguments by the former president that the indictment seeks to criminalize political speech protected by the First Amendment. The indictment issued in August by a Fulton County grand jury accused Trump and 18 others of participating in a wide-ranging scheme to illegally try to overturn the 2020 presidential election in Georgia after the Republican incumbent narrowly lost the state to Democrat Joe Biden. Trump’s attorneys argued that all the charges against him involved political speech that is protected even if the speech ends up being false. But Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee wrote that at this pretrial stage he must consider the language of the indictment in a light favorable to the prosecution. The charges do not suggest that Trump and the others are being prosecuted simply for making false statements but rather that they acted willfully and knowingly to harm the government, he wrote.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James Questions Trump’s $175 Million Bond Deal. James said in court papers that the California company providing the guarantee was not qualified to do such deals in New York. The New York Times, Ben Protess and Matthew Haag, Thursday, 4 April 2024: “The New York attorney general’s office on Thursday took exception to a $175 million bond that Donald J. Trump recently posted in his civil fraud case, questioning the qualifications of the California company that provided it. The dispute stems from a $454 million judgment Mr. Trump is facing in the case, which the attorney general’s office brought against the former president and his family business. The attorney general, Letitia James, accused Mr. Trump of fraudulently inflating his net worth, leading to a monthslong trial last year that ended with a judge imposing the huge penalty.”
Saturday, 6 April 2024:
Trump’s bizarre, vindictive incoherence has to be heard in full to be believed. Excerpts from his speeches do not do justice to Trump’s smorgasbord of vendettas, non sequiturs, and comparisons to famous people. The Guardian, Rachel Leingang, Saturday, 6 April 2024: “Donald Trump’s speeches on the 2024 campaign trail so far have been focused on a laundry list of complaints, largely personal, and an increasingly menacing tone. He’s on the campaign trail less these days than he was in previous cycles – and less than you’d expect from a guy with dedicated superfans who brags about the size of his crowds every chance he gets. But when he has held rallies, he speaks in dark, dehumanizing terms about migrants, promising to vanquish people crossing the border. He rails about the legal battles he faces and how they’re a sign he’s winning, actually. He tells lies and invents fictions. He calls his opponent a threat to democracy and claims this election could be the last one. Trump’s tone, as many have noted, is decidedly more vengeful this time around, as he seeks to reclaim the White House after a bruising loss that he insists was a steal. This alone is a cause for concern, foreshadowing what the Trump presidency redux could look like. But he’s also, quite frequently, rambling and incoherent, running off on tangents that would grab headlines for their oddness should any other candidate say them.”
Sunday, 7 April 2024:
Trump, at Fund-Raiser, Says He Wants Immigrants From ‘Nice’ Countries. At rallies, Donald Trump frequently laments migrants from a list of countries from Africa, Asia, and the Middle East as he stokes fears around the surge at the border. The New York Times, Maggie Haberman and Michael Gold, Sunday, 7 April 2024: “Former President Donald J. Trump, speaking at a multimillion-dollar fund-raiser on Saturday night, lamented that people were not immigrating to the United States from ‘nice’ countries ‘like Denmark’ and suggested that his well-heeled dinner companions were temporarily safe from undocumented immigrants nearby, according to an attendee. Mr. Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, made the comments during a roughly 45-minute presentation at a dinner at a mansion owned by the billionaire financier John Paulson in Palm Beach, Fla., a rarefied island community…. About midway through his remarks … Mr. Trump began an extensive rant about migrants entering the United States, at a time when President Biden has been struggling with an intensified crisis at the Southern border. ‘These are people coming in from prisons and jails. They’re coming in from just unbelievable places and countries, countries that are a disaster,’ Mr. Trump told his guests, according to the attendee. The former president has made a similar claim the heart of his campaign speeches. He then appeared to refer to an episode during his presidency when he drew significant criticism after an Oval Office meeting with federal lawmakers about immigration during which he described Haiti and some nations in Africa as ‘shithole countries,’ compared with places like Norway…. At the dinner, Mr. Trump also lamented the surge of migrants, particularly from Latin America, saying that gang members ‘make the Hells Angels look like extremely nice people. They’ve been shipped in, brought in, deposited in our country, and they’re with us tonight,’ Mr. Trump said. ‘In fact, I don’t think they’re on this island, but I know they’re on that island right there. That’s West Palm,’ Mr. Trump said, gesturing across the water, according to the attendee. ‘Congratulations over there. But they’ll be here. Eventually, they’ll be here.'”
The Method Behind Trump’s Mistruths. A close examination of every public word from the former president during a crucial week of his campaign. The New York Times, Angelo Fichera, Sunday, 7 April 2024: “Since the beginning of his political career, Donald J. Trump has misled, mischaracterized, dissembled, exaggerated and, at times, flatly lied. His flawed statements about the border, the economy, the coronavirus pandemic and the 2020 election have formed the bedrock of his 2024 campaign. Though his penchant for bending, and often breaking, the truth has been well documented, a close study of how he does so reveals a kind of technique to his dishonesty: a set of recurring rhetorical moves with which Mr. Trump fuels his popularity among his supporters. In the week starting with Mr. Trump’s victory speech in Iowa through his win in the New Hampshire primary — the contests that put him on the path to becoming his party’s nominee for the third consecutive time — The New York Times analyzed all of his public statements, including speeches, interviews and social media posts. His words focused heavily on attacking his political rivals, self-aggrandizing and stoking fear to make his case for 2024. In doing so, Mr. Trump often relied on repeated falsehoods and half-truths. He has yet to deviate from this approach in the general election…. He grossly distorts his opponents’ records and proposals to make them sound unreasonable…. He exaggerates and twists the facts to make his record sound better than it is…. He relies on both well-worn and fresh claims of election rigging to suggest he can lose only if his opponents cheat…. He has turned his criminal cases into a rallying cry, baselessly asserting that he is being persecuted by his successor…. He makes unverifiable claims about what the world would have been like had he secured a second term…. He describes the United States as a nation in ruins.”
Top Republican Representative Michael Turner warns pro-Russia messages are echoed ‘on the House floor.’ The latest remarks come after another Republican member said Russian propaganda has ‘infected’ the Republican base. The Washington Post, Yvonne Wingett Sanchez and Abigail Hauslohner, Sunday, 7 April 2024: “Rep. Michael R. Turner (R-Ohio), who chairs the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said Sunday that it was ‘absolutely true’ that some Republican members of Congress were repeating Russian propaganda about the invasion of Ukraine instigated by Russian President Vladimir Putin. Turner did not specify which members he was referring to, but he said he agreed with House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Michael McCaul (R-Tex.), who said in an interview with Puck News last week that Russian propaganda had ‘infected a good chunk of my party’s base’ and suggested that conservative media was to blame.” See also, Michael Turner, chair of the US House Intelligence Committee, says Republicans are ‘absolutely’ repeating Russian propaganda. The Guardian, Ramon Antonio Vargas, published on Monday, 8 April 2024: “Mike Turner, the chairperson of the US House intelligence committee, says some of his fellow Republicans are ‘absolutely’ repeating Russian propaganda on the chamber floor, echoing a similar claim made recently by another rightwing American lawmaker…. Turner maintained that one high-profile instance of such misinformation centered on cases where federal lawmakers have sought to portray Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine as a war between Nato and Vladimir Putin’s forces. ‘Of course it is not,’ Turner said. ‘To the extent that this propaganda takes hold, it makes it more difficult for us to really see this as an authoritarian versus democracy battle.’ Turner has openly advocated for continuing to provide US aid to Ukraine in its efforts to fend off Russia’s invasion. His comments Sunday came days after Michael McCaul, chairman of the House foreign affairs committee, told Puck News that misinformation in favor of Russian interests had found a foothold among his fellow Republicans. ‘Russian propaganda has made its way into the United States, unfortunately, and it’s infected a good chunk of my party’s base,’ McCaul said to Puck.”
Monday, 8 April 2024:
Appeals Court Denies Another Trump Attempt to Delay Trial. Donald J. Trump’s lawyers sought to pause his Manhattan criminal trial as they argued that it should be moved, but a judge rejected their appeal. The New York Times, Ben Protess, Jonah E. Bromwich, and William K. Rashbaum, Monday, 8 April 2024: “One week before Donald J. Trump is set to face a criminal trial in Manhattan, an appeals court judge on Monday rejected his effort to pause the case and move it to a different location. The judge, Lizbeth Gonzalez, issued the decision Monday afternoon after hearing arguments from Mr. Trump’s lawyers and lawyers from the Manhattan district attorney’s office, which has accused the former president of falsifying records to cover up a sex scandal. For weeks, Mr. Trump has sought to delay the trial, the first prosecution of a former U.S. president, and possibly the only one of Mr. Trump’s four criminal cases to make it to trial this year.” See also, New York appeals judge rejects Donald Trump’s request to delay his April 15 hush money trial, Associated Press, Michael R. Sisak, Jake Offenhartz, and Jennifer Peltz, Monday, 8 April 2024: “A New York appeals court judge on Monday rejected Donald Trump’s bid to delay his April 15 hush money criminal trial while he mounts a last-minute fight to move the case out of Manhattan, foiling the former president’s latest attempt to put off the historic trial. Justice Lizbeth González of the state’s mid-level appeals court ruled after an emergency hearing Monday where Trump’s lawyers asked that she postpone the trial indefinitely while they seek a change of venue.”
Prosecutors Ask Supreme Court to Reject Trump’s Immunity Claim in Election Case. The filing was the main submission from Jack Smith, the special counsel prosecuting the former president. The case will be argued on April 25. The New York Times, Adam Liptak, Monday, 8 April 2024: “Jack Smith, the special counsel prosecuting former President Donald J. Trump on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election, urged the Supreme Court on Monday to reject Mr. Trump’s claim that he is immune from prosecution. ‘The president’s constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed does not entail a general right to violate them,’ Mr. Smith wrote. The filing was Mr. Smith’s main submission in the case, which will be argued on April 25. He wrote that the novelty of the case underscored its gravity. ‘The absence of any prosecutions of former presidents until this case does not reflect the understanding that presidents are immune from criminal liability,’ Mr. Smith wrote. ‘It instead underscores the unprecedented nature of petitioner’s alleged conduct.’ He urged the justices not to lose sight of the basic legal terrain. ‘A bedrock principle of our constitutional order,’ he wrote, ‘is that no person is above the law — including the president.’ He added, ‘The Constitution does not give a president the power to conspire to defraud the United States in the certification of presidential-election results, obstruct proceedings for doing so or deprive voters of the effect of their votes.’ Mr. Smith urged the court to move quickly, though he did not directly address the pending election.” See also, Special counsel Jack Smith files brief urging Supreme Court to reject Trump’s immunity claim. The justices will hear oral arguments in the case later this month. ABC News, Alexander Mallin, Monday, 8 April 2024: “The office of special counsel Jack Smith has just filed its brief urging the Supreme Court to reject former President Donald Trump’s appeal claiming he should be immune from prosecution in his 2020 federal election subversion case. In his brief to the Supreme Court, Special Counsel Smith argues that Trump has put forward a ‘novel and sweeping’ theory of immunity that lacks any historical precedent and refutes the vision of the country that its founders intended. ‘The effective functioning of the Presidency does not require that a former President be immune from accountability for these alleged violations of federal criminal law,’ the brief reads. ‘To the contrary, a bedrock principle of our constitutional order is that no person is above the law— including the President. Nothing in constitutional text, history, precedent, or policy considerations supports the absolute immunity that petitioner seeks.’ Smith’s argument seeks to counter accusations from former President Trump that his prosecution is politically motivated by pointing to ‘layered safeguards’ already in the U.S. criminal justice system that serve to protect against such abuses.”
Trump Says Abortion Restrictions Should Be Left to the States. After months of mixed signals, Donald Trump said that whatever states decide ‘must be the law of the land,’ adding that he was ‘strongly in favor of exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother.’ The New York Times, Maggie Haberman, Jonathan Swan, and Michael Gold, Monday, 8 April 2024: “Former President Donald J. Trump said in a video statement on Monday that abortion rights should be left up to the states, remarks that came after months of mixed signals on an issue that he and his advisers have worried could cost him dearly in the election. Mr. Trump said his view was that the states should decide through legislation, and that ‘whatever they decide must be the law of the land, and in this case, the law of the state.’ But he added that he was ‘strongly in favor of exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.’… [P]olitically, Mr. Trump’s announcement that abortion should be left to the states will allow Democrats to tag him with some of the strictest abortion laws in the country, including a six-week ban in Florida that he has said was a ‘terrible mistake.’ In a statement, President Biden accused Mr. Trump, who appointed three conservative Supreme Court justices who were pivotal in overturning Roe, of fostering ‘cruelty’ and ‘chaos’ surrounding abortion in the wake of the decision. He added that Mr. Trump’s position was effectively an endorsement of states that had passed tougher abortion restrictions, including six-week bans. He also contended that Mr. Trump, despite his statement, would be likely to back a federal abortion ban if he won in November. ‘If Donald Trump is elected and the MAGA Republicans in Congress put a national abortion ban on the Resolute Desk, Trump will sign it into law,’ Mr. Biden said.” See also, Trump says abortion should be left to states; he does not endorse a national limit, The Washington Post, Hannah Knowles and Marianne LeVine, Monday, 8 April 2024: “Former president Donald Trump, who has wavered between highlighting and downplaying his role in curtailing abortion rights, suggested Monday that the politically volatile issue should be left to states, after months of mixed signals about his position. In a video posted on social media, Trump took credit for the overturning of Roe v. Wade but was silent about a national ban of any length, which some antiabortion groups had pressed his campaign to embrace. ‘Now it’s up to the states to do the right thing,’ Trump said.” See also, Trump declines to endorse a national abortion ban. He says limits should be left to the states. Associated Press, Jill Colvin and Meg Kinnard, Monday, 8 April 2024: “Former President Donald Trump said Monday he believes abortion limits should be left to the states, outlining his position in a video in which he declined to endorse a national ban after months of mixed messages and speculation. ‘Many people have asked me what my position is on abortion and abortion rights,’ Trump said in the video posted on his Truth Social site. ‘My view is now that we have abortion where everybody wanted it from a legal standpoint, the states will determine by vote or legislation or perhaps both. And whatever they decide must be the law of the land — in this case, the law of the state.'”
Tuesday, 9 April 2024:
Why Trump’s ‘hush money’ case is bigger than hush money. The judge indicates that this might be another case of election interference. Could it have affected the outcome of the 2016 presidential election? The Washington Post, Aaron Blake, Tuesday, 9 April 2024: “The fact that Donald Trump has been indicted four times means we all must use shorthand to differentiate between the cases. So one case is the ‘classified documents’ case. We’ve got the twin federal and Georgia ‘election subversion’ or ‘Jan. 6”’cases. Then there’s the first case charged: the Manhattan ‘hush money’ case, which will also be the first to go to trial, next week, unless Trump succeeds in delaying it. But that last shorthand might not be totally apt, if a Monday letter from the judge in the case is any measure. Indeed, New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan seems to indicate that what we really have is a third election interference case. ‘The allegations are in substance, that Donald Trump falsified business records to conceal an agreement with others to unlawfully influence the 2016 presidential election,’ Merchan summarizes in laying out the process for jury selection, which is set to begin Monday.”
Trump’s Attempt to Delay Trial Is Denied by Appeals Court Judge. Donald Trump could try to have his request reviewed by a full judicial panel, but the opening of his case remains scheduled for Monday. The New York Times, Jonah E. Bromwich and Ben Protess, Tuesday, 9 April 2024: “A New York appeals court judge on Tuesday rejected Donald J. Trump’s latest attempt to delay his criminal case in Manhattan, another blow to the former president’s increasingly desperate attempts to prevent the trial from starting next week. The appeals court judge, Cynthia S. Kern, denied Mr. Trump’s bid to pause the case while he pursues legal action against the judge presiding over the trial. Mr. Trump brought the action against the trial judge, Juan M. Merchan, in hopes that the appeals court would both delay the criminal case and throw out a gag order that Justice Merchan imposed on him. At a brief hearing on Tuesday, the Manhattan district attorney’s office, which brought the charges against Mr. Trump accusing him of covering up a sex scandal, argued that the gag order should stand. The order prevents Mr. Trump from attacking witnesses, prosecutors and the judge’s family — as he so often does. Mr. Trump’s invective ’causes predictable terrifying consequences,’ said Steven Wu, a lawyer for the district attorney’s office, adding that there was ‘no basis’ to delay the trial while the court scrutinizes the gag order. Although Justice Kern ruled against Mr. Trump, he can now have his request heard by a full panel of five appellate court judges. It would be nearly impossible for the court to act before the trial begins Monday, when Mr. Trump will become the first former U.S. president to face criminal prosecution.” See also, New York appeals judge denies Trump’s second trial-delay bid in two days, The Washington Post, Shayna Jacobs, Tuesday, 9 April 2024: “An appeals court judge on Tuesday rejected Donald Trump’s latest bid to delay the start next week of his New York criminal trial for allegedly falsifying business documents to help cover up an affair before the 2016 election. Appellate Judge Cynthia Kern denied Trump’s request to delay the trial, which is scheduled to begin Monday, and a gag order against him imposed by New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan remained in effect. It was the second time in as many days that the appellate court rejected a Trump request to delay the trial.”
Judge Blocks Trump’s Lawyers From Naming Witnesses in Documents Case. The special counsel had asked that the names of about two dozen government witnesses be redacted from a public version of a court filing to protect against potential threats or harassment. The New York Times, Alan Feuer, Tuesday, 9 April 2024: “Granting a request by federal prosecutors, the judge overseeing former President Donald J. Trump’s classified documents case ordered his lawyers on Tuesday to redact the names of about two dozen government witnesses from a public version of one of their court filings to protect them against potential threats or harassment. In a 24-page ruling, the judge, Aileen M. Cannon, told Mr. Trump’s lawyers to refer to the witnesses in their filing with a pseudonym or a categorical description — say, John Smith or F.B.I. Agent 1 — rather than identifying them by name. The special counsel, Jack Smith, had expressed a deep concern over witness safety, an issue that has touched on several of Mr. Trump’s criminal cases. Among the people prosecutors were seeking to protect were ‘career civil servants and former close advisers’ to Mr. Trump, including one who had told them that he was so concerned about potential threats from ‘Trump world’ that he refused to permit investigators to record an interview with him.” See also, After months, Judge Aileen Cannon agrees to shield Trump witness names. Special counsel Jack Smith has been arguing since January to keep the names of government agents redacted ahead of trial. The Washington Post, Devlin Barrett, Tuesday, 9 April 2024: “U.S. District Court Judge Aileen M. Cannon agreed Tuesday to end a long-running dispute with prosecutors over whether government-agent witnesses in Donald Trump’s classified documents criminal trial should be publicly identified in court filings. Her order was the second time this month she has criticized Justice Department lawyers while ruling mostly in their favor. Special counsel Jack Smith has spent months trying to convince Cannon to keep under seal the names of FBI agents, Secret Service agents and other potential witnesses in the case, which charges Trump with mishandling classified documents and obstructing government efforts to retrieve them from Mar-a-Lago, his Florida home and private club. Initially, Cannon ruled against Smith, but on Tuesday she relented, saying she would agree to keeping the names and identifying information under seal. It was not a total victory for Smith, however, because the judge also ruled that the substance of the witness statements can be made public in filings, so long as the material did not identify the witnesses or other people who are mentioned.” See also, Judge Aileen Cannon in Trump’s classified documents case agrees to redact witness names, granting prosecution request, Associated Press, Eric Tucker, published on Wednesday, 10 April 2024: “The federal judge presiding over the classified documents case against former President Donald Trump granted a request by prosecutors on Tuesday aimed at protecting the identities of potential government witnesses. But U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon refused to categorically block witness statements from being disclosed, saying there was no basis for such a ‘sweeping’ and ‘blanket’ restriction on their inclusion in pretrial motions. The 24-page order centers on a dispute between special counsel Jack Smith’s team and lawyers for Trump over how much information about witnesses and their statements could be made public ahead of trial. The disagreement, which had been pending for weeks, was one of many that had piled up before Cannon and had slowed the pace of the case against Trump — one of four prosecutions he is confronting.”
Arizona Reinstates 160-Year-Old Abortion Ban. The state’s highest court said the law, moribund for decades under Roe v. Wade, was now enforceable, but it put its decision on hold for a lower court to hear other challenges to the law. The New York Times, Jack Healy and Kellen Browning, Tuesday, 9 April 2024: “Arizona’s highest court on Tuesday upheld an 1864 law that bans nearly all abortions, a decision that could have far-reaching consequences for women’s health care and election-year politics in a critical battleground state. ‘Physicians are now on notice that all abortions, except those necessary to save a woman’s life, are illegal,’ the court said in a 4-to-2 decision. But the court, whose justices are all Republican appointees, also put its ruling on hold for the moment and sent the matter back to a lower court for additional arguments about the law’s constitutionality. Abortion providers said they expected to continue performing abortions through May as their lawyers and Democratic lawmakers searched for new legal arguments and additional tactics to delay the ruling. The ruling immediately set off a political earthquake. Democrats condemned it as a ‘stain’ on Arizona that would put women’s lives at risk. Several Republicans, sensing political peril, also criticized the ruling and called for the Republican-controlled Legislature to repeal it.” See also, Read the Arizona Supreme Court’s Abortion Ruling, The New York Times, Tuesday, 9 April 2024. See also, Arizona Supreme Court ruling clears way for near-total abortion ban, The Washington Post, Danielle Paquette and Molly Hennessy-Fiske, Tuesday, 9 April 2024: “Arizona’s conservative Supreme Court on Tuesday revived a near-total ban on abortion, invoking an 1864 law that forbids the procedure except to save a mother’s life and punishes providers with prison time. The 4-2 decision supersedes the previous rule, which guarded the right to end a pregnancy by the 15-week mark, resetting policy to the pre-Roe v. Wade era and adding Arizona to the roster of 16 other states where abortion is virtually outlawed.” See also, Arizona Supreme Court rules that a near-total abortion ban from 1864 is enforceable. The ruling is on hold for 14 days, and voters will likely have a chance to weigh in on a ballot measure to enshrine abortion rights in the state’s constitution this fall. NBC News, Adam Edelman and Alex Tabet, Tuesday, 9 April 2024: “The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a 160-year-old near-total abortion ban still on the books in the state is enforceable, a bombshell decision that adds the state to the growing lists of places where abortion care is effectively banned. The ruling allows an 1864 law in Arizona to stand that made abortion a felony punishable by two to five years in prison for anyone who performs one or helps a woman obtain one. The law — which was codified in 1901, and again in 1913 — outlaws abortion from the moment of conception but includes an exception to save the woman’s life.”
Wednesday, 10 April 2024:
Trump Loses His Third Try in a Week to Delay Manhattan Trial. Donald J. Trump was turned down when he asked an appeals court–again–to stave off his prosecution on charges that he faked business records to cover up a sex scandal. The New York Times, Jonah E. Bromwich, William K. Rashbaum, and Ben Protess, Wednesday, 10 April 2024: “Lawyers for Donald J. Trump have spent this week seeking to stave off the former president’s trial on charges that he covered up a sex scandal. They tried again Wednesday. Again, they failed. In Mr. Trump’s latest last-minute bid to delay a trial that starts Monday, he filed a civil action in an appeals court against the judge in the case, Juan M. Merchan. It sought to delay the trial while the appeals court reconsidered several of the judge’s rulings. A single appellate court judge, Ellen Gesmer, promptly rejected Mr. Trump’s request. Mr. Trump can now have his action heard by a full panel of five appellate court judges, but it would be nearly impossible for the court to act before the trial begins.”
Trump’s Ex-Finance Chief Allen H. Weisselberg Is Sentenced to 5 Months in Rikers for Perjury. Weisselberg admitted that he had lied about helping Donald Trump inflate his net worth to win favorable loan terms. The New York Times, Kate Christobek, Jonah E. Bromwich, and Ben Protess, Wednesday, 10 April 2024: “Allen H. Weisselberg, Donald J. Trump’s longtime financial lieutenant, was sentenced Wednesday to five months in a Rikers Island jail for perjury, capping a saga that has now landed him behind bars twice. The sentence, handed down by a state judge in Manhattan, came five days before Mr. Trump is to go on trial in the same courthouse on accusations that he covered up a sex scandal. Mr. Weisselberg was not charged in that case, but he would not be headed to jail if not for his former boss’s own troubles: Prosecutors set their sights on Mr. Weisselberg after he refused to turn on Mr. Trump. Last month, Mr. Weisselberg, 76, pleaded guilty to two counts of perjury committed while he was being questioned in 2020 by the New York attorney general’s office, which was investigating Mr. Trump for fraud.”
Republican National Committee (RNC) under Lara Trump spreads ‘massive fraud’ claims about 2020 election, CNN Politics, Andrew Kaczynski and Em Stack, Wednesday, 10 April 2024: “The Republican National Committee last week sent out a scripted call to voters’ phones on behalf of new co-chair Lara Trump saying Democrats committed ‘massive fraud’ in the 2020 election. It’s the latest example of how the RNC under the former president’s daughter-in-law is perpetuating lies about the 2020 election, even as prominent Republicans say the party needs to look forward to win in 2024. ‘We all know the problems. No photo IDs, unsecured ballot drop boxes, mass mailing of ballots, and voter rolls chock full of deceased people and non-citizens are just a few examples of the massive fraud that took place,’ the RNC call said. ‘If Democrats have their way, your vote could be canceled out by someone who isn’t even an American citizen.’… There is no evidence of widespread fraud in the 2020 election, as even some state GOP election officials and former Trump Attorney General William Barr have acknowledged. The former president and his supporters filed more than 60 court cases in six key battleground states following the election and lost every one of them. And, they have still not brought forth any evidence of the rampant cheating they continue to talk about on the campaign trail. But in the years since the 2020 election, Lara Trump has continued to push claims of fraud. Her comments have been in line with those of her father-in-law, who’s successfully reshaped the GOP in his image and easily secured his third-straight GOP nomination this year.”
Thursday, 11 April 2024:
Georgia’s Lieutenant Governor to Face Inquiry for Role as Fake Trump elector. Fani T. Willis, the district attorney of Fulton County, Georgia, had been disqualified from pursuing the case against Lt. Gov. Burt Jones, but another prosecutor said he would now take it over. The New York Times, Richard Fausset and Danny Hakim, Thursday, 11 April 2024: “Lt. Gov. Burt Jones of Georgia will be investigated for his role as a fake elector for Donald J. Trump in the 2020 presidential election, a state official said Thursday. Fani T. Willis, the district attorney of Fulton County, Ga., has already brought racketeering and other charges against Mr. Trump and several top allies in a sweeping election case. But she was disqualified in 2022 from continuing to investigate Mr. Jones, a Republican, because she had hosted a fund-raiser for his political rival. By law, when a prosecutor on a case is found to have a conflict of interest, the head of the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia, a state government entity, is responsible for choosing a replacement. After facing criticism for not moving more quickly to find a new prosecutor, Pete Skandalakis, the executive director of the council and a former district attorney, said on Thursday that he would do the job himself. ‘I will be handling Burt Jones,’ Mr. Skandalakis, a Republican, said in a text message on Thursday. He declined to elaborate on the matter. His decision was previously reported by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The Trump campaign enlisted fake presidential electors in 2020 in a number of swing states where Mr. Trump was defeated, as part of an effort to circumvent the outcome of the voting. Twenty-four of those electors are facing charges in three states.”
Trump is the likely Republican presidential nominee. He can serve even if convicted of a crime. While many states ban felons from voting, there is no federal prohibition on felons running for or serving in the White House. The Washington Post, David Nakamura, Thursday, 11 April 2024: “Donald Trump is facing felony charges in four separate criminal indictments in three states and Washington, D.C., with a guilty verdict in any of the cases possibly meaning a prison sentence. The circumstances have raised an often-asked question: Could Trump, or anyone else, be convicted of a felony and serve as commander in chief, possibly from prison? The short answer, legal experts said, is yes — because the U.S. Constitution does not forbid it. ‘The Constitution has a limited set of requirements to be president. You have to be at least 35, a natural-born U.S. citizen and a resident here for at least 14 years,’ said UCLA professor Richard L. Hasen, an election law expert…. The scenario might seem counterintuitive, given that numerous states prohibit felons from holding state or local office and even restrict their right to vote. As he has in so many respects, Trump is again testing political norms and demonstrating that just because the nation’s democratic system might not have anticipated an unlikely outcome does not mean it can’t happen. Trump is charged in state court in New York with falsifying business records to conceal a hush money payment from voters in the 2016 election. He also faces charges in federal court in D.C. and state court in Georgia related to trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election. In Florida, he is under federal indictment for allegedly mishandling classified materials after leaving the White House and obstructing government efforts to retrieve them. He has pleaded not guilty to all 88 counts that he faces. In drafting the Constitution, the framers did not seriously consider that someone convicted of a significant crime would be a viable candidate for the White House, said Kimberly Wehle, a law professor at the University of Baltimore. Instead, she said, such a person presumably would be stunted in their political rise and unlikely to reach the highest levels of the American political system.”
Democrats Hammer a Simple Attack on Abortion: Donald Trump Did This. The party is unifying around a blunt message that Vice President Kamala Harris pushed for privately ahead of her Friday trip to Arizona, where Democrats hope to keep Republicans reeling. The New York Times, Lisa Lerer, Reid J. Epstein, and Nicholas Nehamas, Thursday, 11 April 2024: “On Tuesday, Arizona’s top court upheld an 1864 law that bans nearly all abortions. And on Friday, before more than 100 abortion rights activists and supporters, Ms. Harris plans to deliver a simple message: Blame Donald Trump. From campaigns for state legislatures to the race for the White House, Democrats have unified around a central message of protecting what remains of abortion access in the United States, along with the availability of long-established reproductive health measures like contraception and fertility treatments. The Democratic effort underscores how the 2022 Supreme Court decision ending federal abortion rights remade American politics. Four years ago, Joseph R. Biden Jr. rarely mentioned abortion rights in his general-election campaign, fearing the issue could alienate moderate voters and would not sufficiently energize his base. Now, after the fall of Roe v. Wade, abortion rights are a centerpiece of his re-election bid, the first time that an American presidential campaign has focused so intensely on women’s reproductive health.”
Friday, 12 April 2024:
Trump will be first ex-president on criminal trial. Here’s what to know about the hush money case. Associated Press, Friday, 12 April 2024: “Donald Trump will make history as the first former president to stand trial on criminal charges when his hush money case opens Monday with jury selection. The case will force the presumptive Republican presidential nominee to juggle campaigning with sitting in a Manhattan courtroom for weeks to defend himself against charges involving a scheme to bury allegations of marital infidelity that arose during his first White House campaign in 2016. It carries enormous political ramifications as potentially the only one of four criminal cases against Trump that could reach a verdict before voters decide in November whether to send him back to the White House. The former president is accused of falsifying internal Trump Organization records as part of a scheme to bury damaging stories that he feared could hurt his 2016 campaign, particularly as Trump’s reputation was suffering at the time from comments he had made about women. The allegations focus on payoffs to two women, porn actor Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal, who said they had extramarital sexual encounters with Trump years earlier, as well as to a Trump Tower doorman who claimed to have a story about a child he alleged Trump had out of wedlock. Trump says none of these supposed sexual encounters occurred.”
Saturday, 13 April 2024:
Inside Donald Trump’s Embrace of the January 6 Rioters, The New York Times, Alan Feuer and Maggie Haberman, Saturday, 13 April 2024: “Former President Donald Trump has recently taken to publicly celebrating the Capitol riot and those who took part in it, putting a revisionist history of the attack at the heart of his campaign. Trump initially disavowed the attack on the Capitol, but he is now making it a centerpiece of his general election campaign.”
Sunday, 14 April 2024:
New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu switches from supporting South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley to supporting Donald Trump for the Republican presidential nomination, Letters from an American Substack, Heather Cox Richardson, Sunday, 14 April 2924: “Today, on ABC’s This Week, host George Stephanopoulos asked New Hampshire governor Chris Sununu about his recent switch from supporting former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley for the Republican presidential nomination to supporting former president Trump. ‘Just to sum up,’ Stephanopoulos said, ‘You support [Trump] for president even if he’s convicted in [the] classified documents [case]. You support him for president even though you believe he contributed to an insurrection. You support him for president even though you believe he’s lying about the last election. You support him for president even if he’s convicted in the Manhattan case. I just want to say, the answer to that is yes, correct?’ Sununu answered: ‘Yeah. Me and 51% of America.’ Aside from its overstatement of Trump’s national support, Sununu’s answer illustrated the triumph of politics over principle. Earlier in the interview, Sununu explained that he could swallow all of Trump’s negatives because he wanted a Republican administration. ‘This is about politics,’ he said. ”
Monday, 15 April 2024:
Day 1 of Trump’s Criminal Trial: Five Takeaways. The former president faces felony charges of falsifying business records to cover up a sexual scandal involving a porn star [to unlawfully influence] the 2016 presidential election. The New York Times, Jesse McKinley and Kate Christobek, Monday, 15 April 2024: “The criminal trial of Donald J. Trump, the nation’s 45th president and the Republican Party’s presumptive nominee, started Monday with potential jurors assembling in a drab courtroom in New York City while Mr. Trump looked on. Mr. Trump was charged in Manhattan, a deeply Democratic county and his former home, with falsifying nearly three dozen business records in an attempt to cover up a payment to a porn star, Stormy Daniels, who has said she had a brief sexual encounter with him in 2006. Mr. Trump denies that encounter happened, and has declared his innocence, calling the charges politically motivated. He has attacked the judge, Juan M. Merchan, and the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, a Democrat, who also attended the first day of trial on Monday. Mr. Trump faces 34 felony counts and could face probation or up to four years of prison time. The trial, which is expected to last weeks, has a fascinating list of potential witnesses: Michael Cohen, Mr. Trump’s former fixer turned apostate, who made the payment; Karen McDougal, a Playboy model who says she, too, had an affair with Mr. Trump; and Hope Hicks, a former aide to Mr. Trump. Ms. Daniels herself may testify. Before any of that happens, a jury must be selected, a winnowing that began Monday.” See also, Prospective Jurors Are Dismissed in Dozens as Trump’s Trial Begins. Jury selection began in the Manhattan criminal case, but many who might weigh Donald Trump’s fate told a judge that they could not be impartial. The New York Times, Jonah E. Bromwich, Ben Protess, Maggie Haberman, and Kate Christobek, Monday, 15 April 2024: “Follow today’s live coverage of Trump’s hush money trial. After years of investigation and weeks of delay, the criminal case known as the People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump went to trial Monday, with hundreds of citizens summoned to potentially join a jury that will decide the fate of the first American president to face prosecution. But the ritual of choosing the jury got off to a slow start as more than half of the first group of 96 potential jurors raised their hands to say they could not be fair to Mr. Trump, demonstrating the challenges of picking an impartial panel in a city where the defendant is widely loathed. The judge immediately excused them.” See also, A Weary Trump Appears to Doze Off in Courtroom Ahead of Criminal Trial. The former president flashed signs of irritation at times, but he also seemed to fall asleep, before jolting back awake. The New York Times, Maggie Haberman, Monday, 15 April 2024: “Former President Donald J. Trump seemed alternately irritated and exhausted Monday morning, as his lawyers and prosecutors hashed out pretrial motions before jury selection in his criminal case. Even as a judge was hearing arguments on last-minute issues in a criminal case that centers on salacious allegations and threatens to upend his bid for the presidency, Mr. Trump appeared to nod off a few times, his mouth going slack and his head drooping onto his chest. The former president’s lead lawyer, Todd Blanche, passed him notes for several minutes before Mr. Trump appeared to jolt awake.” See also, Who Are Key Players in the Trump Manhattan Criminal Trial? The New York Times, Kate Christobek, Monday, 15 April 2024. See also, Trump’s New York hush money trial completes its first day: Day 1 of Trump’s first criminal trial, The Washington Post, Washington Post staff, Monday, 15 April 2024: “Donald Trump’s hush-money trial — the first criminal prosecution of a former U.S. president — began Monday with the start of jury selection. Ten potential jurors were questioned after dozens of others said they could not be impartial and were excused. The first part of the day in court was taken up by other issues, including discussions of what evidence jurors will hear. The jury will weigh whether Trump broke state law by falsifying business records connected to a 2016 hush money payment meant to keep an adult-film actress quiet about an alleged sexual tryst. Finding 12 jurors and several alternates could take a week or more. The trial is expected to resume Tuesday at 9:30 a.m.” See also, As hush money trial begins, Trump’s sex life emerges as key theme. Before jorors are questioned, judge spends hours hashing out what a jury should know about allegations involving women other than Stormy Daniels. The Washington Post, Devlin Barrett, David Nakamura, and Shayna Jacobs, Monday, 15 April 2024: “The opening day of Donald Trump’s criminal trial delved deep into his tabloid-fodder sex life, as lawyers and the judge debated how many salacious details jurors should eventually hear as they decide whether he broke the law to cover up hush money payments…. The dry rituals of court only made the proceedings more surreal, as New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan warned Trump he could be removed or sent to jail if he disrupted the trial or failed to appear, and prosecutors said they would seek to hold Trump in contempt even before a single potential juror had been questioned. Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, was openly contemptuous of the trial when he spoke to reporters at the end of the day in the courthouse hallway. ‘We are not going to be given a fair trial,’ he said, calling the prosecution ‘a scam.’ Inside the courtroom, however, Trump was anything but disruptive. He frequently appeared bored or uninterested in the legal jousting that took up the entire morning session, but he was mostly attentive once jurors began to be questioned. Shortly after the lunch break, as Merchan read a lengthy series of instructions to prospective jurors, Trump closed his eyes and at times appeared to nod off. He then would abruptly catch himself and stiffen his posture.” See also, Trump Trial day 1 highlights: Court adjourns for the day with no jurors picked. Associated Press, Monday, 15 April 2024: “The first day of Trump’s history-making trial ended with no one yet chosen to be on the panel of 12 jurors and six alternates. Dozens of people were dismissed after saying they didn’t believe they could be fair, though dozens of other prospective jurors have yet to be questioned. Trump is charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records as part of a scheme to bury stories that he feared could hurt his 2016 [presidential] campaign. TV cameras aren’t allowed in the courtroom, but some reporters are, including those from the AP.” See also, Trump’s criminal trial, a first for a former president, has begun in New York, NPR, Ximena Bustillo, Monday, 15 April 2024: “Jury selection began Monday in Manhattan criminal court for Donald Trump’s hush-money trial — the first time in U.S. history a former president is being tried on criminal charges. More than half of prospective jurors in the first panel of 96 people were excused after saying they could not be fair and impartial. An 18-person jury selection is expected to take several days and the trial is expected to last about six weeks — even as Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, campaigns to be president once again. Trump faces 34 felony counts alleging that he falsified New York business records in order to conceal damaging information to influence the 2016 presidential election.” See also, Trump’s hush-money trial: prosecutors’ key arguments in the criminal case, The Guardian, Victoria Bekiempis, Monday, 15 April 2024: “On Monday, 15 April 2024, Donald Trump went to Manhattan court for his trial in Manhattan, making him the first US president, former or present, to face a criminal jury. More than 500 prospective jurors have been summoned to Manhattan supreme court in preparation for a selection process that could span days. Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, in spring 2023 charged Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records over an alleged hush-money scheme involving the adult film star Stormy Daniels and former Playboy playmate Karen McDougal. The charge is a class E felony. Bragg’s office contends that Trump facilitated payoffs to the women through his then attorney, Michael Cohen, to cover up alleged extramarital liaisons that could have damaged his candidacy in the 2016 election. They say that the illicit ‘catch and kill’ payoff scheme spanned from August 2015 to December 2017. Cohen in 2018 pleaded guilty to federal charges in Manhattan related to his involvement in that particular scheme, among other crimes.”
Tuesday, 16 April 2024:
Prosecutors and Defense Lawyers Begin to Seat Jurors for Trump Trial. The prospective jurors questioned on Tuesday mirrored their city: diverse, opinionated, and with strong views about the former president. The New York Times, Ben Protess, Jonah E. Bromwich, Maggie Haberman, and Wesley Parnell, Tuesday, 16 April 2024: “The daunting work of selecting a jury for the first criminal trial of a former American president rapidly gained momentum on Tuesday as seven New Yorkers were picked to sit in judgment of Donald J. Trump, accelerating a crucial phase of the case that many had expected to be a slog. The judge overseeing the case said that if jurors continued to be seated at this pace, opening arguments would most likely begin Monday. The first seven members of the panel that will decide whether Mr. Trump falsified records to cover up a sex scandal involving a porn star were picked in short order after the lunch break. The lawyers quizzed them on their politics, views about the former president and ability to remain impartial in a case that could offend their sensibilities. And Mr. Trump’s lawyers examined their digital footprints, bringing several jurors into the courtroom one by one to ask them about past social media posts that seemed as if they could betray a negative opinion of the former president. The wrangling underscored the importance and challenge of picking a jury in a city where the defendant is deeply unpopular — and not just any defendant, but the presumptive Republican nominee for president. Jury selection is pivotal: The outcome of the case could depend on who ultimately serves on the panel, which will include 12 jurors and most likely six alternates. The two sides reached agreement on four men and three women whose lives will forever be shaped by the landmark trial, and who in turn may shape American political history. They include a man originally from Ireland who will serve as foreman, an oncology nurse, a grandfather originally from Puerto Rico, a middle-school teacher from Harlem, two lawyers and a software engineer for Disney. While of different ages and ethnicities, the chosen seven had one thing in common: They vowed to give Mr. Trump a fair shake. And although prosecutors might have the upper hand in Manhattan, one of the nation’s most Democratic counties, there were glimmers of hope for Mr. Trump. Just one stubborn juror can torpedo a case and hang a jury, an outcome that would be a victory for Mr. Trump.” See also, Live Stream: Trump Criminal Trial Seats 7 Jurors and Adjourns Until Thursday. The jurors were selected after lawyers picked through past social media postings about Donald Trump and argued over whether they reflected bias. Opening statements could come as early as Monday. The New York Times, New York Times reporters, Tuesday, 16 April 2024. See also, Day 2 of Trump’s Criminal Trial: Five Takeaways, The New York Times, Jesse McKinley and Kate Christobek, Tuesday, 16 April 2024. See also, These Are the 42 Questions Prospective Trump Jurors Are Being Asked, The New York Times, Jonah E. Bromwich, Tuesday, 16 April 2024. See also, Seven jurors picked in Trump’s New York trial as judge presses ahead, The Washington Post, Devlin Barrett, Shayna Jacobs, David Nakamura, and Isaac Arnsdorf, Tuesday, 16 April 2024: “The judge overseeing former president Donald Trump’s criminal trial said opening statements could begin as soon as Monday, as the jury selection process sped up and Trump got an earful from the people who might soon decide his fate. Lawyers for Trump on Tuesday repeatedly argued that old social media posts by many of the prospective jurors or their friends showed that they were not being forthcoming about their animosity toward him, while prosecutors argued that old dumb jokes on the internet were not a cause to dismiss someone from the panel.” See also, Live coverage: Trump hush money trial adjourns till Thursday, The Washington Post, Washington Post Staff, Tuesday, 16 April 2024. See also, Trump hush money trial: Day 2 highlights, Associated Press, Tuesday, 16 April 2024.
Wednesday, 17 April 2024:
Fact-Checking Trump’s Defenses in His Court Cases. The former president has trotted out a host of false and misleading claims to defend his conduct, attack judges and prosecutors, and portray himself as a victim of political persecution. The New York Times, Linda Qiu, Wednesday, 17 April 2024: “As former President Donald J. Trump battles a series of criminal and civil actions while he runs to reclaim the White House, he has put his legal woes at center stage, making them a rallying cry for his re-election. It is a tactic that is likely to be on full display this week as his trial in Manhattan over his role in a hush money payment in the 2016 race gets underway. Just as he has done with his other legal troubles, Mr. Trump has dismissed the charges in that case as part of an ‘election interference’ scheme orchestrated by President Biden. He has described the cases against him with colorful hyperbole, defended his conduct with faulty comparisons and lobbed false attacks and baseless accusations at opponents and adjudicators alike. Asked for evidence of Mr. Trump’s claims, the campaign did not directly address the matter but continued to insist, with no evidence, that Mr. Trump was the target of a ‘witch hunt’ led by the Democratic Party. Here’s a fact-check of some of his most repeated claims.”
Trump rails against wind energy in fundraising pitch to oil executives. At a Mar-a-Lago dinner, Donald Trump doubles down on promises to derail a key form of clean energy that competes with fossil fuels. The Washington Post, Maxine Joselow and Josh Dawsey, Wednesday, 17 April 2024: “Former president Donald Trump repeatedly ranted about wind power during a fundraising dinner with oil and gas industry executives last week, claiming that the renewable-energy source is unreliable, unattractive and bad for the environment. ‘I hate wind,’ Trump told the executives over a meal of chopped steak at his Mar-a-Lago Club and resort in Florida, according to a person with knowledge of the meeting, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a private conversation. Trump’s comments reveal how he is wooing potential donors with his long-standing hostility to wind farms and pledges to halt this form of renewable energy if he returns to office. His stance poses a potential threat to one of the linchpins of America’s clean-energy transition, according to more than a dozen Trump allies, energy experts and offshore wind industry officials.”
Donald Trump and American Justice, The New York Times, The Editorial Board, Wednesday, 17 April 2024: “The former and possibly future president of the United States is now on trial in Lower Manhattan, the first criminal prosecution of an American elected to the nation’s highest office. Donald Trump, who relentlessly undermined the justice system while in office and since, is enjoying the same protections and guarantees of fairness and due process before the law that he sought to deny to others during his term. A jury of Americans will ultimately decide Mr. Trump’s legal fate. It may be the only one of the four criminal cases against the former president that comes to trial before the November election. Though the election interference charges are not the most serious of those he faces, the case will determine whether 12 of his fellow Americans find him guilty of a felony — a result that most voters say they would consider to be serious. In the first two days of this trial, Mr. Trump has offered a defense of himself to the public, in brief appearances between his courtroom table and the television cameras: He portrays himself as a victim of an unfair and politically motivated prosecution. That defense is built on lies. Mr. Trump is no victim. He is fortunate to live in a country where the rule of law guarantees a presumption of innocence and robust rights for defendants. A guiding principle of the American experiment is that the law applies to everyone equally. At the same time, prosecuting any current or former elected official requires vigilance against bias and awareness about how the case will be perceived by the public. For this reason, judges and prosecutors have an obligation to hew to stringent standards of fairness, to reduce the risk that they appear to be interfering in electoral politics by using criminal cases to damage or favor one candidate over another…. Mr. Trump’s vision of an American legal system that protects his interests goes beyond his trial, of course, and extends in particular to the Justice Department. He has been explicit about his desire, if elected in November, to bring the Justice Department more fully under his control, to use it to protect his friends and, more important, punish his enemies. As president, Mr. Trump had an unparalleled record of abusing presidential pardons, and if he is re-elected, he appears likely to order the Justice Department to drop the criminal cases against him or to try to pardon himself for potential crimes. To Mr. Trump, independent prosecutors and Justice Department officials are precisely the problem. They will say no to him when he wants to do things that are illegal or unconstitutional, choosing to be faithful to the Constitution rather than to him. This Mr. Trump cannot abide. Mr. Trump has said he intends to find a prosecutor to ‘go after’ Mr. Biden and his family, suggesting that he intends to pursue prosecution with little regard to evidence or facts. According to The Washington Post, he also wants to investigate figures in his administration whom he perceives as being disloyal to him, including John Kelly, his former chief of staff; William Barr, his former attorney general; and Gen. Mark Milley, the former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (Mr. Trump has separately suggested General Milley should be executed for treason.)… The former president is singular in one respect: As much as he accuses others of warping the justice system, he is the one who consistently demeans and disparages the role of the courts and the exercise of due process. The leaders of the Republican Party, echoing the views of Mr. Trump’s fervent base of followers, have fallen in line behind him, indicating that they will continue to support his candidacy even if he is a convicted felon.”
Thursday, 18 April 2024:
Trump Manhattan Criminal Hush-Money Trial: ‘We Have Our Jury.’ The New York Times, Jesse McKinley, Thursday, 18 April 2024: “With a jury of 12 now seated, we are just days away from opening statements in the trial of Donald Trump, a key moment in what is already a landmark case. After some early drama, resulting in the dismissal of two previously seated jurors, Justice Juan Merchan swore in 12 Manhattanites today, completing the panel that will be asked to render a verdict in the first criminal trial of a former American president…. Trump, 77, is charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in relation to his attempt to cover up a sex scandal involving a porn star, Stormy Daniels, before the 2016 election. And that — and that alone, Steinglass said — is what prosecutors intend to drill into jurors’ heads. ‘This case is about whether this man broke the law,’ Steinglass said, as Trump looked on. ‘Did he falsify business records in order to cover up an agreement to unlawfully influence the 2016 presidential election?’ Prosecutors also seem likely to acknowledge possible weaknesses of their case, including several witnesses with unsavory pasts. That includes Michael Cohen, Trump’s former fixer, who pleaded guilty in 2018 to breaking campaign finance and other federal laws.” See also, Live Updates: Jury of 12 Is Seated in Trump Criminal Trial. Five takeaways from the Third day of Trump’s criminal trial. Twelve New Yorkers have been chosen to decide the Manhattan criminal case against Donald Trump, who is accused of falsifying business records to cover up a sex scandal before the 2016 election. The New York Times, Thursday, 18 April 2024. See also, In a Manhattan Court, a Jury Is Picked to Judge a President. Justice Juan Merchan warned against identifying the people who might judge Donald Trump, who regularly attacks the justice system. The New York Times, Ben Protess, Jonah E. Bromwich, Jesse McKinley, and Kate Christobek, Thursday, 18 April 2024: “Now, just as he bent the political world to his will, Mr. Trump is testing the limits of the American justice system, assailing the integrity of jury and judge alike. His attacks have emboldened his base, and might well resonate more broadly on the campaign trial. But it will be the 12 men and women of the jury — in Mr. Trump’s hometown — who will first decide his fate, before millions more do so at the polls.” See also, Manhattan hush money trial: Tumultuous Trump trial day ends with 12 jurors and 1 alternate selected, The Washington Post, Shayna Jacobs, Devlin Barrett, Rachel Weiner, and Isaac Arnsdorf, Thursday, 18 April 2024: “A 12-member jury was assembled for Donald Trump’s hush money trial on Thursday hours after two previously sworn-in jurors were removed, illustrating the intense scrutiny and potential public exposure that comes with sitting in judgment of the former president and likely 2024 Republican White House nominee. Seven men and five women have been picked, along with the first of what is expected to be a group of six alternates. Jury selection will resume Friday. While it is possible that additional sworn-in jurors will also drop out or be removed, requiring more to be screened and chosen, New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan said he expected opening statements on Monday…. Trump is the first former U.S. president to stand criminal trial. He faces 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection with reimbursement of a hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election. Prosecutors have accused Trump of classifying the reimbursement as a legal expense, rather than a campaign expense, and of authorizing the payment to Daniels to keep her from publicly accusing him just before the 2016 election of a tryst she alleged happened years earlier.” See also: Live coverage: 12 jurors seated in Trump hush money trial as more alternates sought, The Washington Post, 14 Live coverage contributors, Thursday, 18 April 2024. See also, Trump’s hush money trial day 3 highlights: 12 jurors seated, Associated Press, Thursday, 18 April 2024: “Trump is charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records as part of a scheme to bury stories that he feared could hurt his 2016 campaign.” See also, Day 3 of Trump New York hush money trial, CNN Politics, Jeremy Herb, Lauren del Valle, and Kara Scannell in the courthouse, Thursday, 18 April 2024: “We have our jury”: Once Trump’s attorneys and the district attorney’s office used up their 10 peremptory strikes to remove jurors, things moved quickly. The judge rejected Trump’s challenges to remove jurors for cause because they had expressed negative opinions about Trump, telling the former president’s attorneys that not liking his persona was not enough. The seated jury includes seven men and five women. At least a couple of jurors on Trump’s panel said they aren’t a fan: On Thursday afternoon, jurors were generally more open about their opinions of Trump. Many said they didn’t like his politics or some of his behavior in public but felt they could see past that to be a fair and impartial juror. One woman who will eventually decide Trump’s fate called him selfish and self-serving. ‘I don’t like his persona,’ she said. ‘I don’t like some of my coworkers, but I don’t try to sabotage their work.’ There were some bumps with the jury, likely not the last: Thursday’s court session began with one of the seven jurors who had been empaneled Tuesday returning to ask to be dismissed from the jury. She was excused after she said she was concerned aspects of her identity were made public. Later, a second juror was excused after prosecutors questioned the truthfulness of the answers he gave to questions from attorneys on Tuesday. DA’s office won’t tell Trump which witnesses they will call: Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche asked the district attorney’s office to share the first three witnesses they plan to call. The district attorney’s office refused. Assistant District Attorney Josh Steinglass acknowledged that courtesy is often extended. But because Trump has been posting on social media about their witnesses, he said with a shrug, ‘We’re not telling him who the witnesses are.’ We’re on track to start opening arguments Monday: 22 prospective jurors have yet to go through the questionnaire process from the second panel. Merchan will begin with them on Friday to try to fill out a slate of five additional alternate jurors, although the judge noted he may change that number. If jury selection wraps up quickly enough Friday, Merchan said he will hold what’s called a Sandoval hearing Friday afternoon, where they will discuss what in Trump’s legal history can be used to try to impeach him if he chooses to testify.”
Judge Rejects Trump’s Effort to Delay January 6 Civil Cases. The former president had sought to have lawsuits against him put on hold until after his federal criminal trial on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election. The New York Times, Alan Feuer, Thursday, 18 April 2024: “A federal judge on Thursday rejected former President Donald J. Trump’s attempt to delay a group of civil lawsuits that are seeking to hold him accountable for inspiring the violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Mr. Trump had sought to have the suits put on hold until after the completion of his federal criminal trial connected to many of the same events. But in a nine-page ruling, the judge, Amit P. Mehta, decided that the civil lawsuits could move forward without running the risk that Mr. Trump might damage his chances in the criminal case by revealing his defense strategy prematurely or making statements that prosecutors might use against him. Last month, when lawyers for Mr. Trump first asked Judge Mehta to postpone the civil cases, it was the latest example of the former president seeking to pit his multiple legal matters against one another in an effort to delay them.”
Judge Aileen Cannon denies dismissal motions by Trump co-defendants in documents case, The Washington Post, Perry Stein, Thursday, 18 April 2024: “U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon on Thursday rejected requests from Donald Trump’s two co-defendants to dismiss the charges against them in the classified document case, ruling that federal prosecutors had met the legal threshold for the obstruction counts. Attorneys for Trump employees Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira had argued that the charges should be dismissed, in part, because the indictment accused them of obstructing government efforts to retrieve classified materials from Trump’s property without providing clear evidence that the two men were aware of an ongoing investigation or knew the boxes of documents contained classified materials. Cannon wrote that any arguments the co-defendants want to make about their lack of knowledge about why Trump allegedly wanted to conceal the boxes from investigators could be used as their defense at trial — but not as a basis to dismiss the case.”
The U.S. just changed how it manages a tenth of its land. The Interior Department rule puts conservation and clean energy development on par with drilling, mining, and resource extraction on federal lands for the first time. The Washington Post, Maxine Joselow, Thursday, 18 April 2024: “For decades, the federal government has prioritized oil and gas drilling, hardrock mining and livestock grazing on public lands across the country. That could soon change under a far-reaching Interior Department rule that puts conservation, recreation and renewable energy development on equal footing with resource extraction. The final rule released Thursday represents a seismic shift in the management of roughly 245 million acres of public property — about one-tenth of the nation’s land mass. It is expected to draw praise from conservationists and legal challenges from fossil fuel industry groups and Republican officials, some of whom have lambasted the move as a ‘land grab.’ Interior’s Bureau of Land Management, known as the nation’s largest landlord, has long offered leases to oil and gas companies, mining firms and ranchers. Now, for the first time, the nearly 80-year-old agency will auction off ‘restoration leases’ and ‘mitigation leases’ to entities with plans to restore or conserve public lands.”
Friday, 19 April 2024:
Full Jury Is Chosen in Trump Criminal Trial. Twelve jurors and six alternates have been chosen in the Manhattan trial of Donald Trump. Outside the courthouse, a man set himself on fire. Five takeaways from the fourth day of Trump’s criminal trial. The New York Times, Friday, 19 April 2024: “The first week of the criminal trial of Donald J. Trump ended with a disturbing jolt: a 37-year-old man set himself on fire outside the courthouse, an event that overshadowed the legal proceedings inside. The news of the immolation rippled through the press corps just as the final members of Mr. Trump’s jury — including 12 seated jurors and six alternates — were being sworn in. Reporters rushed from the Lower Manhattan courtroom. But the trial’s pace, which has been faster than expected, did not slack. After lunch, Justice Juan M. Merchan conducted a hearing to determine which questions prosecutors might ask Mr. Trump if he were to testify in his own defense.” See also, First week of Trump hush money trial ends with full jury selected, The Washington Post, 12 Live coverage contributors, Friday, 19 April 2024: “The first week of Donald Trump’s hush money trial in New York wrapped up Friday afternoon. A full jury has been selected, including alternates, and the proceedings are expected to resume Monday with opening statements. Jury selection concluded Friday afternoon with five alternate jurors getting selected. They joined the 12 jurors and one alternate who had already been picked, giving the trial its full panel. Then, the proceedings continued Friday with a hearing that debated what topics Trump could be asked about, if he chooses to testify. The judge said he will rule on that by Monday.” See also, The jurors in Trump’s New York hush money trial, The Washington Post, Derek Hawkins, Patrick Svitek, and Maegan Vazquez, updated Friday, 19 April 2024: “In a typical trial, prospective jurors who know the defendant would not be allowed to serve on the jury because such familiarity would interfere with their ability to remain unbiased. As for Trump, the judge said the key issue was not whether jurors know him or have an opinion of him, but whether they can set aside their feelings and render a verdict based on the evidence and law. During questioning, some of the selected jurors acknowledged having personal views of Trump or his presidency but said they could remain impartial in the case. One spoke favorably of him, saying she liked that he ‘speaks his mind.’ Another told the court, ‘I don’t like his persona.’ Overall, the jurors showed a range of knowledge about his court cases, with several saying they didn’t follow the news closely. Trump faces 34 counts of falsifying business records, part of what prosecutors have described as a scheme during the 2016 presidential campaign to cover up an alleged affair with adult-film actress Stormy Daniels. Trump has pleaded not guilty.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James says $175 million Trump fraud bond isn’t properly backed and should be voided, CNBC, Dan Mangan, Friday, 19 April 2024: “The New York Attorney General’s office on Friday asked a judge to effectively void a $175 million bond posted by former President Donald Trump to secure a much larger monetary damage award in his civil business fraud case as he appeals the judgment. The AG’s office in a filing said Trump and other defendants in the case had failed to show there is enough identifiable collateral to back the bond for the judgment in Manhattan Supreme Court. The filing notes that the surety Trump used to obtain the bond, Knight Specialty Insurance Company, is ‘a small insurer that is not authorized to write business in New York and thus not regulated by the state’s insurance department, had never before written a surety bond in New York or in the prior two years in any other jurisdiction, and has a total policyholder surplus of just $138 million.'”
Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.) Will Make Polluters Pay to Clean Up Two ‘Forever Chemicals.’ The step follows an extraordinary move that requires utilities to reduce the levels of carcinogenic PFAS compounds in drinking water to near-zero. The New York Times, Coral Davenport, Friday, 19 April 2024: “The Biden administration is designating two ‘forever chemicals,’ man-made compounds that are linked to serious health risks, as hazardous substances under the Superfund law, shifting responsibility for their cleanup to polluters from taxpayers. The new rule announced on Friday empowers the government to force the many companies that manufacture or use perfluorooctanoic acid, also known as PFOA, and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid, known as PFOS, to monitor any releases into the environment and be responsible for cleaning them up. Those companies could face billions of dollars in liabilities. The pair of compounds are part of a larger family of chemical substances known collectively as PFAS. The compounds, found in everything from dental floss to firefighting foams to children’s toys, are called forever chemicals because they degrade very slowly and can accumulate in the body and the environment. Exposure to PFAS has been associated with metabolic disorders, decreased fertility in women, developmental delays in children and increased risk of some prostate, kidney and testicular cancers, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. The chemicals are so ubiquitous that they can be detected in the blood of almost every person in the United States. One recent government study discovered PFAS chemicals in nearly half of the nation’s tap water. In 2022, the E.P.A. found the chemicals could cause harm at levels ‘much lower than previously understood’ and that almost no level of exposure was safe. The announcement follows an extraordinary move last week from the E.P.A. mandating that water utilities reduce the PFAS in drinking water to near-zero levels. The agency has also proposed to designate seven additional PFAS chemicals as hazardous waste.” See also, For the first time, the U.S. may force polluters to clean up these ‘forever chemicals.’ The EPA is classifying two of the most prevalent PFAS ‘forever chemicals’ as hazardous substances under the federal Superfund law. The Washington Post, Maxine Joselow and Brady Dennis, Friday, 19 April 2024: “The Biden administration on Friday moved to force polluters to clean up two of the most pervasive forms of ‘forever chemicals,’ designating them as hazardous substances under the nation’s Superfund law. The long-awaited rule from the Environmental Protection Agency could mean billions of dollars of liabilities for major chemical manufacturers and users of certain types of compounds known as polyfluoroalkyl and perfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS. ‘Designating these chemicals under our Superfund authority will allow EPA to address more contaminated sites, take earlier action, and expedite cleanups, all while ensuring polluters pay for the costs to clean up pollution threatening the health of communities,’ EPA Administrator Michael Regan said in a statement. The EPA’s action on Friday applies to two widely used PFAS chemicals — perfluorooctanoic acid, known as PFOA, and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid, known as PFOS. The agency said the designation will enable regulators to investigate and force the cleanup of leaks and spills of the chemicals, which have been associated with a range of health issues, including cardiovascular problems, low birth weights and certain cancers.”
Biden Shields Millions of Acres of Alaskan Wilderness From Drilling and Mining. The administration has blocked a proposed industrial road needed to mine copper in the middle of the state and has banned oil drilling on 13 million acres in the North Slope. The New York Times, Lisa Friedman, Friday, 19 April 2024: “The Biden administration expanded federal protections across millions of acres of Alaskan wilderness on Friday, blocking oil, gas and mining operations in some of the most unspoiled land in the country. The Interior Department said it would deny a permit for an industrial road that the state of Alaska had wanted to build through the Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve in order to reach a large copper deposit with an estimated value of $7.5 billion. It also announced it would ban drilling in more than half of the 23-million-acre National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, an ecologically sensitive expanse north of the Arctic Circle. Together, the two moves amount to one of biggest efforts in history to shield Alaskan land from drilling and mining. They are expected to face challenges from industry as well as from elected leaders in Alaska, where oil and gas revenues make up much of the state’s budget and where mining is a main driver of the economy.” See also, Biden administration bans drilling in nearly half of Alaska petroleum reserve in sweeping win for climate advocates, CNN World, Ella Nilsen, Friday, 19 April 2024: “In a sweeping win for climate and environmental advocates, the Biden administration on Friday finalized a rule to ban fossil fuel drilling on nearly half of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, alongside other major conservation actions. The Interior Department will block oil drilling on over 13 million acres in the Western Arctic, including about 40% of the land of the NPR-A – a remote area that is home to protected animal species including polar bears and caribou. The reserve is more than 23 million acres of public land and an underground emergency oil supply for the US Navy that was designated in the early 1920s. More recently, it’s become the site of the ConocoPhillips-owned Willow project, a controversial oil drilling venture in the Arctic. When the Biden administration approved Willow in March 2023, it sparked intense backlash among young people on social media, as well as environmental and climate groups. Friday’s action could improve President Joe Biden’s approval among young voters.”
House Approves $95 Billion Aid Bill for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. After months of delay at the hands of a bloc of ultraconservative Republicans, the package drew overwhelming bipartisan support, reflecting broad consensus. The New York Times, Catie Edmondson, Saturday, 20 April 2024: “The House voted resoundingly on Saturday to approve $95 billion in foreign aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, as Speaker Mike Johnson put his job on the line to advance the long-stalled aid package by marshaling support from mainstream Republicans and Democrats. In four back-to-back votes, overwhelming bipartisan coalitions of lawmakers approved fresh rounds of funding for the three U.S. allies, as well as another bill meant to sweeten the deal for conservatives that could result in a nationwide ban of TikTok. The scene on the House floor reflected both the broad support in Congress for continuing to help the Ukrainian military beat back Russia, and the extraordinary political risk taken by Mr. Johnson to defy the anti-interventionist wing of his party who had sought to thwart the measure. Minutes before the vote on assistance for Kyiv, Democrats began to wave small Ukrainian flags on the House floor, as hard-right Republicans jeered…. With an ‘America First’ sentiment gripping the party’s voter base, led by Mr. Trump, Republicans dug in last year against another aid package for Kyiv, saying the matter should not even be considered unless Mr. Biden agreed to stringent anti-immigration measures. When Senate Democrats agreed earlier this year to legislation that paired the aid with stiffer border enforcement provisions, Mr. Trump denounced it and Republicans rejected it out of hand.” See also, House passes foreign aid bill, sending help to Ukraine and Israel. The measure is headed to the Senate for action next week, and President Biden has expressed support for it. The Washington Post, Marianna Sotomayor and Maegan Vazquez, Saturday, 20 April 2024: “The House passed a sweeping $95 billion package Saturday to aid foreign allies amid global threats, showcasing broad support for America’s role in the world in a risky push by Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), whose far-right flank is threatening to oust him for the action…. Passage of Ukraine aid is also a major rebuke to former president Donald Trump. Trump has long criticized Ukraine while repeatedly sympathizing with Russian leader Vladmir Putin, and has told advisers he would settle the war by letting Russia keep the land it has already seized. He pushed to turn the Ukraine aid into a loan, prompting Republicans to include a loan requirement in Saturday’s legislation, with some caveats.” See also, The House passes billions in aid for Ukraine and Israel after months of struggle. Next is the Senate. Associated Press, Stephen Groves and Lisa Mascaro, Saturday, 20 April 2024: “The House has approved $95 billion in foreign aid for Ukraine, Israel and other U.S. allies in a rare weekend session as Democrats and Republicans banded together after months of hard-right resistance over renewed American support for repelling Russia’s invasion. With an overwhelming vote Saturday, the $61 billion in aid for Ukraine passed in a matter of minutes, a strong showing as American lawmakers race to deliver a fresh round of U.S. support to the war-torn ally. Many Democrats cheered on the House floor and waved blue-and-yellow flags of Ukraine. Aid to Israel and the other allies also won approval by healthy margins, as did a measure to clamp down on the popular platform TikTok, with unique coalitions forming to push the separate bills forward. The whole package will go to the Senate, which could pass it as soon as Tuesday. President Joe Biden has promised to sign it immediately. ‘We did our work here, and I think history will judge it well,’ said a weary Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who risked his own job to marshal the package to passage…. The scene in Congress was a striking display of action after months of dysfunction and stalemate fueled by Republicans, who hold the majority but are deeply split over foreign aid, particularly for Ukraine. Johnson relied on Democrats to ensure the military and humanitarian funding — the first major package for Ukraine since December 2022 — won approval.”
Monday, 22 April 2024:
Opening Statements in Trump’s Criminal Trial: Five Takeaways. Prosecutors signaled a sweeping case, and Donald Trump’s lawyers began their assult on witnesses’ credibility. The judge seems intent on expediting the first trial of an American president. The New York Times, Jesse McKinley and Kate Christobek, Monday, 22 April 2024: “Monday marked another key moment in the criminal trial of Donald J. Trump: opening statements, during which the former president listened quietly to the prosecution’s allegations of crimes, and the defense’s counterargument that he was a simple man, wrongly accused. The jury that will decide Mr. Trump’s case concentrated intently on the statements, which began the presentation of what will be weeks of testimony and other evidence, all in a tense courtroom in Lower Manhattan.” See also, An Unprecedented Trial Opens With Two Visions of Trump. The prosecution’s opening statement sketched a seamy scheme meant to further the election of Donald Trump. His lawyer said the government’s case is merely “34 pieces of paper.” The New York Times, Jonah E. Bromwich and Ben Protess, Monday, 22 April 2024: “Manhattan prosecutors delivered a raw recounting of Donald J. Trump’s seamy past on Monday as they debuted their case against him to jurors, the nation and the world, reducing the former president to a co-conspirator in a plot to cover up three sex scandals that threatened his 2016 election win. Their opening statement was a pivotal moment in the first prosecution of an American president, a sweeping synopsis of the case against Mr. Trump, who watched from the defense table, occasionally shaking his head. Moments later, Mr. Trump’s lawyer delivered his own opening, beginning with the simple claim that ‘President Trump is innocent,’ then noting that he is once again the presumptive Republican nominee and concluding with an exhortation for jurors to ‘use your common sense.’ The jury of 12 New Yorkers who will weigh Mr. Trump’s legal fate before millions of voters decide his political future also heard brief testimony from the prosecution’s leadoff witness, David Pecker, a former tabloid publisher who was close with Mr. Trump. Mr. Pecker, who ran The National Enquirer, testified that his supermarket tabloids practiced ‘checkbook journalism.’ In this case, prosecutors say, he bought and buried stories that could have imperiled Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign.” See also, David Pecker Is the First Witness of Trump’s Criminal Trial. Mr. Pecker, the longtime publisher of The National Enquirer, is first on the stand at the former president’s trial. The New York Times, Michael Rothfeld, Monday, 22 April 2024: “The first witness in Donald J. Trump’s criminal trial is David Pecker, who was the publisher of The National Enquirer, and had traded favors with Mr. Trump since the 1990s. Mr. Pecker, who was sometimes referred to as the ‘tabloid king,’ had long used his publications to curry favor with Mr. Trump and other celebrities, in exchange for tips or for business reasons. Staff members called Mr. Trump, like other favored stars who were off limits, an ‘F.O.P.’ — ‘Friend of Pecker.’ Mr. Trump and Mr. Pecker, along with Mr. Trump’s former fixer Michael Cohen, hatched a plan in August 2015 to boost his upstart presidential campaign, prosecutors say. The former Trump allies are each expected to take a turn on the witness stand….” See also, Live Coverage: ‘Criminal Conspiracy’ Alleged as Jury Starts Hearing Trump Trial. Court adjourned for the day after opening statements from both sides and the start of testimony from the longtime publisher of The National Enquirer David Pecker. A lawyer for Donald Trump told jurors the former president did nothing illegal. The New York Times, Monday, 22 April 2024. See also, Live Updates: Court wraps up for the day in Trump hush money trial, The Washington Post, 15 Live coverage contributors, Monday, 22 April 2024: “Court ended for the day early Monday afternoon in Donald Trump’s criminal trial for allegedly falsifying business records to hide a hush money payment during the 2016 presidential election campaign. Prosecutors called their first witness, former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker, who briefly testified about using ‘checkbook journalism’ to pay for stories — a practice that prosecutors say Pecker used to help Trump’s bid for the White House. Earlier, during opening statements, the prosecution promised ‘damning’ testimony from a key witness, while Trump’s defense team told jurors that none of Trump’s conduct was criminal. The trial is scheduled to resume Tuesday morning.” See also, As hush money trial gets underway, prosecutor alleges Trump tried to ‘corrupt’ the 2016 election, Associated Press, Michael R. Sisak, Jennifer Peltz, Eric Tucker, and Jake Offenhartz, Monday, 22 April 2024: “Donald Trump tried to illegally influence the 2016 presidential election by preventing damaging stories about his personal life from becoming public, a prosecutor told jurors Monday at the start of the former president’s historic hush money trial. ‘This was a planned, coordinated, long-running conspiracy to influence the 2016 election — to help Donald Trump get elected through illegal expenditures to silence people who had something bad to say about his behavior, using doctored corporate records and bank forms to conceal those payments along the way,’ prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said. ‘It was election fraud, pure and simple.’ A defense lawyer countered by assailing the case as baseless and attacking the integrity of the onetime Trump confidant who’s now the government’s star witness. ‘President Trump is innocent. President Trump did not commit any crimes. The Manhattan district attorney’s office should never have brought this case,’ attorney Todd Blanche said. The opening statements offered the 12-person jury — and the voting public — radically divergent roadmaps for a case that will unfold against the backdrop of a closely contested White House race in which Trump is not only the presumptive Republican nominee but also a criminal defendant facing the prospect of a felony conviction and prison.” See also, First day of Trump’s hush money trial kicks off with opening statements and a witness, NPR, Ximena Bustillo, Monday, 22 April 2024: “Just before 10 a.m. Monday, a jury of 18 every-day New Yorkers filed into the Manhattan courtroom where former President Donald Trump sat at the defense table. ‘Members of the jury, we are about to proceed with the outset of the trial of Donald J. Trump,’ pronounced Judge Juan Merchan. As Merchan began instructing the jury on their critical role over the next few weeks, Trump, the defendant, sat flanked by his legal team, occasionally looking down and slightly shifting in his chair. Trump faces 34 felony counts alleging that he falsified New York business records in order to conceal damaging information to influence the 2016 presidential election. Trump claims the trial itself is ‘election interference’ because of how it is disrupting his 2024 bid for president. He has pleaded not guilty and instead argues that all he did was pay his lawyer. Merchan told the jurors that the burden of proof will be on the prosecutors, who must prove that Trump is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt…. Jurors also began to hear from the first witness: David Pecker, former CEO of American Media, the publishing company of the National Enquirer magazine.” See also, The prosecution details the meeting where Trump, Michael Cohen, and media CEO David Pecker allegedly ‘struck an agreement’ to ‘influence the 2016 presidential election,’ Politico, Erica Orden, Monday, 22 April 2024: “Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo pointed jurors to what he described as the underlying scheme that resulted in Donald Trump’s alleged crimes, starting with a 2015 meeting that took place at Trump Tower and included Trump, Michael Cohen and David Pecker, the former CEO of National Enquirer publisher American Media Inc. The three of them, Colangelo said, ‘struck an agreement at that meeting. Together, they conspired to influence the 2016 presidential election in three different ways.’ First, Colangelo said, Pecker agreed to act as the ‘eyes and ears’ for Trump’s campaign and use the publications Pecker controlled to find negative information about Trump and report it to Cohen to prevent it from becoming public. Colangelo described this as the ‘core of the conspiracy.’ Second, Colangelo said, Pecker agreed to publish flattering stories about Trump, in many cases sending Trump headlines and stories about himself for his approval before they ran. And third, according to Colangelo, AMI would use its publications to run stories attacking Trump’s political opponents, including Ben Carson and Ted Cruz.”
Trump and Attorney General Letitia James Agree on Minor Changes to $175 Million Bond. James had asked a court to reject the bond that Donald Trump posted in his civil fraud case. A deal on Monday will keep the terms of the bond largely unchanged. The New York Times, Matthew Haag, Monday, 22 April 2024: “The New York attorney general’s office and representatives for Donald J. Trump agreed in court on Monday to slightly modify the terms of a $175 million bond posted by the former president in his civil fraud case after the state questioned the qualifications of the company that provided it and sought to have it rejected. The deal will keep the bond largely unchanged, with the $175 million in cash that Mr. Trump deposited as collateral remaining in a money-market account, while adding new terms stipulating that the $175 million must remain as cash, and not be transferred into mutual funds, for example. The two sides also agreed to give the California firm that provided the bond, Knight Specialty Insurance Company, exclusive control over the money-market account.”
Tuesday, 23 April 2024:
Trump’s Hush-Money Trial Features Fierce Debate Over What He Can Say: 5 Takeaways. Donald Trump’s lawyer was harshly questioned as he tried to avoid a contempt citation. And a publisher testified about how he put The National Enquirer to work for Mr. Trump’s campaign. The New York Times, Jesse McKinley and Kate Christobek, Tuesday, 23 April 2024: “Tuesday’s session of Donald J. Trump’s criminal trial began with a heated clash between Justice Juan M. Merchan and Mr. Trump’s lead lawyer over a gag order. It ended with an insider’s look into a tabloid newspaper practice known as ‘catch and kill.’ Prosecutors said that Mr. Trump had ‘willfully and blatantly’ violated a gag order barring him from attacking jurors and witnesses, among others. They said he had done so in comments outside the courtroom and online and should be found in contempt of court. Mr. Trump’s top lawyer said in response that Mr. Trump was simply defending himself from political attacks. Justice Merchan did not rule, but he scolded the lawyer, Todd Blanche, saying, ‘you’re losing all credibility with the court.’ A former ally of Mr. Trump, David Pecker, the ex-publisher of The National Enquirer, later testified to buying and burying unflattering stories about Mr. Trump during his 2016 run for president, an arrangement he called ‘highly, highly confidential.’ Mr. Trump, 77, faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to hide a payment to a porn star, Stormy Daniels, made to cover up a sex scandal that threatened to derail his campaign. Ms. Daniels, who may testify, has said that she and Mr. Trump had a brief sexual encounter in 2006, something the former president denies.” See also, Live Coverage: Tabloid Publisher David Pecker Testifies Trump Asked Him to ‘Help the Campaign.’ The jury heard testimony about what prosecutors say was a conspiracy to bury negative news, including a porn star’s claim of a sexual encounter with Donald Trump. The longtime publisher of The National Enquirer will resume his testimony on Thursday. The New York Times, Tuesday, 23 April 2024. See also, Judge Questions Credibility of Trump’s Lawyer as Witness Details Coverup Allegations. Donald Trump’s criminal trial in Manhattan is off to an ominous start for the former president, and it might not get any easier in the days ahead. The New York Times, Jonah E. Bromwich, Ben Protess, and Maggie Haberman, Tuesday, 23 April 2024: “The judge questioned his defense lawyer’s credibility. The prosecution accused him of orchestrating a criminal conspiracy to influence the 2016 presidential election. And his former friend corroborated that accusation, delivering hours of gripping testimony about their secret plot to protect his campaign…. The judge presiding over the case, Juan M. Merchan, is expected to rule soon on a request from prosecutors to hold Mr. Trump in contempt of court for attacking witnesses and jurors alike. And the first witness — David Pecker, longtime publisher of The National Enquirer — will return to the stand on Thursday after the trial’s weekly Wednesday hiatus. Mr. Pecker, who was once close to Mr. Trump, is expected to face hours of additional questioning from prosecutors in the Manhattan district attorney’s office, before Mr. Trump’s lawyers get a chance to cross-examine him. Already, Mr. Pecker has delivered some compelling testimony, transporting jurors back to a crucial 2015 meeting with Mr. Trump and his fixer at Trump Tower in Midtown Manhattan. Prosecutors called it the ‘Trump Tower conspiracy,’ arguing that Mr. Pecker, Mr. Trump and Michael D. Cohen, who was then Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer and fixer, hatched a plot at the meeting to conceal sex scandals looming over Mr. Trump’s campaign. Their effort led Mr. Pecker’s tabloids to buy and bury two damaging stories about Mr. Trump. Mr. Cohen purchased the silence of a porn star, a deal at the heart of the case against the former president.” See also, Gag Order Hearing Is Heated as Judge Considers Citing Trump for Contempt. Justice Juan M. Merchan, overseeing Donald Trump’s criminal trial, warned the former president’s lawyer that he was losing credibility. The New York Times, Alan Feuer, Tuesday, 23 April 2024: “The judge overseeing former President Donald J. Trump’s trial in Manhattan held a fiery hearing on Tuesday about whether to find Mr. Trump in criminal contempt for repeatedly violating the provisions of a gag order. While the judge, Juan M. Merchan, did not issue an immediate ruling, he engaged in a heated back-and-forth with one of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, scolding him for his failure to offer any facts in his defense of the former president. ‘You’ve presented nothing,’ Justice Merchan told the lawyer, Todd Blanche, adding soon after: ‘You’re losing all credibility with the court.'” See also, Live updates: Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker details ‘catch and kill’ at Trump’s hush money trial, The Washington Post, 8 Live coverage contributors, Tuesday, 23 April 2024: “Donald Trump’s trial on allegations of business fraud related to hush money payments featured former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker, who was back on the stand Tuesday to detail how he offered to deploy the publication’s ‘catch and kill’ strategy to intercept negative stories about the former president. Pecker’s testimony came after an at-times contentious hearing to consider whether the former president was in contempt for violating a gag order. New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan did not immediately issue a ruling on the alleged gag order violations, but had a testy exchange with Trump attorney Todd Blanche. Pecker told jurors Tuesday that he offered in 2015 to suppress negative stories about his longtime friend, Trump, and to flag any efforts by women who would try to profit by selling stories about the then-presidential candidate. That ‘catch and kill’ strategy would prove relevant when it came to the revelation that Trump allegedly had a tryst with adult-film actress Stormy Daniels.” See also, A secret pact at Trump Tower helped kill bad stories about Trump in 2016, The Washington Post, Shayna Jacobs, Tom Jackman, Devlin Barrett, and Hannah Knowles, Tuesday, 23 April 2024: “Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign was repeatedly aided by the National Enquirer, which squelched potentially damaging stories about him and pumped out articles pummeling his rivals, the former boss of the supermarket tabloid testified Tuesday during the ex-president’s trial on charges of falsifying business records. Trump, the first former U.S. president to face a criminal trial, spent his day in the Manhattan courtroom fighting two pitched battles — one against the testimony of former tabloid executive David Pecker, his longtime friend, and another against the increasingly likely prospect that he will be punished by the trial judge for allegedly violating a gag order. On both fronts, prosecutors seemed to inflict significant damage. At one point, New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan warned Trump lawyer Todd Blanche that he was ‘losing all credibility.’ At another, Trump grimaced and shook his head as Pecker described how he helped kill an allegation — ultimately found to be false — that Trump had a child with a maid at his building.” See also, Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker says he pledged to be Trump campaign’s ‘eyes and ears’ during the 2016 presidential race, Associated Press, Michael R. Sisak, Jennifer Peltz, Eric Tucker, and Jake Offenhartz, Tuesday, 23 April 2024: “A veteran tabloid publisher testified Tuesday that he pledged to be Donald Trump ‘s ‘eyes and ears’ during his 2016 presidential campaign, recounting how he promised the then-candidate that he would help suppress harmful stories and even arranged to purchase the silence of a doorman. The testimony from David Pecker was designed to bolster the prosecution’s premise of a decades-long friendship between Trump and the former publisher of the National Enquirer that culminated in an agreement to give the candidate’s lawyer a heads-up on negative tips and stories so they could be quashed. The effort to suppress unflattering information was designed to illegally influence the election, prosecutors have alleged in striving to elevate the gravity of the first trial of a former American president and the first of four criminal cases against Trump to reach a jury.”
National Enquirer’s Help for Trump Broke Norms Even in the Tabloid World. The tabloid’s parent company was fined for breaking federal election laws after spending money to buy and bury stories that could have harmed Donald Trump’s campaign. The New York Times, Jim Rutenberg, Tuesday, 23 April 2024: “The National Enquirer was more than a friendly media outlet for Donald J. Trump’s presidential campaign in 2016. It was a powerful, national political weapon that was thrust into the service of a single candidate, in violation of campaign finance law. The tabloid’s former publisher, David Pecker, testified nonchalantly on Tuesday about how the tabloid operated in tandem with the Trump campaign, ‘catching and killing’ potentially damaging stories and running elaborate and false hit pieces on Mr. Trump’s opponents. But its practices were unusual even in the wild supermarket tabloid news game. By the admission of The Enquirer’s own publisher — first made to federal prosecutors years ago during the prosecution of Mr. Trump’s fixer, Michael Cohen — the tabloid was operating with the full intention of helping Mr. Trump’s campaign. Under the First Amendment, newspapers are permitted to support candidates. But The Enquirer’s support went beyond journalism: The publication paid $150,000 for a story a Playboy model, Karen McDougal, was preparing to tell about an affair she said she had with the candidate. Then, it published nothing. That sort of deal is not unusual in the tabloid news trade, even if it violates journalistic standards followed by mainstream American outlets like this one, which have rules against paying sources. But before 2016, there had never been a known catch-and-kill deal to aid a presidential campaign. In that context, The Enquirer’s payment violated federal campaign laws prohibiting corporations from donating to presidential candidates — who are limited to receiving direct donations of $4,400 per person — and forbidding them to coordinate election-related spending with campaigns. As The Enquirer’s parent company at the time, American Media, admitted in a ‘non-prosecution’ deal with the federal government in 2018: ‘AMI knew that corporations such as AMI are subject to federal campaign finance laws, and that expenditures by corporations, made for purposes of influencing an election and in coordination with or at the request of a candidate or campaign, are unlawful.'”
Wednesday, 24 April 2024:
Arizona Charges Giuliani and Other Trump Allies in Election Interference Case. Those charged included Boris Epshteyn, a top legal strategist for Donald Trump, and fake electors who acted on Mr. Trump’s behalf in Arizona after the 2020 election. The New York Times, Danny Hakim and Maggie Haberman, Wednesday, 24 April 2024: “Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mark Meadows, and a number of others who advised Donald J. Trump during the 2020 election were indicted in Arizona on Wednesday, along with all of the fake electors who acted on Mr. Trump’s behalf there to try to keep him in power despite his loss in the state. Boris Epshteyn, one of Mr. Trump’s top legal strategists, was also among those indicted, a complication for Mr. Trump’s defense in the criminal trial that began this week in Manhattan over hush money payments made to a porn star, Stormy Daniels. The indictment includes conspiracy, fraud and forgery charges, related to alleged attempts by the defendants to change the 2020 election results. Arizona is the fourth swing state to bring an elections case involving the activities of the Trump campaign in 2020, but only the second after Georgia to go beyond the fake electors whom the campaign deployed in swing states lost by Mr. Trump. The former president, who is seeking another term, was also named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Arizona case.” See also, Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani, and other Trump allies are charged in Arizona 2020 election investigation, The Washington Post, Yvonne Wingett Sanchez, 24 April 2024: “An Arizona grand jury on Wednesday indicted seven attorneys or aides affiliated with Donald Trump’s 2020 presidential campaign as well as 11 Arizona Republicans on felony charges related to their alleged efforts to subvert Joe Biden’s 2020 victory in the state, according to an announcement by the state attorney general. Those indicted include former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, attorneys Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, John Eastman and Christina Bobb, top campaign adviser Boris Epshteyn and former campaign aide Mike Roman. They are accused of allegedly aiding an unsuccessful strategy to award the state’s electoral votes to Trump instead of Biden after the 2020 election. Also charged are the Republicans who signed paperwork on Dec. 14, 2020, that falsely purported Trump was the rightful winner, including former state party chair Kelli Ward, two state senators and Tyler Bowyer, a GOP national committeeman and chief operating officer of Turning Point Action, the campaign arm of the pro-Trump conservative group Turning Point USA. Trump was not charged, but he is described in the indictment as an unindicted co-conspirator.” See also, Here’s who was charged in the Arizona 2020 election interference case, The Washington Post, Yvonne Wingett Sanchez, Amy Gardner, and Holly Bailey, Wednesday, 24 April 2024. See also, Arizona indicts 18 in election interference case, including Rudy Jiuliani and Mark Meadows, Associated Press, Jacques Billeaud, Josh Kelety, and Jonathan J. Cooper, Wednesday, 24 April 2024: “An Arizona grand jury has indicted former President Donald Trump ‘s chief of staff Mark Meadows, lawyer Rudy Giuliani and 16 others for their roles in an attempt to overturn Trump’s loss to Joe Biden in the 2020 election. The indictment released Wednesday names 11 Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring that Trump won Arizona in 2020. They include the former state party chair, a 2022 U.S. Senate candidate and two sitting state lawmakers, who are charged with nine counts each of conspiracy, fraud and forgery. The identities of seven other defendants, including Giuliani and Meadows, were not immediately released because they had not yet been served with the documents. They were readily identifiable based on descriptions of the defendants, however. Trump himself was not charged but was referred to as an unindicted co-conspirator.”
Trump Named as Unindicted Conspirator in Michigan Election Interference Case. An investigator said in court that former President Donald Trump and some of his aides conspired with fake electors to overturn his 2020 defeat in Michigan. The New York Times, Danny Hakim, Wednesday, 24 April 2024: “Former President Donald J. Trump was named as an unindicted co-conspirator on Wednesday in the investigation by the Michigan attorney general’s office into interference in the 2020 election. Charges have already been brought in Michigan against 15 Republicans who acted as fake electors for Mr. Trump after President Biden defeated him in the state in 2020. During pretrial hearings in the case this week in Lansing, a special agent for the attorney general’s office, Howard Shock, said the investigation was still open. He named a number of people he said had taken part in the conspiracy but have not been indicted, including Mr. Trump; Mark Meadows, the former White House chief of staff, and Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s former personal lawyer. Defense lawyers for the Michigan fake electors, and some of the electors themselves, have been critical of the actions of the Republican Party and the 2020 Trump campaign, saying that lawyers and operatives had led the fake electors astray.”
Thursday, 25 April 2024:
5 Takeaways From David Pecker’s Testimony in Trump’s Criminal Trial. David Pecker told jurors of a universe in which favors for celebrities were demanded and dispensed. His cross-examination will continue Friday. The New York Times, Jesse McKinley and Kate Christobek, Thursday, 25 April 2024: “The criminal trial of Donald Trump featured vivid testimony on Thursday about a plot to protect his first presidential campaign and the beginnings of a tough cross-examination of the prosecution’s initial witness, David Pecker. In his third day of testimony, Mr. Pecker, the former publisher of The National Enquirer, described his involvement in the suppression of the stories of two women who claimed to have had sex with Mr. Trump: Karen McDougal, a Playboy model, and Stormy Daniels, the porn star whose 2016 hush-money payoff forms the basis of the prosecution’s case.” See also, Live Coverage: Tabloid Publisher David Pecker Describes Deals to Buy Silence at Trump Trial, He has described buying and burying stories that could have damaged Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign. The New York Times, Thursday, 25 April 2024. See also, In Trump Tower, Days Before He Became President in 2017, Trump Praised David Pecker, the Man Who Kept His Secrets. Pecker, former publisher of The National Enquirer, testified that Donald Trump thanked him for burying stories. The New York Times, Jonah E. Bromwich, Ben Protess, and Michael Rothfeld, Thursday, 25 April 2024: “Days before Donald J. Trump became president in 2017, a cadre of advisers, officials and allies descended on his office at Trump Tower: a future secretary of state, his soon-to-be chief of staff, the F.B.I. director — and the publisher of The National Enquirer. The publisher, David Pecker, may have seemed out of place, but he had just performed an indispensable and confidential service to the Trump campaign: He had paid off a Playboy model, Karen McDougal, who had said she had an affair with Mr. Trump, and a doorman who had heard that Mr. Trump had fathered a child out of wedlock. The future president, triumphant, thanked Mr. Pecker for his service. ‘He said, I want to thank you for handling the McDougal situation, and then he also said, I wanted to thank you for the doorman situation,’ Mr. Pecker testified at Mr. Trump’s criminal trial in Manhattan Thursday, leaving it unclear if anyone else heard the exchange. ‘He said that the stories could be very embarrassing.’ Mr. Trump also asked after Ms. McDougal: ‘How’s our girl?’ Mr. Pecker said he replied, She’s cool. She’s very quiet. No issues.’ That remarkable scene — where Mr. Trump’s lofty new status as president-elect collided with his colorful New York habitat — was private until Thursday, when Mr. Pecker recounted it to jurors. He described in vivid detail how Mr. Trump depended on him to buy and bury damaging stories that could have derailed Mr. Trump’s campaign, the plot that prosecutors put at the center of the case.” See also, Ex-National Enquirer publisher David Pecker testifies about adult-film actress and others at Trump’s hush money trial, The Washington Post, 10 Live coverage contributors, Thursday, 25 April 2024: “Ex-National Enquirer publisher David Pecker’s testimony Thursday in Donald Trump’s hush money trial in New York included references to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels and deals to quash potentially embarrassing stories about Trump ahead of the 2016 presidential election. Pecker, during direct examination by prosecutors, testified that he spoke with Trump and his aides about paying to shut down a former Playboy model’s story about a year-long affair with Trump. He also said he heard about a story involving Daniels. Trump’s defense team began cross examination in the afternoon. Before Pecker began testifying, prosecutors again asked the court to hold Trump in contempt of a gag order, citing additional statements he has made over the past two days. The judge did not say when he would make a decision.” See also, Live coverage: Trump hush money trial day 7 highlights: David Pecker cross-examination begins, Associated Press, Thursday, 25 April 2024.
Conservative Justices Appear Poised to Rule Ex-Presidents Have Some Level of Immunity. Such a ruling would probably send the case back to a lower court and could delay any trial until after the November election. The New York Times, Adam Liptak, Thursday, 25 April 2024: “The Supreme Court’s conservative majority appeared ready on Thursday to rule that former presidents have some degree of immunity from criminal prosecution, a move that could further delay the criminal case against former President Donald J. Trump on charges that he plotted to subvert the 2020 election. Such a ruling would most likely send the case back to the trial court, ordering it to draw distinctions between official and private conduct. It would amount to a major statement on the scope of presidential power. Though there was seeming consensus among the justices that the case could eventually go forward based on Mr. Trump’s private actions, the additional proceedings could make it hard to conduct the trial before the 2024 election.” See also, 4 Takeaways From the Supreme Court Hearing on Trump’s Immunity Claim. Several justices signaled interest in some protections for official acts, which could impede a swift trial in the federal election subversion case. The New York Times, Charlie Savage and Alan Feuer, Thursday, 25 April 2024. See also, Live Coverage: Justices Seem Ready to Limit the 2020 Election Case Against Trump. Such a ruling in the case, on whether the former president is immune from prosecution, would probably send it back to a lower court and could delay any trial until after the November election. The New York Times, Thursday, 25 April 2024. See also, Supreme Court seems poised to allow Trump January 6 trial, but not immediately, The Washington Post, Ann E. Marimow, Thursday, 25 April 2024: “The Supreme Court on Thursday appeared ready to reject Donald Trump’s sweeping claim that he is immune from prosecution on charges of trying to subvert the 2020 election, but in a way that is likely to significantly delay his stalled federal trial in the nation’s capital. In nearly three hours of oral argument, both conservative and liberal justices grappled with the historic significance of the case, which will set boundaries for presidential power in the future even as it impacts whether Trump faces trial in D.C. before this year’s presidential election — in which he is the likely Republican nominee.” See also, Live coverage: Highlights from Supreme Court arguments over Trump’s immunity claim, The Washington Post, 10 Live coverage contributors, Thursday, 25 April 2024. See also, Chief Justice John Roberts hates Trump appeals court decision and other takeaways from the oral argument on Trump’s claim of immunity from prosecution, The Washington Post, Devlin Barrett and Ann E. Marimow, Thursday, 25 April 2024: “1. the justices seemed to generally agree, in broad terms, that Trump does not have blanket immunity…. 2. The chief justice does not like the appeals court ruling on this issue…. 3. Conservative justices seem more focused on future presidents than Trump’s future…. 4. Liberal justices say Trump’s immunity claims would create a lawless king.” See also, Supreme Court seems skeptical of Trump’s claim of absolute immunity but decision’s timing is unclear, Associated Press, Mark Sherman, Thursday, 25 April 2024: “The Supreme Court on Thursday appeared likely to reject former President Donald Trump’s claim of absolute immunity from prosecution over election interference, but several justices signaled reservations about the charges that could cause a lengthy delay, possibly beyond November’s election. A majority of the justices did not appear to embrace the claim of absolute immunity that would stop special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of Trump on charges he conspired to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden. But in arguments lasting more than 2 1/2 hours in the court’s first consideration of criminal charges against a former president, several conservative justices indicated they could limit when former presidents might be prosecuted, suggesting that the case might have to be sent back to lower courts before any trial could begin.”
Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.) Severely Limits Pollution From Coal-Burning Power Plants. These new regulations could spell the end for plants that burn coal, the fossil fuel that powered the country for more than a century. The New York Times, Lisa Friedman and Coral Davenport, Thursday, 25 April 2024: “The Biden administration on Thursday placed the final cornerstone of its plan to tackle climate change: a regulation that would force the nation’s coal-fired power plants to virtually eliminate the planet-warming pollution that they release into the air, or shut down. The regulation from the Environmental Protection Agency requires coal plants in the United States to reduce 90 percent of their greenhouse pollution by 2039, one year earlier than the agency had initially proposed. The compressed timeline was welcomed by climate activists but condemned by coal executives who said the new standards would be impossible to meet. The E.P.A. also imposed three additional regulations on coal-burning power plants, including stricter limits on emissions of mercury, a neurotoxin linked to developmental damage in children, from plants that burn lignite coal, the lowest grade of coal. The rules also more tightly restrict the seepage of toxic ash from coal plants into water supplies and limit the discharge of wastewater from coal plants.” See also, New Environmental Protection Agency rules will slash air, water, and planet warming pollution from U.S. power plants. Four rules will reduce harmful emissions from gas and coal-fired power plants across the country. Legal challenges are likely. The Washington Post, Maxine Joselow, Thursday, 25 April 2024: “The Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday finalized an ambitious set of rules aimed at slashing air pollution, water pollution and planet-warming emissions spewing from the nation’s power plants. If fully implemented, the rules will have enormous consequences for U.S. climate goals, the air Americans breathe and the ways they get their electricity. The power sector ranks as the nation’s second-largest contributor to climate change, and it is a major source of toxic air pollutants tied to various health problems.” See also, Strict new Environmental Protection Agency rules would force coal-fired power plants to capture emissions or shut down, Associated Press, Matthew Daly, Thursday, 25 April 2024: “Coal-fired power plants would be forced to capture smokestack emissions or shut down under a rule issued Thursday by the Environmental Protection Agency. New limits on greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel-fired electric plants are the Biden administration’s most ambitious effort yet to roll back planet-warming pollution from the power sector, the nation’s second-largest contributor to climate change. The rules are a key part of President Joe Biden’s pledge to eliminate carbon pollution from the electricity sector by 2035 and economy-wide by 2050. The rule was among four measures targeting coal and natural gas plants that the EPA said would provide ‘regulatory certainty’ to the power industry and encourage them to make investments to transition ‘to a clean energy economy.’ The measures include requirements to reduce toxic wastewater pollutants from coal-fired plants and to safely manage coal ash in unlined storage ponds. EPA Administrator Michael Regan said the rules will reduce pollution and improve public health while supporting the reliable, long-term supply of electricity that America needs.”
Friday, 26 April 2024:
5 Takeaways From the Second Week of Donald Trump’s Criminal Trial. A tabloid publisher’s testimony dominated a week that began with opening statements setting the stage for the first prosecution of a president. The New York Times, Kate Christobek and Jesse McKinley, Friday, 26 April 2024: “The second week of Donald Trump’s Manhattan criminal trial was dominated by four days of testimony by David Pecker, the former publisher of The National Enquirer, who detailed his efforts to safeguard Mr. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. Mr. Pecker, a longtime associate of the former president, talked at length about a ‘catch and kill’ scheme that he said he had entered into with Mr. Trump and his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, during a 2015 meeting at Trump Tower. The publisher said he would purchase the rights to unsavory stories he had no intention of running. His testimony also teed up the story of Stormy Daniels, a porn star who claims to have had sex with Mr. Trump in 2006 and received a hush-money payment in the days before the 2016 election, a deal at the center of the case…. The week also brought more accusations that Mr. Trump had violated a gag order prohibiting him from attacking witnesses, prosecutors and jurors. Justice Juan M. Merchan has not ruled on the prosecution’s request to hold Mr. Trump in contempt, and said he would hold another hearing next Thursday to address allegations of new violations.” See also, Live Coverage: Trump Trial Adjourns Until Tuesday, The New York Times, Friday, 26 April 2024: “The jury heard from three witnesses on Friday: a banker, Donald J. Trump’s longtime executive assistant and the former publisher of The National Enquirer, who explained how he had worked to bury negative stories and help elect Mr. Trump.” See also, Live coverage: Trump’s hush money trial is finished for the week after third witness testifies, The Washington Post, 8 Live coverage contributors, Friday, 26 April 2024: “The second week of Donald Trump’s hush money trial concluded Friday afternoon. Before the proceedings wrapped for the day, former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker finished his testimony. He was followed by witnesses Rhona Graff, a longtime Trump assistant, and a banker who dealt with Michael Cohen. The trial is set to resume Tuesday morning. The former president is charged with falsifying business records in connection with a hush money payment to an adult film actress before the 2016 presidential election.” See also, Trump’s lawyers try to discredit testimony of prosecution’s first witness in hush money trial, Associated Press, Michael R. Sisak, Jennifer Peltz, Jake Offenhartz, and Alanna Durkin Richer, Friday, 26 April 2024: “Donald Trump’s defense team attacked the credibility of prosecutors’ first witness in his hush money case on Friday, seeking to discredit testimony detailing a scheme to bury negative stories to protect the Republican’s 2016 presidential campaign. On the witness stand for a fourth day, former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker was grilled about his memory and past statements as the defense tried to poke holes in potentially crucial testimony in the first criminal trial of a former American president. Two other witnesses followed Pecker as prosecutors built the foundation of their case involving a hush money payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels, who claimed she had a sexual encounter with Trump. Trump’s longtime executive assistant told jurors she recalled seeing Daniels in a reception area of Trump Tower, though the date of the visit wasn’t clear.”
Trump’s “Absolute Immunity” Claim: Conservative Supreme Court Justices Take Argument Over Trump’s Immunity in Unexpected Direction. Thursday’s Supreme Court hearing was memorable for its discussion of coups, assassinations, and internments–but very little about the former president’s conduct. The New York Times, Adam Liptak, Friday, 26 April 2024: “Before the Supreme Court heard arguments on Thursday on former President Donald J. Trump’s claim that he is immune from prosecution, his stance was widely seen as a brazen and cynical bid to delay his trial. The practical question in the case, it was thought, was not whether the court would rule against him but whether it would act quickly enough to allow the trial to go forward before the 2024 election. Instead, members of the court’s conservative majority treated Mr. Trump’s assertion that he could not face charges that he tried to subvert the 2020 election as a weighty and difficult question. They did so, said Pamela Karlan, a law professor at Stanford, by averting their eyes from Mr. Trump’s conduct. ‘What struck me most about the case was the relentless efforts by several of the justices on the conservative side not to focus on, consider or even acknowledge the facts of the actual case in front of them,’ she said…. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson took a … straightforward approach. ‘If the potential for criminal liability is taken off the table, wouldn’t there be a significant risk that future presidents would be emboldened to commit crimes with abandon while they’re in office?’ she asked…. The conservative justices did not seem concerned that Mr. Trump’s lawyer, D. John Sauer, said his client was free during his presidency to commit lawless acts, subject to prosecution only after impeachment by the House and conviction in the Senate. (There have been four presidential impeachments, two of Mr. Trump, and no convictions.) Liberal justices asked whether he was serious, posing hypothetical questions. ‘If the president decides that his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military or orders someone to assassinate him,’ Justice Jackson asked, ‘is that within his official acts for which he can get immunity?’ Mr. Sauer said ‘that could well be an official act’ not subject to prosecution. Justice Elena Kagan also gave it a go. ‘How about,’ she said, ‘if a president orders the military to stage a coup?’ Mr. Sauer, after not a little back and forth, said that ‘it could well be’ an official act.”
Trump Allies Draw Up Plans to Blunt the Federal Reserve’s Independence. Some Trump advisers argue that the president should be consulted on interest-rate decisions. The Wall Street Journal, Andrew Restuccia, Nick Timiroos, and Alex Leary, Friday, 26 April 2024: “Donald Trump’s allies are quietly drafting proposals that would attempt to erode the Federal Reserve’s independence if the former president wins a second term, in the midst of a deepening divide among his advisers over how aggressively to challenge the central bank’s authority. Former Trump administration officials and other supporters of the presumptive GOP nominee have in recent months discussed a range of proposals, from incremental policy changes to a long-shot assertion that the president himself should play a role in setting interest rates. A small group of the former president’s allies—whose work is so secretive that even some prominent former Trump economic aides weren’t aware of it—has produced a roughly 10-page document outlining a policy vision for the central bank, according to people familiar with the matter.”
Trump Vice President contender Kristi Noem writes of killing her dog and goat in new book, The Guardian, Martin Pengelly, Friday, 26 April 2024: “In 1952, as a Republican candidate for vice-president, Richard Nixon stirred criticism by admitting receiving a dog, Checkers, as a political gift. In 2012, as the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney was pilloried for tying a dog, Seamus, to the roof of the family car for a cross-country trip. But in 2024 Kristi Noem, a strong contender to be named running mate to Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, has managed to go one further – by admitting killing a dog of her own. ‘Cricket was a wirehair pointer, about 14 months old,’ the South Dakota governor writes in a new book, adding that the dog, a female, had an ‘aggressive personality’ and needed to be trained to be used for hunting pheasant. What unfolds over the next few pages shows how that effort went very wrong indeed – and, remarkably, how Cricket was not the only domestic animal Noem chose to kill one day in hunting season.”
Five Major Climate Policies Trump Would Probably Reverse if Elected. He has called for increased oil production and said that electric vehicles will result in an ‘assassination’ of jobs. The New York Times, Lisa Friedman, Friday, 26 April 2024: “Former President Donald J. Trump has vowed to ‘cancel’ President Biden’s policies for cutting pollution from fossil-fuel-burning power plants, ‘terminate’ efforts to encourage electric vehicles, and ‘develop the liquid gold that is right under our feet’ by promoting oil and gas. Those changes and others that Mr. Trump has promised, if he were to win the presidency again, represent a 180-degree shift from Mr. Biden’s climate agenda. When he was president, Mr. Trump reversed more than 100 environmental protections put in place by the Obama administration. Mr. Biden has in turn reversed much of Mr. Trump’s agenda. But climate advocates argue a second Trump term would be far more damaging than his first, because the window to keep rising global temperatures to relatively safe levels is rapidly closing.”
Saturday, 27 April 2024:
Fact-Checking Trump’s Remarks in the Hush Money Trial. Each day before and after court proceedings, the former president stepped out in front of the cameras and offered his version of the case. The New York Times, Linda Qiu, Saturday, 27 April 2024: “Donald J. Trump spent the bulk of the past week in a Manhattan courtroom, standing trial as the first American president to face criminal prosecution. He is accused of falsifying business records to cover up an affair with a porn actress ahead of the 2016 election. Even though he did not take the stand as opening statements got underway, he took to the cameras to argue his case each day the court was in session. Here’s a fact check.”
Sunday, 28 April 2024:
Trump’s Trial Could Bring a Rarity: Consequences for His Words. The former president has spent decades spewing thousands and thousands of words, sometimes contradicting himself. That tendency is now working against him in his Manhattan criminal case. The New York Times, Maggie Haberman and Jonah E. Bromwich, Sunday, 28 April 2024: “The question of what is true — or at least what can be proven — is at the heart of any trial. But this particular defendant [Trump], accused by the Manhattan district attorney’s office of falsifying business records to conceal a sex scandal, has spent five decades spewing thousands and thousands of words, sometimes contradicting himself within minutes, sometimes within the same breath, with little concern for the consequences of what he said. Mr. Trump has treated his own words as disposable commodities, intended for single use, and not necessarily indicative of any deeply held beliefs. And his tendency to pile phrases on top of one another has often worked to his benefit, amusing or engaging his supporters — sometimes spurring threats and even violence — while distracting, enraging or just plain disorienting his critics and adversaries.”
Letters from an American, Substack, Heather Cox Richardson, Sunday, 28 April 2024: “Saturday night, journalists, politicians, and celebrities gathered for the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, an annual fundraiser for the White House Correspondents’ Association, which protects press passes for journalists who regularly cover the White House, assigns seats in the briefing room, funds scholarships for aspiring journalists, and gives awards for outstanding journalism. It is traditionally an evening of comedy, but last night, after a humorous speech, President Joe Biden implored the press to take the threat of dictatorship seriously. ‘I’m sincerely not asking of you to take sides but asking you to rise up to the seriousness of the moment; move past the horse race numbers and the gotcha moments and the distractions, the sideshows that have come to dominate and sensationalize our politics; and focus on what’s actually at stake,’ he said. ‘Every single one of us has…a serious role to play in making sure democracy endures…. I have my role, but, with all due respect, so do you.’ George Stephanopoulos of ABC’s This Week apparently took this reminder to heart. ‘Until now,’ he said in the show’s opener on Sunday, ‘[n]o American president had ever faced a criminal trial. No American president had ever faced a federal indictment for retaining and concealing classified documents. No American president had ever faced a federal indictment or a state indictment for trying to overturn an election, or been named an unindicted co-conspirator in two other states for the same crime. No American president ever faced hundreds of millions of dollars in judgments for business fraud, defamation, and sexual abuse…. The scale of the abnormality is so staggering, that it can actually become numbing. It’s all too easy to fall into reflexive habits, to treat this as a normal campaign, where both sides embrace the rule of law, where both sides are dedicated to a debate based on facts and the peaceful transfer of power. But, that is not what’s happening this election year. Those bedrock tenets of our democracy are being tested in a way we haven’t seen since the Civil War. It’s a test for the candidates, for those of us in the media, and for all of us as citizens.'”
Monday, 29 April 2024:
Florida Abortion Ban to Take Effect, Cutting Off Major Access Point. The state has dozens of clinics that serve tens of thousands of women a year, including from across the Southeast. The six-week ban will require most to travel much farther. The New York Times, Patricia Mazzei, Monday, 29 April 2024: “Florida has long played a significant role in the American abortion landscape, with dozens of clinics providing the procedure to tens of thousands of residents a year while also taking in patients from across the Southeast. That era will end, at least for now, on Wednesday, when a ban on most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy will take effect. The strict new law will replace a 15-week ban and require most Floridians and other Southerners seeking the procedure to travel to Virginia or farther. Almost every other state in the region banned or sharply restricted abortion after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022; many had few abortion providers even before the ruling. North Carolina still allows abortions up to 12 weeks, but with a 72-hour waiting period that makes it a less practical option for out-of-state patients.”
Tuesday, 30 April 2024:
How Far Trump Would Go, Time, Eric Cortellessa, Tuesday, 30 April 2024: “Donald Trump thinks he’s identified a crucial mistake of his first term: He was too nice. We’ve been talking for more than an hour on April 12 at his fever-dream palace in Palm Beach. Aides lurk around the perimeter of a gilded dining room overlooking the manicured lawn. When one nudges me to wrap up the interview, I bring up the many former Cabinet officials who refuse to endorse Trump this time. Some have publicly warned that he poses a danger to the Republic. Why should voters trust you, I ask, when some of the people who observed you most closely do not? As always, Trump punches back, denigrating his former top advisers. But beneath the typical torrent of invective, there is a larger lesson he has taken away. ‘I let them quit because I have a heart. I don’t want to embarrass anybody,’ Trump says. ‘I don’t think I’ll do that again. From now on, I’ll fire.’ Six months from the 2024 presidential election, Trump is better positioned to win the White House than at any point in either of his previous campaigns. He leads Joe Biden by slim margins in most polls, including in several of the seven swing states likely to determine the outcome. But I had not come to ask about the election, the disgrace that followed the last one, or how he has become the first former—and perhaps future—American President to face a criminal trial. I wanted to know what Trump would do if he wins a second term, to hear his vision for the nation, in his own words. What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world. To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding. He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen. Trump remains the same guy, with the same goals and grievances. But in person, if anything, he appears more assertive and confident. ‘When I first got to Washington, I knew very few people,’ he says. ‘I had to rely on people.’ Now he is in charge. The arranged marriage with the timorous Republican Party stalwarts is over; the old guard is vanquished, and the people who remain are his people. Trump would enter a second term backed by a slew of policy shops staffed by loyalists who have drawn up detailed plans in service of his agenda, which would concentrate the powers of the state in the hands of a man whose appetite for power appears all but insatiable. ‘I don’t think it’s a big mystery what his agenda would be,’ says his close adviser Kellyanne Conway. ‘But I think people will be surprised at the alacrity with which he will take action.'” See also, Read the Full Transcripts of Donald Trump’s Interviews With TIME, Time, Time Staff, Tuesday, 30 April 2024. See also, Trump Again Vows Mass Deportations and Won’t Rule Out Political Violence. In an interview with Time magazine, the former president said he planned to use the military to deport migrants and would not dismiss the possibility of political violence after this year’s election. The New York Times, Michael Gold, Tuesday, 30 April 2024: “Former President Donald J. Trump told Time magazine in an interview published Tuesday morning that if elected in November, he would deploy the U.S. military to detain and deport migrants and permit states to decide whether to prosecute those who violate abortion bans, while hedging on the possibility of political violence after the 2024 election. Mr. Trump has rarely given lengthy interviews with mainstream news outlets, particularly since leaving the White House. His conversations with Time — a sit-down at the former president’s residence in Palm Beach, Fla., and a follow-up phone call — offered a revealing glimpse of how he would wield presidential power, challenge democratic norms and reshape the country if he won back the White House in November. At one point, Mr. Trump told Time that he would be willing to deploy the military as part of an extreme deportation operation he has said he plans to conduct if elected, and that he would be willing to bypass a law that prohibits using U.S. troops against civilians.”
Trump Jurors Hear How Seamy Hush-Money Deals Were Made. Keith Davidson, a lawyer for Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, will resume testimony on Thursday. The New York Times, Ben Protess, Jonah E. Bromwich, Alan Feuer, and William K. Rashbaum, Tuesday, 30 April 2024: “He was the man behind the hush money, the amiable Beverly Hills lawyer who specialized in celebrity dirt — unearthing it, and then, for the right price, burying it forever. But in 2016, the lawyer, Keith Davidson, was on the verge of something grander than a run-of-the-mill sex tape or affair. He had two clients shopping stories so big they might sway a presidential election: Their names were Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, and they were ready to tell the world about their sexual encounters with Donald J. Trump. In the days ahead, the Manhattan district attorney’s office will question Mr. Davidson at Mr. Trump’s criminal trial in Manhattan, asking him to take jurors behind the scenes to see how Mr. Trump’s allies bought his clients’ silence. Mr. Davidson, who began testifying earlier in the week, is expected to face questioning about the hush-money payment to Ms. Daniels, as well as its aftermath, when for a time she denied having an affair with Mr. Trump…. In a crucial back-and-forth with prosecutors this week, Mr. Davidson began to tie Mr. Trump to the $130,000 hush-money payment to Ms. Daniels, the porn star whose payoff is at the heart of the case. Although Mr. Trump did not pay Ms. Daniels directly — his fixer, Michael D. Cohen did — Mr. Davidson portrayed Mr. Trump as the hidden hand shaping the machinations. ‘Michael Cohen didn’t have the authority to actually spend money,’ Mr. Davidson told the jury, adding, ‘My understanding was that Mr. Trump was the beneficiary of this contract.'” See also, Contempt Fines and Hush-Money Details: 5 Takeaways From Trump’s Trial. Donald Trump was fined for contempt and warned of jail time before a lawyer testified about how he struck deals to silence two women who said they had trysts with the former president. The New York Times, Jesse McKinley and Kate Christobek, Tuesday, 30 April 2024: “The third week of the criminal trial of Donald J. Trump began with a rebuke: The judge, Juan M. Merchan, held the former president in contempt and fined him $9,000 for repeatedly violating a gag order. He also threatened jail time if the violations continue. That decision on Tuesday, triggered by Mr. Trump’s comments on social media about witnesses and others, preceded riveting testimony from a lawyer who had arranged a $130,000 hush-money payment to conceal a tryst between Mr. Trump and a porn star, Stormy Daniels, a sum paid weeks before the 2016 election.” See also, Live Coverage: Lawyer for Stormy Daniels Says He Believed Trump Was Behind Hush-Money Talks, The New York Times, Tuesday, 30 April 2024: “The lawyer, Keith Davidson, testified that the release of the ‘Access Hollywood’ tape, in which Donald J. Trump described assaulting women, increased the urgency of talks to buy and bury Ms. Daniels’s story of a sexual encounter with him. The $130,000 payment is at the heart of the case.” See also, Read the Judge’s Contempt Ruling Against Trump, The New York Times, Tuesday, 30 April 2024. See also, Trump Trials takeaways, The Washington Post, Perry Stein and Devlin Barrett, Tuesday, 30 April 2024: “Today in Manhattan criminal court, we got into the weeds of banking, the sleaze of tabloid dealmaking and the screams of Michael Cohen. The ninth day of the New York state case concluded with Keith Davidson — the Los Angeles lawyer who once represented adult-film actress Stormy Daniels — still on the stand. He spent hours detailing how each of the hush money payments to Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal were brokered. In his telling, all negotiations flowed through the National Enquirer and Cohen, then Trump’s attorney.” See also, Trump held in contempt after violating gag order in hush money trial. The former president complains the trial is moving like a ‘speeding bullet.’ The Washington Post, Devlin Barrett, Shayna Jacobs, Perry Stein, and Isaac Arnsdorf, Tuesday, 30 April 2024: “Former president Donald Trump was held in contempt of court Tuesday for repeatedly violating a gag order, and the judge overseeing his ongoing criminal trial warned him that he could go to jail if he keeps breaking the court’s rules. ‘Defendant is hereby warned that the Court will not tolerate continued violations of its lawful orders and that if necessary and appropriate under the circumstances, it will impose an incarceratory punishment,’ New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan wrote in an eight-page ruling finding Trump violated the order on nine occasions. Merchan ruled that Trump was in contempt of court for violations of a gag order that was imposed to protect the safety of people involved in the hush money trial and their families. Trump purposely violated the order in his Truth Social posts and campaign materials, the judge said, and his behavior warranted a finding of contempt and a $9,000 fine, $1,000 per each violation. The judge ordered the nine offending posts deleted, and within hours of his ruling they were gone.” See also, Live coverage: Lawyer Keith Davidson testifies about Stormy Daniels in Trump hush money trial, The Washington Post, 12 Live coverage contributors, Tuesday, 30 April 2024: “The Donald Trump criminal trial proceedings in New York on Tuesday started with the former president being found in contempt for violating a gag order, before moving onto testimony that included a lawyer who had represented former model Karen McDougal and adult-film actress Stormy Daniels. Lawyer Keith Davidson testified about behind-the-scenes arrangements that he said involved McDougal and Daniels in connection with their alleged experiences with Trump. Earlier, as proceedings entered their third week, the judge in the hush money trial ruled that Trump was in contempt of court for nine violations of a gag order that was imposed to protect the safety of people involved in the trial and their families. New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan said Trump purposely violated the order in his Truth Social posts and campaign materials and that his behavior warranted a finding of contempt and a $9,000 fine. See also, Hush money trial judge raises threat of jail as he finds Trump violated gag order and fines him $9,000, Associated Press, Michael R. Sisak, Jennifer Peltz, Jake Offenhartz, and Colleen Long, Tuesday, 30 April 2024: “Donald Trump was held in contempt of court Tuesday and fined $9,000 for repeatedly violating a gag order that barred him from making public statements about witnesses, jurors and some others connected to his New York hush money case. If he does it again, the judge warned, he could be jailed. Prosecutors had alleged 10 violations, but New York Judge Juan M. Merchan found there were nine. Trump stared down at the table in front of him as the judge read the ruling, frowning slightly.” See also, Live coverage: Trump trial Day 9 highlights: Judge rules Trump violated gag order, Associated Press, Tuesday, 30 April 2024.
Trump Wants to Prosecute Biden. He Also Thinks Presidents Deserve Immunity. In arguing to the Supreme Court that he cannot be charged for acts while in office, Donald Trump has asked the justices to enforce a norm that he has long threatened to shatter. The New York Times, Alan Feuer and Maggie Haberman, Tuesday, 30 April 2024: “When a lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump argued before the Supreme Court last week that his client should be immune from charges of plotting to subvert the last election, he asked the justices to picture a world in which former presidents were ceaselessly pursued in the courts by their successors. ‘Could President Biden someday be charged with unlawfully inducing immigrants to enter the country illegally for his border policies?’ the lawyer, D. John Sauer, asked. What Mr. Sauer did not mention was that Mr. Trump has done as much as anyone to escalate the prospect of threatening political rivals with prosecution. In 2016, his supporters greeted mentions of Hillary Clinton with chants of ‘lock her up.’ In his current campaign, Mr. Trump has explicitly warned of his intent to use the legal system as a weapon of political retribution, with frequent declarations that he could go after President Biden and his family. In effect, Mr. Trump has asked the Supreme Court to enforce a norm — that in the United States, public officials do not engage in tit-for-tat political prosecutions — that he has for years threatened to shatter. In promising to sic his Justice Department on Mr. Biden, Mr. Trump has laid the grounds for the very conditions that he was asking the justices to guard against by granting him immunity.”
Even though the Trump administration is no longer in office, I am continuing to post summaries of the daily political news and major stories relating to this tragic and dangerous period in US history. I try to focus on the differences between the Trump administration and the Biden administration and on the ongoing toxic residual effects of the Trump administration and Republicans. I usually post throughout the day and let the news settle for a day or so before posting.
I created Muckraker Farm in 2014 as a place to post muckraking (investigative) journalism going back to the 19th century. I hope to return to this original project soon. You can find these muckraking pieces under the Home Page link at the top of this site. Thanks for reading!