Page 35 of 111
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 4:13 pm
by MN-Skeptic
This is a thread which is being updated as I am posting it here.
Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
Breaking
The Manhattan DA tells the judge that Trump's "dangerous, violent, and reprehensible rhetoric fundamentally threatens the integrity of these proceedings," in a new filing urging him to expand the gag order.
Bragg on Trump posting a photo of Justice Merchan's daughter
"There is no constitutional right to target the family of this Court, let alone on the blatant falsehoods that have served as the flimsiest pretexts [...] Defendant knows what he is doing, and everyone else does too."
Bragg:
"Defendant’s claim of a constitutional right to levy personal attacks on family members is as disturbing as it is wrong."
Trump's attorneys argued that Justice Merchan's daughter is fair game because she's allegedly engaged in "adversarial campaign speech" by his political opponents.
But Bragg calls this a "fig leaf" and a "fiction," rejected by a state judicial ethics committee last year.
Edited to add link to filing -
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... ents-filed
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 4:21 pm
by MN-Skeptic
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 5:21 pm
by raison de arizona
Thx, that's a good quick read.
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 6:03 pm
by raison de arizona
That's tfg's response to the new clarification letter, it is dated 4/1.
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 7:34 pm
by chancery
https://twitter.com/AWeissmann_/status/ ... 316285865
Andrew Weissmann (weissmann11 on Threads)
@AWeissmann_
BREAKING: Trump lawyers file submission apologizing to NY Judge Merchan and his daughter. And expressing regret at posting Biden effigy photo as unbecoming of a former president of the United States.
Happy 4/1
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 7:36 pm
by much ado
Okay, you had me for a couple of seconds...
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 7:38 pm
by chancery
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 8:25 pm
by chancery
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 8:58 pm
by p0rtia
Defendant, in his opposition of r\pril 1,2024, desperately attempts to justify, and explain away his dangerous rhetoric by "turning the tables" and blaming those he attacks. The arguments counsel makes are at best strained and at worst baseless misrepresentations which are uncorroborated and rely upon innuendo and exaggeration. Put mildly, the assortment of allegations presented as "facts" and cobbled together, result in accusations that are disingenuous and not rational. To argue that the most recent attacks, which included photographs, were, "necessary and appropriate in the current environment," is farcical.
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 8:58 pm
by raison de arizona
One day following the issuance of said Order, Defendant made several extrajudicial
statements attacking a family, member of this court. Contrary to the position Defendant took in his
opposition to the People's February 22,2024 motion for an order restricting extrajudicial statements,
i.e. that hrs statements "plainly constitute cote political speech on matters of great public concern
and criticism of major public figures," Defendant's opposition to 2/22/24 Motion, pgs. 8-9, this
pattern of attacking family members of presiding jurists and attorneys assigned to his cases serves
no legitimate purpose. 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.
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 10:51 pm
by chancery
Earlier today, before Judge Merchan issued his expanded order, the District Attorney filed a supplemental memorandum, and Trump's lawyers responded.
Trump's response is here
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... 240401.pdf, but the only online source for the DA's supplemental memorandum is on Scribd:
https://www.scribd.com/document/7191126 ... -Gag-Order
My Scribd account worked for a few months, and then it didn't, and I gave up wrestling with it years ago. If someone here has a Scribd account that works, I'd be grateful for a post of the supplemental memorandum.
Edit: Never mind. I still can't download the document, but when I wrapped the link in url code, it opened in my browser in a way that let me read it online.
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 2:46 pm
by Dr. Ken
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 2:56 pm
by realist
chancery wrote: ↑Mon Apr 01, 2024 10:51 pm
Earlier today, before Judge Merchan issued his expanded order, the District Attorney filed a supplemental memorandum, and Trump's lawyers responded.
Trump's response is here
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... 240401.pdf, but the only online source for the DA's supplemental memorandum is on Scribd:
https://www.scribd.com/document/7191126 ... -Gag-Order
My Scribd account worked for a few months, and then it didn't, and I gave up wrestling with it years ago. If someone here has a Scribd account that works, I'd be grateful for a post of the supplemental memorandum.
Edit: Never mind. I still can't download the document, but when I wrapped the link in url code, it opened in my browser in a way that let me read it online.
See if this works for ya.
https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:s ... 3ae72f1aaf
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 2:59 pm
by raison de arizona
Hmm. He didn't direct Turley to say that. He reTruthed it. I'm not sure that violates the order as written. It says: "Making or directing others to make public statements". He didn't make a statement, he reposted one. He didn't direct Turley to do it.
Just playing Devil's advocate.
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 2:59 pm
by chancery
Thanks!
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 3:05 pm
by realist
chancery wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2024 2:59 pm
Thanks!
You're welcome.
As all the old-timers here know, I live to serve.
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 3:18 pm
by p0rtia
Watching the justice system fail to treat fuckhead accountable any god damn thing he does is the modern Zeno's Paradox.
Obviously not aimed at any of the good folks here, but there is an endless list of reasons why, however lose we inch, this quite obviously dangerous and criminal insurrectionist cannot be thrown in jail.
There's a parallel Zeno list of excuses as to why Merrick Garland is really doing exactly the right thing and will be vindicated in the end.
However much our eyes bug out as we observe, "You do realize that at this rate we're never gonna get where you keep assuring we're going," we get nowhere, and our observations that it doesn't have to be like this are pushed aside.
Life in the autocracy. Look around. The evidence is everywhere.
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 3:51 pm
by Reality Check
Off Topic
Speaking of cousins....
For most of my life I thought that a cousin of mine was my second cousin. He was actually 3 years older than me and his father, my first cousin, was much older than me by around 20 years. However, I found out my cousin was actually my first cousin, once removed and not a second cousin. I learned an easy set of rules for keeping cousins straight: first cousins share at least one grandparent. Second cousins share a great grandparent. The removed part comes when cousins are of different generational levels. In my cousin's case his grandmother was my aunt. Hence we were first cousins once removed.
I ironically I only found recently that same aunt (long deceased) had married her second cousin. I had always heard that they were distantly related but when I dug into the family tree info a bit I found the truth. I think it's legal to marry a second cousin at least in the US. I am not sure how aware my aunt was of her being related to my uncle. They were raised in different towns and only met as teenagers.
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 4:38 pm
by chancery
https://twitter.com/TylerMcBrien/status ... 186325318
Tyler McBrien
@TylerMcBrien
JUST IN: Trump files a pre-motion letter for recusal of Justice Merchan.
The letter is in the tweet. Haven't read it. We have family visiting for a few days.
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 4:43 pm
by RTH10260
I assume the denial will trigger an appeal and another delay?
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 4:45 pm
by raison de arizona
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 5:07 pm
by Sam the Centipede
Off Topic
Reality Check wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2024 3:51 pm
I found out my cousin was actually my first cousin, once removed and not a second cousin. I learned an easy set of rules for keeping cousins straight: first cousins share at least one grandparent. Second cousins share a great grandparent. The removed part comes when cousins are of different generational levels. In my cousin's case his grandmother was my aunt. Hence we were first cousins once removed.
That's not so much an
easy rule as
the rule, as far as I am aware. In essence, for a pair of people, find the most recent common ancestor. Let's assume it's not a parent*. Look at the relationship of the common ancestor to the closer of the pair. Grandparent→first cousins, great-grandparent→second cousins and so on. If both of the pair are the same generation, that's it. Otherwise if there's one extra generation for the other, it's first removed, two is second removed, and so on.
Where it gets complicated is when cousins (of any ilk) marry, which throws in multiple paths, so the family tree becomes a family tangle with multiple ways of describing the relationships.
A not-very-distant European great*4-uncle and aunt of mine converted to Mormonism in the 19C and emigrated to America in the 1850s. Unsuccessfully for him, he traveled ahead alone and died
en route from cholera in New Orleans or St Louis (I forget which). His wife and children successfully emigrated a few years later, so that branch of my family is well-recorded by the LDS folk. I have been surprised how many 5th (?) cousins I have dispersed around the globe.
_______
* that's [great*]uncles/aunts and [great*]nieces/nephews
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 5:14 pm
by chancery
I've read it quickly. It's bullshit on stilts. The case doesn't have anything to do with the 2024 campaign, and the judge's daughter doesn't have an "interest" in the outcome of the case as that term is used in any recusal decision that I've read.
RTH10260 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2024 4:43 pm
I assume the denial will trigger an appeal and another delay?
Appeal, probably yes, delay, probably not. There would be no basis for judge or the appeals court to delay the trial. It sometimes happens that a conviction gets reversed because the judge should have recused herself, but this isn't like immunity. A defendant doesn't have the right to halt the proceedings while the court system evaluates a recusal motion. The court might chose to do so in the event the stated grounds for recusal were strong; no one wants to have to redo a trial if it can be avoided. But not automatically.
And in fact, IMO, there's no particular reason why the judge couldn't put the recusal motion on a slow track. He probably won't, but he
could say that he'll take it up with post-trial motions.
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 5:17 pm
by Rolodex
And who knows if the judge and his daughter are estranged, maybe. There are plenty of adult kids who have no relationship with their parents. I mean, who knows in this case, but it shouldn't make any difference anyway.
Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!”
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 6:46 pm
by chancery
https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/sta ... 777009093
Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
New
Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg's prosecutors skewer Trump's latest effort to seek Justice Merchan's recusal, through a "daisy chain of innuendos" about the judge's daughter.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... l-argument
Trump's attorneys have argued that the judge has a conflict of interest because of his daughter's position at Authentic Campaigns, a digital marketing agency allegedly doing work for entities associated with his rivals.
The DA said that Team Trump didn't provide citations.
The no citations point is weak. The judge's rules restrict pre-motion letters to a single page; usually no room for citations.
What's more, they say, it's the same position the judge rejected last year with approval from the state's top judicial ethics body.
"A relative's independent political activities do not provide a reasonable basis to question the judge's impartiality," that committee found.
As it relates to the judge's daughter, prosecutors say there's "simply nothing new here."
Trump's attorneys also claim Justice Merchan made inappropriate "extrajudicial" statements by agreeing to this brief interview with The AP.
Notably, Merchan declined to talk about the Trump case and affirmed he had "no agenda."
The DA notes that it's unclear that remark was about Trump:
"Even if the Court did have this case in mind, expressing a broad commitment to impartiality is very obviously not a prohibited 'comment about a pending or impending proceeding,' [...] and is not a basis for recusal."
