The prosecution is flimsy and if this is going to be a reality TV sensation, let’s not forget that Trump was a reality TV star. From Jonathan Turley at thehill.com:
“The moment that we are waiting for, we made it to the finale together” — those familiar words from “America’s Got Talent” — could well be the opening line for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg next week, when he is expected to unveil an indictment of former President Trump. With Trump’s reported announcement that he expects to be arrested on Tuesday, it would be a fitting curtain raiser for a case that has developed more like a television production than a criminal prosecution. Indeed, this indictment was repeatedly rejected only to be brought back by popular demand.
Trump faces serious legal threats in the ongoing Mar-a-Lago investigation. But the New York case would be easily dismissed outside of a jurisdiction like New York, where Bragg can count on highly motivated judges and jurors.
Although it may be politically popular, the case is legally pathetic. Bragg is struggling to twist state laws to effectively prosecute a federal case long ago rejected by the Justice Department against Trump over his payment of “hush money” to former stripper Stormy Daniels. In 2018 (yes, that is how long this theory has been around), I wrote how difficult such a federal case would be under existing election laws. Now, six years later, the same theory may be shoehorned into a state claim.
It is extremely difficult to show that paying money to cover up an embarrassing affair was done for election purposes as opposed to an array of obvious other reasons, from protecting a celebrity’s reputation to preserving a marriage. That was demonstrated by the failed federal prosecution of former presidential candidate John Edwards on a much stronger charge of using campaign funds to cover up an affair.
One quick indicator is to check and see how much your bank and its officials donated to Democrats. From Mark E. Jeftovic at bombthrower.com:
The Elites are bailing out their own banks, not yours
The systemic banking and financial crisis I’ve been warning about for years has arrived. (In fact, the report I put out in January seems to be playing out in spades).
The printing of 37 trillion dollars out of thin air over the pandemic widened the wealth inequality gap – and they followed that up with the most drastic and rapid interest rate hiking cycle in Fed history.
What did they think was going to happen?
Now the banks are failing – Silicon Valley Bank went from passing its KPMG audit with flying colours and getting their debt rated “A” by Moody’s mere weeks ago, to the executives frantically paying themselves bonuses and selling their shares in the hours and days before the bank failed and was taken over by the FDIC.
98% of the deposits in SVB were uninsured, meaning that those deposits wouldn’tshouldn’t have been covered by FDIC insurance. That means any accounts with balances above $250K were facing the loss of their funds.
But this is Silicon Valley Bank – this is where the elites place their bets on Silicon Valley unicorns. So we can’t have that.
In a hastily convened meeting between the FDIC, the Fed and the US Treasury, it was decided that all deposits would be covered, insured or not.
Crisis averted, right?
Wrong. It turns out that only SVB and Signature banks would be covered; if any other banks fail, like your bank, your community co-op in your hometown or state, or any other bank in flyover America far away from the Coastal elites – if they get into trouble (because people are moving their money into “protected” banks), then that’s not covered.
Fighting between Russia and Ukraine has been going on for a little over a year now, ending the lives of hundreds of thousands of young men and displacing millions. Ukraine’s Defense Minister, Oleksii Reznikov, invited Western arms manufacturers to test their newest weapons against Russians in 2022. And indeed, all kinds of weaponry have been flowing into Ukraine. It is truly a testing ground.
So, this begs the question, is anything else getting tested there? The Ukrainian government seems pretty willing to use its own citizens as guinea pigs, and the American government seems pretty willing to foot the bill. Are American tax dollars going to any other interesting projects?
Here’s what the US is funding in Ukraine.
Yes, actually. Volodymyr Zelensky became president of Ukraine in May 2019, and almost immediately he introduced his idea of a “country in a smartphone.”
In early September 2019, Ukraine launched its Ministry of Digital Transformation, headed by a World Economic Forum participant, Mykhailo Fedorov According to Federov, the goal of this new government department was to streamline government services, making it easier to apply for driver’s licenses, passports, and so on. Ukraine has long held the reputation as Europe’s most corrupt country, and young politicians like Federov want to take advantage of new technology to make changes.
Trump says they’re untouchable. Most of the other Republican candidates and potentials say otherwise. From A.B. Stoddard at realclearwire.com:
In the prospective 2024 nominating contest, some GOP wannabes are serving up straight talk about the need to fix Medicare and Social Security, even though Donald Trump banished entitlement reform from Republican doctrine in 2016. These fiscally sober, and actually conservative, Republicans aren’t likely to win the nomination, and they’re making Trump giddy. But they could also put House Republicans and Ron DeSantis in a jam.
Nikki Haley, who announced her candidacy last month, and likely contenders Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo, have all said the looming insolvency of these programs – which take up 30% of the federal budget – must be addressed.
House Republicans vowing to find $130 billion in spending cuts had initially placed entitlements squarely on the negotiating table, but removed them after Trump and President Biden united against reform. Biden taunted congressional Republicans at his State of the Union, saying it was their “dream” to cut both popular programs, which was met with boos. Trump has released a video warning congressional Republicans not to cut “one penny” from either safety net program in their negotiations over the debt ceiling. After both events, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy made it explicit: In their hunt for savings they will look elsewhere and leave both programs alone.
“Clean” increases in the debt ceiling passed during Trump’s presidency, while the debt increased by 39%. House Freedom Caucus members, who rode the Tea Party wave and sought drastic spending cuts for years, went all in on the Trump spending bender. One of those Freedom Caucus members who went on to serve as both budget director and then chief of staff to Trump – Mick Mulvaney – told The Dispatch, “The truth of the matter is that the first two years of the Trump administration, when the Republicans had the House and the Senate, we raised spending faster than the last couple of years of the Obama administration.”
A smidgen of the scientific literature is catching up with the reality that the Covid vaccines kill. From Steve Kirsch at stevekirsch.substack.com:
Will the CDC ever acknowledge it? No way! Their evidence to debunk this study? None whatsoever. They simply ignore it. So does the mainstream medical community and the press.
Figure 1. The Schwab paper shows that the COVID vaccine causes antigen to be expressed by the heart causing the body to attack the heart leading to death. It’s that simple.
Executive summary
I’ve written about the Schwab paper before, but I wanted to put it all in an article to make it easy to reference.
Basically, this study, written by top German scientists and published in a prestigious German peer-reviewed medical journal, proves that the COVID vaccines kill people. They basically started with 35 bodies who died within 20 days of a COVID shot, and focused on 5 where no other cause of death could be ascribed. All 5 had similar findings consistent with a vaccine injury and inconsistent with any other known cause of death.
This suggests that at least 5/35 or 14% of people who die within 20 days of vaccination were likely killed by the vaccine. Note that is a lower bound.
Despite having world-famous pathologist Peter Schirmacher as the senior author on the paper, the Schwab paper will never be covered in the mainstream media anywhere in the world. It was published Nov 22, 2022 and ignored by the media.
Having more than 14% of the deaths 20 days after vaccination being caused by the vaccine should be an immediate stopping condition in any sane world.
But medicine today is dictated by politics, not science.
So the vaccine will continue to be recommended and nobody will be warned about how deadly the vaccine is.
When the slaves revolt, they will seek the blood of their masters.
In 2013, a century after the establishment of the Federal Reserve, I published The Golden Pinnacle. The novel’s hero is Daniel Durand, a Wall Street banker. Chapter 27, “Fools’ Gold,” features Daniel’s testimony in 1913 before a House of Representatives subcommittee against legislation under consideration that would establish the Federal Reserve. Eleanor is Daniel’s wife and Tom and Alexander are two of his four sons. As the current banking crisis unfolds, I won’t have much to say that will add in any meaningful way to what I said in “Fools’ Gold”. Why repeat myself? Perhaps I’ll just keep linking back to this post. Please share in whole or in part with attribution and a link back to this post.
From “Fools’ Gold”
Daniel sat at a table in a committee hearing room of the House of Representatives. The drafts crisscrossing the room carried the winter cold of February. There were few spectators in the gallery. Daniel glanced at Eleanor, who sat with Tom and Alexander, but she was staring in a different direction. Although she had wished him well, she had seemed preoccupied when they met briefly in the hall outside the hearing room.
Members of the subcommittee of the House Committee on Banking and Currency strolled to their seats, signs denoting the representative, at an elevated, semicircular panel at the front of the room. They chatted with each other. Nine representatives sat down. The chair for Representative Bulkley of Ohio remained empty. The chairman of the subcommittee, Representative Carter Glass, from Virginia, banged his gavel.
“The hearing in consideration of House Bill 7837, for the establishment of a federal reserve bank and the furnishing of an elastic currency, shall now come to order. The subcommittee will hear the testimony of Mr. Daniel Durand, from the firm of Durand & Woodbury, of New York.” Chairman Glass’s accent had an unmistakable Virginia lilt that reminded Daniel of Aldus Kincaid, his attorney for the court of inquiry. A dapper gentleman in his mid-fifties, Glass had prominent ears and a nose that filled a larger proportion of his face than the average nose filled of the average face.
“Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, members of the committee,” Daniel said. “This legislation is still in its early stages and the details of the reserve system are the subjects of dispute. However, before everyone is enmeshed in them, it’s time to consider not just the purported benefits but also the real dangers of central banking and government-created money, or an elastic currency, if you will, and to ask if this supposed innovation is in the best interests of our country.” He glanced at his notes.
“A persistent misnomer is the term ‘bank deposit,’ which is not a deposit at all. If I take an item to a warehouse and pay a fee to deposit it for safekeeping, when I exercise my contractual rights and claim it, the owner of the warehouse must give it back to me. The owner can’t lend it out, use it to secure a loan, or give it to another depositor to satisfy his claim. On the other hand, when I put my money in a bank, the banker can lend or invest it, use those loans and investments as collateral to borrow money, or use my funds to pay creditors or other depositors. I haven’t deposited my money in the same sense that I deposited the item at the warehouse.
“My deposit is actually a loan and I’m an unsecured creditor of the bank. Much of the instability of the present system stems from a fiction. The respectable bank is housed in a neoclassical fortress and prominently displays a sturdy vault, to convince the depositor his money is safe. In fact, almost all his money leaves the bank in search of a return higher than the interest the bank pays him. Only a small portion is held in reserve to meet depositor withdrawals, although all depositors are told they can withdraw their money on demand.
“The bank has made a promise that it can’t always keep. Business and financial cycles are as immutable as human nature. When famine follows feast and fear replaces greed, the demand for money inevitably increases. The banker faces his worst nightmare—a run on the bank. Banks with sufficient reserves or borrowing power survive. Those without them go bankrupt.”
Daniel looked up at the representatives. Only a couple appeared interested.
MANHATTAN, NY — Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has announced a brilliant new plan to get Trump elected President in 2024.
“I will stop at absolutely nothing to put Trump back in the White House where he belongs,” said Mr. Bragg. “I’m about to charge up his base like you’ve never seen!”
Mr. Bragg had carefully waited until the moment he could give Trump the biggest political boost to push forward with an indictment. “Check and mate, libs,” laughed Mr. Bragg as he pulled on a MAGA hat. “I’ve already put in my request to be Trump’s Transportation Secretary, I hear it’s super easy. 2024, here we come!”
After lawyers of every political allegiance agreed there was no criminal case against Trump over hush money paid during his 2016 campaign, Mr. Bragg knew taking the hopeless case was his big chance. “The optics of Democrats indicting, even handcuffing Trump on charges that have no chance of sticking – what more could the Trump campaign ask for?” said MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow. “Mr. Bragg might be the most brilliant Republican strategist this century. He’s playing chess while the rest of us are out here playing checkers.”
At publishing time, Governor Ron DeSantis was wondering what sort of crime he needed to be indicted for to keep pace with Trump.
Fifteen days that will live in infamy. From Julie Kelly at amgreatness.com:
As we approach the third anniversary of “15 Days to Slow the Spread” there remains no accountability and no assurances that it couldn’t happen again.
Three years ago this week, our vibrant, noisy country went silent.
Or, I should say, it was silenced. Businesses didn’t shutter due to a sudden economic crash—although one quickly followed—and highways weren’t empty due to a global fuel shortage. Schools didn’t close because of a nationwide teacher’s strike; parents and children didn’t hunker down in separate rooms of the same house over a nasty family fight.
No, it was a man-made disaster the likes of which can only be compared to war. On March 16, 2020, President Donald Trump and his Coronavirus Task Force announced the infamous “15 Days to Slow the Spread.” For the first time in modern history, the free world, or so it was considered at the time, resorted to medieval methods to stop the unstoppable transmission of a novel contagion. Had there been enough time to farm a massive supply of leeches, the nation’s top government officials probably would have recommended bloodletting, too.
“The new recommendations are simple to follow but will have a resounding impact on public health,” the official White House announcement read. “While the President leads a nationwide response, bringing together government resources and private-sector ingenuity, every American can help slow the virus’ spread and keep our most high-risk populations safe.”
It is a day, and a decision, that will live in infamy. Trump, of course, is not solely responsible; Drs. Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx shrewdly won the affection and trust of the American people early on, so any move contrary to their counsel would have created an even bigger crisis in the White House. Prior to the official declaration, Republican governors warned shut downs were imminent. Congressional Republicans with a few exceptions—Rep. Tom Massie (R-Ky.) comes to mind—grasped the devastating impact on the most vulnerable, especially children, the poor, and the elderly. The national news media amplified the untested “mitigation” approach without a shred of skepticism.
An arrest wouldn’t hurt his election campaign. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:
Update (1315ET): The Washington Post reports that Trump spokesman Steven Cheung said Saturday morning there had been no “notification” of an indictment and said Trump’s supporters should attend a rally he is holding next week in Texas for his 2024 reelection.
Susan Necheles, a lawyer for Trump, said his remark about the timing of his arrest was gleaned from media reports on Friday about local and federal law enforcement players expecting to convene early next week to discuss security and logistics related to Trump’s expected indictment.
“Since this is a political prosecution, the District Attorney’s office has engaged in a practice of leaking everything to the press, rather than communication with President Trump’s attorneys as would be done in a normal case,” Necheles said in a statement.
* * *
As the banking crisis and the Hunter Biden laptop scandal continues to unfold, the potential indictment of former President Trump on felony falsification charges could be the only headline that really matters next week.
Fox News anchor John Roberts informed viewers on Friday afternoon that the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office has requested a “meeting with law enforcement ahead of a potential Trump indictment.” He said, “to discuss logistics for some time next week, which would mean that they are anticipating an indictment next week.”
SLL HAS MANY OF THE SMARTEST AND BEST INFORMED READERS ON THE INTERNET. IT REQUIRES TIME AND EFFORT TO MAINTAIN THE SITE AND FEATURE THE ARTICLES YOU WANT TO READ. PLEASE CONSIDER MAKING A PAYMENT AS COMPENSATION FOR THE VALUE YOU RECEIVE FROM SLL. THANKS.
STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC 
