133 Comments
May 17Liked by Chris Bray

The concept of justice in the United States has turned into the consummate shitshow.

Shouldn't the G be capitalized in the "Get Trump project"?

I know, a tedious Karen.

p.s. my real name actually IS Karen. It sucks, and I want to talk to the manager.

Expand full comment
May 18Liked by Chris Bray

You are lucky. My real name is the same as one of the most loathsome Rinos. But just like the guy in Office Space, I say “why should I change my name?”

Expand full comment
author

Your real name is Pierre Delecto?

Expand full comment

"He's the one that sucks."

Expand full comment

That no-talent ass-clown!

Expand full comment

"Face disbandment..." hilarious. They should face Dismemberment... 🤔

Expand full comment

Right!?!? Chris sounds like he's gone all soft on crime with this one. C'mon man!

Expand full comment

With a very dull and rust covered hand saw.

Expand full comment

I think you and I would be good friends. We think very much alike. When you ever make it to Tejas. Let's go catch a beer.

Expand full comment

Sounds good to me, I got the first round.

Expand full comment

I work at a brew pub so no worries there.

Expand full comment

No wonder they have secretly consulted with Dickless Cheney in recent weeks.

Expand full comment

I'm thinking pressing with heavy stones...

Expand full comment
May 17Liked by Chris Bray

I have come to the conclusion that Trump must be the most law-abiding person alive given the lengths they have had to go to 'get him'

Expand full comment
May 17Liked by Chris Bray

I’d have to add some qualifications to that. His career hasn’t been all sweetness and light. He rightly had to pay a large settlement to the people who had been duped into shelling out money for “Trump University.” And if all four criminal cases had been stripped down to just the obstruction and false statements counts in the Florida case, he might already be a convicted felon (though I’m not saying even those charges should have been brought).

But I basically agree: he’s undergone scrutiny like (as Trump might put it) nobody’s ever seen before, and all they’ve come up with are these Rube Goldberg contraptions made out of disarticulated pieces of what is supposed to be a justice system.

Trump comes out of it looking very good.

Expand full comment

Keep in mind that this man has made millions in the absolute toughest real estate market on earth, and survived casino battles against the likes of Steve Wynn. His own security people make the secret service and FBI look like Keystone Cops. You do not survive the business environments that he has learned to navigate without being extremely lucky or just plain smart. For all of his faults as a person, his ability to win is unquestioned.

Expand full comment
author

I'd agree to the Trump University thing.

Expand full comment
May 17Liked by Chris Bray

Though I’d add a qualification even to that, and in Trump’s favor: from his perspective, that was just another branding opportunity. He didn’t have any scruples about going along with it, as long as the checks to him cleared, but he didn’t run the thing.

He was rightly held legally responsible, but I don’t consider it to be really his fraud.

Expand full comment

It was an era when lots of for-profit schools were doing the same thing. And nobody had a problem with them. Like ITT Tech, Art Institute, there were a lot of them advertising on late-night tv.

They eventually angered the public institutions that saw all that those students and money as theirs. Students those institutions had written off. And I'd hazard to say that graduates of many for-profit schools like Trump U were more prepared for success in life than graduates of public institutions today. Who's the bigger fraudsters?

Expand full comment

The bigger fraudsters--Harvard, Yale, most other mainstream "universities."

Expand full comment
May 19Liked by Chris Bray

This underscores a recurring problem with Trump. He seems incapable of recognizing obvious hustlers and incompetents that will damage and undermine him.

Expand full comment

Considering THE COMPLETE SCAM “higher education “ has become its hard to believe Trump University was any worse then Harvard and the other criminal enterprises.

Expand full comment

I absolutely agree with you. I’ve been telling my friends this for years. How much very unflattering and probably worse crap would the government find on them with an infinite amount of money at their disposal and thousands of agents available to work on producing dirt? DJT and his children must have the cleanest record of anybody on earth if these are the worst “crimes” the government prosecutors could come up with. They should be ashamed.

Expand full comment

Just remember, Trump IS NOT A REPUBLICAN. He has always been a Democrat. He only took on the R because he ran against the witch. This whole thing I really believe is the grand deception they are setting to use as to demoralize the entire nation. Keep that in the back of your mind so when that happens, tou already have seen it coming and then your will willr5r2d. be steeled even further because voting our way out isn't going to happen. These vermin will have to be removed through violence tempered through extreme prejudice.

Expand full comment

Seriously!

Expand full comment
May 17Liked by Chris Bray

Sounds like Pomerantz could be a good witness for the defense.

Expand full comment
author

Alas, Mark Pomerantz has bunkered down behind the Fifth Amendment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m50Uz9F8Y5k

Expand full comment

Still , the lawyer in me says call him anyway. Ask as many questions as the judge will allow and let him invoke. Jurors hate it when they know the ball is being hidden from them. It might not matter with this bunch , but it only takes one brave soul

Expand full comment

The judge will stop the questioning in the interest of saving time for everyone involved. He MIGHT allow the straightforward reading (by the clerk) of the questions the attorney would have asked so the jury can appreciate the scope of the evasion.

Expand full comment

Probably. If you can get a few good ones I’m it’s worth it.

Expand full comment

An amendment in which your silence speaks volumes.

And how the heck can "how long have you known Alvin Bragg" result in an incriminating statement?

Expand full comment

As we've seen it. But our adversaries have been much more adept at enjoying its protections under man's (amoral) law than our allies who waive their Fifth Amendment rights, speaking truth. Which can and is used against them. Think about all of those who've been put through the wringer and done time, like Gen. Flynn, for thinking that they have nothing to fear speaking truthfully.

This 46-minute video does a fantastic job explaining why you NEVER talk to the police. About ANYTHING. Even if you're not guilty of anything. Especially if you're not guilty of anything. Take it to heart. Everybody should take it to heart:

Don't Talk to the Police

Regent University Law School, 2012

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE

And if ever compelled to speak before investigators the words, "I don't recall" are nearly impossible to disprove, taking perjury off the table.

Expand full comment

I’ve insisted that all five of my children view this video. Years ago. The Supreme Court has said that refusing to answer questions shall never be considered as an admission of guilt.

You can talk your way into getting arrested, but you cannot talk your way out of it. Everything you say can and will be used AGAINST you in a court of law. Nothing you say will be used in your favor in a court of law. In fact, a prosecutor will use all of his options to have it forbidden from testimony.

Expand full comment
May 17·edited May 17

I'd read that one, but here's a compelling counter by a guy that's been there:

https://warriortalknews.typepad.com/the-gabe-suarez-blog/2017/07/killing-within-the-law-3-managing-the-initial-police-contact.html

Expand full comment

To the degree that those circumstances it may be helpful to talk to the police the writer makes good points. In an era when violent crime has become political theater with pre-scripted villains found in one party or race and pre-scripted heroes found in another party or race, law becomes secondary or even tertiary to narrative public relations agendas. But absent the PR angle that writer voices the Regent Law video applies to the other 99% of the time there's a police encounter.

Expand full comment

Jurisdiction matters for sure, and the best advice of all is to stay out of bad jurisdictions and bad situations. But saying nothing and immediately demanding a lawyer makes you look guilty even to the fairest investigator. Suarez points out that victim, witness, or suspect are the only three designations available to the investigating officer, and you're going to be marked down as one of those, so there's always an element of PR to consider. Officer might be overruled later by a woke demon prosecutor, but it still seems best to get off to a good start.

Expand full comment
May 17Liked by Chris Bray

thank you for exposing the lies associated with the Witch Trials of DJT.

Expand full comment

All true, but none of it matters with a New York jury of bad faith actors. Trump needs one honest person on the jury, who is also not an imbecile. Will he get one? Odds aren't great.

You have to admire our Maoist lawfare class. They've figured out that the jury makes the crime, not the criminal. I'm guessing at least half the jury knew they were voting guilty the day they were selected, no matter what. What happens in the courtroom is completely meaningless to these people.

Expand full comment

Unfortunately, I am afraid you are right. Reality doesn’t seem to matter any more, just an opinion and what “they” decide is right.

Your opinion, just your opinion. No facts are necessary. Joe Friday would be turning in his grave!

Expand full comment
May 17·edited May 17Liked by Chris Bray

show trial, ussr style. ultimate game plan is to set a precedent, lawless as it is. if they can convict a POTUS, they can convict you

Expand full comment

None of this matters—facts, law, precedence, the obviously corrupt politicians weaponizing the legal system to destroy their hated foe—because nothing matters in our tribal age except the needs and demands of the tribe and your public displays of tribal loyalty (which are necessary to keep off the fatal stink of disloyalty).

I guarantee there is ZERO chance Trump is acquitted, and ZERO chance he is not found guilty on every charge.

Just put yourself in the shoes of every juror: they all know that if they let Trump walk, 1) there will be multiple leaks from other jury members describing which jury member(s) were most responsible for letting the Orange Beast escape; 2) the NYT or WaPo (or maybe they'll outsource the initial dirty work to Vox or something similar) will describe the heretics down to their socks and shoes, at which point they will be doxxed by a friendly neighbor or someone else with a heart on fire for Justice; 3) the disloyal jury member and all their friends and family will be hounded at work, hounded at school, campaigns will be launched to get them fired and banished.

And of course all the jury members know this already, as much as the members of the various Gotti juries back in the day knew that if (god forbid) the defendant found out their name and address, well, the only shoes they'd soon be wearing would be made out of cement.

Most people would vote to convict their own mothers if the only other choice was social destruction, impoverishment or worse. The fix is in, there is no way Trump walks here.

Expand full comment
author

We'll see. Hesitating to adopt this view.

Expand full comment

We'll see, hope I'm wrong, but I think insuring that your wife doesn't have a blind date w Antifa will be the motivating factor here.

Expand full comment

I don’t see Bragg retrying this case if it’s a mistrial. There is no crime in this case. The judge in this case, Marchan? Chutkin? I forget which idiot it is, should never allowed this case to proceed, except the judge is corrupt as hell.

Expand full comment

I’m still clinging to the belief it could be a mistrial by hung jury.

Expand full comment

Remember Trumps only been a republican for election purposes. He went in to run against Hillary. How else do you explain the utter shit he surrounded himself with in his cabinet. He eeally isn't much different than that jug eared neuro who preceded him except in that case congress committed treason by letting a foreign born become e president. In 2016 they allowed a lifelong democrat to run as a republican over a friendly wager and nothing else. This has been the grand deception for the past 7 years and still people act like it's not a scam played on them.

Expand full comment

DJT should pledge to hound ANYONE doxxing jury info into Gitmo.

Expand full comment

No, no, no, that would be jury tampering, and even worse, violate a judge's sacred gag order.

Expand full comment

It may be CP, if so, I guess it will be "appeal, appeal, appeal" all the way to the Supremes

Expand full comment

the Dems don't care about any appeal, they only care about winning in Nov, nothing else.

Expand full comment

I’m hesitant to adopt this view only because Trump is not a Christ-like figure. But there numerous people in government who openly want to emulate Pontius Pilate. These people are more vain than Trump and all too happy to bear false witness. God help us.

Expand full comment

I am so moved that Michael Cohen has recovered his "moral compass". He must have been absolutely lost without it. He has confirmed every stereotypical bias I have against attorneys.

Expand full comment
May 18Liked by Chris Bray

As Jonathan Turley said in regard to this case, sometimes you have to replace rats with lawyers, because there are some things rats won't do.

Expand full comment

And yet…and yet… they brought these pathetic, absurd cases anyway that aren’t even in the statutes really. Because the Democrat elite don’t care that in the event of a conviction by crooked judges, crooked prosecutors, and likely crooked juries ( with the crooks in the prosecution and bench a demonstrable fact in Manhattan and Atlanta at least at this point) that the conviction absolutely won’t hold up on appeal. They don’t care about the waste of resources, or the perversion of justice, or the damage to their reputations and that of the nation. They just want to harass Trump, harass Americans who vote for Trump, do whatever they can to prevent a fair and free election in a country that at one time set the standard for peaceful changes in government.

These motherfucking cynical pieces of shit do not care about anybody but themselves. This isn’t about the charade of preserving “our democracy”. This is about not wanting democracy. This is about you don’t get a say anymore in who gets elected.

They don’t care that you see them.

They know you see them. They know you hate them. They believe they are untouchable, that no matter what they do, as long as they do it to the people the regime criticizes and hates, they will skate away unscathed if they lose, and be rewarded handsomely if their crime somehow succeeds. That’s why we have to reach out and touch these malevolent henchmen , and show them that nobody is above the Constitution, and nobody is above the laws of man and God. If they lose the election and Trump gets in, a lot of these bad guys are going to suddenly find religion. They need to find it in Leavenworth and Riker’s Island or involuntarily enjoying the natural beauty of the Everglades.

Expand full comment

But they've had over a century of successes. The communists have proven that if you repeat lies often enough they become truth.

Expand full comment

Just throw them feet first into wood chippers. The Hussein kids at least had that right.

Expand full comment

What about a catapult into a volcano? Just spitballing here.

Expand full comment

With online betting room swe who makes the biggest visual impact and the winner gets to be absolved of income taxes for 5 years? That's a good ppv event. I like your thinking.

Expand full comment

Amen!!

Expand full comment

Terrific stuff, thanks. Loved reading.

Expand full comment
May 17Liked by Chris Bray

It’s not working. Trump is walking through the fire & coming out better for it.

Expand full comment

Remember, Trump is a democrat.

Expand full comment

Yes he was a democrat- probably more for business reasons than ideology. I understand he’s not your classic conservative, but clips going back more than 30 - 40 years show him saying many of the same things he states today - MAGA type comments. Bottom line he’s not perfect, needs to be smarter about whom he takes advice from, but he loves this country & wants us to thrive imo. The saying “the good is the enemy of the perfect” applies to a lot of life.

Expand full comment

Ao you do rememberbqhen ge said he would run as a republican because they were stupid. Or his statement about forgoing the 2nd amendment protections under the constitution to haul someone into jail because of perceived legal offenses. That conservative type stuff?

I'm not mentioning the stuff he said that sounded idiotic in the press like the blood bleaching comments because if anyone with a working pulse has kept up slightly obliquely with techniques of modern medicine the running blood through a filter then through a UV chamber where it's bombarded with UV light to help sanitize it has been common practice for over 30 years and is where the idea to use the technique to clean aquarium water came from. Those statements I'll give him a pass on because he was asking the right question, just using wrong technique. Why the media went about the way they did made them out to be fools, not Trump.

Trump has also shown his democrat ideology on a couple of fantastic ideas he did thar helped the Republic. Two I can think of right now are changing the status quo, and changing rules so your side is able to move their agenda forward. Both used at the same time when he changed the rules for federal employees to be able to get fired for not doing their job. The debacle at the Veterens Administration prompted these changes. What he did was a democrat move. No republican would ever change the status quo nor make it so a federal employee could get fired. Those employees might get mad and strike since it was Republicans who allowed the federal employees to unionize under Clinton out of fear of looking stern.

That Trump changed those rules via executive order and not through proper channels of running it through the legislative arm was another democrat tactic. Albeit most on the right missed the mechanics for the pay offs popularity.

Trump really lost me forever as a supporter was his comments of forgoing 2A protections to apprehend a suspected criminal prior to a conviction then let the courts handle it whether that application was proper or not. By then precedence is already set for the scum in black robes to side with the state. The character of the victim of the abolished 2A at thar point assassinated via the media and the electorate, to look educated will participate In the not yet convicted felons conviction in the press so the optics of their opinions will look proper under the scrutiny of their peers.

Anyone remember the guy who crashed his Cessna into the IRS office in Austin Texas? Anyone remember why he did that?

Anyone remember Killdozer and why thar happened?

If not please go research both and the why here is important. The opening salvos of the second revolution began in the late 1990s. Our dollar is worth even less now then when it was then which partly caused these two men to do what they did. When are we going to be pushed too far? Myself and at least 20 others I personally know will act but don't because why bother when your neighbor who says and feels the same as you will rip your reputation to shreds because out of fear they will go along to get along. Quite feankly, the CITIZENS OF THE REPUBLIC aren't worth the trouble. You're not worth it.

Expand full comment
May 17Liked by Chris Bray

And despite all this the jury has probably decided he's guilty of SOMETHING because Orange man bad. And the point was not really to convict ( though they knew NY likely would) it was to humiliate, tie Trump up in court and make a show of the immense power the deep state has at its disposal.

Expand full comment

In reality they don't hold shit for power. Almost it's going to take is a few motivated men with zeroed in rifles who then use those tools to turn politicians, lawyers, and judges heads into pink mist before they start shaking in their boots. I'm just not sure that the public reaction will he what's necessary to not react in a manner which will help those involved in the act.

Expand full comment

The NY prosecutors just Pomerantzed the bed.

Expand full comment
May 17Liked by Chris Bray

Thank you for your excellent contribution to American English.

New verb: "to pomerantz"

Time to call the Merriam Webster people.

Expand full comment

It smells like some took a pomerantz in the courtroom!

Expand full comment
May 17Liked by Chris Bray

😂

Expand full comment

I don't know what's more pathetic, the Trump trial or the fact that anyone would buy Pomerantz's book!

Expand full comment
May 17Liked by Chris Bray

I think Chris said he bought this book used. To prevent Pomerantz from getting any of his money. Which is funny.

Might’ve been another book tho.

Expand full comment
author

No, it was this one. Used copy.

Expand full comment

Oh, I saw that. I meant anyone else who actually bought the book!

Expand full comment

Got it.

Expand full comment
May 17Liked by Chris Bray

Isn't Pomerantz basically confessing to a crime? If malicious prosecution isn't a crime, it should be.

Expand full comment
author

And he's now taking the fifth whenever he's asked about it, so I suspect that thought has occurred to him as well. Amazed that he put all of this down in writing.

Expand full comment
May 18Liked by Chris Bray

Amazing that he had a thought!

Expand full comment

Caveat: I don't know US law, and I know nothing about this law firm, but it was the first search result (using DDG) when I searched for "malicious prosecution":

"Examples of malicious prosecutions include situations in which law enforcement:

charges a person with a crime to cover up police misconduct, such as excessive use of force or false imprisonment;

intends to punish a person by harassing them with criminal proceedings;

intends to ruin a person’s reputation by bringing unfounded criminal charges against them;

or charges a person with a crime to divert attention from the actual perpetrator."

It then goes into detail about Ohio, so maybe it is an issue that's different between states?

https://www.chandralaw.com/practice-areas/malicious-prosecution-abuse-of-process-and-false-arrest

To my completely un-lawyered eyes, the processes against Trump certainly looks like malicious prosecution, at least as far as harassment and ruining a person's reputation goes. It might turn out expensive if Trump walks scot free and the starts a process for damages, reparations and recoupment of losses incurred due to the legal shenanigans.

We've got a similar case brewing over here, where a business-man was charged and held for months on not just false evidence, but evidence planted by police on the instigation of a prosecutor. When it got to court, the judge tossed it out.

The business man is now suing the state for the eq. of $150 000 000 in damages.

Expand full comment