SIMPLE OUTPUT (Author and post)
by ti-amie Michigan school shooting suspect’s parents held on $500,000 bond each as judge expresses flight-risk concerns
Acting on a tip, police found the pair hiding in a commercial building, authorities said
By Jennifer Hassan, Timothy Bella, María Luisa Paúl and Meryl Kornfield
Today at 4:30 a.m. EST|Updated today at 12:23 p.m. EST
The parents of a 15-year-old boy accused of fatally shooting four classmates at a Michigan high school were ordered held Saturday on $500,000 bond each, hours after they were found hiding in a commercial building in Detroit and taken into custody.
Jennifer and James Crumbley each pleaded not guilty to four counts of involuntary manslaughter, appearing separately via webcam at a 35-minute virtual arraignment in which the prosecution and defense clashed over whether the parents had provided easy access to the weapon authorities say was used in the crime.
“This is a serious, horrible, terrible shooting, and this has affected the entire community,” Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald said, adding that the likelihood of conviction is “strong.” “And these two individuals could have stopped it.”
The arraignment capped a stunning series of events in the aftermath of Tuesday’s shooting, which left Tate Myre, 16, Madisyn Baldwin, 17, Hana St. Juliana, 14, and Justin Shilling, 17, dead.
Prosecutors allege that the parents bought the gun for their son, and that Jennifer Crumbley boasted on social media about taking her son to a shooting range to try it out. Authorities also say 15-year-old Ethan Crumbley’s parents left the gun unlocked and neglected to act on concerns expressed by school officials that he might act violently.
Hours after announcing that the pair was being charged — an extraordinarily rare move to hold parents accountable when a minor uses a weapon in a school shooting — police officials said that the couple had gone missing. They were located overnight in a commercial building after an extensive search involving police dogs, local law enforcement and the U.S. Marshals Service, authorities said.
Jennifer Crumbley fought back tears when asked by the judge if she understood that she faces the charges while her husband shook his head as McDonald recounted some of the accusations, including that the parents had provided “total access” to the weapon. Their defense attorneys, Shannon Smith and Mariell Lehman, denied that allegation and said the pair had always planned to cooperate with the investigation.
“This case is absolutely the saddest, most tragic, worst case imaginable, there’s no doubt,” Smith said. “But our clients were absolutely going to turn themselves in.”
Oakland County Judge Julie A. Nicholson agreed with the prosecution’s request for a $500,000 bond, stating that the couple could pose a flight risk, and ordering parents to hand over all weapons to sheriff’s office if they are released from jail.
“Obviously, these charges are very, very serious, there is no question about that,” Nicholson said. “The court does have some concern about the flight risk along with the public safety, given the circumstances that occurred yesterday and the fact that the defendants did have to be apprehended in order to appear for purposes of arraignment.”
Ethan Crumbley faces multiple charges as an adult in the attack Tuesday at Oxford High School: one count of terrorism causing death, four counts of first-degree murder, seven counts of assault with intent to murder and 12 counts of possession of a firearm.
The shooting has torn apart the small Michigan community, located about 45 minutes outside Detroit, and reignited calls for tighter gun laws, with more states considering laws to punish parents if children fire unsecured guns. It appears to be the deadliest episode of on-campus violence in the United States in more than 18 months. Seven others were wounded.
Charging parents is unusual in a school shooting. A Washington Post review of 145 school shootings committed by children in the two decades after the Columbine High massacre in 1999 found that the weapon’s source had been publicly identified in 105 cases. In total, the guns those children used were taken from their own homes or those of relatives or friends 80 percent of the time.
However, in just four instances did the adult owners of the weapons face any criminal punishment for not having locked them up — and none of those prosecutions stemmed from negligent-storage laws.
“While the shooter was the one who entered the high school and pulled the trigger, there were other individuals who contributed to the event,” McDonald said Friday as she announced the charges against the parents.
Jennifer and James Crumbley were located after a 911 call from a business owner who spotted the couple’s car in his parking lot in Detroit, Chief Deputy Mike McCabe of the Oakland County Sheriff’s Office. He added in an emailed statement that a female observed near the car fled on foot when he called 911. Detroit Police Chief James White said police found “video of one of the two fugitives entering the building” and that police had quickly “set up a perimeter” at the location.
The pair “did not break in” at the building but “were aided,” White said, adding that police were investigating one other person who may have helped the couple. He thanked the community, saying that “it was a tip that led us to this location” and that officers responded “in a matter of minutes,” arriving on scene at 10:30 p.m. local time Friday.
Law enforcement officers outside the building where James and Jennifer Crumbley, the parents of suspected Oxford High School shooter Ethan Crumbley, were arrested on Dec. 4 in Detroit. (Matthew Hatcher/Getty Images)
When asked about the pair’s emotional state as they were taken into custody, White said that they were “very distressed” and that one of them left the scene with head bowed.
Attorneys for the Crumbleys had earlier said the couple left town the night of the shooting “for their own safety,” adding that they would return to be arraigned on the manslaughter charges. They repeated that at the arraignment Saturday, saying that the couple had planned to meet their attorneys outside the court at 7:30 a.m.
“We did not announce it because unlike prosecution we weren’t attempting to make this a media spectacle,” Smith said.
But police and prosecutors disputed that account, with White telling reporters Saturday: “This isn’t indicative of turning themselves in, hiding in a warehouse.”
The pistol, purchased by James Crumbley on Nov. 26, was stored in an unlocked drawer in the parents’ bedroom, according to officials.
A day before the fatal shooting, a teacher noticed Ethan Crumbley using his cellphone to search for information on firearm ammunition. Jennifer Crumbley did not respond when the school contacted her via voice mail about her son’s “inappropriate” search, McDonald said. Instead, she exchanged a text message with her son that read, “LOL I’m not mad at you. You have to learn not to get caught.”
On the morning of the shooting, both parents were summoned to a meeting by school administrators after a teacher found a troubling note in their son’s desk, McDonald said. It contained a drawing of a semiautomatic handgun pointing at the words “The thoughts won’t stop. Help me.”
The note included a drawing of a bullet with the words “blood everywhere.” There was also a drawing of a bloody figure with two gunshot wounds, McDonald said, and another drawing of a laugh emoji.
Ethan altered the note, McDonald said, scratching out the most disturbing parts of it by the time the meeting with his parents began shortly after 10 a.m. on Nov. 30. McDonald said the teen brought his backpack to the counselor’s office for the meeting and noted that at no point did his parents ask about the recently purchased gun. McDonald said neither the Crumbleys nor school officials searched the teen’s backpack.
The Crumbleys “resisted the idea of their son leaving the school at that time,” McDonald said. Instead, Ethan returned to class with his backpack.
Karin Brulliard, Kim Bellware, John Woodrow Cox and Paulina Firozi contributed to this report.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2 ... s-custody/
Video of the arraignment.
<iframe width='480' height='290' scrolling='no' src='' frameborder='0' webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe>
Jennifer and James Crumbley, the parents of the alleged Michigan high school school shooter, were held on $500,000 bond each on Dec. 4. (The Washington Post)
Acting on a tip, police found the pair hiding in a commercial building, authorities said
By Jennifer Hassan, Timothy Bella, María Luisa Paúl and Meryl Kornfield
Today at 4:30 a.m. EST|Updated today at 12:23 p.m. EST
The parents of a 15-year-old boy accused of fatally shooting four classmates at a Michigan high school were ordered held Saturday on $500,000 bond each, hours after they were found hiding in a commercial building in Detroit and taken into custody.
Jennifer and James Crumbley each pleaded not guilty to four counts of involuntary manslaughter, appearing separately via webcam at a 35-minute virtual arraignment in which the prosecution and defense clashed over whether the parents had provided easy access to the weapon authorities say was used in the crime.
“This is a serious, horrible, terrible shooting, and this has affected the entire community,” Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald said, adding that the likelihood of conviction is “strong.” “And these two individuals could have stopped it.”
The arraignment capped a stunning series of events in the aftermath of Tuesday’s shooting, which left Tate Myre, 16, Madisyn Baldwin, 17, Hana St. Juliana, 14, and Justin Shilling, 17, dead.
Prosecutors allege that the parents bought the gun for their son, and that Jennifer Crumbley boasted on social media about taking her son to a shooting range to try it out. Authorities also say 15-year-old Ethan Crumbley’s parents left the gun unlocked and neglected to act on concerns expressed by school officials that he might act violently.
Hours after announcing that the pair was being charged — an extraordinarily rare move to hold parents accountable when a minor uses a weapon in a school shooting — police officials said that the couple had gone missing. They were located overnight in a commercial building after an extensive search involving police dogs, local law enforcement and the U.S. Marshals Service, authorities said.
Jennifer Crumbley fought back tears when asked by the judge if she understood that she faces the charges while her husband shook his head as McDonald recounted some of the accusations, including that the parents had provided “total access” to the weapon. Their defense attorneys, Shannon Smith and Mariell Lehman, denied that allegation and said the pair had always planned to cooperate with the investigation.
“This case is absolutely the saddest, most tragic, worst case imaginable, there’s no doubt,” Smith said. “But our clients were absolutely going to turn themselves in.”
Oakland County Judge Julie A. Nicholson agreed with the prosecution’s request for a $500,000 bond, stating that the couple could pose a flight risk, and ordering parents to hand over all weapons to sheriff’s office if they are released from jail.
“Obviously, these charges are very, very serious, there is no question about that,” Nicholson said. “The court does have some concern about the flight risk along with the public safety, given the circumstances that occurred yesterday and the fact that the defendants did have to be apprehended in order to appear for purposes of arraignment.”
Ethan Crumbley faces multiple charges as an adult in the attack Tuesday at Oxford High School: one count of terrorism causing death, four counts of first-degree murder, seven counts of assault with intent to murder and 12 counts of possession of a firearm.
The shooting has torn apart the small Michigan community, located about 45 minutes outside Detroit, and reignited calls for tighter gun laws, with more states considering laws to punish parents if children fire unsecured guns. It appears to be the deadliest episode of on-campus violence in the United States in more than 18 months. Seven others were wounded.
Charging parents is unusual in a school shooting. A Washington Post review of 145 school shootings committed by children in the two decades after the Columbine High massacre in 1999 found that the weapon’s source had been publicly identified in 105 cases. In total, the guns those children used were taken from their own homes or those of relatives or friends 80 percent of the time.
However, in just four instances did the adult owners of the weapons face any criminal punishment for not having locked them up — and none of those prosecutions stemmed from negligent-storage laws.
“While the shooter was the one who entered the high school and pulled the trigger, there were other individuals who contributed to the event,” McDonald said Friday as she announced the charges against the parents.
Jennifer and James Crumbley were located after a 911 call from a business owner who spotted the couple’s car in his parking lot in Detroit, Chief Deputy Mike McCabe of the Oakland County Sheriff’s Office. He added in an emailed statement that a female observed near the car fled on foot when he called 911. Detroit Police Chief James White said police found “video of one of the two fugitives entering the building” and that police had quickly “set up a perimeter” at the location.
The pair “did not break in” at the building but “were aided,” White said, adding that police were investigating one other person who may have helped the couple. He thanked the community, saying that “it was a tip that led us to this location” and that officers responded “in a matter of minutes,” arriving on scene at 10:30 p.m. local time Friday.
Law enforcement officers outside the building where James and Jennifer Crumbley, the parents of suspected Oxford High School shooter Ethan Crumbley, were arrested on Dec. 4 in Detroit. (Matthew Hatcher/Getty Images)
When asked about the pair’s emotional state as they were taken into custody, White said that they were “very distressed” and that one of them left the scene with head bowed.
Attorneys for the Crumbleys had earlier said the couple left town the night of the shooting “for their own safety,” adding that they would return to be arraigned on the manslaughter charges. They repeated that at the arraignment Saturday, saying that the couple had planned to meet their attorneys outside the court at 7:30 a.m.
“We did not announce it because unlike prosecution we weren’t attempting to make this a media spectacle,” Smith said.
But police and prosecutors disputed that account, with White telling reporters Saturday: “This isn’t indicative of turning themselves in, hiding in a warehouse.”
The pistol, purchased by James Crumbley on Nov. 26, was stored in an unlocked drawer in the parents’ bedroom, according to officials.
A day before the fatal shooting, a teacher noticed Ethan Crumbley using his cellphone to search for information on firearm ammunition. Jennifer Crumbley did not respond when the school contacted her via voice mail about her son’s “inappropriate” search, McDonald said. Instead, she exchanged a text message with her son that read, “LOL I’m not mad at you. You have to learn not to get caught.”
On the morning of the shooting, both parents were summoned to a meeting by school administrators after a teacher found a troubling note in their son’s desk, McDonald said. It contained a drawing of a semiautomatic handgun pointing at the words “The thoughts won’t stop. Help me.”
The note included a drawing of a bullet with the words “blood everywhere.” There was also a drawing of a bloody figure with two gunshot wounds, McDonald said, and another drawing of a laugh emoji.
Ethan altered the note, McDonald said, scratching out the most disturbing parts of it by the time the meeting with his parents began shortly after 10 a.m. on Nov. 30. McDonald said the teen brought his backpack to the counselor’s office for the meeting and noted that at no point did his parents ask about the recently purchased gun. McDonald said neither the Crumbleys nor school officials searched the teen’s backpack.
The Crumbleys “resisted the idea of their son leaving the school at that time,” McDonald said. Instead, Ethan returned to class with his backpack.
Karin Brulliard, Kim Bellware, John Woodrow Cox and Paulina Firozi contributed to this report.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2 ... s-custody/
Video of the arraignment.
<iframe width='480' height='290' scrolling='no' src='' frameborder='0' webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe>
Jennifer and James Crumbley, the parents of the alleged Michigan high school school shooter, were held on $500,000 bond each on Dec. 4. (The Washington Post)
by ti-amie
Wait it's a 13m drive? Were they waiting for someone to take them? I guess customs at the other end would've snagged them if they didn't have fake id.
Wait it's a 13m drive? Were they waiting for someone to take them? I guess customs at the other end would've snagged them if they didn't have fake id.
13 min (1.8 mi) via Detroit Windsor Tunnel
by ti-amie Also don't forget I'm a native NY'er. Everything past the Hudson River is a blur! 
by JazzNU 
And then I was busy yesterday being Aunt Jazz. So instead you're going to get deep thinking on a football Sunday.
by ti-amie Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes found mostly guilty in epic fraud trial
The three-month trial featured intense lawyering and testimony, including from Holmes herself — possibly to her detriment with the 12-person jury.
MATTHEW RENDA / January 3, 2022
FILE- In this Nov. 2, 2015, file photo, Elizabeth Holmes, founder and CEO of Theranos, speaks at the Fortune Global Forum in San Francisco. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu, File)
SAN JOSE, Calif. (CN) — Disgraced Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes faces decades in prison after a federal jury on Monday found her guilty on 8 of 11 counts of fraud and criminal conspiracy, bringing to an end a trial filled with technical details that began in early September.
This is a developing story.
https://www.courthousenews.com/theranos ... aud-trial/
The three-month trial featured intense lawyering and testimony, including from Holmes herself — possibly to her detriment with the 12-person jury.
MATTHEW RENDA / January 3, 2022
FILE- In this Nov. 2, 2015, file photo, Elizabeth Holmes, founder and CEO of Theranos, speaks at the Fortune Global Forum in San Francisco. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu, File)
SAN JOSE, Calif. (CN) — Disgraced Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes faces decades in prison after a federal jury on Monday found her guilty on 8 of 11 counts of fraud and criminal conspiracy, bringing to an end a trial filled with technical details that began in early September.
This is a developing story.
https://www.courthousenews.com/theranos ... aud-trial/
by ti-amie Summary from @KlasfeldReports of the AUSA and Michael Avenatti's closing remarks. Avenatti is representing himself.
Good morning from New York.
It’s Groundhog Day… again, which means proceedings in yet another federal trial against Michael Avenatti.
Closing arguments are expected to start this morning in the Stormy Daniels case.
Follow along here, @lawcrimenews
"All rise"
The jury is entering.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Sobelman is up:
"The defendant was a lawyer who stole from his own client. She thought that he was her own advocate, but he betrayed her."
And he told lies to cover it up, the AUSA says.
"The defendant's lies and betrayal were exposed."
That line very much echoes that the one by Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Rohrbach during opening statements a little more than a week ago. lawandcrime.com/uncategorized/…
AUSA:
"He lied to Ms. Daniels for months to cover it up."
In February 2019, Avenatti got caught up in his own "web of lies," he adds.
The prosecutor says the jury has a "mountain of evidence" before it.
AUSA: Why did the defendant lie in those messages? He knew that [the money] did not belong to him. He stole it.
Prosecutors show this text exchange between Avenatti and Daniels to the jury, noting that the publisher wasn't late with the payment, as she thought.
Avenatti had it and didn't tell her, he notes.
Good morning from New York.
It’s Groundhog Day… again, which means proceedings in yet another federal trial against Michael Avenatti.
Closing arguments are expected to start this morning in the Stormy Daniels case.
Follow along here, @lawcrimenews
"All rise"
The jury is entering.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Sobelman is up:
"The defendant was a lawyer who stole from his own client. She thought that he was her own advocate, but he betrayed her."
And he told lies to cover it up, the AUSA says.
"The defendant's lies and betrayal were exposed."
That line very much echoes that the one by Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Rohrbach during opening statements a little more than a week ago. lawandcrime.com/uncategorized/…
AUSA:
"He lied to Ms. Daniels for months to cover it up."
In February 2019, Avenatti got caught up in his own "web of lies," he adds.
The prosecutor says the jury has a "mountain of evidence" before it.
AUSA: Why did the defendant lie in those messages? He knew that [the money] did not belong to him. He stole it.
Prosecutors show this text exchange between Avenatti and Daniels to the jury, noting that the publisher wasn't late with the payment, as she thought.
Avenatti had it and didn't tell her, he notes.
The prosecutor shows the jury a similar exchange from October 2018.
AUSA: That was false. The publisher didn't owe Ms. Daniels anything. It was the defendant who took her money.
AUSA: Another category of lies was telling Daniels that he would threaten litigation against the publisher to get the money.
In fact, he says, the publisher sent Avenatti the money and he spent it by that time.
Note: I deleted an old version of the previous tweet for clarity and grammar.
Prosecution slide—
"The Defendant Broke Rules to Steal Money"
"When a lawyer receives any money on behalf of a client, the lawyer must deposit the money into a bank account labeled as a client trust bank account, and must promptly notify the client of the receipt of the funds."
AUSA says that Avenatti also broke notification rule.
Prosecution slide: "The Defendant Was Desperate for Money"
Avenatti's assistant testified that his law firm couldn't afford the basics, like rent and health insurance, the prosecutor noted.
AUSA: "The defendant's law firm was broke. That is one of the reasons that he stole Ms. Daniels's money."
AUSA: "That explains why he stole Ms. Daniels's money, but it doesn't excuse his crimes."
AUSA says that another reason the jury should know Avenatti is guilty is that he "played dumb when he got caught."
AUSA says of Daniels: "She could not believe that her trusted lawyer could have lied to her every day for months."
He shows this text message as an example of Avenatti "playing dumb."
The exchange continues.
AUSA: "She told you that this was her 'mic drop' moment."
That moment is illustrated in these texts from Feb. 19, 2019.
Avenatti claims that he was entitled to a portion of Daniels's book advance, but the prosecutor says that text messages demolish that defense.
AUSA: "If he thought the money was actually his, he would have just said so."
The prosecutor skewers what he calls Avenatti's "'I deserve it' defense."
Whatever work Avenatti did for Daniels does not give him a "free pass" to defraud her, he tells the jury.
AUSA Sobelman takes on Avenatti's "distraction" about Stormy Daniels's belief in the paranormal:
"Has she had some unusual experiences? Yes. Does she have some unusual beliefs? Sure."
Defense summation begins.
P1
Good morning from New York.
It’s Groundhog Day… again, which means proceedings in yet another federal trial against Michael Avenatti.
Closing arguments are expected to start this morning in the Stormy Daniels case.
Follow along here, @lawcrimenews
"All rise"
The jury is entering.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Sobelman is up:
"The defendant was a lawyer who stole from his own client. She thought that he was her own advocate, but he betrayed her."
And he told lies to cover it up, the AUSA says.
"The defendant's lies and betrayal were exposed."
That line very much echoes that the one by Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Rohrbach during opening statements a little more than a week ago. lawandcrime.com/uncategorized/…
AUSA:
"He lied to Ms. Daniels for months to cover it up."
In February 2019, Avenatti got caught up in his own "web of lies," he adds.
The prosecutor says the jury has a "mountain of evidence" before it.
AUSA: Why did the defendant lie in those messages? He knew that [the money] did not belong to him. He stole it.
Prosecutors show this text exchange between Avenatti and Daniels to the jury, noting that the publisher wasn't late with the payment, as she thought.
Avenatti had it and didn't tell her, he notes.
Good morning from New York.
It’s Groundhog Day… again, which means proceedings in yet another federal trial against Michael Avenatti.
Closing arguments are expected to start this morning in the Stormy Daniels case.
Follow along here, @lawcrimenews
"All rise"
The jury is entering.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Sobelman is up:
"The defendant was a lawyer who stole from his own client. She thought that he was her own advocate, but he betrayed her."
And he told lies to cover it up, the AUSA says.
"The defendant's lies and betrayal were exposed."
That line very much echoes that the one by Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Rohrbach during opening statements a little more than a week ago. lawandcrime.com/uncategorized/…
AUSA:
"He lied to Ms. Daniels for months to cover it up."
In February 2019, Avenatti got caught up in his own "web of lies," he adds.
The prosecutor says the jury has a "mountain of evidence" before it.
AUSA: Why did the defendant lie in those messages? He knew that [the money] did not belong to him. He stole it.
Prosecutors show this text exchange between Avenatti and Daniels to the jury, noting that the publisher wasn't late with the payment, as she thought.
Avenatti had it and didn't tell her, he notes.
The prosecutor shows the jury a similar exchange from October 2018.
AUSA: That was false. The publisher didn't owe Ms. Daniels anything. It was the defendant who took her money.
AUSA: Another category of lies was telling Daniels that he would threaten litigation against the publisher to get the money.
In fact, he says, the publisher sent Avenatti the money and he spent it by that time.
Note: I deleted an old version of the previous tweet for clarity and grammar.
Prosecution slide—
"The Defendant Broke Rules to Steal Money"
"When a lawyer receives any money on behalf of a client, the lawyer must deposit the money into a bank account labeled as a client trust bank account, and must promptly notify the client of the receipt of the funds."
AUSA says that Avenatti also broke notification rule.
Prosecution slide: "The Defendant Was Desperate for Money"
Avenatti's assistant testified that his law firm couldn't afford the basics, like rent and health insurance, the prosecutor noted.
AUSA: "The defendant's law firm was broke. That is one of the reasons that he stole Ms. Daniels's money."
AUSA: "That explains why he stole Ms. Daniels's money, but it doesn't excuse his crimes."
AUSA says that another reason the jury should know Avenatti is guilty is that he "played dumb when he got caught."
AUSA says of Daniels: "She could not believe that her trusted lawyer could have lied to her every day for months."
He shows this text message as an example of Avenatti "playing dumb."
The exchange continues.
AUSA: "She told you that this was her 'mic drop' moment."
That moment is illustrated in these texts from Feb. 19, 2019.
Avenatti claims that he was entitled to a portion of Daniels's book advance, but the prosecutor says that text messages demolish that defense.
AUSA: "If he thought the money was actually his, he would have just said so."
The prosecutor skewers what he calls Avenatti's "'I deserve it' defense."
Whatever work Avenatti did for Daniels does not give him a "free pass" to defraud her, he tells the jury.
AUSA Sobelman takes on Avenatti's "distraction" about Stormy Daniels's belief in the paranormal:
"Has she had some unusual experiences? Yes. Does she have some unusual beliefs? Sure."
Defense summation begins.
P1
by ti-amie Adam Klasfeld @KlasfeldReports
Feb 9 • 26 tweets • https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1491 ... 90691.html
Ex-NYT editor James Bennet's second day of testimony continues in Sarah Palin's defamation suit.
NYT's counsel is up now.
Some highlights so far:
Q: When you used the word “incite,” were you intending to convey only that “incite” meant direct orders?
A: No, no. You can incite hate. You can incite anger. You can incite passion. You can even incite doubt. [...] Incite requires an object as a verb.
Bennet:
"We were focused on [...] rhetoric on the left, which had become much hotter in the period. Things were worse. Things are worse today than they were then in 2017. [...]
We were focused on rhetoric on the left—and the right, but particularly on the left that day."
Bennet:
"The absolute drop-dead deadline was about 8 o’clock."
But he said that he was trying to get it in at around 6 and 7.
Asked why he didn't research the link between the Loughner shooting and the Sarah PAC map, Bennet gives multiple answers.
"I was functioning as the editor, not the reporter on this piece."
Also: "I didn’t think then & don’t think now that the map caused Jared Loughner to act."
Bennet on readers interpreting it that way:
"It didn't enter my mind."
He adds: "I was very conscious of the deadline."
Questioning turns to parsing this line of the editorial: "The sniper, James Hodgkinson, who was killed by Capitol Police officers, was surely deranged, and his derangement had found its fuel in politics."
Bennet says he added a "surely" to the draft, as a "hedge."
Little was known about the 2017 congressional baseball shooting at the time, and Hodgkinson's derangement was an "opinion,' Bennet said.
He adds he thought Hodgkinson was because only a deranged person would do such a thing.
Now they're parsing the line at the heart of the defamation suit: "the link to political incitement was clear."
Bennet says that if he thought the Sarah PAC map "caused" the Giffords shooting, he would have written that. It would have saved words.
Bennet says he thought the lines about "derangement" would have made that clear.
"I don't personally believe that anybody but that person is responsible—and their derangement—for an act like this."
Asked whether he knew readers would interpret his words differently, Bennet again says no.
"That's on me. That's my failure. I didn't."
Questioning turns to this passage about how "liberals should of course hold themselves to the same standards of decency."
Bennet: "It's true of opinion journalists, who are allowed to venture such judgments. News journalists aren't allowed to do such a thing."
Q: When you published "America's Lethal Politics," did you have any ill-will toward Ms. Palin?
A: No.
Asked whether he meant to convey that Loughner acted because of the crosshairs map, Bennet replies: "I did not."
After a morning recess, the Times counsel asks Bennet about him receiving an email by Ross Douthat criticizing the link to Palin.
"I was very concerned," Bennet says, noting that he saw similar and "quite harsh" criticism at the NYT editorial page on Twitter.
Bennet on the night that the editorial ran:
"I couldn't sleep."
Q: Why didn't you have anyone do that research [on Loughner's motivations]?
A: As I said, he was deranged. He was a lunatic. [...] His motives were his own. They were his own responsibility, and I thought that was clear.
Q: Did you know it was a mistake when you published this?
A: No.
(As the NYT's attorney shows Bennet a Twitter thread.)
Q: Can you explain what threading the tweets like this means for the jury?
Bennet explains what threading is.
Asked how he felt after learning he made a mistake, he said: "I felt terrible."
Q: Why is that?
A: It's just a terrible thing to make a mistake. I've edited and written hundreds of pieces on deadline, thousands of pieces overall.
Full transcript:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1491 ... =real_time
Feb 9 • 26 tweets • https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1491 ... 90691.html
Ex-NYT editor James Bennet's second day of testimony continues in Sarah Palin's defamation suit.
NYT's counsel is up now.
Some highlights so far:
Q: When you used the word “incite,” were you intending to convey only that “incite” meant direct orders?
A: No, no. You can incite hate. You can incite anger. You can incite passion. You can even incite doubt. [...] Incite requires an object as a verb.
Bennet:
"We were focused on [...] rhetoric on the left, which had become much hotter in the period. Things were worse. Things are worse today than they were then in 2017. [...]
We were focused on rhetoric on the left—and the right, but particularly on the left that day."
Bennet:
"The absolute drop-dead deadline was about 8 o’clock."
But he said that he was trying to get it in at around 6 and 7.
Asked why he didn't research the link between the Loughner shooting and the Sarah PAC map, Bennet gives multiple answers.
"I was functioning as the editor, not the reporter on this piece."
Also: "I didn’t think then & don’t think now that the map caused Jared Loughner to act."
Bennet on readers interpreting it that way:
"It didn't enter my mind."
He adds: "I was very conscious of the deadline."
Questioning turns to parsing this line of the editorial: "The sniper, James Hodgkinson, who was killed by Capitol Police officers, was surely deranged, and his derangement had found its fuel in politics."
Bennet says he added a "surely" to the draft, as a "hedge."
Little was known about the 2017 congressional baseball shooting at the time, and Hodgkinson's derangement was an "opinion,' Bennet said.
He adds he thought Hodgkinson was because only a deranged person would do such a thing.
Now they're parsing the line at the heart of the defamation suit: "the link to political incitement was clear."
Bennet says that if he thought the Sarah PAC map "caused" the Giffords shooting, he would have written that. It would have saved words.
Bennet says he thought the lines about "derangement" would have made that clear.
"I don't personally believe that anybody but that person is responsible—and their derangement—for an act like this."
Asked whether he knew readers would interpret his words differently, Bennet again says no.
"That's on me. That's my failure. I didn't."
Questioning turns to this passage about how "liberals should of course hold themselves to the same standards of decency."
Bennet: "It's true of opinion journalists, who are allowed to venture such judgments. News journalists aren't allowed to do such a thing."
Q: When you published "America's Lethal Politics," did you have any ill-will toward Ms. Palin?
A: No.
Asked whether he meant to convey that Loughner acted because of the crosshairs map, Bennet replies: "I did not."
After a morning recess, the Times counsel asks Bennet about him receiving an email by Ross Douthat criticizing the link to Palin.
"I was very concerned," Bennet says, noting that he saw similar and "quite harsh" criticism at the NYT editorial page on Twitter.
Bennet on the night that the editorial ran:
"I couldn't sleep."
Q: Why didn't you have anyone do that research [on Loughner's motivations]?
A: As I said, he was deranged. He was a lunatic. [...] His motives were his own. They were his own responsibility, and I thought that was clear.
Q: Did you know it was a mistake when you published this?
A: No.
(As the NYT's attorney shows Bennet a Twitter thread.)
Q: Can you explain what threading the tweets like this means for the jury?
Bennet explains what threading is.
Asked how he felt after learning he made a mistake, he said: "I felt terrible."
Q: Why is that?
A: It's just a terrible thing to make a mistake. I've edited and written hundreds of pieces on deadline, thousands of pieces overall.
Full transcript:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1491 ... =real_time
by ti-amie From @KlasfeldReports via @threadreaderapp
Good morning from New York.
Sarah Palin's testimony continues in her lawsuit against the New York Times.
I'm covering the proceedings for @lawcrimenews.
During pre-trial arguments, the NYT's lawyer argues that someone known for saying "Don’t retreat, reload" will have a hard time arguing that she sustained emotional damage in the face of criticism about her gun rhetoric.
The NYT wants to grill Palin on rhetoric like that to establish that Palin "plays in the public field" and "uses hyperbole" to make her points.
Judge Rakoff says he'll allow it.
Everyone rises, and Judge Rakoff sends in the jury.
Palin returns to the witness box.
Today's testimony continues with more biographical details, including her education (journalism degree from the University of Idaho).
Testimony then turns to Sarah PAC.
"Sarah PAC was Sarah, Sarah Palin. It was the tool, the forum, to have my voice heard."
Palin says that the Tucson shooting was "a huge concern to me personally."
Asked about her response to being blamed for it, she responds: "I wasn't going to politicize, like the way the media was politicizing at that time, the deaths of a 9-year-old girl."
Palin:
"I just felt for the family more than I could express. Also the federal judge."
She rattles off the names of the other victims.
"I felt for them, and I wanted to get the message out that there needed to be fairness."
Palin:
"It was mortifying because I knew what the truth was."
Asked whether the blame affected her, she says: "Absolutely, the death threats really ramped up. Disturbing death threats against my children. There seemed to be a campaign out there from my daughter, Piper."
Palin:
"I feared for my family's safety and my supporters' safety because of those threats."
Loughner's nine-year-old victim was Christina-Taylor Green, and Palin said that some wanted her daughter Piper to be harmed in the same way.
Right now, Palin's testimony is about the immediate aftermath of the 2011 Loughner shootings—well before the NYT editorial.
Palin, pressed by the judge, claims that the NYT linked her to incitement before the editorial at issue.
She can't specify what.
NYT moves to strike.
The parties are at sidebar because Palin just alleged a generic, amorphous claim against the NYT not specified in her defamation case — essentially accusing the paper of linking her to incitement before the 2017 editorial that's the subject of this lawsuit.
Reminder:
The testimony so far has not touched upon the NYT's "America's Lethal Politics" editorial. These are her grievances against the media writ large for linking her to the Loughner shooting post-2011.
NYT wasn't alone.
From 2011, 6 years earlier
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' blood is on Sarah Palin's hands after putting cross hair over district
Here is what Sarah Palin said on the Facebook page where she depicted Gabrielle Giffords in the cross hairs of a rifle scope: "Don't retreat! Instead - RELOAD!" Well, the guy who shot Giffor…
Unlike that Daily News editorial, the NYT later issued a correction over the false link.
(Long sidebar ends)
Rakoff explains to the jury why they took a long break to resolve legal issues.
Questioning turns to the publication of "America's Lethal Politics" in 2017.
Q: Do you remember where you were when you first found out this editorial was being published.
A: No.
Palin:
"I remember feeling immediately, 'Oh, no.' First, in realizing how significant and horrible the incident was."
She says she was "mortified."
Asked if she was in politics at the time, she says: "No."
Q: Was your profile as high?
A: Not at all.
After the editorial's publication, she says she thought: "Oh, no. Not again!
Palin talks about defending Bernie Sanders after the 2017 shooting.
"I did not want to see more untruths printed. I wanted Bernie Sanders not to be blamed" in a "knee-jerk reaction," trying to "score political points" by those who wanted to "capitalize" on violence.
Palin says "the media" would let "no tragedy go to waste."
"The New York Times, the be all end all, the loud voice in media had already taken a knee-jerk reaction, and I felt [...] tried to score political points" over the "horrific violence."
Palin:
"There was no mention of me in what they called a correction."
(NYT staffers previously testified that's by design: The paper doesn't want to compound the error to dragging out the person's name out with it.)
The NYT dropped language about the incitement, but Palin claimed that the after version wasn't much better:
"Nothing changed. They doubled down."
(See before and after.)
Palins says that she felt that the NYT was “Goliath” and she, representing “the people,” was “David.”
Palin: "There I was up in Wasilla, Alaska, up against those who buy ink by the barrel, and here I was with my No. 2 pencil."
On cross-ex, the NYT's lawyer presses Palin on her experiences facing criticism in the political arena.
Q: You have felt political animus from the political left since the 2008 election.
A: Some.
Asked if she's been described as "polarizing," she responds: "I've heard that."
NYT's lawyer asks about her payment for her appearance on "The Masked Singer."
"It paid some bills," Palin acknowledges.
Q: You have 1.3 million followers on Twitter?
A: I don't know. I don't tweet.
NYT's lawyer shows her the account. She acknowledges it shows just that—and her infrequent tweeting.
NYT's lawyer says that she'd agree the markings on the map look like crosshairs.
She responds a "reasonable person could and would" see it that way.
"They also look like other things that you could perceive those as, the surveyor markings"
NYT's counsel David Axelrod asks about this tweet.
Morning recess.
P1
Good morning from New York.
Sarah Palin's testimony continues in her lawsuit against the New York Times.
I'm covering the proceedings for @lawcrimenews.
During pre-trial arguments, the NYT's lawyer argues that someone known for saying "Don’t retreat, reload" will have a hard time arguing that she sustained emotional damage in the face of criticism about her gun rhetoric.
The NYT wants to grill Palin on rhetoric like that to establish that Palin "plays in the public field" and "uses hyperbole" to make her points.
Judge Rakoff says he'll allow it.
Everyone rises, and Judge Rakoff sends in the jury.
Palin returns to the witness box.
Today's testimony continues with more biographical details, including her education (journalism degree from the University of Idaho).
Testimony then turns to Sarah PAC.
"Sarah PAC was Sarah, Sarah Palin. It was the tool, the forum, to have my voice heard."
Palin says that the Tucson shooting was "a huge concern to me personally."
Asked about her response to being blamed for it, she responds: "I wasn't going to politicize, like the way the media was politicizing at that time, the deaths of a 9-year-old girl."
Palin:
"I just felt for the family more than I could express. Also the federal judge."
She rattles off the names of the other victims.
"I felt for them, and I wanted to get the message out that there needed to be fairness."
Palin:
"It was mortifying because I knew what the truth was."
Asked whether the blame affected her, she says: "Absolutely, the death threats really ramped up. Disturbing death threats against my children. There seemed to be a campaign out there from my daughter, Piper."
Palin:
"I feared for my family's safety and my supporters' safety because of those threats."
Loughner's nine-year-old victim was Christina-Taylor Green, and Palin said that some wanted her daughter Piper to be harmed in the same way.
Right now, Palin's testimony is about the immediate aftermath of the 2011 Loughner shootings—well before the NYT editorial.
Palin, pressed by the judge, claims that the NYT linked her to incitement before the editorial at issue.
She can't specify what.
NYT moves to strike.
The parties are at sidebar because Palin just alleged a generic, amorphous claim against the NYT not specified in her defamation case — essentially accusing the paper of linking her to incitement before the 2017 editorial that's the subject of this lawsuit.
Reminder:
The testimony so far has not touched upon the NYT's "America's Lethal Politics" editorial. These are her grievances against the media writ large for linking her to the Loughner shooting post-2011.
NYT wasn't alone.
From 2011, 6 years earlier
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' blood is on Sarah Palin's hands after putting cross hair over district
Here is what Sarah Palin said on the Facebook page where she depicted Gabrielle Giffords in the cross hairs of a rifle scope: "Don't retreat! Instead - RELOAD!" Well, the guy who shot Giffor…
Unlike that Daily News editorial, the NYT later issued a correction over the false link.
(Long sidebar ends)
Rakoff explains to the jury why they took a long break to resolve legal issues.
Questioning turns to the publication of "America's Lethal Politics" in 2017.
Q: Do you remember where you were when you first found out this editorial was being published.
A: No.
Palin:
"I remember feeling immediately, 'Oh, no.' First, in realizing how significant and horrible the incident was."
She says she was "mortified."
Asked if she was in politics at the time, she says: "No."
Q: Was your profile as high?
A: Not at all.
After the editorial's publication, she says she thought: "Oh, no. Not again!
Palin talks about defending Bernie Sanders after the 2017 shooting.
"I did not want to see more untruths printed. I wanted Bernie Sanders not to be blamed" in a "knee-jerk reaction," trying to "score political points" by those who wanted to "capitalize" on violence.
Palin says "the media" would let "no tragedy go to waste."
"The New York Times, the be all end all, the loud voice in media had already taken a knee-jerk reaction, and I felt [...] tried to score political points" over the "horrific violence."
Palin:
"There was no mention of me in what they called a correction."
(NYT staffers previously testified that's by design: The paper doesn't want to compound the error to dragging out the person's name out with it.)
The NYT dropped language about the incitement, but Palin claimed that the after version wasn't much better:
"Nothing changed. They doubled down."
(See before and after.)
Palins says that she felt that the NYT was “Goliath” and she, representing “the people,” was “David.”
Palin: "There I was up in Wasilla, Alaska, up against those who buy ink by the barrel, and here I was with my No. 2 pencil."
On cross-ex, the NYT's lawyer presses Palin on her experiences facing criticism in the political arena.
Q: You have felt political animus from the political left since the 2008 election.
A: Some.
Asked if she's been described as "polarizing," she responds: "I've heard that."
NYT's lawyer asks about her payment for her appearance on "The Masked Singer."
"It paid some bills," Palin acknowledges.
Q: You have 1.3 million followers on Twitter?
A: I don't know. I don't tweet.
NYT's lawyer shows her the account. She acknowledges it shows just that—and her infrequent tweeting.
NYT's lawyer says that she'd agree the markings on the map look like crosshairs.
She responds a "reasonable person could and would" see it that way.
"They also look like other things that you could perceive those as, the surveyor markings"
NYT's counsel David Axelrod asks about this tweet.
Morning recess.
P1
by ti-amie P2
After the jury leaves, Rakoff incredulously asks Palin about her comments that she doesn't dance or sing.
Rakoff: "You are missing one of the great joys in life. I am encouraging you to reconsider."
Rakoff discloses that his wife, who is an "expert" in ballroom dancing, is in the courtroom.
Notably:
Palin appeared to describe little tangible impact from the 2017 editorial.
She testified about death threats **preceding** the 2017 editorial from the Loughner connection, but not about threats, lost wages, or other consequences—other than lost sleep—*following* it.
Her direct examination is over—and her lawyer spent little time trying to thread that needle.
We're back.
Questioning turns to Jan. 8, 2011, the date of the Loughner shooting.
Palin agrees that some in the press criticized her after that, and she put out a statement. The NYT's lawyer David Axelrod shows her the statement for identification.
It's received as an exhibit.
Q: Did you write this last statement?
She says yes, but adds a couple of people were helping her.
Part of her statement:
"My heart broke for the innocent victims [...] We do mourn for the victims' families as we express our sympathies."
It also states.
"Vigorous and spirited debate during elections are among our most cherished traditions."
Palin's statement at the time continued:
"If you don't like their ideas, you're free to propose better ideas."
It also, much more controversially, compared criticism of her to a "blood libel."
The "blood libel" was the antisemitic lie that Jews used the blood of Christian babies in their matzoh, leading to centuries of persecution and massacres against Jewish people.
Palin's invoking the phrase for herself sparked widespread condemnation.
Sarah Palin's 'Blood Libel' Charge Stirs New Controversy
Palin's use of "blood libel" has drawn criticism because it recalls a vicious anti-Jewish lies. J Street, the Jewish organization, asks her to retract her statement and use something less inflammatory…
https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpoli ... -blood-lib
Palin ducks a number of questions from the NYT's attorney about whether she meant "blood libel" to refer to news outlets tying her to the Loughner shooting.
She says it's about "the power of the pen, the power in words."
Q: Did any journalists say 'Go out there and hunt Sarah Palin because of the crosshairs map'?
Palin says she's seen her face in crosshairs, "so yes."
Q: Who?
A: I don't have it in front of me, but I have years of that kind of graphic or statement or death threats.
Q: Your use of the [phrase] "blood libel" created more criticism, yes?
A: Correct.
Asked whether she hired a PR firm to repair her image after the Loughner controversy, Palin replies that she never hired PR firms.
It's not her practice, she said.
Axelrod asked Palin whether one of her first reactions to the editorial was to consider a lawsuit.
She agrees: "I knew something had to be done."
The NYT's attorney David Axelrod refers to her tweet saying she's "exploring options" regarding litigation.
Before tweeting that, Axelrod asks: "You didn't reach out to the Times to ask for a correction, did you?"
She agrees she didn't.
Palin:
"No, they just accused me of inciting murder. I didn't think I would get a friendly response."
Later:
"I did not personally reach out an unfriendly recipient of what I'd be requesting of them. It was common sense. They knew that they were printing an untruth."
Q: Fair to say, you never sought an apology from the Times, did you?
She didn't.
Palin quibbles over the language that she "circulated" the crosshairs map.
"It was on a website," she says, noting it was months before the shooting.
(No link was established.)
"Sarah Palin Tells a Jury That Her Defamation Suit Against the New York Times Is Just Like David vs. Goliath"
Axelrod asks her whether she recalls speaking to family about the editorial.
"As I sit here today, in the penalty box, I don't recall specifically," Palin said, amusingly referring to the Plexiglas enclosure that are witness stands in the age of COVID-19.
Q: In this case, you're not seeking to recover any lost income, correct?
A: Not lost income, but [...]
Rakoff interjects to tell the jury that it's a legal matter and not something sought in her lawsuit.
Q: You can't identify anybody who's shied away from you as a result of the editorial?
A: I can't name names.
Q: You can't specifically identify any candidates who's shied away from you as a result of the publication of the editorial?
She says generally "things changed" after the editorial.
"I can't specifically give you any name of someone who told me that they didn't want me to help them," Palin said.
Axelrod asked whether she spent any money on a PR firm or other such professional to try to repair Palin's reputation.
Palin's lawyer objects, asking for a sidebar.
Rakoff grants that request, and they huddle.
Confronting about her claim of lost sleep, Palin insists that it was "hard to lay my head peacefully on the pillow at night, yes."
Q: Did you see a doctor about that?
A: No.
Q: Did you take any medication?
A: No.
Palin: "I holistically remedied any issues caused by stress."
Q: You believe Americans should have the right to voice their opinions, right?
A: Yes.
Q: Even if it's an unpopular opinion?
A: Absolutely.
Q: That's the beauty of the First Amendment, right?
A: Right.
She adds later: "As long as everyone's speaking truthfully."
Axelrod notes that part of the faith of the First Amendment is that the truth will eventually win out, setting the stage for his questions about the NYT's prompt correction.
Q: Gov. Palin, isn't it true that you've recently talked about running for office again?
Palin responds that: "The door's always open."
NYT's counsel notes that, since the editorial, she's been Fox News and appeared on Turning Point USA.
She says she's appeared twice for the latter.
Cross-examination ends.
Redirect by her lawyer begins.
Palin on her "blood libel" remark: "I did not expect that anybody would take such issue with it."
We resume after the lunch recess.
Palin's attorney asks her about "Don't retreat, reload."
"It was a bumper sticker on my dad's truck forever."
She credits it to her dad's motivational saying. Her parents were marathon runners, she says.
Q: Were sports important in your family?
A: Extremely important.
Palin makes a passing remark about how the Times "circulated" their erroneous editorial.
(She previously claimed her crosshairs map wasn't circulated—because it was just put on her website.)
Recross:
NYT's counsel says that Palin said in August 2021 that she contemplated running for office this year.
She reiterates she may have said at the time: "The door's always open."
Palin notes she sued a couple weeks after the editorial.
She previously testified that she wasn't in politics at the time, but Axelrod has her acknowledge that she hit the trail with a couple Georgia senate candidates.
Palin tweeted this a couple months after filing suit:
"Hitting the trail... stay tuned for details!"
(Note: FB Image and I can't post)
The link touted her bus tour with Judge Roy Moore.
See Who Gov. Palin is Campaigning For In The South
A: I think so.
Q: About three months after the publication of the editorial.
She acknowledged that's true.
She left the witness box after that question and answer, ending her testimony
After the jury leaves, Rakoff incredulously asks Palin about her comments that she doesn't dance or sing.
Rakoff: "You are missing one of the great joys in life. I am encouraging you to reconsider."
Rakoff discloses that his wife, who is an "expert" in ballroom dancing, is in the courtroom.
Notably:
Palin appeared to describe little tangible impact from the 2017 editorial.
She testified about death threats **preceding** the 2017 editorial from the Loughner connection, but not about threats, lost wages, or other consequences—other than lost sleep—*following* it.
Her direct examination is over—and her lawyer spent little time trying to thread that needle.
We're back.
Questioning turns to Jan. 8, 2011, the date of the Loughner shooting.
Palin agrees that some in the press criticized her after that, and she put out a statement. The NYT's lawyer David Axelrod shows her the statement for identification.
It's received as an exhibit.
Q: Did you write this last statement?
She says yes, but adds a couple of people were helping her.
Part of her statement:
"My heart broke for the innocent victims [...] We do mourn for the victims' families as we express our sympathies."
It also states.
"Vigorous and spirited debate during elections are among our most cherished traditions."
Palin's statement at the time continued:
"If you don't like their ideas, you're free to propose better ideas."
It also, much more controversially, compared criticism of her to a "blood libel."
The "blood libel" was the antisemitic lie that Jews used the blood of Christian babies in their matzoh, leading to centuries of persecution and massacres against Jewish people.
Palin's invoking the phrase for herself sparked widespread condemnation.
Sarah Palin's 'Blood Libel' Charge Stirs New Controversy
Palin's use of "blood libel" has drawn criticism because it recalls a vicious anti-Jewish lies. J Street, the Jewish organization, asks her to retract her statement and use something less inflammatory…
https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpoli ... -blood-lib
Palin ducks a number of questions from the NYT's attorney about whether she meant "blood libel" to refer to news outlets tying her to the Loughner shooting.
She says it's about "the power of the pen, the power in words."
Q: Did any journalists say 'Go out there and hunt Sarah Palin because of the crosshairs map'?
Palin says she's seen her face in crosshairs, "so yes."
Q: Who?
A: I don't have it in front of me, but I have years of that kind of graphic or statement or death threats.
Q: Your use of the [phrase] "blood libel" created more criticism, yes?
A: Correct.
Asked whether she hired a PR firm to repair her image after the Loughner controversy, Palin replies that she never hired PR firms.
It's not her practice, she said.
Axelrod asked Palin whether one of her first reactions to the editorial was to consider a lawsuit.
She agrees: "I knew something had to be done."
The NYT's attorney David Axelrod refers to her tweet saying she's "exploring options" regarding litigation.
Before tweeting that, Axelrod asks: "You didn't reach out to the Times to ask for a correction, did you?"
She agrees she didn't.
Palin:
"No, they just accused me of inciting murder. I didn't think I would get a friendly response."
Later:
"I did not personally reach out an unfriendly recipient of what I'd be requesting of them. It was common sense. They knew that they were printing an untruth."
Q: Fair to say, you never sought an apology from the Times, did you?
She didn't.
Palin quibbles over the language that she "circulated" the crosshairs map.
"It was on a website," she says, noting it was months before the shooting.
(No link was established.)
"Sarah Palin Tells a Jury That Her Defamation Suit Against the New York Times Is Just Like David vs. Goliath"
Axelrod asks her whether she recalls speaking to family about the editorial.
"As I sit here today, in the penalty box, I don't recall specifically," Palin said, amusingly referring to the Plexiglas enclosure that are witness stands in the age of COVID-19.
Q: In this case, you're not seeking to recover any lost income, correct?
A: Not lost income, but [...]
Rakoff interjects to tell the jury that it's a legal matter and not something sought in her lawsuit.
Q: You can't identify anybody who's shied away from you as a result of the editorial?
A: I can't name names.
Q: You can't specifically identify any candidates who's shied away from you as a result of the publication of the editorial?
She says generally "things changed" after the editorial.
"I can't specifically give you any name of someone who told me that they didn't want me to help them," Palin said.
Axelrod asked whether she spent any money on a PR firm or other such professional to try to repair Palin's reputation.
Palin's lawyer objects, asking for a sidebar.
Rakoff grants that request, and they huddle.
Confronting about her claim of lost sleep, Palin insists that it was "hard to lay my head peacefully on the pillow at night, yes."
Q: Did you see a doctor about that?
A: No.
Q: Did you take any medication?
A: No.
Palin: "I holistically remedied any issues caused by stress."
Q: You believe Americans should have the right to voice their opinions, right?
A: Yes.
Q: Even if it's an unpopular opinion?
A: Absolutely.
Q: That's the beauty of the First Amendment, right?
A: Right.
She adds later: "As long as everyone's speaking truthfully."
Axelrod notes that part of the faith of the First Amendment is that the truth will eventually win out, setting the stage for his questions about the NYT's prompt correction.
Q: Gov. Palin, isn't it true that you've recently talked about running for office again?
Palin responds that: "The door's always open."
NYT's counsel notes that, since the editorial, she's been Fox News and appeared on Turning Point USA.
She says she's appeared twice for the latter.
Cross-examination ends.
Redirect by her lawyer begins.
Palin on her "blood libel" remark: "I did not expect that anybody would take such issue with it."
We resume after the lunch recess.
Palin's attorney asks her about "Don't retreat, reload."
"It was a bumper sticker on my dad's truck forever."
She credits it to her dad's motivational saying. Her parents were marathon runners, she says.
Q: Were sports important in your family?
A: Extremely important.
Palin makes a passing remark about how the Times "circulated" their erroneous editorial.
(She previously claimed her crosshairs map wasn't circulated—because it was just put on her website.)
Recross:
NYT's counsel says that Palin said in August 2021 that she contemplated running for office this year.
She reiterates she may have said at the time: "The door's always open."
Palin notes she sued a couple weeks after the editorial.
She previously testified that she wasn't in politics at the time, but Axelrod has her acknowledge that she hit the trail with a couple Georgia senate candidates.
Palin tweeted this a couple months after filing suit:
"Hitting the trail... stay tuned for details!"
(Note: FB Image and I can't post)
The link touted her bus tour with Judge Roy Moore.
See Who Gov. Palin is Campaigning For In The South
Q: This was September 2017.
A: I think so.
Q: About three months after the publication of the editorial.
She acknowledged that's true.
She left the witness box after that question and answer, ending her testimony
by ti-amie Maybe this is why?
EXCLUSIVE: NYC's elite are in a tizzy after Justice Department 'inadvertently' publishes list of 121 'clients' - including lawyers, businessmen, and socialites - who solicited Sarah Lawrence 'sex cult victim' who was forced into prostitution
The US Attorney's Office on Tuesday accidentally published a list of alleged clients of the student prostitute in the Sarah Lawrence 'sex cult' case
DailyMail.com acquired a copy of the list of 121 names which was taken down nearly as fast as it was put up
The list, which was entered into evidence in the trial under seal, includes lawyers and businessmen and socialites throughout the Tri-state area
Alleged clients include a Metropolitan Transit Authority executive, an account executive at Amazon, and a former New York State Supreme Court judge
The Justice Department later sent out an email admitting the file was shared in error, adding: 'Please do not reproduce, share, or use this exhibit in any way'
Alleged cult victim Claudia Drury, 31, took the stand Friday and Monday to tell jurors how she was forced into prostitution by accused leader Larry Ray, 62
Ray is charged with sex trafficking, extortion, money laundering, violent crime in aid of racketeering, racketeering conspiracy and forced labor
The ex-convict is accused of running a sex cult out of his daughter Talia's dorm at Sarah Lawrence College
By KAREN RUIZ and GREG WOODFIELD FOR DAILYMAIL.COM and LAURA COLLINS, CHIEF INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER IN MANHATTAN FEDERAL COURT FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 10:50 EDT, 22 March 2022 | UPDATED: 12:52 EDT, 22 March 2022
New York's business elite was left shaking in its boots Tuesday after a list of alleged clients of the student prostitute in the Sarah Lawrence 'sex cult' case was inadvertently published online.
The list, which was entered into evidence under seal in the ongoing trial of accused cult leader Larry Ray, includes lawyers and businessmen and socialites throughout the Tri-state area.
DailyMail.com acquired a copy of the list of 121 names which was taken down nearly as fast as it was put up.
A top executive at The Gap clothing firm and her husband was one of two married couples included. A former New York State Supreme Court judge is also named.
Another alleged client is a painter who has studios in Manhattan's East Village and in Italy. A third is an architect, famous for designing college and university buildings.
An investment executive who was also in pedophile Jeffrey Epstein's infamous little black book of contacts is also listed.
Other names include a hedge fund manager who has donated millions to charity and has his name on a museum building in New York, a Washington DC, lobbyist who has worked for a foreign resistance movement and an international diamond dealer.
Also included is an executive at the Metropolitan Transit Authority, an account executive at Amazon and a veteran travel writer.
The document is among the government exhibits admitted in the federal case against 62-year-old Ray, who is on trial in New York, charged with operating a sex cult out of his daughter's dorm room at Sarah Lawrence College.
The list is said to have been compiled and included in an email by former Sarah Lawrence student Claudia Drury, 31, who has been on the stand giving evidence against Ray, whom she claims coerced her into becoming a prostitute.
But somehow the government posted the 'sealed' document online and then immediately scrambled to stop the information getting out.
'Per order of the Court, government exhibit #3217 (GX 3217) was admitted under seal,' a spokesman for the Department of Justice wrote in an email soon after the document was taken offline.
'This file was inadvertently loaded to the U.S. v. Ray file share. Please do not reproduce, share, or use this exhibit in any way, if you have downloaded this file, please delete it.'
But the department's plea is unlikely to be successful as the document has already been posted on Twitter.
The list is included in an email said to be from Drury to the Department.
'This is not an exhaustive list but it includes all my main clients/regulars and many others,' she wrote.
Drury is one of at least five cult members who were students at the elite liberal arts college in Bronxville, just north of Manhattan, when they met Ray.
Ray was introduced to the group in the fall of 2010 when he began living in his daughter Talia's on-campus dorm, where he persuaded her friends to stay the next summer at his city apartment.
Prosecutors say Ray coerced the students to join his 'family' as he accumulated power, sex and money, forcing one woman into a sex work enterprise so lucrative that she turned over more than $1million to him in a single year.
Drury, 31, began her testimony Friday, telling jurors at Manhattan Federal Court how Ray's campaign of charisma resulted in her being hospitalized in a psychiatric facility and ultimately led her into a life of prostitution.
She described how she went from a naïve student to soliciting sex, ultimately handing over $2.5million in earnings to Ray, his daughter Talia and his 'lieutenant' and co-accused Isabella Pollok.
Drury admitted that she had always been very uncomfortable and lacked confidence about her body and couldn't believe that anybody would find her attractive.
She credited this insecurity along with Ray's coercion with her decision to have sexual encounters with 'Sam', a married man from whom Ray bought power tools.
Earlier in the trial jurors were also shown texts between Drury and Pollok and Pollok and Talia apparently discussing Drury's prostitution, her clients, payment and transfers of cash into Pollok's bank account.
In the texts read aloud, Drury listed meetings and sums of money she expected in payment.
One read: 'I'm seeing Joe, the $3,500 guy at 3:30pm. I believe that will be another $8k though maybe less.'
Sums of money ranging from a few hundred to more than $17,000 in cash and bank accounts were discussed.
In a follow up text exchange between Pollok and Talia allegedly regarding the transfer of money earned by Drury through prostitution, Talia reassures Pollok: 'We got the moollah.'
On Monday, the court was shown emails in which Drury praised Ray's selflessness and the supposed psychological 'help' he was providing to her and college friends including Santos Rosario, Dan Levin, Felicia Rosario and Ray's co-accused and alleged 'lieutenant' Isabella Pollok.
At the time, she referred to Ray as, 'the hero of the story.'
Taking the stand for a second day on Monday, she continued her account of the alleged gas-lighting, physical and sexual abuse that she claims she suffered at Ray's hands.
On one occasion, she recalled, Ray showed her a photograph of friend and fellow student Levin.
She explained: '[Ray] told me that he was having a confrontation or conversation with Dan about Dan's sexuality and that in the course of this Isabella was folding laundry and Dan kept eyeing a dress.
'Larry asked Dan, "Do you want to wear the dress?" He told me Dan really did and so he made Dan put on the dress and go down to get mail wearing the dress.'
On his return to the Upper East Side apartment in which the students and Ray were, for the most part, living, Drury said the confrontation 'escalated.'
'From there it escalated to Larry telling Isabella to go get her bag of sex toys and dildos and to get the biggest one, and he [Ray] showed me a picture of Dan trying to fit it in his mouth,' she added.
'This was all framed as something Dan wanted – that was helpful and clarifying for Dan.'
But according to Drury, Levin's face was 'contorted' in the photograph in which he was looking directly at the camera.
She said: 'He looks panicked and questioning and scared. It's not a look I've actually ever seen on anyone's face again.'
During another incident recalled by Drury in court, Ray made a 'noose' out of tinfoil and had Levin place it round his testicles while he interrogated him – tightening the noose whenever he deemed the younger man to be 'playing with the truth.'
Ray is accused of 17 counts including sex-trafficking, extortion, money laundering, violent crime in aid of racketeering, racketeering conspiracy
She went on to tell the court how the campaign of control escalated during the summer of 2013, when she and several others travelled to Pinehurst, North Carolina, to help with yardwork at Ray's stepfather's property.
At this point, she said, Ray was controlling what students ate – forbidding carbohydrates – and forcing them to work sometimes until three or four in the morning to re-do mistakes that he found in their work.
'Someone went out and got hamburgers and fries and milkshakes. [Ray] said, "This is your last meal, Felicia. You can have carbs; you can have whatever you want,"' she told the court.
Earlier in the trial, prosecutors began their opening statements alleging that Ray, an ex-convict, had used 'violence, fear, sex and manipulation' to get sex, power and money.
After learning the students' secrets and insecurities and gaining their trust, Ray exploited them, 'profiting off their labor, their money and even their bodies,' Assistant US Attorney Lindsey Keenan said.
'Once he gained control of their lives, ... he took over their lives.'
Ray's lawyer told the jury that Ray committed no federal crimes as he encircled himself with college-age 'storytellers' who claimed to have poisoned him and arranged to have him physically attacked.
'You'll see that Larry Ray is not guilty,' attorney Allegra Glashausser said.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... trial.html
EXCLUSIVE: NYC's elite are in a tizzy after Justice Department 'inadvertently' publishes list of 121 'clients' - including lawyers, businessmen, and socialites - who solicited Sarah Lawrence 'sex cult victim' who was forced into prostitution
The US Attorney's Office on Tuesday accidentally published a list of alleged clients of the student prostitute in the Sarah Lawrence 'sex cult' case
DailyMail.com acquired a copy of the list of 121 names which was taken down nearly as fast as it was put up
The list, which was entered into evidence in the trial under seal, includes lawyers and businessmen and socialites throughout the Tri-state area
Alleged clients include a Metropolitan Transit Authority executive, an account executive at Amazon, and a former New York State Supreme Court judge
The Justice Department later sent out an email admitting the file was shared in error, adding: 'Please do not reproduce, share, or use this exhibit in any way'
Alleged cult victim Claudia Drury, 31, took the stand Friday and Monday to tell jurors how she was forced into prostitution by accused leader Larry Ray, 62
Ray is charged with sex trafficking, extortion, money laundering, violent crime in aid of racketeering, racketeering conspiracy and forced labor
The ex-convict is accused of running a sex cult out of his daughter Talia's dorm at Sarah Lawrence College
By KAREN RUIZ and GREG WOODFIELD FOR DAILYMAIL.COM and LAURA COLLINS, CHIEF INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER IN MANHATTAN FEDERAL COURT FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 10:50 EDT, 22 March 2022 | UPDATED: 12:52 EDT, 22 March 2022
New York's business elite was left shaking in its boots Tuesday after a list of alleged clients of the student prostitute in the Sarah Lawrence 'sex cult' case was inadvertently published online.
The list, which was entered into evidence under seal in the ongoing trial of accused cult leader Larry Ray, includes lawyers and businessmen and socialites throughout the Tri-state area.
DailyMail.com acquired a copy of the list of 121 names which was taken down nearly as fast as it was put up.
A top executive at The Gap clothing firm and her husband was one of two married couples included. A former New York State Supreme Court judge is also named.
Another alleged client is a painter who has studios in Manhattan's East Village and in Italy. A third is an architect, famous for designing college and university buildings.
An investment executive who was also in pedophile Jeffrey Epstein's infamous little black book of contacts is also listed.
Other names include a hedge fund manager who has donated millions to charity and has his name on a museum building in New York, a Washington DC, lobbyist who has worked for a foreign resistance movement and an international diamond dealer.
Also included is an executive at the Metropolitan Transit Authority, an account executive at Amazon and a veteran travel writer.
The document is among the government exhibits admitted in the federal case against 62-year-old Ray, who is on trial in New York, charged with operating a sex cult out of his daughter's dorm room at Sarah Lawrence College.
The list is said to have been compiled and included in an email by former Sarah Lawrence student Claudia Drury, 31, who has been on the stand giving evidence against Ray, whom she claims coerced her into becoming a prostitute.
But somehow the government posted the 'sealed' document online and then immediately scrambled to stop the information getting out.
'Per order of the Court, government exhibit #3217 (GX 3217) was admitted under seal,' a spokesman for the Department of Justice wrote in an email soon after the document was taken offline.
'This file was inadvertently loaded to the U.S. v. Ray file share. Please do not reproduce, share, or use this exhibit in any way, if you have downloaded this file, please delete it.'
But the department's plea is unlikely to be successful as the document has already been posted on Twitter.
The list is included in an email said to be from Drury to the Department.
'This is not an exhaustive list but it includes all my main clients/regulars and many others,' she wrote.
Drury is one of at least five cult members who were students at the elite liberal arts college in Bronxville, just north of Manhattan, when they met Ray.
Ray was introduced to the group in the fall of 2010 when he began living in his daughter Talia's on-campus dorm, where he persuaded her friends to stay the next summer at his city apartment.
Prosecutors say Ray coerced the students to join his 'family' as he accumulated power, sex and money, forcing one woman into a sex work enterprise so lucrative that she turned over more than $1million to him in a single year.
Drury, 31, began her testimony Friday, telling jurors at Manhattan Federal Court how Ray's campaign of charisma resulted in her being hospitalized in a psychiatric facility and ultimately led her into a life of prostitution.
She described how she went from a naïve student to soliciting sex, ultimately handing over $2.5million in earnings to Ray, his daughter Talia and his 'lieutenant' and co-accused Isabella Pollok.
Drury admitted that she had always been very uncomfortable and lacked confidence about her body and couldn't believe that anybody would find her attractive.
She credited this insecurity along with Ray's coercion with her decision to have sexual encounters with 'Sam', a married man from whom Ray bought power tools.
Earlier in the trial jurors were also shown texts between Drury and Pollok and Pollok and Talia apparently discussing Drury's prostitution, her clients, payment and transfers of cash into Pollok's bank account.
In the texts read aloud, Drury listed meetings and sums of money she expected in payment.
One read: 'I'm seeing Joe, the $3,500 guy at 3:30pm. I believe that will be another $8k though maybe less.'
Sums of money ranging from a few hundred to more than $17,000 in cash and bank accounts were discussed.
In a follow up text exchange between Pollok and Talia allegedly regarding the transfer of money earned by Drury through prostitution, Talia reassures Pollok: 'We got the moollah.'
On Monday, the court was shown emails in which Drury praised Ray's selflessness and the supposed psychological 'help' he was providing to her and college friends including Santos Rosario, Dan Levin, Felicia Rosario and Ray's co-accused and alleged 'lieutenant' Isabella Pollok.
At the time, she referred to Ray as, 'the hero of the story.'
Taking the stand for a second day on Monday, she continued her account of the alleged gas-lighting, physical and sexual abuse that she claims she suffered at Ray's hands.
On one occasion, she recalled, Ray showed her a photograph of friend and fellow student Levin.
She explained: '[Ray] told me that he was having a confrontation or conversation with Dan about Dan's sexuality and that in the course of this Isabella was folding laundry and Dan kept eyeing a dress.
'Larry asked Dan, "Do you want to wear the dress?" He told me Dan really did and so he made Dan put on the dress and go down to get mail wearing the dress.'
On his return to the Upper East Side apartment in which the students and Ray were, for the most part, living, Drury said the confrontation 'escalated.'
'From there it escalated to Larry telling Isabella to go get her bag of sex toys and dildos and to get the biggest one, and he [Ray] showed me a picture of Dan trying to fit it in his mouth,' she added.
'This was all framed as something Dan wanted – that was helpful and clarifying for Dan.'
But according to Drury, Levin's face was 'contorted' in the photograph in which he was looking directly at the camera.
She said: 'He looks panicked and questioning and scared. It's not a look I've actually ever seen on anyone's face again.'
During another incident recalled by Drury in court, Ray made a 'noose' out of tinfoil and had Levin place it round his testicles while he interrogated him – tightening the noose whenever he deemed the younger man to be 'playing with the truth.'
Ray is accused of 17 counts including sex-trafficking, extortion, money laundering, violent crime in aid of racketeering, racketeering conspiracy
She went on to tell the court how the campaign of control escalated during the summer of 2013, when she and several others travelled to Pinehurst, North Carolina, to help with yardwork at Ray's stepfather's property.
At this point, she said, Ray was controlling what students ate – forbidding carbohydrates – and forcing them to work sometimes until three or four in the morning to re-do mistakes that he found in their work.
'Someone went out and got hamburgers and fries and milkshakes. [Ray] said, "This is your last meal, Felicia. You can have carbs; you can have whatever you want,"' she told the court.
Earlier in the trial, prosecutors began their opening statements alleging that Ray, an ex-convict, had used 'violence, fear, sex and manipulation' to get sex, power and money.
After learning the students' secrets and insecurities and gaining their trust, Ray exploited them, 'profiting off their labor, their money and even their bodies,' Assistant US Attorney Lindsey Keenan said.
'Once he gained control of their lives, ... he took over their lives.'
Ray's lawyer told the jury that Ray committed no federal crimes as he encircled himself with college-age 'storytellers' who claimed to have poisoned him and arranged to have him physically attacked.
'You'll see that Larry Ray is not guilty,' attorney Allegra Glashausser said.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... trial.html
by ti-amie Republicans are labeling everyone a pedophile lately. Here's some legal news that clarifies why that could be...
by ti-amie Ponchi, 
You said that the US system is broken the other day and I, foolishly, tried to say not completely.
You said that the US system is broken the other day and I, foolishly, tried to say not completely. by ti-amie Church of Scientology Asks U.S. Supreme Court to Force Danny Masterson Rape Accusers into Binding ‘Religious Arbitration’
AARON KELLER Jul 23rd, 2022, 7:03 pm
Danny Masterson was photographed at a Hollywood premiere on June 29, 2015. (Photo by Jason Merritt/Getty Images.)
The Church of Scientology is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a case that questions whether religious groups can force their followers — and even their ex-followers — to submit to internal arbitration proceedings to settle disputes.
The case is connected to and indeed names Daniel Masterson, the “That 70s Show” actor who faces an upcoming rape trial in the California state court system. The respondents in the case allege that Masterson, who is described in Church legal filings as “another Church parishioner,” sexually assaulted them between 2000 and 2003. The instant case involves not the instances of alleged assault but rather whether church officials “improperly handled Respondents’ reporting of the alleged assaults.”
An intermediate California appellate court ruled on Jan. 19, 2022 that the respondents enjoyed a First Amendment right to leave the Church of Scientology and that their mandatory arbitration agreement with the church was terminated along with the respondents’ departure from the faith. That ruling flatly described the Masterson allegations as “rape”:
The California Supreme Court refused to take the case, so the church appealed to a higher authority. The church’s U.S. Supreme Court petition asks the nation’s highest court to pluck the matter from the California court system and proffers these two issues as questions presented:
The church’s practice of resolving disputes with members is described in the petition as “religious arbitration.” The petition chides California’s court system for — in Scientology’s view — forcing it to change the way it admits and deals with its own congregants. The church argues that the First Amendment bans the state and its courts from governing church dispute resolution procedures.
“[R]eligious arbitration is a long-recognized institution that is increasing in use throughout the United States and across religions,” the church wrote. “Review by this Court is necessary to settle the confusion created by the California Court of Appeal. Religious organizations need this Court to remove any doubt that their contracts – including their agreements to arbitrate disputes before a religious forum – cannot be voided by a party’s professed change of mind. Churches have the right to know that their contracts are equal under law and not subject to ad hoc and unprecedented application of a state action theory by judicial officers.”
The church elsewhere described the dispute for the Court in these terms:
Masterson is scheduled to face a separate criminal trial in California this October. Masterson has denied the allegations against him, Law&Crime has previously reported.
Read the church’s 144-page petition (and its concomitant attachments) below:
https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/c ... qus_thread
AARON KELLER Jul 23rd, 2022, 7:03 pm
Danny Masterson was photographed at a Hollywood premiere on June 29, 2015. (Photo by Jason Merritt/Getty Images.)
The Church of Scientology is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a case that questions whether religious groups can force their followers — and even their ex-followers — to submit to internal arbitration proceedings to settle disputes.
The case is connected to and indeed names Daniel Masterson, the “That 70s Show” actor who faces an upcoming rape trial in the California state court system. The respondents in the case allege that Masterson, who is described in Church legal filings as “another Church parishioner,” sexually assaulted them between 2000 and 2003. The instant case involves not the instances of alleged assault but rather whether church officials “improperly handled Respondents’ reporting of the alleged assaults.”
An intermediate California appellate court ruled on Jan. 19, 2022 that the respondents enjoyed a First Amendment right to leave the Church of Scientology and that their mandatory arbitration agreement with the church was terminated along with the respondents’ departure from the faith. That ruling flatly described the Masterson allegations as “rape”:
One key point of the California Court of Appeal ruling was that petitioners’ case involved conduct that allegedly occurred after the petitioners left the church:Petitioners in this writ proceeding are former members of the Church of Scientology who reported to the police that another Church member had raped them. They allege that, in retaliation for their reports, the Church encouraged its members to engage in a vicious campaign of harassment against them. After petitioners brought suit in superior court against the Church and related entities and persons, some of those defendants moved to compel arbitration, relying on agreements that provided all disputes with the Church would be resolved according to the Church’s own “Ethics, Justice and Binding Religious Arbitration system.” That system was created to decide matters “in accordance with Scientology principles of justice and fairness.”
The Court of Appeal opinion is officially unpublished and therefore carries little to no weight as precedent under the California Rules of Court (Rule 8.1115, specifically).Individuals have a First Amendment right to leave a religion. We hold that once petitioners had terminated their affiliation with the Church, they were not bound to its dispute resolution procedures to resolve the claims at issue here, which are based on alleged tortious conduct occurring after their separation from the Church and do not implicate resolution of ecclesiastical issues. We issue a writ directing the trial court to vacate its order compelling arbitration and instead to deny the motion.
The California Supreme Court refused to take the case, so the church appealed to a higher authority. The church’s U.S. Supreme Court petition asks the nation’s highest court to pluck the matter from the California court system and proffers these two issues as questions presented:
At times co-opting language from the Court of Appeal opinion, the church asserts in its petition to the U.S. Supreme Court that its followers consented to an “irrevocable agreement” to “submit disputes to Scientology arbitration” — which is just “one of the prices of joining [the Scientology] religion.”(1) Where a parishioner freely executes a religious arbitration agreement with her church, does the First Amendment prohibit enforcement of the agreement if the parishioner leaves the faith?
(2) Does the First Amendment restrict the terms on which a Church may accept members into its faith?
The church’s practice of resolving disputes with members is described in the petition as “religious arbitration.” The petition chides California’s court system for — in Scientology’s view — forcing it to change the way it admits and deals with its own congregants. The church argues that the First Amendment bans the state and its courts from governing church dispute resolution procedures.
“[R]eligious arbitration is a long-recognized institution that is increasing in use throughout the United States and across religions,” the church wrote. “Review by this Court is necessary to settle the confusion created by the California Court of Appeal. Religious organizations need this Court to remove any doubt that their contracts – including their agreements to arbitrate disputes before a religious forum – cannot be voided by a party’s professed change of mind. Churches have the right to know that their contracts are equal under law and not subject to ad hoc and unprecedented application of a state action theory by judicial officers.”
The church elsewhere described the dispute for the Court in these terms:
The statement of the case continues:Contracts are contracts, even when a church is a party. It should go without saying that contracts with churches are entitled to the same protection under the law as contracts with secular entities. The California Court of Appeal disagrees. It held that a voluntary party to an otherwise enforceable contract with a church may annul that contract by asserting a First Amendment right to “leave the faith” and “extricate” themselves from the church. While secular entities can enforce contracts over the objections of a party that no longer wishes to be bound, churches now cannot, as long as a party asserts a change of faith. The Court of Appeal deprived churches of the contractual right that really matters – the right to enforce. And it did so expressly because churches are religious.
A response to the church’s petition is due Aug. 22, according to the Supreme Court’s docket for the case.The dispute here is simple. The Respondents, as a condition for joining Petitioners’ church, repeatedly and expressly agreed to religious arbitration of any disputes between them and Petitioners, regardless of when those disputes arose. The agreement to submit disputes to religious arbitration is not anomalous. American courts have long recognized the right of religious institutions to use dispute resolution procedures derived from and guided by their foundational beliefs and scripture. Secular courts have placed agreements to submit disputes to religious arbitration on equal footing with agreements calling for secular arbitration – and declined invitations to discriminate against religious arbitration just because it is religious.
At some point, Respondents changed their minds, and their faith. They argued that their change of faith should free them from their contractual obligations to submit their disputes with Petitioners to the chosen religious forum. The California Court of Appeal agreed. It became the first court in the nation to overturn a freely executed religious arbitration agreement based on the objection by a party that the selected forum was exactly what the party agreed to – religious. The Court of Appeal arrived at this result by finding state action in the judicial enforcement of religious arbitration agreements, while acknowledging that the enforcement of secular arbitration agreements does not amount to state action.
Masterson is scheduled to face a separate criminal trial in California this October. Masterson has denied the allegations against him, Law&Crime has previously reported.
Read the church’s 144-page petition (and its concomitant attachments) below:
https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/c ... qus_thread
by ti-amie The judge presiding over this case was appointed by TFG. There are 74 tweets in the thread. There will be a lot of skipping of tweets
Jordan Fischer via @threadreaderapp
Good morning. I'm at D.C. District Court where, in a few minutes, the sentencing for Texas Three Percenter Guy Reffitt will begin. The DOJ will argue Reffitt should be the first Jan. 6 defendant to receive a terrorism enhancement. Follow for live coverage.
For those who like to listen to these themselves, it is not clear to me if there will be the usual listen-only line but, if there is, it will be this.
Toll Free Number: 877-336-1829
Access Code: 8424583
Guy Reffitt entered the courtroom a few minutes ago in an orange inmate's jumper and a white mask. Like at his trial, his hair is pulled back in a short ponytail. Reffitt is joined by his new attorney, F. Clinton Broden, who did not represent him at trial.
Now in the courtroom as the hearing begins: U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich and assistant U.S. attorneys Jeffrey Nestler and Risa Berkower.
Two victims will give impact statements today: U.S. Capitol Police Officer Shauni Kerkhoff and Guy Reffitt's son, Jackson. Both testified at his trial.
Reffitt's wife Nicole will also make a statement on his behalf.
Guy Reffitt's wife, Jodi Nicole Reffitt, already submitted a letter to the court. It does not mention the two occasions when Reffitt, according to Nicole's own statements on the podcast "Will Be Wild," placed a loaded gun against her head.
Defense raising a few objections to the PSR. Says they don't think it's fair to say Guy Reffitt recruited fellow militia member Rocky Hardie (Judge Friedrich says she thinks it is). Also, don't agree Reffitt instructed crowd how to overcome police.
Judge Friedrich says it seems to her to be overstating it to say Guy Reffitt "charged" police. She does agree it's fair to say Reffitt instructed fellow Three Percenters to purge texts. Doesn't think it's accurate to say Reffitt instructed Rocky Hardie on what firearms to bring.
None of these objections, as Guy Reffitt's attorney Clinton Broden said, will affect the sentencing calculation.
On to the more substantive questions about which, if any, sentencing enhancements Guy Reffitt should receive. The government is seeking quite a few. See their sentencing memo below.
Guy Reffitt's attorney F. Clinton Broden trying to walk a precarious line here. He's acknowledging the verbal threats Reffitt made to Speaker Pelosi and others, but denying they were threats made to further the obstruction charge.
Discussion has now turned to the amount of weapons/body armor/etc. Guy Reffitt brought to D.C.
"We believe the defendant brought more gear than almost anybody else" who's going to sentencing, AUSA Jeffrey Nestler says.
Judge Friedrich: "What concerns the court is... his decision to go to trial should not result in a dramatically different sentence" from those who took plea deals.
That's why she's probing evidence of planning by Guy Reffitt.
DOJ now arguing for the +2 level "aggravating role" enhancement. Judge Friedrich asks if Guy Reffitt encouraging/waving on the crowd is enough to warrant that.
Judge Friedrich: "It seemed... my impression from the trial was he was kind of a lone guy there who couldn't even get the leader of the Texas Three Percenters to join him."
Clinton Broden says the mob "would have gone up those stairs regardless without Mr. Reffitt, I think we all know that."
Guy Reffitt told multiple people he "lit the match" on Jan. 6 and bragged that no one was moving on police on the stairs until he did.
Judge Friedrich says it's a "very close call" whether there's enough evidence to support BOTH the extensive planning adjustment AND the aggravated role adjustment. Would be a "slam dunk," she says, if Guy Reffitt's fellow militia member Rocky Hardie had joined at the stairs.
Judge Friedrich: "I struggled with this. I'm not going to apply it." Says adding both the extensive planning and aggravated role adjustments would be cumulative.
We aren't to the terrorism enhancement the DOJ wants yet, but Judge Friedrich's rejection of an aggravated role enhancement does seem to suggest prosecutors will have an even steeper climb on that one. Aggravated role adds 2 levels. The terrorism enhancement does much more.
Judge Friedrich rules Guy Reffitt's offense level will be 29 with the adjustments she agreed on. That makes his recommended sentencing guideline 87-108 months in prison. But first: DOJ arguments for multiple upward departures.
(...)
AUSA Nestler says Guy Reffitt is responsible for four firearms: the two pistols he and Rocky Hardie carried onto Capitol grounds and the two fully assembled AR-15s they kept stored at the hotel in Georgetown.
Clinton Broden: "This is the only case where the government has asked for the terrorism enhancement, and this is the only case where the defendant has gone to trial. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure that out."
Judge Friedrich is NOT going to apply the upward departures for inadequate offense grouping or weapons. Terrorism enhancement being discussed now.
AUSA Nestler: "He was trying to take over our government. He wasn't just trying to stop the vote... the terrorism enhancement is warranted by all of those factors. Not just the defendant's conduct on Jan. 6, but afterward."
Judge Freidrich, sounding very much like she's going to deny the terrorism enhancement, notes there are many other cases involving weapons/assaults on police and the same sort of "very disturbing statements" Guy Reffitt made — but where DOJ didn't seek it.
Judge Friedrich references Mark Ponder, who I reported about last week, and Nicholas Languerand, an ex-Army private who assaulted police w/ multiple objects and had a notebook with a "target list."
(...)
JUST NOW: Judge Friedrich DENIES prosecutors' request to impose a terrorism enhancement and other upward departures at the sentencing of Guy Reffitt. His recommended sentencing range will be 87-108 months in prison.
The lowest end of this would be 2 years longer than the longest Jan. 6 sentence to date. Guy Reffitt's attorney will now argue for a downward variance to 24 months.
Former USCP Officer Shauni Kerkhoff speaking now. Says she was one of the first officers to confront Guy Reffitt: “I watched in horror as he encouraged the angry mob to push past him and advance on the Capitol – physically assaulting some of my fellow officers in the process.”
Shauni Kerkhoff says since testifying at Guy Reffitt's trial she's become a target of his supporters online. She asks for him to receive the maximum sentence: “His actions weren’t acts of patriotism. They were acts of domestic terrorism.”
AUSA Jeffrey Nestler, pushing back a bit on Judge Friedrich's reasoning on the terrorism enhancement, says Guy Reffit was "in a class all by himself."
"This is not someone who was a lone wolf," AUSA Nestler says. He had a leadership role in his militia group, reached out to Sen. Ted Cruz's office (no evidence Cruz responded), etc.
"He didn't just want President Trump to remain in office," AUSA Nestler says. "He wanted to physically and literally remove members of Congress from power. We believe he is a domestic terrorist."
Judge Friedrich: "This defendant has some frightening claims that border on delusional, and they are extraordinarily concerning for the court. But other defendants did too. That's the point I'm trying to make."
Judge Friedrich asks Nestler if she shouldn't consider Guy Reffitt's mental health issues as a mitigating factor? Agrees w/ Jackson that mental health should be part of sentence and she's going to order full treatment. Now clear he has "very serious" mental health issues.
AUSA Nestler: "We think he's dangerous. But we don't think any mental health condition" caused him to do what he did.
p1/2
Jordan Fischer via @threadreaderapp
Good morning. I'm at D.C. District Court where, in a few minutes, the sentencing for Texas Three Percenter Guy Reffitt will begin. The DOJ will argue Reffitt should be the first Jan. 6 defendant to receive a terrorism enhancement. Follow for live coverage.
For those who like to listen to these themselves, it is not clear to me if there will be the usual listen-only line but, if there is, it will be this.
Toll Free Number: 877-336-1829
Access Code: 8424583
Guy Reffitt entered the courtroom a few minutes ago in an orange inmate's jumper and a white mask. Like at his trial, his hair is pulled back in a short ponytail. Reffitt is joined by his new attorney, F. Clinton Broden, who did not represent him at trial.
Now in the courtroom as the hearing begins: U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich and assistant U.S. attorneys Jeffrey Nestler and Risa Berkower.
Two victims will give impact statements today: U.S. Capitol Police Officer Shauni Kerkhoff and Guy Reffitt's son, Jackson. Both testified at his trial.
Reffitt's wife Nicole will also make a statement on his behalf.
Guy Reffitt's wife, Jodi Nicole Reffitt, already submitted a letter to the court. It does not mention the two occasions when Reffitt, according to Nicole's own statements on the podcast "Will Be Wild," placed a loaded gun against her head.
Defense raising a few objections to the PSR. Says they don't think it's fair to say Guy Reffitt recruited fellow militia member Rocky Hardie (Judge Friedrich says she thinks it is). Also, don't agree Reffitt instructed crowd how to overcome police.
Judge Friedrich says it seems to her to be overstating it to say Guy Reffitt "charged" police. She does agree it's fair to say Reffitt instructed fellow Three Percenters to purge texts. Doesn't think it's accurate to say Reffitt instructed Rocky Hardie on what firearms to bring.
None of these objections, as Guy Reffitt's attorney Clinton Broden said, will affect the sentencing calculation.
On to the more substantive questions about which, if any, sentencing enhancements Guy Reffitt should receive. The government is seeking quite a few. See their sentencing memo below.
Guy Reffitt's attorney F. Clinton Broden trying to walk a precarious line here. He's acknowledging the verbal threats Reffitt made to Speaker Pelosi and others, but denying they were threats made to further the obstruction charge.
Discussion has now turned to the amount of weapons/body armor/etc. Guy Reffitt brought to D.C.
"We believe the defendant brought more gear than almost anybody else" who's going to sentencing, AUSA Jeffrey Nestler says.
Judge Friedrich: "What concerns the court is... his decision to go to trial should not result in a dramatically different sentence" from those who took plea deals.
That's why she's probing evidence of planning by Guy Reffitt.
DOJ now arguing for the +2 level "aggravating role" enhancement. Judge Friedrich asks if Guy Reffitt encouraging/waving on the crowd is enough to warrant that.
Judge Friedrich: "It seemed... my impression from the trial was he was kind of a lone guy there who couldn't even get the leader of the Texas Three Percenters to join him."
Clinton Broden says the mob "would have gone up those stairs regardless without Mr. Reffitt, I think we all know that."
Guy Reffitt told multiple people he "lit the match" on Jan. 6 and bragged that no one was moving on police on the stairs until he did.
Judge Friedrich says it's a "very close call" whether there's enough evidence to support BOTH the extensive planning adjustment AND the aggravated role adjustment. Would be a "slam dunk," she says, if Guy Reffitt's fellow militia member Rocky Hardie had joined at the stairs.
Judge Friedrich: "I struggled with this. I'm not going to apply it." Says adding both the extensive planning and aggravated role adjustments would be cumulative.
We aren't to the terrorism enhancement the DOJ wants yet, but Judge Friedrich's rejection of an aggravated role enhancement does seem to suggest prosecutors will have an even steeper climb on that one. Aggravated role adds 2 levels. The terrorism enhancement does much more.
Judge Friedrich rules Guy Reffitt's offense level will be 29 with the adjustments she agreed on. That makes his recommended sentencing guideline 87-108 months in prison. But first: DOJ arguments for multiple upward departures.
(...)
AUSA Nestler says Guy Reffitt is responsible for four firearms: the two pistols he and Rocky Hardie carried onto Capitol grounds and the two fully assembled AR-15s they kept stored at the hotel in Georgetown.
Clinton Broden: "This is the only case where the government has asked for the terrorism enhancement, and this is the only case where the defendant has gone to trial. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure that out."
Judge Friedrich is NOT going to apply the upward departures for inadequate offense grouping or weapons. Terrorism enhancement being discussed now.
AUSA Nestler: "He was trying to take over our government. He wasn't just trying to stop the vote... the terrorism enhancement is warranted by all of those factors. Not just the defendant's conduct on Jan. 6, but afterward."
Judge Freidrich, sounding very much like she's going to deny the terrorism enhancement, notes there are many other cases involving weapons/assaults on police and the same sort of "very disturbing statements" Guy Reffitt made — but where DOJ didn't seek it.
Judge Friedrich references Mark Ponder, who I reported about last week, and Nicholas Languerand, an ex-Army private who assaulted police w/ multiple objects and had a notebook with a "target list."
(...)
JUST NOW: Judge Friedrich DENIES prosecutors' request to impose a terrorism enhancement and other upward departures at the sentencing of Guy Reffitt. His recommended sentencing range will be 87-108 months in prison.
The lowest end of this would be 2 years longer than the longest Jan. 6 sentence to date. Guy Reffitt's attorney will now argue for a downward variance to 24 months.
Former USCP Officer Shauni Kerkhoff speaking now. Says she was one of the first officers to confront Guy Reffitt: “I watched in horror as he encouraged the angry mob to push past him and advance on the Capitol – physically assaulting some of my fellow officers in the process.”
Shauni Kerkhoff says since testifying at Guy Reffitt's trial she's become a target of his supporters online. She asks for him to receive the maximum sentence: “His actions weren’t acts of patriotism. They were acts of domestic terrorism.”
AUSA Jeffrey Nestler, pushing back a bit on Judge Friedrich's reasoning on the terrorism enhancement, says Guy Reffit was "in a class all by himself."
"This is not someone who was a lone wolf," AUSA Nestler says. He had a leadership role in his militia group, reached out to Sen. Ted Cruz's office (no evidence Cruz responded), etc.
"He didn't just want President Trump to remain in office," AUSA Nestler says. "He wanted to physically and literally remove members of Congress from power. We believe he is a domestic terrorist."
Judge Friedrich: "This defendant has some frightening claims that border on delusional, and they are extraordinarily concerning for the court. But other defendants did too. That's the point I'm trying to make."
Judge Friedrich asks Nestler if she shouldn't consider Guy Reffitt's mental health issues as a mitigating factor? Agrees w/ Jackson that mental health should be part of sentence and she's going to order full treatment. Now clear he has "very serious" mental health issues.
AUSA Nestler: "We think he's dangerous. But we don't think any mental health condition" caused him to do what he did.
p1/2
by ti-amie P2/L
Guy Reffitt's daughter, Peyton, is speaking now. She says his mental health has "always been a real issue."
Adds: "My father's name wasn't on the flags that everyone was carrying that day. It was another man's name. He wasn't the leader."
Guy Reffitt's attorney, Clinton Broden: "A lot of this stuff is highly disturbing. A lot of this stuff... we're not even trying
to defend some of this stuff. But the government says this isn't about words, and a lot of it does seem to be about words."
Judge Friedrich: “The fact remains... he hasn’t walked back his statements about being a martyr. He hasn’t walked back his statements about being a patriot. And so, as here he sits, I have to consider: what is this man going to do when he’s released from prison?”
Judge Friedrich: "In a democracy we respect the peaceful transition of power. This election was challenged, and in courts across the country, judge after judge said there was no evidence of election fraud that would have changed the results of the election."
Judge Friedrich, having an hour or so ago rejected the DOJ's argument that Guy Reffitt deserved a terrorism enhancement because he was in a class of his own, tells Broden, somewhat confusingly, that Reffitt is in a class of his own.
Clinton Broden says we can "question the wisdom of keeping all these guys together," suggesting the grouping of many of the most serious Jan. 6 cases together in the D.C. Jail was a bad idea. Extremism experts told us as much last year.
Clinton Broden suggests Guy Reffitt's refusal to say what he was convicted of was wrong is more honest than other Jan. 6 defendants who've pleaded guilty and then "gone outside and held press conferences." Doesn't name anyone in particular.
Judge Friedrich: "From a deterrence perspective, what is this defendant going to do in the future? That's something that's very much on my mind."
Broden: "I do believe he's done with politics and demonstrations."
Judge Friedrich says Guy Reffitt wrote her a "very carefully crafted letter" that doesn't disavow the Three Percenters and makes "really troubling" comparisons between Jan. 6 and 1776.
Guy Reffitt is NOT going to speak today. Court is going to recess until 2:30 and then we'll learn his sentence.
You're not missing anything. Court hasn't resumed yet.
CHANGE OF PLANS: Now Guy Reffitt WILL make a statement. Stand by for that...
Learning first about some of the conditions for Guy Reffitt's eventual supervised release. It will include an order prohibiting him from contacting or associating with any members of an extremist group, including the Texas Three Percenters, Oath Keepers and Texas Freedom Force.
Judge Friedrich says Guy Reffitt's sentence will include the maximum period of supervised release (5 years). She warns if he violates any of the terms or doesn't abide by the mental health treatment requirements she will order him back to prison.
Guy Reffitt: "I want to make multiple apologies. I was, to put it colorfully, a f***ing idiot."
"I don't want to have anything to do with militia groups or any stupid s*** like that. I'd be lucky if I could get into a church group after this with my mouth."
Judge Friedrich: I'm hearing now at the 11th hour moments before sentencing what I would have expected to hear much earlier. Wonders if he's really sincere.
Judge Friedrich: "You were indicted on every count in the indictment. Do you believe now you violated the law?"
Guy Reffitt: "Yes your honor. I f***ed up."
Guy Reffitt says his family "would be on the streets if he didn't say something to garner money for them."
Judge Friedrich: You're telling me all the things you said in jail, during your trial, about needing to rebel against the tyranny of the government was just to raise money for your family?
Guy Reffitt, in short: Yes.
Judge Friedrich: "It's hard to sit here with a straight face and believe you just got caught up in the crowd" considering the weapons and body armor he brought and all his pre- and post-trial statements.
Judge Friedrich: How do I know you're not going to post tomorrow, I'm really a patriot folks I just said all that to get a lower sentence.
"How do I know you're really heartfelt?"
Guy Reffitt: "It's very clear to me I have an issue with just rambling and saying stupid s***."
Judge Friedrich: "It seems to me you like to be the big guy, the important guy, the first guy to go to trial. You really pushed hard for that trial over your defense attorney's objection."
Guy Reffitt, laughing, asks if he just gave the longest sentencing statement ever: "We're always setting precedents around here, aren't we?"
AUSA Nestler says Guy Reffitt told a reporter for the New Yorker as recently as a few months ago that Jan. 6 was a false flag.
In summation of everything Mr. Reffitt just said: "We don't think any of that was credible."
Nestler said they did offer Guy Reffitt a plea deal in the 50 month range and his former attorney Bill Welch told them he had rejected any felony plea.
Judge Friedrich is laying the groundwork for her sentencing order now. Talks about the "highly disturbing" threats Guy Reffitt made toward his children. Also his efforts to get fellow Three Percenters to delete messages after Jan. 6.
Judge Friedrich talks about the disturbing evidence Guy Reffitt has placed a loaded gun against his wife's head on at least two occasions.
(...)
Judge Friedrich: "Under no legitimate definition of the word patriot does what Mr. Reffitt did on Jan. 6 fit the term. What he and other rioters did was the antithesis of patriotism."
Judge Friedrich describes Guy Reffitt and those who committed similar acts a "direct threat to our democracy" and says they will be "punished as such."
Judge Friedrich says she's crediting Guy Reffitt's 11th hour apology "to a degree," but does not find credible at all his claim that he never saw a plea offer.
SENTENCE: U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich orders Guy Reffitt to serve 87 months in prison, to be followed by 3 years of supervised release. Warns if he violates terms she will send him back to prison for up to maximum term. $2,000 in restitution.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1554 ... 61408.html
Guy Reffitt's daughter, Peyton, is speaking now. She says his mental health has "always been a real issue."
Adds: "My father's name wasn't on the flags that everyone was carrying that day. It was another man's name. He wasn't the leader."
Guy Reffitt's attorney, Clinton Broden: "A lot of this stuff is highly disturbing. A lot of this stuff... we're not even trying
to defend some of this stuff. But the government says this isn't about words, and a lot of it does seem to be about words."
Judge Friedrich: “The fact remains... he hasn’t walked back his statements about being a martyr. He hasn’t walked back his statements about being a patriot. And so, as here he sits, I have to consider: what is this man going to do when he’s released from prison?”
Judge Friedrich: "In a democracy we respect the peaceful transition of power. This election was challenged, and in courts across the country, judge after judge said there was no evidence of election fraud that would have changed the results of the election."
Judge Friedrich, having an hour or so ago rejected the DOJ's argument that Guy Reffitt deserved a terrorism enhancement because he was in a class of his own, tells Broden, somewhat confusingly, that Reffitt is in a class of his own.
Clinton Broden says we can "question the wisdom of keeping all these guys together," suggesting the grouping of many of the most serious Jan. 6 cases together in the D.C. Jail was a bad idea. Extremism experts told us as much last year.
Clinton Broden suggests Guy Reffitt's refusal to say what he was convicted of was wrong is more honest than other Jan. 6 defendants who've pleaded guilty and then "gone outside and held press conferences." Doesn't name anyone in particular.
Judge Friedrich: "From a deterrence perspective, what is this defendant going to do in the future? That's something that's very much on my mind."
Broden: "I do believe he's done with politics and demonstrations."
Judge Friedrich says Guy Reffitt wrote her a "very carefully crafted letter" that doesn't disavow the Three Percenters and makes "really troubling" comparisons between Jan. 6 and 1776.
Guy Reffitt is NOT going to speak today. Court is going to recess until 2:30 and then we'll learn his sentence.
You're not missing anything. Court hasn't resumed yet.
CHANGE OF PLANS: Now Guy Reffitt WILL make a statement. Stand by for that...
Learning first about some of the conditions for Guy Reffitt's eventual supervised release. It will include an order prohibiting him from contacting or associating with any members of an extremist group, including the Texas Three Percenters, Oath Keepers and Texas Freedom Force.
Judge Friedrich says Guy Reffitt's sentence will include the maximum period of supervised release (5 years). She warns if he violates any of the terms or doesn't abide by the mental health treatment requirements she will order him back to prison.
Guy Reffitt: "I want to make multiple apologies. I was, to put it colorfully, a f***ing idiot."
"I don't want to have anything to do with militia groups or any stupid s*** like that. I'd be lucky if I could get into a church group after this with my mouth."
Judge Friedrich: I'm hearing now at the 11th hour moments before sentencing what I would have expected to hear much earlier. Wonders if he's really sincere.
Judge Friedrich: "You were indicted on every count in the indictment. Do you believe now you violated the law?"
Guy Reffitt: "Yes your honor. I f***ed up."
Guy Reffitt says his family "would be on the streets if he didn't say something to garner money for them."
Judge Friedrich: You're telling me all the things you said in jail, during your trial, about needing to rebel against the tyranny of the government was just to raise money for your family?
Guy Reffitt, in short: Yes.
Judge Friedrich: "It's hard to sit here with a straight face and believe you just got caught up in the crowd" considering the weapons and body armor he brought and all his pre- and post-trial statements.
Judge Friedrich: How do I know you're not going to post tomorrow, I'm really a patriot folks I just said all that to get a lower sentence.
"How do I know you're really heartfelt?"
Guy Reffitt: "It's very clear to me I have an issue with just rambling and saying stupid s***."
Judge Friedrich: "It seems to me you like to be the big guy, the important guy, the first guy to go to trial. You really pushed hard for that trial over your defense attorney's objection."
Guy Reffitt, laughing, asks if he just gave the longest sentencing statement ever: "We're always setting precedents around here, aren't we?"
AUSA Nestler says Guy Reffitt told a reporter for the New Yorker as recently as a few months ago that Jan. 6 was a false flag.
In summation of everything Mr. Reffitt just said: "We don't think any of that was credible."
Nestler said they did offer Guy Reffitt a plea deal in the 50 month range and his former attorney Bill Welch told them he had rejected any felony plea.
Judge Friedrich is laying the groundwork for her sentencing order now. Talks about the "highly disturbing" threats Guy Reffitt made toward his children. Also his efforts to get fellow Three Percenters to delete messages after Jan. 6.
Judge Friedrich talks about the disturbing evidence Guy Reffitt has placed a loaded gun against his wife's head on at least two occasions.
(...)
Judge Friedrich: "Under no legitimate definition of the word patriot does what Mr. Reffitt did on Jan. 6 fit the term. What he and other rioters did was the antithesis of patriotism."
Judge Friedrich describes Guy Reffitt and those who committed similar acts a "direct threat to our democracy" and says they will be "punished as such."
Judge Friedrich says she's crediting Guy Reffitt's 11th hour apology "to a degree," but does not find credible at all his claim that he never saw a plea offer.
SENTENCE: U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich orders Guy Reffitt to serve 87 months in prison, to be followed by 3 years of supervised release. Warns if he violates terms she will send him back to prison for up to maximum term. $2,000 in restitution.https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1554 ... 61408.html
by ti-amie
by ti-amie Anna Merlan
@annamerlan
Good morning. Jury deliberations today for Alex Jones and Infowars’ first (only their first!!) damages trial. Here’s my thread in case anything occurs
Excuse me
@annamerlan
Good morning. Jury deliberations today for Alex Jones and Infowars’ first (only their first!!) damages trial. Here’s my thread in case anything occurs
Excuse me
by ponchi101 You write this 
as a movie script, and it would be rejected as ridiculous.
as a movie script, and it would be rejected as ridiculous.by ponchi101 
by ponchi101 Steve Bannon can get 6 months in prison for contempt.
I'll believe it when I see it.
As to how much time he will do for fraud:
0
I'll believe it when I see it.
As to how much time he will do for fraud:
0
by ponchi101 And he'll appeal again, and again, and again...
One of the reasons I used to admire the USA was a naive belief, when I was growing up, that the justice system in the USA worked.
One of the evidences that young people really know about anything.
One of the reasons I used to admire the USA was a naive belief, when I was growing up, that the justice system in the USA worked.
One of the evidences that young people really know
about anything.by ti-amie P2/3
Jury seated.
AUSA Kathryn Rakoczy resumes cross.
fall of 2020, OKs contemplated operation in Vancouver/Washington area.
Rh: memorial service for person shot by Antifa?
Rak: member of patriot movement killed in Portland.
Rh: assassinated on street.
Rak: many people upset.
/132
Rh: discussion about whether to have memorial service at location of his assassination. ... decided not to.
Rak: discussed going on Alex Jones show to let everyone know you were going to go? Plan to announce you'd be in Vancouver Washington? Plan was so you could
/133
have your weapons and bait antifa and have them come across the line and ambush them?
that is not correct.
Rak: you say you're not in it for money. but you draw salary. last 12 years or so you use OK money to pay for your dinners & travel?
yes.
Rak: & firearms?
yes.
/134
Rak: use OK credit card for personal expenses quite a bit?
Rh: wouldn't say that. full time job.
Rak: one board member resigned over your use of OK funds?
Rh: fair to say.
Rak: fair to say you did not file income taxes from 2008-2020?
Sidebar.
/135
She moves on period after presidential election.
Rak: you urged your followers to resist the result?
Rh: correct
Rak: you opposed biden as president?
Rh: yes.
Rak: you referred to biden/kamala as chicom puppets? so it's not just process, it's result?
Rh: it's both.
/136
Rh: my opposition came from the constitutional problems.
Rak: not the fact that they were ChiCom puppets?
Rh ...
Rak: you said SoRelle thought she saw election fraud?
Rh: yes.
Rak: what she actually saw was news crew bringing in equipment?
Rh: that's what news media said.
/137
now showing 11/7/20 Rhodes to Old Leadershp Chat:
"answer must be to refuse to accept ... these imposters ... get your gear squared away and ready to fight."
another 11/7/20: to friends of stone chat
"the final defense is us and our rifles."
/138 "trump has one last chance right now to act ... but he will need us and our rifles too. but will he act? only if we act and call on him to lead us."
In that message Rhodes links to a video from a Serbian friend about overthrowing Serbian govt.
/139
Not showing Rhodes
/140
talks about swarming streets ... culminating here, with storming of parliament. ...
Rh: i only meant this in the future context, not with respect to before inauguration.
Rak: you say: "it has to happen NOW."
Rh: that's not what i meant.
Now playing an audio tape of Rhodes' GoToMeeting of 11/9/20: ... let's make no illusion ... in same spot that
/143
foundingn fatehers were in in March 1775. ... nothing left to do but fight. ...
Rh: right, but on condition trump invokes insurrection act.
Rak: later you said they need to be prepared to fight regardless of what trump did?
Rh: later, yes. ...
/144
Now talking about QRF for 11/14/20 event.
Rh: purpose was to defend against a benghazi style attack on white house.
Rak: you thought secret service couldn't manage?
Rh: He had had to go the basement earlier.
now talking about 12/12/20 Jericho event. there...
/145
you implored trump to invoke insurrection act?
Rh: yes to do mass declassification and data jump.
Rak: president doesn't need insurrection act to declassify docs, does he?
Rh: no, but needed to use it to use national guard and unorganized data to help seize the data.
/146 Rak: was this the data that was going to expose CIA & NSA officials as pedophiles?
Rh: that and other things.
Rak: isn't what you really wanted him to do is call you all up as private bodyguards?
Rh: no. ... down the road we'd have no choice but to fight. if you leave office
/147
without fixing this.
12/14/20 electoral college meets, makes biden winner?
Rh: yes, unconstitutionally, yes.
Rak: you wrote, Trump has one more opportunity to act, must invoke insurrection act.
Rh: 12/14 wasn't big priority in my mind.
Rak: that's why you post this ...
/148
talking about bloody civil war & revolution?
Rh: ...
Rak: you're talking about a call to arms to help keep Trump in power.
Rh: wouldn't want to characterize it like that.
Now showing open letter 12/14
/149
Cover photo is Washington leading troops into battle.
Rak: you wanted trump to use troops to keep him in power?
Rh: wanted him to declassify data.
now reading: imploring Trump to invoke insurrection act to "stop the steal and stop the coup"
now second open letter of 12/23
/150
calls on Trump: "immediately order ... national guard to order new election ... do not conceded ..."
Rh: i'm referring to state officials certifying unc'l results.
Rak: throw out election and hold new one?
Rh: well supreme court hadn't heard case challenging c'lity.
/151
Rak: so it got all the way to SCOTUS and declined to take the case?
Rh: yes, illegitimately.
Rak: and you said SCOTUS should be declared illegitimate?
Rh: no, well, can't remember, what did i say?
/152
In the 12/23 open letter he tells Trump to declare that ruling because 7 of the 9 justices refused to hear the case illegitimately. ...
Rak: A lawsuit had been filed? highest court didn't take case. so legal challenges had been exhausted?
Rh: yes, but supreme court did not
/153
do it's duty.
Rak: says you.
Rh: says a lot of people. ...
i think trump had a responsibility to defend constitution when others failing to do so.
Rak: what's to prevent every president in future from invoking Insurrection Act throwing out result & delcaring new election?
/154
that's the problem when you're in an uncharted election.
Rak: insurrection action has never been used to throw out an election has it?
Rh: we've never had an election like this one.
Rak: you knew J6 was hard constitutional line?
Rh: yes. i supported challenges but didn't
/155
hold much faith in them.
Rakoczy showing Rhodes message of 12/15/20 to Friends of Stone:
president must do it now before J6 ... tragic mistake to wait for J6 or after. Congress will stab him in the back.
Believe can't trust Mcconnell?
yes.
/156
you can't because his wife in Chinese?
Rh: in part, yes. ... i think she has ties to communist party in china.
Rak: and her husband Sen. McConnell too?
Rh: yes.
Rak: you knew either Trump would have to invoke insurrection act or you & your followers would have to act?
/157 not correct.
showing message from Rhodes 12/10/20: either trump will invoke Insurreection Act ... or we will have to rise up to oppose the chicom puppet.
Rak: so civil war would be on J21 and not J6?
Rh: not necessarily.
/158
Now showing message from Rhodes to SoRelle on 12/29: ... "i'll turn my attention to what comes after Trump fails to do his duty. ... i think an open letter to the current serving US military is needed ... [about J6] they won't fear us till we come with rifles in hand."
/159
Now showing Rhodes a video of his interview with FBI Agent Palian.
Rh: i did not know this was video'd.
Rak: it's a body-worn camera.
Sidebar.
playing video.
[hard to hear audio]
"by january we knew there would be zero percent chance he'd invoke insurrection act."
/160
she's now reading more of his messages: "be ready to roll any way we are needed, get your gear squared away."
now 12/21 to OKFL Hangout: "need to push trump to do his duty. if he doesn't, we will do ours ... conquer or die. this needs to be our attitude."
Rh: that would be
/161
post J6.
& more of his messages:
12/31/20 rhodes: on the 6th they'll put final nail in coffin of this republic unless we fight our way out. with trump, preferably, or without him. we have no choice.
/162
Rak: so you came to VA prepared to fight?
Rh: no. well, we had a qrf.
Rak: you personally brought 100s of rounds. You paid $17,000 for gun-related materials?
Rh: yes.
Rak: organized a QRF?
Rh: didn't have a vehicle. ... I knew Meggs had gotten 2 hotel rooms
/163
did not know there was anyone sitting on them.
Rak: this was planned within plane sight of you.
Rh: I didn't know about Stamey & Caldwell's side chats.
Showing him J2 message from Meggs to Rhodes: "last night we discussed QRF RP."
Rhodes respondes: OK. we WILL have a QRF. ..
/164
the situation calls for it."
now showing him another message from Meggs to him saying "we have the overlay of maps and Lincoln is the RP if SHTF." Rhodes responds, "cool. ... I'll reimburse you."
Now showing him message from Meggs to DC OP Jan 6 21 ...
/165
On J2 Meggs is talking about the QRF on that.
... Meggs says: 1 if by land (north side of Lincoln memorial) 2 if by sea (c'o of west basin) ... QRF Rally Points. water if the bridges get closed.
Rh: i saw them but i didn't really know why he was posting these. wasn't my op.
/166
Rak: buck stops with you in the operation?
Rh: i'm not in charge when they do something off mission.
Rak: you're OK chairman of board for life?
right.
Rak: Command structure carried over into operations?
Rh: no, that's not right.
/167
Now showing Rhodes message of 12/30 to DC Op Jan 6 21:
"prefer that cohesive teams under under the immediate leadership of their [team] leader but ... of course under my overall command."
Rak: "overall command" would be yours.
Rh: only step in if i see a major problem.
/168 Rhodes brings up "commander's intent."
Rak: so you were familiar with concept of commander's intent?
Rh: yes. selected greene & siekerman. we were there to protect latinos for trump, escort ali alexander, general escort duties ... etc.
/169
Now showing message Rhodes sent 12/25 to OKFL Hangout:
trump needs to know we support him in using insurrection act. ... if congress rubber stamps an unconstitutional fraud, president trump must ddefend the constitution and we use him to use the insurrection act ...
/170
we will support him ... and he needs to know if he fails to act then we will. he needs to understand that we will have no choice."
Rh: yes, but that's post J6.
Rak: but you don't say that do you?
Rh: a few slides earlier. ... [but it's not there either, Rakoczy shows.]
/171
Rak: on J6, you told followers VP had "punked out"?
Rh: ummmm, i don't remember. [Rhodes has begun to say "ummmm" frequently to start his answers.]
Now talking about QRFs again.
/172
Rak: when you were interviewed by FBI agent Palian on 5/3/2 you told him you had no knowledge of the QRFs?
Rh: that's the problem with that term, it means so many different things to different people.
Rak: perhaps it would help to play the video. ...
/173
[again, I can't make out the audio.]
Rak: You tried to say you weren't privy to the plans of the NC guys.
Rh: yes.
Rak: but you added the NC guys to the DC Op Jan 6 21 chat right?
...
Rh: i knew about vallejo.
Rak: but you didn't tell Palian about him either right?
[I don't know what's coming through from reading the cold disjointed record of my tweets, and of course I'm just one person. But to me this is very very powerful cross by Rakoczy. The word "demolish" comes to mind. ...
/176
... When you're down to arguing that your civil war wasn't supposed to start until January 21, as opposed to starting Jan. 6, I think you're on the defensive. Also, he basically said that he distrusted Sen. McConnell because his wife is Chinese. That sort of blows ...
/177
a hole in the claim--which he went out of his way to raise--that he has no racism. He tried to recover by saying she had ties to the Chinese Communist Party, but as a cabinet official under multiple administrations it's a stretch. Rakoczy also effectively had him admit
/178
that no president in history had ever used the Insurrection Act to nullify an election & keep himself in power and that, if a president could do so, any president could use it to nullify all the laws & constitutional provisions governing transition of presidential power.
/179
Judge Mehta's back.
Rhodes back on stand.
Awaiting jury. (Here, by the way, is a sample message Rakoczy showed him. His response to these is, basically, to say the revolution wasn't supposed to begin J6; not until after J20.)
/180
Jury back.
AUSA Rakoczy continues cross.
Turning to J6.
At 1:45pm Greene called him at said they're storming the Capitol.
Rh: i said who? he said Trump supporters. then went to meet him.
Rak: saw there was no event going to take place ... & walked into restricted area.
Jury seated.
AUSA Kathryn Rakoczy resumes cross.
fall of 2020, OKs contemplated operation in Vancouver/Washington area.
Rh: memorial service for person shot by Antifa?
Rak: member of patriot movement killed in Portland.
Rh: assassinated on street.
Rak: many people upset.
/132
Rh: discussion about whether to have memorial service at location of his assassination. ... decided not to.
Rak: discussed going on Alex Jones show to let everyone know you were going to go? Plan to announce you'd be in Vancouver Washington? Plan was so you could
/133
have your weapons and bait antifa and have them come across the line and ambush them?
that is not correct.
Rak: you say you're not in it for money. but you draw salary. last 12 years or so you use OK money to pay for your dinners & travel?
yes.
Rak: & firearms?
yes.
/134
Rak: use OK credit card for personal expenses quite a bit?
Rh: wouldn't say that. full time job.
Rak: one board member resigned over your use of OK funds?
Rh: fair to say.
Rak: fair to say you did not file income taxes from 2008-2020?
Sidebar.
/135
She moves on period after presidential election.
Rak: you urged your followers to resist the result?
Rh: correct
Rak: you opposed biden as president?
Rh: yes.
Rak: you referred to biden/kamala as chicom puppets? so it's not just process, it's result?
Rh: it's both.
/136
Rh: my opposition came from the constitutional problems.
Rak: not the fact that they were ChiCom puppets?
Rh ...
Rak: you said SoRelle thought she saw election fraud?
Rh: yes.
Rak: what she actually saw was news crew bringing in equipment?
Rh: that's what news media said.
/137
now showing 11/7/20 Rhodes to Old Leadershp Chat:
"answer must be to refuse to accept ... these imposters ... get your gear squared away and ready to fight."
another 11/7/20: to friends of stone chat
"the final defense is us and our rifles."
/138 "trump has one last chance right now to act ... but he will need us and our rifles too. but will he act? only if we act and call on him to lead us."
In that message Rhodes links to a video from a Serbian friend about overthrowing Serbian govt.
/139
Not showing Rhodes
/140
talks about swarming streets ... culminating here, with storming of parliament. ...
Rh: i only meant this in the future context, not with respect to before inauguration.
Rak: you say: "it has to happen NOW."
Rh: that's not what i meant.
Now playing an audio tape of Rhodes' GoToMeeting of 11/9/20: ... let's make no illusion ... in same spot that
/143
foundingn fatehers were in in March 1775. ... nothing left to do but fight. ...
Rh: right, but on condition trump invokes insurrection act.
Rak: later you said they need to be prepared to fight regardless of what trump did?
Rh: later, yes. ...
/144
Now talking about QRF for 11/14/20 event.
Rh: purpose was to defend against a benghazi style attack on white house.
Rak: you thought secret service couldn't manage?
Rh: He had had to go the basement earlier.
now talking about 12/12/20 Jericho event. there...
/145
you implored trump to invoke insurrection act?
Rh: yes to do mass declassification and data jump.
Rak: president doesn't need insurrection act to declassify docs, does he?
Rh: no, but needed to use it to use national guard and unorganized data to help seize the data.
/146 Rak: was this the data that was going to expose CIA & NSA officials as pedophiles?
Rh: that and other things.
Rak: isn't what you really wanted him to do is call you all up as private bodyguards?
Rh: no. ... down the road we'd have no choice but to fight. if you leave office
/147
without fixing this.
12/14/20 electoral college meets, makes biden winner?
Rh: yes, unconstitutionally, yes.
Rak: you wrote, Trump has one more opportunity to act, must invoke insurrection act.
Rh: 12/14 wasn't big priority in my mind.
Rak: that's why you post this ...
/148
talking about bloody civil war & revolution?
Rh: ...
Rak: you're talking about a call to arms to help keep Trump in power.
Rh: wouldn't want to characterize it like that.
Now showing open letter 12/14
/149
Cover photo is Washington leading troops into battle.
Rak: you wanted trump to use troops to keep him in power?
Rh: wanted him to declassify data.
now reading: imploring Trump to invoke insurrection act to "stop the steal and stop the coup"
now second open letter of 12/23
/150
calls on Trump: "immediately order ... national guard to order new election ... do not conceded ..."
Rh: i'm referring to state officials certifying unc'l results.
Rak: throw out election and hold new one?
Rh: well supreme court hadn't heard case challenging c'lity.
/151
Rak: so it got all the way to SCOTUS and declined to take the case?
Rh: yes, illegitimately.
Rak: and you said SCOTUS should be declared illegitimate?
Rh: no, well, can't remember, what did i say?
/152
In the 12/23 open letter he tells Trump to declare that ruling because 7 of the 9 justices refused to hear the case illegitimately. ...
Rak: A lawsuit had been filed? highest court didn't take case. so legal challenges had been exhausted?
Rh: yes, but supreme court did not
/153
do it's duty.
Rak: says you.
Rh: says a lot of people. ...
i think trump had a responsibility to defend constitution when others failing to do so.
Rak: what's to prevent every president in future from invoking Insurrection Act throwing out result & delcaring new election?
/154
that's the problem when you're in an uncharted election.
Rak: insurrection action has never been used to throw out an election has it?
Rh: we've never had an election like this one.
Rak: you knew J6 was hard constitutional line?
Rh: yes. i supported challenges but didn't
/155
hold much faith in them.
Rakoczy showing Rhodes message of 12/15/20 to Friends of Stone:
president must do it now before J6 ... tragic mistake to wait for J6 or after. Congress will stab him in the back.
Believe can't trust Mcconnell?
yes.
/156
you can't because his wife in Chinese?
Rh: in part, yes. ... i think she has ties to communist party in china.
Rak: and her husband Sen. McConnell too?
Rh: yes.
Rak: you knew either Trump would have to invoke insurrection act or you & your followers would have to act?
/157 not correct.
showing message from Rhodes 12/10/20: either trump will invoke Insurreection Act ... or we will have to rise up to oppose the chicom puppet.
Rak: so civil war would be on J21 and not J6?
Rh: not necessarily.
/158
Now showing message from Rhodes to SoRelle on 12/29: ... "i'll turn my attention to what comes after Trump fails to do his duty. ... i think an open letter to the current serving US military is needed ... [about J6] they won't fear us till we come with rifles in hand."
/159
Now showing Rhodes a video of his interview with FBI Agent Palian.
Rh: i did not know this was video'd.
Rak: it's a body-worn camera.
Sidebar.
playing video.
[hard to hear audio]
"by january we knew there would be zero percent chance he'd invoke insurrection act."
/160
she's now reading more of his messages: "be ready to roll any way we are needed, get your gear squared away."
now 12/21 to OKFL Hangout: "need to push trump to do his duty. if he doesn't, we will do ours ... conquer or die. this needs to be our attitude."
Rh: that would be
/161
post J6.
& more of his messages:
12/31/20 rhodes: on the 6th they'll put final nail in coffin of this republic unless we fight our way out. with trump, preferably, or without him. we have no choice.
/162
Rak: so you came to VA prepared to fight?
Rh: no. well, we had a qrf.
Rak: you personally brought 100s of rounds. You paid $17,000 for gun-related materials?
Rh: yes.
Rak: organized a QRF?
Rh: didn't have a vehicle. ... I knew Meggs had gotten 2 hotel rooms
/163
did not know there was anyone sitting on them.
Rak: this was planned within plane sight of you.
Rh: I didn't know about Stamey & Caldwell's side chats.
Showing him J2 message from Meggs to Rhodes: "last night we discussed QRF RP."
Rhodes respondes: OK. we WILL have a QRF. ..
/164
the situation calls for it."
now showing him another message from Meggs to him saying "we have the overlay of maps and Lincoln is the RP if SHTF." Rhodes responds, "cool. ... I'll reimburse you."
Now showing him message from Meggs to DC OP Jan 6 21 ...
/165
On J2 Meggs is talking about the QRF on that.
... Meggs says: 1 if by land (north side of Lincoln memorial) 2 if by sea (c'o of west basin) ... QRF Rally Points. water if the bridges get closed.
Rh: i saw them but i didn't really know why he was posting these. wasn't my op.
/166
Rak: buck stops with you in the operation?
Rh: i'm not in charge when they do something off mission.
Rak: you're OK chairman of board for life?
right.
Rak: Command structure carried over into operations?
Rh: no, that's not right.
/167
Now showing Rhodes message of 12/30 to DC Op Jan 6 21:
"prefer that cohesive teams under under the immediate leadership of their [team] leader but ... of course under my overall command."
Rak: "overall command" would be yours.
Rh: only step in if i see a major problem.
/168 Rhodes brings up "commander's intent."
Rak: so you were familiar with concept of commander's intent?
Rh: yes. selected greene & siekerman. we were there to protect latinos for trump, escort ali alexander, general escort duties ... etc.
/169
Now showing message Rhodes sent 12/25 to OKFL Hangout:
trump needs to know we support him in using insurrection act. ... if congress rubber stamps an unconstitutional fraud, president trump must ddefend the constitution and we use him to use the insurrection act ...
/170
we will support him ... and he needs to know if he fails to act then we will. he needs to understand that we will have no choice."
Rh: yes, but that's post J6.
Rak: but you don't say that do you?
Rh: a few slides earlier. ... [but it's not there either, Rakoczy shows.]
/171
Rak: on J6, you told followers VP had "punked out"?
Rh: ummmm, i don't remember. [Rhodes has begun to say "ummmm" frequently to start his answers.]
Now talking about QRFs again.
/172
Rak: when you were interviewed by FBI agent Palian on 5/3/2 you told him you had no knowledge of the QRFs?
Rh: that's the problem with that term, it means so many different things to different people.
Rak: perhaps it would help to play the video. ...
/173
[again, I can't make out the audio.]
Rak: You tried to say you weren't privy to the plans of the NC guys.
Rh: yes.
Rak: but you added the NC guys to the DC Op Jan 6 21 chat right?
...
Rh: i knew about vallejo.
Rak: but you didn't tell Palian about him either right?
[I don't know what's coming through from reading the cold disjointed record of my tweets, and of course I'm just one person. But to me this is very very powerful cross by Rakoczy. The word "demolish" comes to mind. ...
/176
... When you're down to arguing that your civil war wasn't supposed to start until January 21, as opposed to starting Jan. 6, I think you're on the defensive. Also, he basically said that he distrusted Sen. McConnell because his wife is Chinese. That sort of blows ...
/177
a hole in the claim--which he went out of his way to raise--that he has no racism. He tried to recover by saying she had ties to the Chinese Communist Party, but as a cabinet official under multiple administrations it's a stretch. Rakoczy also effectively had him admit
/178
that no president in history had ever used the Insurrection Act to nullify an election & keep himself in power and that, if a president could do so, any president could use it to nullify all the laws & constitutional provisions governing transition of presidential power.
/179
Judge Mehta's back.
Rhodes back on stand.
Awaiting jury. (Here, by the way, is a sample message Rakoczy showed him. His response to these is, basically, to say the revolution wasn't supposed to begin J6; not until after J20.)
/180
Jury back.
AUSA Rakoczy continues cross.
Turning to J6.
At 1:45pm Greene called him at said they're storming the Capitol.
Rh: i said who? he said Trump supporters. then went to meet him.
Rak: saw there was no event going to take place ... & walked into restricted area.
by ti-amie
Straight No Chaser
@serioustalk01
Replying to
@gulovsen and @TiffanyFong_
That was competent representation.
Straight No Chaser
@serioustalk01Replying to
@gulovsen and @TiffanyFong_
That was competent representation.
by ti-amie MindF_ck :toad:
@Gal_suburban@toad.social
Judge J. Michael Luttig himself today on Post wrote that he will be joining as co-counsel with Neal Katyal in arguing for respondents against the Independent State Legislature Doctrine/Theory.
"Moore v. Harper the most important case for American Democracy since the founding of the nation." -- Judge J. Michael Luttig
THAT'S how dire this case is. Messaging that is clear, concise and captivating is essential to motivate Democracy First Americans to express their outrage.
Get loud! Stay loud!
https://toad.social/@Gal_suburban/109402716972361492
@Gal_suburban@toad.social
Judge J. Michael Luttig himself today on Post wrote that he will be joining as co-counsel with Neal Katyal in arguing for respondents against the Independent State Legislature Doctrine/Theory.
"Moore v. Harper the most important case for American Democracy since the founding of the nation." -- Judge J. Michael Luttig
THAT'S how dire this case is. Messaging that is clear, concise and captivating is essential to motivate Democracy First Americans to express their outrage.
Get loud! Stay loud!
https://toad.social/@Gal_suburban/109402716972361492
by ti-amie MindF_ck :toad:
@Gal_suburban@toad.social
Remarkably bipartisan expert opposition
8 amicus curiae briefs filed by/on behalf of prominent conservative & Republican constitutional lawyers:
▪Judge J. Michael Luttig
▪Steven Calabresi, Federalist Society
▪Benjamin Ginsberg
▪Thomas Griffith
▪Charles Fried, Reagan’s solicitor general
▪John Danforth, chief Senate sponsor of Justice Thomas’s nomination to the SCOTUS
▪Carter Phillips, deputy solicitor general under Reagan, who has argued more cases before SCOTUS than anyone in history.
@Gal_suburban@toad.social
Remarkably bipartisan expert opposition
8 amicus curiae briefs filed by/on behalf of prominent conservative & Republican constitutional lawyers:
▪Judge J. Michael Luttig
▪Steven Calabresi, Federalist Society
▪Benjamin Ginsberg
▪Thomas Griffith
▪Charles Fried, Reagan’s solicitor general
▪John Danforth, chief Senate sponsor of Justice Thomas’s nomination to the SCOTUS
▪Carter Phillips, deputy solicitor general under Reagan, who has argued more cases before SCOTUS than anyone in history.
by ti-amie Teri Kanefield
@Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
Here are the elements of seditious conspiracy (see attached)
The key to this crime is the use of force.
The prosecutions started with the easy ones: Vandalism, etc. and progressed to seditious conspiracy
Treason is almost impossible to charge. It’s defined in the Constitution as:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."
2/
The Supreme Court has said that the “enemy” must be a country in which we are at open war–meaning a war declared by Congress.
This means that seditious conspiracy is the closest we have to a charge of treason.
It's also hard to prove.
The defendants are members of an extremist group.
Stewart Rhodes is a dangerous guy. Here is how the Southern Poverty Law Center describes him:
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/ex
https://law-and-politics.online/@Teri_K ... 3363772873
@Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
Here are the elements of seditious conspiracy (see attached)
The key to this crime is the use of force.
The prosecutions started with the easy ones: Vandalism, etc. and progressed to seditious conspiracy
Treason is almost impossible to charge. It’s defined in the Constitution as:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."
2/
The Supreme Court has said that the “enemy” must be a country in which we are at open war–meaning a war declared by Congress.
This means that seditious conspiracy is the closest we have to a charge of treason.
It's also hard to prove.
The defendants are members of an extremist group.
Stewart Rhodes is a dangerous guy. Here is how the Southern Poverty Law Center describes him:
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/ex
https://law-and-politics.online/@Teri_K ... 3363772873
by ti-amie Sam Bankman-Fried Said to Agree to Extradition After Chaotic Hearing
The disgraced FTX founder, who has been in a Bahamas prison for the past week, agreed to be sent to the United States, after a confusing day in court.
By Royston Jones Jr., David Yaffe-Bellany, Matthew Goldstein and Rob Copeland
Dec. 19, 2022
Updated 6:20 p.m. ET
The disgraced cryptocurrency mogul Sam Bankman-Fried has agreed to be extradited to the United States, one of his lawyers said on Monday, after a chaotic morning of legal maneuvering in which Mr. Bankman-Fried was shunted back and forth between court and prison in the Bahamas.
Mr. Bankman-Fried is facing fraud charges in the United States related to the collapse of his cryptocurrency exchange, FTX, which was based in the Bahamas. Jerone Roberts, a local defense lawyer for Mr. Bankman-Fried, told reporters that his client had agreed to extradition voluntarily, defying “the strongest possible legal advice.”
“We as counsel will prepare the necessary documents to trigger the court,” Mr. Roberts said. “Mr. Bankman-Fried wishes to put the customers right, and that is what has driven his decision.”
After being arrested at his luxury apartment complex last week, Mr. Bankman-Fried initially indicated that he would challenge the extradition. But he later had a change of heart, a person briefed on the matter said over the weekend, and was prepared to return to the United States to be arraigned on a criminal indictment.
On Monday, Mr. Bankman-Fried appeared at a Magistrate Court hearing in Nassau, the capital of the Bahamas. The hearing had been scheduled specifically for Mr. Bankman-Fried to tell the authorities that he would not contest the extradition. But the courtroom soon descended into chaos: Mr. Roberts said he was “shocked” to see his client in court, and requested at least one 45-minute break to confer privately with Mr. Bankman-Fried.
Mr. Roberts said Mr. Bankman-Fried needed more information and wanted to read the indictment filed by federal prosecutors before deciding whether to go along with the extradition.
The magistrate judge overseeing the matter ordered Mr. Bankman-Fried to return to the Fox Hill prison in Nassau, where he has been held since last week.
“I certainly feel it is a wasted day,” said the judge, Shaka Serville.
Not long after the hearing ended, Mr. Roberts announced that Mr. Bankman-Fried was agreeing to the extradition after all.
Jerone Roberts, center, Sam Bankman-Fried’s lawyer in the Bahamas, with Crystal Stuart, left, and Kendrea Demeritte in Nassau on Monday.Credit...Eva Marie Uzcategui for The New York Times
Mark Cohen, a lawyer in New York who was hired to handle Mr. Bankman-Fried’s federal prosecution, was not in the courtroom in Nassau on Monday and did not return requests for comment. Mark Botnick, a spokesman for Mr. Bankman-Fried and Mr. Cohen, declined to comment.
It was not clear whether Mr. Roberts’s claim that Mr. Bankman-Fried was defying legal advice referred just to his own counsel or to advice from Mr. Cohen as well.
(...)
Speaking to reporters after the hearing in Nassau, Mr. Roberts said his legal team was preparing documents so a “time and date could be fixed for the extradition process to continue and to be completed.” Mr. Bankman-Fried could appear for a new hearing as soon as Tuesday, a person familiar with the matter said.
Once he is returned to the United States, Mr. Bankman-Fried will be arraigned in Federal District Court in Manhattan. He is likely to be detained at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, pending a bail hearing.
The extradition will set up months of courtroom maneuvering in the United States. And it will be the end of a peculiar legal drama that has unfolded in the Bahamas in the week since Mr. Bankman-Fried’s arrest.
At an initial hearing last week, Mr. Bankman-Fried said he would not waive his right to contest the extradition. He was denied bail, and then moved from a police holding cell to the Caribbean island nation’s notorious Fox Hill prison, which has been widely criticized for its poor living conditions — so much so that locals call it “Fox Hell.”
Mr. Bankman-Fried was expected to reverse his position on extradition when he appeared in Magistrate Court again on Monday morning. Wearing a navy blue suit and a white shirt unbuttoned at the cuff, he slumped in his seat, with his head down and his leg shaking.
Soon the proceedings were thrown into turmoil.
“Whatever trail got him here this morning, it did not involve me,” Mr. Roberts told the judge in front of a packed courtroom. He said Mr. Bankman-Fried’s court appearance had happened “prematurely” and without his involvement. The hearing was adjourned so Mr. Roberts could speak privately with Mr. Bankman-Fried.
When the hearing resumed, the confusion only intensified. Mr. Roberts said Mr. Bankman-Fried wanted to make a decision on extradition but needed “a bit more information.” He also said Mr. Bankman-Fried needed time to speak with his lawyers in the United States.
A prosecutor representing the Bahamian government, Franklyn Williams, accused Mr. Roberts of wasting the court’s time. Amid the uncertainty, the judge ordered Mr. Bankman-Fried to be returned to prison, where he is being held in a medical unit with four other inmates.
By the afternoon, however, Mr. Roberts had changed tack. He convened a few reporters for a meeting at Arawak Cay, an area of Nassau known for its restaurants, picking an oceanside spot with palm trees and cruise ships in the background.
Promising “a rather laconic press conference,” Mr. Roberts said Mr. Bankman-Fried had agreed to a voluntary extradition. He said the next step would be for the FTX founder to appear once again in Magistrate Court.
“Throughout my involvement with Sam, he has indicated an overwhelming desire to put the customers right and make the customers whole,” Mr. Roberts said.
The collapse of FTX has devastated the crypto industry, putting other companies in jeopardy and costing customers a fortune in lost cryptocurrencies. Outside the courthouse, a group of visitors to the Bahamas, including some who said they had invested in digital assets and done business with FTX, showed up to express anger with Mr. Bankman-Fried.
Erin Gambrel, who flew to Nassau from Dallas to attend the hearing, said she had shared office space with FTX this year in the Bahamas, where she met Mr. Bankman-Fried.
Ms. Gambrel said she wanted to see him “go away for a long time.” She had not invested with FTX, she said, but some of her friends had stored funds on the platform.
“He’s ruined millions of lives,” she said. “He’s caused friends of mine to lose their life savings.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/19/busi ... ition.html
The disgraced FTX founder, who has been in a Bahamas prison for the past week, agreed to be sent to the United States, after a confusing day in court.
By Royston Jones Jr., David Yaffe-Bellany, Matthew Goldstein and Rob Copeland
Dec. 19, 2022
Updated 6:20 p.m. ET
The disgraced cryptocurrency mogul Sam Bankman-Fried has agreed to be extradited to the United States, one of his lawyers said on Monday, after a chaotic morning of legal maneuvering in which Mr. Bankman-Fried was shunted back and forth between court and prison in the Bahamas.
Mr. Bankman-Fried is facing fraud charges in the United States related to the collapse of his cryptocurrency exchange, FTX, which was based in the Bahamas. Jerone Roberts, a local defense lawyer for Mr. Bankman-Fried, told reporters that his client had agreed to extradition voluntarily, defying “the strongest possible legal advice.”
“We as counsel will prepare the necessary documents to trigger the court,” Mr. Roberts said. “Mr. Bankman-Fried wishes to put the customers right, and that is what has driven his decision.”
After being arrested at his luxury apartment complex last week, Mr. Bankman-Fried initially indicated that he would challenge the extradition. But he later had a change of heart, a person briefed on the matter said over the weekend, and was prepared to return to the United States to be arraigned on a criminal indictment.
On Monday, Mr. Bankman-Fried appeared at a Magistrate Court hearing in Nassau, the capital of the Bahamas. The hearing had been scheduled specifically for Mr. Bankman-Fried to tell the authorities that he would not contest the extradition. But the courtroom soon descended into chaos: Mr. Roberts said he was “shocked” to see his client in court, and requested at least one 45-minute break to confer privately with Mr. Bankman-Fried.
Mr. Roberts said Mr. Bankman-Fried needed more information and wanted to read the indictment filed by federal prosecutors before deciding whether to go along with the extradition.
The magistrate judge overseeing the matter ordered Mr. Bankman-Fried to return to the Fox Hill prison in Nassau, where he has been held since last week.
“I certainly feel it is a wasted day,” said the judge, Shaka Serville.
Not long after the hearing ended, Mr. Roberts announced that Mr. Bankman-Fried was agreeing to the extradition after all.
Jerone Roberts, center, Sam Bankman-Fried’s lawyer in the Bahamas, with Crystal Stuart, left, and Kendrea Demeritte in Nassau on Monday.Credit...Eva Marie Uzcategui for The New York Times
Mark Cohen, a lawyer in New York who was hired to handle Mr. Bankman-Fried’s federal prosecution, was not in the courtroom in Nassau on Monday and did not return requests for comment. Mark Botnick, a spokesman for Mr. Bankman-Fried and Mr. Cohen, declined to comment.
It was not clear whether Mr. Roberts’s claim that Mr. Bankman-Fried was defying legal advice referred just to his own counsel or to advice from Mr. Cohen as well.
(...)
Speaking to reporters after the hearing in Nassau, Mr. Roberts said his legal team was preparing documents so a “time and date could be fixed for the extradition process to continue and to be completed.” Mr. Bankman-Fried could appear for a new hearing as soon as Tuesday, a person familiar with the matter said.
Once he is returned to the United States, Mr. Bankman-Fried will be arraigned in Federal District Court in Manhattan. He is likely to be detained at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, pending a bail hearing.
The extradition will set up months of courtroom maneuvering in the United States. And it will be the end of a peculiar legal drama that has unfolded in the Bahamas in the week since Mr. Bankman-Fried’s arrest.
At an initial hearing last week, Mr. Bankman-Fried said he would not waive his right to contest the extradition. He was denied bail, and then moved from a police holding cell to the Caribbean island nation’s notorious Fox Hill prison, which has been widely criticized for its poor living conditions — so much so that locals call it “Fox Hell.”
Mr. Bankman-Fried was expected to reverse his position on extradition when he appeared in Magistrate Court again on Monday morning. Wearing a navy blue suit and a white shirt unbuttoned at the cuff, he slumped in his seat, with his head down and his leg shaking.
Soon the proceedings were thrown into turmoil.
“Whatever trail got him here this morning, it did not involve me,” Mr. Roberts told the judge in front of a packed courtroom. He said Mr. Bankman-Fried’s court appearance had happened “prematurely” and without his involvement. The hearing was adjourned so Mr. Roberts could speak privately with Mr. Bankman-Fried.
When the hearing resumed, the confusion only intensified. Mr. Roberts said Mr. Bankman-Fried wanted to make a decision on extradition but needed “a bit more information.” He also said Mr. Bankman-Fried needed time to speak with his lawyers in the United States.
A prosecutor representing the Bahamian government, Franklyn Williams, accused Mr. Roberts of wasting the court’s time. Amid the uncertainty, the judge ordered Mr. Bankman-Fried to be returned to prison, where he is being held in a medical unit with four other inmates.
By the afternoon, however, Mr. Roberts had changed tack. He convened a few reporters for a meeting at Arawak Cay, an area of Nassau known for its restaurants, picking an oceanside spot with palm trees and cruise ships in the background.
Promising “a rather laconic press conference,” Mr. Roberts said Mr. Bankman-Fried had agreed to a voluntary extradition. He said the next step would be for the FTX founder to appear once again in Magistrate Court.
“Throughout my involvement with Sam, he has indicated an overwhelming desire to put the customers right and make the customers whole,” Mr. Roberts said.
The collapse of FTX has devastated the crypto industry, putting other companies in jeopardy and costing customers a fortune in lost cryptocurrencies. Outside the courthouse, a group of visitors to the Bahamas, including some who said they had invested in digital assets and done business with FTX, showed up to express anger with Mr. Bankman-Fried.
Erin Gambrel, who flew to Nassau from Dallas to attend the hearing, said she had shared office space with FTX this year in the Bahamas, where she met Mr. Bankman-Fried.
Ms. Gambrel said she wanted to see him “go away for a long time.” She had not invested with FTX, she said, but some of her friends had stored funds on the platform.
“He’s ruined millions of lives,” she said. “He’s caused friends of mine to lose their life savings.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/19/busi ... ition.html
by ti-amie Two Executives in Sam Bankman-Fried’s Crypto Empire Plead Guilty to Fraud
Caroline Ellison, the former chief executive of Alameda Research, and Gary Wang, a founder of FTX, are cooperating in the federal criminal case against Mr. Bankman-Fried.
A plane in the Bahamas that was set to take Sam Bankman-Fried to the United States on Wednesday night. He was in F.B.I. custody, a federal official said.Credit...Joe Raedle/Getty Images
By David Yaffe-Bellany, Matthew Goldstein and Benjamin Weiser
Dec. 21, 2022, 8:58 p.m. ET
Two former top executives of Sam Bankman-Fried’s crypto trading empire have pleaded guilty to federal charges and are cooperating in the criminal case against the disgraced crypto entrepreneur, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York said on Wednesday night.
The two are Caroline Ellison, who was the chief executive of Mr. Bankman-Fried’s crypto trading company, Alameda Research, and Gary Wang, a founder of the crypto exchange FTX.
The guilty pleas and cooperation agreements are a major advance in the fraud case against Mr. Bankman-Fried, who is in U.S. custody after agreeing to be extradited from the Bahamas earlier on Wednesday.
Mr. Bankman-Fried has been charged with orchestrating a multiyear fraud that diverted billions in customer money for other uses including buying real estate in the Bahamas, trading crypto at Alameda, making campaign donations and investing in other crypto companies. Prosecutors contend he defrauded customers, investors and lenders to his crypto trading firm, which was once one of the biggest in the world before it collapsed in bankruptcy last month.
The U.S. attorney, Damian Williams, also said Mr. Bankman-Fried was now in F.B.I. custody and being flown back to the United States on Wednesday night, and would be presented before a judge as soon as possible. He is expected to be taken into court as early as Thursday.
Lawyers for Ms. Ellison were not immediately available for comment. Ilan Graff, the lawyer for Mr. Wang, said, “Gary has accepted responsibility for his actions and takes seriously his obligations as a cooperating witness.”
A spokesman for Mr. Bankman-Fried declined to comment.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/21/tech ... pleas.html
Caroline Ellison, the former chief executive of Alameda Research, and Gary Wang, a founder of FTX, are cooperating in the federal criminal case against Mr. Bankman-Fried.
A plane in the Bahamas that was set to take Sam Bankman-Fried to the United States on Wednesday night. He was in F.B.I. custody, a federal official said.Credit...Joe Raedle/Getty Images
By David Yaffe-Bellany, Matthew Goldstein and Benjamin Weiser
Dec. 21, 2022, 8:58 p.m. ET
Two former top executives of Sam Bankman-Fried’s crypto trading empire have pleaded guilty to federal charges and are cooperating in the criminal case against the disgraced crypto entrepreneur, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York said on Wednesday night.
The two are Caroline Ellison, who was the chief executive of Mr. Bankman-Fried’s crypto trading company, Alameda Research, and Gary Wang, a founder of the crypto exchange FTX.
The guilty pleas and cooperation agreements are a major advance in the fraud case against Mr. Bankman-Fried, who is in U.S. custody after agreeing to be extradited from the Bahamas earlier on Wednesday.
Mr. Bankman-Fried has been charged with orchestrating a multiyear fraud that diverted billions in customer money for other uses including buying real estate in the Bahamas, trading crypto at Alameda, making campaign donations and investing in other crypto companies. Prosecutors contend he defrauded customers, investors and lenders to his crypto trading firm, which was once one of the biggest in the world before it collapsed in bankruptcy last month.
The U.S. attorney, Damian Williams, also said Mr. Bankman-Fried was now in F.B.I. custody and being flown back to the United States on Wednesday night, and would be presented before a judge as soon as possible. He is expected to be taken into court as early as Thursday.
Lawyers for Ms. Ellison were not immediately available for comment. Ilan Graff, the lawyer for Mr. Wang, said, “Gary has accepted responsibility for his actions and takes seriously his obligations as a cooperating witness.”
A spokesman for Mr. Bankman-Fried declined to comment.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/21/tech ... pleas.html
by ti-amie
by ti-amie 'Matt Schlapp is a Sexual Predator': Accuser Sues Over Sexual Battery
'UNMISTAKABLY TRUE'
He first detailed the account of Matt Schlapp sexually assaulting him to The Daily Beast. Now he's suing Schlapp.
Roger Sollenberger
Political Reporter
Matt Fuller
Senior Politics Editor
Updated Jan. 17, 2023 4:40PM ET / Published Jan. 17, 2023 3:46PM ET
Lev Radin/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty
The former Herschel Walker staffer who came forward to The Daily Beast earlier this month to detail a sexual assault allegation against conservative icon Matt Schlapp is now suing the powerful chairman of the American Conservative Union—for battery, defamation, and conspiracy.
The lawsuit, which the staffer’s attorneys filed Tuesday in the circuit court of Alexandria, Virginia, accuses Schlapp of “sexual battery” after “aggressively fondling” his “genital area in a sustained fashion” while the staffer drove Schlapp home from an evening of drinks at Atlanta bars in October.
The complaint also accuses Schlapp—as well as his wife, conservative commentator and former Trump White House communications adviser, Mercedes Schlapp—of defamation, citing efforts to “impugn” the accuser’s character in response to media reports of the allegation. It further alleges a conspiracy count where the couple worked to denigrate the accuser with the help of conservative fundraiser Caroline Wren, who has acted as a representative for the Schlapps in the matter.
The lawsuit claims that Schlapp, who oversees the Conservative Political Action Conference, made "repeated unsolicited and undesired advances" toward the campaign staffer for Herschel Walker. The staffer previously told The Daily Beast that Schlapp "groped" his crotch while he drove the conservative organizer back to his hotel after a day of campaign events.
The staffer filed the lawsuit under the alias of “John Doe,” citing privacy concerns and fear of retaliation. He has vowed to come forward with his real name should Schlapp deny the allegations.
But according to the complaint, the retaliation is already underway. The lawsuit cites text messages Mercedes Schlapp sent to a “neighborhood group chat or text,” where she called the staffer a “troubled individual” who had been fired “for lying and lying on his resume”—a claim the lawsuit says is untrue and defamatory.
The complaint also cites a series of tweets from Wren, who orchestrated high-dollar fundraising efforts behind the Jan. 6 rally. In those tweets, Wren outed the accuser by name following media reports in which he chose to remain anonymous out of privacy concerns. She accused him of being fired from campaigns because he was a “habitual liar"—claims the lawsuit also says are false and defamatory.
The lawsuit seeks a total of $9.4 million in damages: $3.85 million against Schlapp for the alleged assault, $1.85 million from both Schlapp and his wife for the alleged defamation, and an additional $1.85 million from the couple for the conspiracy charge.
The New York Times first reported the lawsuit Wednesday afternoon.
In a letter, the staffer’s attorney, Tim Hyland of Hyland Law, called Schlapp a “sexual predator.”
“Mr. Schlapp has not directly denied our client's allegations, and with good reason—they are unmistakably true, and corroborated by extensive contemporaneous evidence,” the letter read.
“We intend to keep a singular focus: to demonstrate that Matt Schlapp is a sexual predator who assaulted our client,” the letter also said.
Schlapp, for his part, once again indirectly denied the allegations through a lawyer.
“This anonymous complaint demonstrates the accuser's real agenda, working in concert with [The] Daily Beast to attack and harm the Schlapp family," a statement from Schlapp's lawyer, Charlie Spies, read. "The complaint is false, and the Schlapp family is suffering unbearable pain and stress due to the false allegation from an anonymous individual. No family should ever go through this, and the Schlapps and their legal team are assessing counter-lawsuit options.”
The staffer’s account has now been independently confirmed by NBC News and CNN since The Daily Beast first reported on it on Jan. 5. The lawsuit says The Daily Beast “accurately recounted, in all material aspects, the facts surrounding Mr. Schlapp’s sexual battery of Mr. Doe.”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/accuser-s ... y?ref=wrap
'UNMISTAKABLY TRUE'
He first detailed the account of Matt Schlapp sexually assaulting him to The Daily Beast. Now he's suing Schlapp.
Roger Sollenberger
Political Reporter
Matt Fuller
Senior Politics Editor
Updated Jan. 17, 2023 4:40PM ET / Published Jan. 17, 2023 3:46PM ET
Lev Radin/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty
The former Herschel Walker staffer who came forward to The Daily Beast earlier this month to detail a sexual assault allegation against conservative icon Matt Schlapp is now suing the powerful chairman of the American Conservative Union—for battery, defamation, and conspiracy.
The lawsuit, which the staffer’s attorneys filed Tuesday in the circuit court of Alexandria, Virginia, accuses Schlapp of “sexual battery” after “aggressively fondling” his “genital area in a sustained fashion” while the staffer drove Schlapp home from an evening of drinks at Atlanta bars in October.
The complaint also accuses Schlapp—as well as his wife, conservative commentator and former Trump White House communications adviser, Mercedes Schlapp—of defamation, citing efforts to “impugn” the accuser’s character in response to media reports of the allegation. It further alleges a conspiracy count where the couple worked to denigrate the accuser with the help of conservative fundraiser Caroline Wren, who has acted as a representative for the Schlapps in the matter.
The lawsuit claims that Schlapp, who oversees the Conservative Political Action Conference, made "repeated unsolicited and undesired advances" toward the campaign staffer for Herschel Walker. The staffer previously told The Daily Beast that Schlapp "groped" his crotch while he drove the conservative organizer back to his hotel after a day of campaign events.
The staffer filed the lawsuit under the alias of “John Doe,” citing privacy concerns and fear of retaliation. He has vowed to come forward with his real name should Schlapp deny the allegations.
But according to the complaint, the retaliation is already underway. The lawsuit cites text messages Mercedes Schlapp sent to a “neighborhood group chat or text,” where she called the staffer a “troubled individual” who had been fired “for lying and lying on his resume”—a claim the lawsuit says is untrue and defamatory.
The complaint also cites a series of tweets from Wren, who orchestrated high-dollar fundraising efforts behind the Jan. 6 rally. In those tweets, Wren outed the accuser by name following media reports in which he chose to remain anonymous out of privacy concerns. She accused him of being fired from campaigns because he was a “habitual liar"—claims the lawsuit also says are false and defamatory.
The lawsuit seeks a total of $9.4 million in damages: $3.85 million against Schlapp for the alleged assault, $1.85 million from both Schlapp and his wife for the alleged defamation, and an additional $1.85 million from the couple for the conspiracy charge.
The New York Times first reported the lawsuit Wednesday afternoon.
In a letter, the staffer’s attorney, Tim Hyland of Hyland Law, called Schlapp a “sexual predator.”
“Mr. Schlapp has not directly denied our client's allegations, and with good reason—they are unmistakably true, and corroborated by extensive contemporaneous evidence,” the letter read.
“We intend to keep a singular focus: to demonstrate that Matt Schlapp is a sexual predator who assaulted our client,” the letter also said.
Schlapp, for his part, once again indirectly denied the allegations through a lawyer.
“This anonymous complaint demonstrates the accuser's real agenda, working in concert with [The] Daily Beast to attack and harm the Schlapp family," a statement from Schlapp's lawyer, Charlie Spies, read. "The complaint is false, and the Schlapp family is suffering unbearable pain and stress due to the false allegation from an anonymous individual. No family should ever go through this, and the Schlapps and their legal team are assessing counter-lawsuit options.”
The staffer’s account has now been independently confirmed by NBC News and CNN since The Daily Beast first reported on it on Jan. 5. The lawsuit says The Daily Beast “accurately recounted, in all material aspects, the facts surrounding Mr. Schlapp’s sexual battery of Mr. Doe.”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/accuser-s ... y?ref=wrap
by ti-amie Former senior FBI official accused of working for Russian he investigated
Charles McGonigal, a former counterintelligence chief, is also accused of taking $225,000 from a former Albanian intelligence worker while still at the FBI
By Shayna Jacobs, Spencer S. Hsu, Devlin Barrett and Shane Harris
Updated January 23, 2023 at 6:44 p.m. EST|Published January 23, 2023 at 12:56 p.m. EST
Charles McGonigal, then a counterintelligence chief for the FBI in New York, is interviewed by Leonardo Reis in 2018. (Courtesy of Leonardo Reis)
NEW YORK — The FBI’s former top spyhunter in New York was charged Monday with taking secret cash payments of more than $225,000 while overseeing highly sensitive cases, and breaking the law by trying to get Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska removed from a U.S. sanctions list — accusations that shocked the cloistered world of his fellow high-ranking intelligence officials.
Charles McGonigal, 54, who retired from the FBI in September 2018, was indicted in federal court in Manhattan on charges of money laundering, violating U.S. sanctions and other counts stemming from his alleged ties to Deripaska, an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin. In his role at the FBI, McGonigal had been tasked with investigating Deripaska, whose own indictment on sanctions-violation charges was unsealed in September.
A second indictment, filed in Washington, accused McGonigal of hiding payments totaling $225,000 that he allegedly received from a New Jersey man employed decades ago by an Albanian intelligence agency. The indictment also accussed him of acting to advance that person’s interests.
McGonigal’s alleged crimes may undercut Justice Department efforts to ramp up economic sanctions on wealthy Russians after last year’s invasion of Ukraine. The twin indictments are also a black eye for the FBI, alleging that one of its most senior and trusted intelligence officials accepted large sums of money and undermined the bureau’s overall intelligence-gathering mission.
McGonigal was arrested by agents from the bureau where he had worked for 22 years and where he rose to one of the most important counter-espionage positions in the U.S. government. Given his former role, the investigation was run by FBI agents in Los Angeles and D.C. rather than in New York.
FBI Director Christopher A. Wray said the case showed the FBI did its duty. “The way we maintain the trust and confidence of the American people is through our work—showing, when all the facts come out, that we stuck to the process and we treated everyone equally, even when it is one of our own,” Wray said in a statement. "We hold ourselves to the highest standard, and our focus will remain on our mission and on doing the right thing, in the right way, every time.”
Charles McGonigal, former special agent in charge of the FBI's counterintelligence division in New York, leaves court on Monday in New York. (John Minchillo/AP)
Through his lawyer, Seth DuCharme, McGonigal pleaded not guilty to the New York charges at a brief court appearance Monday, where he was released on bond. DuCharme, a former Justice Department official who recently served as acting U.S. attorney in Brooklyn, said outside the courthouse that he looks forward to reviewing the evidence, “but we have a lot of confidence in Mr. McGonigal.”
“As you all know, Charlie’s had a long distinguished career with the FBI. He served the United States for decades,” DuCharme said. “This is obviously a distressing day for Mr. McGonigal and his family.”
McGonigal is scheduled to appear via video link in federal court in D.C. on Wednesday. In that case, prosecutors alleged that from at least August 2017 — and continuing after his retirement from the FBI — McGonigal failed to disclose to the FBI his relationship with the former Albanian intelligence worker, described as “Person A” in charging papers. He also allegedly failed to disclose that he had an “ongoing relationship with the Prime Minister of Albania,” the indictment said. Since 2013, Edi Rama has served as the prime minister of that country.
In late 2017, authorities charge, McGonigal received sums of cash totaling $225,000 from Person A — the first time in a parked car outside a New York City restaurant, and the next two times at the person’s New Jersey home. According to the indictment, McGonigal “indicated to Person A that the money would be paid back.”
Months later, at McGonigal’s urging, the FBI opened an investigation into an American lobbyist for an Albanian political party that is a rival of Rama, an investigation that used Person A as a source of information, authorities said.
That was not the only instance in which the indictments suggest McGonigal used his job for the benefit of people with whom he had undisclosed financial or personal relationships.
On a 2017 trip to Austria, McGonigal and a Justice Department prosecutor interviewed an Albanian businessperson and politician who had previously told McGonigal that they wanted someone to investigate a death threat against them, according to the indictment in Washington. McGonigal had been introduced to that individual by “Person A,” the indictment charges.
The following year, McGonigal allegedly asked the FBI’s liaison to the United Nations to arrange a meeting with the then-U.S. ambassador, Nikki Haley, or another high ranking official, as well as a former Bosnian defense minister and founder of a Bosnian pharmaceutical company.
The indictment says McGonigal’s associates sought that meeting for political reasons that would have benefited Person A financially. At the time, the indictment charges, McGonigal suggested that the pharmaceutical company pay half a million dollars to a company registered to Person A, as a fee for arranging the meeting.
Current and former U.S. officials who know and have worked with McGonigal said they were shocked by the indictments. As a senior FBI counterintelligence official, McGonigal had access to an extraordinary amount of sensitive information, potentially including investigations of foreign spies or U.S. citizens suspected of working on behalf of foreign governments, these people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the work McGonigal did. One former official said McGonigal had worked with the CIA on counterintelligence matters.
According to the New York indictment, a law firm retained McGonigal to work as a consultant and investigator on the effort to get Deripaska removed from the sanctions list. He was listed as a consultant and arranged for $25,000 monthly payments to be sent to an account controlled by another person, an interpreter for the U.S. government who was a former Russian diplomat. The interpreter, Sergey Shestakov, was also charged.
McGonigal’s FBI role gave him access to classified information, including a then-secret list of Russian prospects for sanctioning by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, the Justice Department said. That list included Deripaska before the sanctions were actually imposed.
Manhattan U.S. Attorney Damian Williams said in a statement that McGonigal and Shestakov “should have known better” given their experience in government service. Shestakov also pleaded not guilty.
U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves of D.C. called the alleged coverup of foreign contacts and financial relationships a “gateway to corruption,” and he credited the FBI with its handling of the “delicate and difficult” investigation of a former high-ranking official.
“McGonigal is alleged to have committed the very violations he swore to investigate while he purported to lead a workforce of FBI employees who spend their careers protecting secrets and holding foreign adversaries accountable,” said the FBI assistant director in charge of the Los Angeles field office, Donald Alway, who announced the charges along with Graves and the leaders of the D.C. FBI office and the Justice Department National Security Division. Asked about the case Monday, Attorney General Merrick Garland declined to comment.
McGonigal faces a statutory maximum sentence of 20 years in prison on the two D.C. counts of falsification of records and documents, and up to five years in prison for each of seven counts of concealing material facts or making false statements. The most serious charge in the New York indictment carries a maximum possible sentence of 20 years in prison.
McGonigal joined the FBI in 1996, working in New York, Washington, Baltimore and Cleveland. Along the way, he was involved in some of the most sensitive and high-profile intelligence cases in the U.S. government, including the conviction of former national security adviser Samuel Berger for knowingly removing classified documents from the National Archives. In 2010, McGonigal was tapped to lead the task force probing the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks.
The charges against McGonigal alarmed his former colleagues in part because of his depth of knowledge of so many elements of U.S. espionage. McGonigal was an expert on Russian intelligence activities targeting the United States, as well as U.S. efforts to recruit Russian spies, said several former intelligence officials who worked with him and spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive matters.
His position at the New York field office would have given him direct access to past and current recruitment efforts, work that was coordinated with the CIA, these people said. McGonigal was well-known at the CIA among officers who dealt with Russia and counterintelligence matters, and he knew the details of some intelligence operations targeting Russia, former officials said.
McGonigal has not been charged with espionage, but the former officials who worked with him said his knowledge and experience would have put him at high risk of being recruited by a foreign government.
One former official noted that McGonigal was in charge of an investigation into why numerous individuals in China who were spying for the United States were arrested and taken out of commission. As part of that investigation, McGonigal would have known details about the covert systems that the CIA used to communicate with its agents, the former official said. Those systems are believed to have played a central role in exposing the agents to government authorities.
Deripaska has been a focus of FBI investigative work for many years. In 2021, agents searched two homes linked to him, one in D.C. and the other in New York. At the time, a spokeswoman for the aluminum tycoon said the properties were owned by his relatives.
A politically connected billionaire, Deripaska’s name came up repeatedly in recent U.S. investigations involving Russia and the 2016 presidential campaign of Donald Trump. Deripaska did business for years with Paul Manafort, whose tenure as Trump’s campaign chairman became an intense focus of FBI investigations.
Manafort and Deripaska have both confirmed that they had a business relationship in which Manafort was paid as an investment consultant. In 2014, Deripaska accused Manafort in a Cayman Islands court of taking nearly $19 million intended for investments without accounting for how they were used.
Hsu, Barrett and Harris reported from Washington. Rosalind S. Helderman and Perry Stein in Washington contributed to this report.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... tment-fbi/
Charles McGonigal, a former counterintelligence chief, is also accused of taking $225,000 from a former Albanian intelligence worker while still at the FBI
By Shayna Jacobs, Spencer S. Hsu, Devlin Barrett and Shane Harris
Updated January 23, 2023 at 6:44 p.m. EST|Published January 23, 2023 at 12:56 p.m. EST
Charles McGonigal, then a counterintelligence chief for the FBI in New York, is interviewed by Leonardo Reis in 2018. (Courtesy of Leonardo Reis)
NEW YORK — The FBI’s former top spyhunter in New York was charged Monday with taking secret cash payments of more than $225,000 while overseeing highly sensitive cases, and breaking the law by trying to get Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska removed from a U.S. sanctions list — accusations that shocked the cloistered world of his fellow high-ranking intelligence officials.
Charles McGonigal, 54, who retired from the FBI in September 2018, was indicted in federal court in Manhattan on charges of money laundering, violating U.S. sanctions and other counts stemming from his alleged ties to Deripaska, an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin. In his role at the FBI, McGonigal had been tasked with investigating Deripaska, whose own indictment on sanctions-violation charges was unsealed in September.
A second indictment, filed in Washington, accused McGonigal of hiding payments totaling $225,000 that he allegedly received from a New Jersey man employed decades ago by an Albanian intelligence agency. The indictment also accussed him of acting to advance that person’s interests.
McGonigal’s alleged crimes may undercut Justice Department efforts to ramp up economic sanctions on wealthy Russians after last year’s invasion of Ukraine. The twin indictments are also a black eye for the FBI, alleging that one of its most senior and trusted intelligence officials accepted large sums of money and undermined the bureau’s overall intelligence-gathering mission.
McGonigal was arrested by agents from the bureau where he had worked for 22 years and where he rose to one of the most important counter-espionage positions in the U.S. government. Given his former role, the investigation was run by FBI agents in Los Angeles and D.C. rather than in New York.
FBI Director Christopher A. Wray said the case showed the FBI did its duty. “The way we maintain the trust and confidence of the American people is through our work—showing, when all the facts come out, that we stuck to the process and we treated everyone equally, even when it is one of our own,” Wray said in a statement. "We hold ourselves to the highest standard, and our focus will remain on our mission and on doing the right thing, in the right way, every time.”
Charles McGonigal, former special agent in charge of the FBI's counterintelligence division in New York, leaves court on Monday in New York. (John Minchillo/AP)
Through his lawyer, Seth DuCharme, McGonigal pleaded not guilty to the New York charges at a brief court appearance Monday, where he was released on bond. DuCharme, a former Justice Department official who recently served as acting U.S. attorney in Brooklyn, said outside the courthouse that he looks forward to reviewing the evidence, “but we have a lot of confidence in Mr. McGonigal.”
“As you all know, Charlie’s had a long distinguished career with the FBI. He served the United States for decades,” DuCharme said. “This is obviously a distressing day for Mr. McGonigal and his family.”
McGonigal is scheduled to appear via video link in federal court in D.C. on Wednesday. In that case, prosecutors alleged that from at least August 2017 — and continuing after his retirement from the FBI — McGonigal failed to disclose to the FBI his relationship with the former Albanian intelligence worker, described as “Person A” in charging papers. He also allegedly failed to disclose that he had an “ongoing relationship with the Prime Minister of Albania,” the indictment said. Since 2013, Edi Rama has served as the prime minister of that country.
In late 2017, authorities charge, McGonigal received sums of cash totaling $225,000 from Person A — the first time in a parked car outside a New York City restaurant, and the next two times at the person’s New Jersey home. According to the indictment, McGonigal “indicated to Person A that the money would be paid back.”
Months later, at McGonigal’s urging, the FBI opened an investigation into an American lobbyist for an Albanian political party that is a rival of Rama, an investigation that used Person A as a source of information, authorities said.
That was not the only instance in which the indictments suggest McGonigal used his job for the benefit of people with whom he had undisclosed financial or personal relationships.
On a 2017 trip to Austria, McGonigal and a Justice Department prosecutor interviewed an Albanian businessperson and politician who had previously told McGonigal that they wanted someone to investigate a death threat against them, according to the indictment in Washington. McGonigal had been introduced to that individual by “Person A,” the indictment charges.
The following year, McGonigal allegedly asked the FBI’s liaison to the United Nations to arrange a meeting with the then-U.S. ambassador, Nikki Haley, or another high ranking official, as well as a former Bosnian defense minister and founder of a Bosnian pharmaceutical company.
The indictment says McGonigal’s associates sought that meeting for political reasons that would have benefited Person A financially. At the time, the indictment charges, McGonigal suggested that the pharmaceutical company pay half a million dollars to a company registered to Person A, as a fee for arranging the meeting.
Current and former U.S. officials who know and have worked with McGonigal said they were shocked by the indictments. As a senior FBI counterintelligence official, McGonigal had access to an extraordinary amount of sensitive information, potentially including investigations of foreign spies or U.S. citizens suspected of working on behalf of foreign governments, these people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the work McGonigal did. One former official said McGonigal had worked with the CIA on counterintelligence matters.
According to the New York indictment, a law firm retained McGonigal to work as a consultant and investigator on the effort to get Deripaska removed from the sanctions list. He was listed as a consultant and arranged for $25,000 monthly payments to be sent to an account controlled by another person, an interpreter for the U.S. government who was a former Russian diplomat. The interpreter, Sergey Shestakov, was also charged.
McGonigal’s FBI role gave him access to classified information, including a then-secret list of Russian prospects for sanctioning by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, the Justice Department said. That list included Deripaska before the sanctions were actually imposed.
Manhattan U.S. Attorney Damian Williams said in a statement that McGonigal and Shestakov “should have known better” given their experience in government service. Shestakov also pleaded not guilty.
U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves of D.C. called the alleged coverup of foreign contacts and financial relationships a “gateway to corruption,” and he credited the FBI with its handling of the “delicate and difficult” investigation of a former high-ranking official.
“McGonigal is alleged to have committed the very violations he swore to investigate while he purported to lead a workforce of FBI employees who spend their careers protecting secrets and holding foreign adversaries accountable,” said the FBI assistant director in charge of the Los Angeles field office, Donald Alway, who announced the charges along with Graves and the leaders of the D.C. FBI office and the Justice Department National Security Division. Asked about the case Monday, Attorney General Merrick Garland declined to comment.
McGonigal faces a statutory maximum sentence of 20 years in prison on the two D.C. counts of falsification of records and documents, and up to five years in prison for each of seven counts of concealing material facts or making false statements. The most serious charge in the New York indictment carries a maximum possible sentence of 20 years in prison.
McGonigal joined the FBI in 1996, working in New York, Washington, Baltimore and Cleveland. Along the way, he was involved in some of the most sensitive and high-profile intelligence cases in the U.S. government, including the conviction of former national security adviser Samuel Berger for knowingly removing classified documents from the National Archives. In 2010, McGonigal was tapped to lead the task force probing the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks.
The charges against McGonigal alarmed his former colleagues in part because of his depth of knowledge of so many elements of U.S. espionage. McGonigal was an expert on Russian intelligence activities targeting the United States, as well as U.S. efforts to recruit Russian spies, said several former intelligence officials who worked with him and spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive matters.
His position at the New York field office would have given him direct access to past and current recruitment efforts, work that was coordinated with the CIA, these people said. McGonigal was well-known at the CIA among officers who dealt with Russia and counterintelligence matters, and he knew the details of some intelligence operations targeting Russia, former officials said.
McGonigal has not been charged with espionage, but the former officials who worked with him said his knowledge and experience would have put him at high risk of being recruited by a foreign government.
One former official noted that McGonigal was in charge of an investigation into why numerous individuals in China who were spying for the United States were arrested and taken out of commission. As part of that investigation, McGonigal would have known details about the covert systems that the CIA used to communicate with its agents, the former official said. Those systems are believed to have played a central role in exposing the agents to government authorities.
Deripaska has been a focus of FBI investigative work for many years. In 2021, agents searched two homes linked to him, one in D.C. and the other in New York. At the time, a spokeswoman for the aluminum tycoon said the properties were owned by his relatives.
A politically connected billionaire, Deripaska’s name came up repeatedly in recent U.S. investigations involving Russia and the 2016 presidential campaign of Donald Trump. Deripaska did business for years with Paul Manafort, whose tenure as Trump’s campaign chairman became an intense focus of FBI investigations.
Manafort and Deripaska have both confirmed that they had a business relationship in which Manafort was paid as an investment consultant. In 2014, Deripaska accused Manafort in a Cayman Islands court of taking nearly $19 million intended for investments without accounting for how they were used.
Hsu, Barrett and Harris reported from Washington. Rosalind S. Helderman and Perry Stein in Washington contributed to this report.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... tment-fbi/
by Owendonovan 
I'll celebrate his death no matter how or when it comes. 
I'll celebrate his death no matter how or when it comes. by ti-amie Tate rape allegations, text exchanges with women detailed in court document
By Loveday Morris
February 2, 2023 at 5:14 p.m. EST
Andrew and Tristan Tate in Romania on Wednesday. (Inquam Photos/Octav Ganea/Reuters)
Andrew Tate, the self-styled “king of toxic masculinity” who was arrested in Romania for running a human trafficking ring, is being investigated for two counts of rape, according to a court order obtained by The Washington Post, which also includes excerpts of extensive phone message conversations showing how Tate and his brother are alleged to have lured victims to Bucharest.
Romanian prosecutors have previously publicly stated the case involved accusations of rape but have declined to disclose further details or say which suspect was accused. A 67-page court ruling that ordered Tate, 36, and his brother Tristan, 34, into administrative detention in late December details the charges prosecutors are investigating against the brothers and two Romanian women accused of helping them run a human trafficking ring.
All four were arrested in December on suspicion of human trafficking and organizing a criminal enterprise and ordered held as the investigation continued. None have been formally charged but prosecutors have outlined the specific crimes that there is a “reasonable suspicion” each defendant has committed, according to the court ruling.
Their lawyers say the fact that they have not been charged shows a lack of evidence and argue their continued detention violates their human rights. In closed court sessions, Tate’s lawyers have said the sex was consensual, according to the court order. Tina Glandian, who has represented celebrities including Mike Tyson and Chris Brown and joined the Tates’ legal team this week, said that as the proceedings are closed she cannot comment on specific evidence but that the brothers deny all the allegations.
“It speaks volumes that they haven’t been charged yet despite the fact that there’s been an investigation for so long,” said Glandian. “They’ve searched their residences, seized their devices and here we are in February and their detention has been extended.”
Tate, a former champion kickboxer and American and British dual national, is being investigated for trafficking a Moldovan woman from London and allegedly raping her on two occasions in March last year, once at a hotel in Bucharest and another time at a property in the city, according to the court order, which was first reported on by Reuters.
Tate is accused of exerting “psychological and verbal pressure” to force the woman to have sex with him and two other women at the hotel, prosecutors said, according to the court order. The second alleged rape occurred 11 days later when Tate used “physical violence and psychological and verbal pressure” to force the woman into intercourse, according to the court order.
Extensive WhatsApp conversations between Tate and the woman in London and Tristan Tate and an American woman he is being investigated for trafficking from the United States are also included in the file as well as references to statements from the women to Romanian authorities. The messages were reproduced in the file in Romanian but have been translated into English by The Post and have not been independently verified.
Prosecutors have said the messages are evidence of the methods used by the brothers to “gain the trust of victims they manipulated” by posing as “affectionate, honest people,” according to the court order.
Tate, who has millions of online followers, met the Moldovan woman through Instagram in January last year, prosecutors alleged, according to the court order, and they began to speak romantically before meeting in February.
The conversation quickly turned to a move to Romania, according to the court order. “So I can keep an eye on you,” Tate wrote in a message on Feb. 7, the court order states.
The woman raised concerns about Tate’s work after seeing his online videos, according to prosecution statements in the court order. It’s unclear from the document exactly what videos are being referenced but the controversial social media influencer has spoken openly on YouTube videos about how he makes money from women doing live sexual performances online.
In the messages in the court order, Tate explained to the woman that he had used a webcam business to “launder money” and that he’d also started teaching men to start their own. “It’s all a cover,” he wrote, assuring her she could trust him. He told the victim that he’d meet her in Romania after taking care of some work in Prague and spoke about the prospect of marriage.
“I want to know that you are determined … serious about marriage,” Tate stated in one message, according to the court order.
“Yes. I am serious,” the woman replied.
After arriving in Romania, prosecutors say the victims were brought to a property where Tate produced internet pornography.
“I’m in the house,” the Moldovan woman messaged Tate, according to the court order. “I feel a bit strange … I wish you would tell it like it is so I know what’s going on … what do these girls do exactly?”
According to the court order, Tate replied that the women in the house work for “Only Fans” — an internet subscription service used extensively by sex workers.
“I mean, do they undress and stuff? Or something else,” the woman responded.
“No, just bikini,” Tate wrote. “And underwear.”
“I thought I would come here and live with you,” she wrote the next day. “It’s a little strange to have you put me with girls who work for you.”
Victims were coerced into producing internet pornography after effectively being turned into “slaves,” prosecutors argued, according to the court order.
In the messages reproduced in the court order, the woman tells Tate that she is being asked to make videos for TikTok.
“Just do it,” Tate responded, according to the court order. “It’s simple.”
The suspects took 50 percent of the online earnings of the women who worked for them, according to the testimony of one of the victims cited in the document who said women were subject to “fines” if they did not post exactly the content they were asked or if they cried during a live session or took too long on a break.
Tate and his co-accused said the women were free to leave or call the police. “Ask them for evidence and they will give you none,” Andrew Tate said as he was led out of court on Wednesday after an appeals court upheld a 30-day extension of his detention. “Because it doesn’t exist.”
In a video of an appearance on the “Fresh & Fit” podcast posted online in March last year, Tate called himself a “webcam kingpin.” He said that at one point he had 75 women working for his webcam “business” in four different locations, bringing in $600,000 a month.
Tate said in the podcast that he was forced move his webcam business to Romania from the United Kingdom after an armed police raid at his house. One woman — whom he said made him about $25,000 a month — had accused him of assault. He described flushing his phone down the toilet as police banged on the door but denied the assault.
Prosecutors say that money “obtained by the exploitation of the victims was used by the defendants to support themselves,” arguing that the women were essentially imprisoned in Romania in the brothers’ properties.
In a message reproduced in the court order, for instance, the Moldovan woman said she was thinking about going into town.
“NO,” Tate writes. “Going out alone … without telling me. Mall. Supermarket. NOWHERE. FROM NOW ON. It’s the last warning.”
The investigation against the brothers was triggered last year when the U.S. Embassy in Bucharest tipped off Romanian police that a 21-year-old American citizen was being held against her will in a property belonging to the Tates.
Constantin Ioan Gliga, a lawyer on the defense team, has said parts of messages disseminated to the public are “exaggerated and distorted interpretation of some harmless discussions in the private environment.”
Defense lawyers point out that two other Romanians described as “injured parties” in the case file have spoken out in favor of the Tates, saying they are not victims. The Post was unable to reach the other women named as victims.
Ramona Bolla, a spokeswoman for the Directorate for Investigating Organized Crime and Terrorism, said she was confident the suspects would be charged.
The American victim met Tristan Tate on Reddit in 2021, according to the court order. Tristan Tate presented himself as “exactly what she wanted in a lover,” the prosecution argued — someone educated, creative and respectful. The two spent a week together when Tristan Tate was on a trip to Miami, and later “the idea of visits to Romania turned into the idea of moving,” the court order said.
One of Tristan’s “rules” for her in Romania was “you never talk to anyone unless I introduce you,” messages between the two show. “Romania is my world. No friends from the outside,” he wrote.
When the woman arrived in Romania, Tristan Tate told her that she wouldn’t be able to leave, and that if she managed to “he would make sure that she will return to Romania,” the court order said, citing her statement. If she asked the armed guards to leave, they told her they did not speak English, she said, according to the court order.
She said that she did not call the police because Tristan Tate “scared” her and told her that he had surveillance cameras everywhere in the house, according to the court order. He would text her when she went into the living room, she said, to show that he was watching her at all times.
Tristan Tate’s defense argued that he had a “fun week” with the woman in Miami but that he did not suggest she move to Romania.
“I really wanted to see Romania and you be the one to show it to me,” she wrote to Tristan Tate in April last year. But she also said what she didn’t want to do, according to the court order: “I can’t show my body on Only Fans — sorry. I want to keep it just for you.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/20 ... gn=wp_main
By Loveday Morris
February 2, 2023 at 5:14 p.m. EST
Andrew and Tristan Tate in Romania on Wednesday. (Inquam Photos/Octav Ganea/Reuters)
Andrew Tate, the self-styled “king of toxic masculinity” who was arrested in Romania for running a human trafficking ring, is being investigated for two counts of rape, according to a court order obtained by The Washington Post, which also includes excerpts of extensive phone message conversations showing how Tate and his brother are alleged to have lured victims to Bucharest.
Romanian prosecutors have previously publicly stated the case involved accusations of rape but have declined to disclose further details or say which suspect was accused. A 67-page court ruling that ordered Tate, 36, and his brother Tristan, 34, into administrative detention in late December details the charges prosecutors are investigating against the brothers and two Romanian women accused of helping them run a human trafficking ring.
All four were arrested in December on suspicion of human trafficking and organizing a criminal enterprise and ordered held as the investigation continued. None have been formally charged but prosecutors have outlined the specific crimes that there is a “reasonable suspicion” each defendant has committed, according to the court ruling.
Their lawyers say the fact that they have not been charged shows a lack of evidence and argue their continued detention violates their human rights. In closed court sessions, Tate’s lawyers have said the sex was consensual, according to the court order. Tina Glandian, who has represented celebrities including Mike Tyson and Chris Brown and joined the Tates’ legal team this week, said that as the proceedings are closed she cannot comment on specific evidence but that the brothers deny all the allegations.
“It speaks volumes that they haven’t been charged yet despite the fact that there’s been an investigation for so long,” said Glandian. “They’ve searched their residences, seized their devices and here we are in February and their detention has been extended.”
Tate, a former champion kickboxer and American and British dual national, is being investigated for trafficking a Moldovan woman from London and allegedly raping her on two occasions in March last year, once at a hotel in Bucharest and another time at a property in the city, according to the court order, which was first reported on by Reuters.
Tate is accused of exerting “psychological and verbal pressure” to force the woman to have sex with him and two other women at the hotel, prosecutors said, according to the court order. The second alleged rape occurred 11 days later when Tate used “physical violence and psychological and verbal pressure” to force the woman into intercourse, according to the court order.
Extensive WhatsApp conversations between Tate and the woman in London and Tristan Tate and an American woman he is being investigated for trafficking from the United States are also included in the file as well as references to statements from the women to Romanian authorities. The messages were reproduced in the file in Romanian but have been translated into English by The Post and have not been independently verified.
Prosecutors have said the messages are evidence of the methods used by the brothers to “gain the trust of victims they manipulated” by posing as “affectionate, honest people,” according to the court order.
Tate, who has millions of online followers, met the Moldovan woman through Instagram in January last year, prosecutors alleged, according to the court order, and they began to speak romantically before meeting in February.
The conversation quickly turned to a move to Romania, according to the court order. “So I can keep an eye on you,” Tate wrote in a message on Feb. 7, the court order states.
The woman raised concerns about Tate’s work after seeing his online videos, according to prosecution statements in the court order. It’s unclear from the document exactly what videos are being referenced but the controversial social media influencer has spoken openly on YouTube videos about how he makes money from women doing live sexual performances online.
In the messages in the court order, Tate explained to the woman that he had used a webcam business to “launder money” and that he’d also started teaching men to start their own. “It’s all a cover,” he wrote, assuring her she could trust him. He told the victim that he’d meet her in Romania after taking care of some work in Prague and spoke about the prospect of marriage.
“I want to know that you are determined … serious about marriage,” Tate stated in one message, according to the court order.
“Yes. I am serious,” the woman replied.
After arriving in Romania, prosecutors say the victims were brought to a property where Tate produced internet pornography.
“I’m in the house,” the Moldovan woman messaged Tate, according to the court order. “I feel a bit strange … I wish you would tell it like it is so I know what’s going on … what do these girls do exactly?”
According to the court order, Tate replied that the women in the house work for “Only Fans” — an internet subscription service used extensively by sex workers.
“I mean, do they undress and stuff? Or something else,” the woman responded.
“No, just bikini,” Tate wrote. “And underwear.”
“I thought I would come here and live with you,” she wrote the next day. “It’s a little strange to have you put me with girls who work for you.”
Victims were coerced into producing internet pornography after effectively being turned into “slaves,” prosecutors argued, according to the court order.
In the messages reproduced in the court order, the woman tells Tate that she is being asked to make videos for TikTok.
“Just do it,” Tate responded, according to the court order. “It’s simple.”
The suspects took 50 percent of the online earnings of the women who worked for them, according to the testimony of one of the victims cited in the document who said women were subject to “fines” if they did not post exactly the content they were asked or if they cried during a live session or took too long on a break.
Tate and his co-accused said the women were free to leave or call the police. “Ask them for evidence and they will give you none,” Andrew Tate said as he was led out of court on Wednesday after an appeals court upheld a 30-day extension of his detention. “Because it doesn’t exist.”
In a video of an appearance on the “Fresh & Fit” podcast posted online in March last year, Tate called himself a “webcam kingpin.” He said that at one point he had 75 women working for his webcam “business” in four different locations, bringing in $600,000 a month.
Tate said in the podcast that he was forced move his webcam business to Romania from the United Kingdom after an armed police raid at his house. One woman — whom he said made him about $25,000 a month — had accused him of assault. He described flushing his phone down the toilet as police banged on the door but denied the assault.
Prosecutors say that money “obtained by the exploitation of the victims was used by the defendants to support themselves,” arguing that the women were essentially imprisoned in Romania in the brothers’ properties.
In a message reproduced in the court order, for instance, the Moldovan woman said she was thinking about going into town.
“NO,” Tate writes. “Going out alone … without telling me. Mall. Supermarket. NOWHERE. FROM NOW ON. It’s the last warning.”
The investigation against the brothers was triggered last year when the U.S. Embassy in Bucharest tipped off Romanian police that a 21-year-old American citizen was being held against her will in a property belonging to the Tates.
Constantin Ioan Gliga, a lawyer on the defense team, has said parts of messages disseminated to the public are “exaggerated and distorted interpretation of some harmless discussions in the private environment.”
Defense lawyers point out that two other Romanians described as “injured parties” in the case file have spoken out in favor of the Tates, saying they are not victims. The Post was unable to reach the other women named as victims.
Ramona Bolla, a spokeswoman for the Directorate for Investigating Organized Crime and Terrorism, said she was confident the suspects would be charged.
The American victim met Tristan Tate on Reddit in 2021, according to the court order. Tristan Tate presented himself as “exactly what she wanted in a lover,” the prosecution argued — someone educated, creative and respectful. The two spent a week together when Tristan Tate was on a trip to Miami, and later “the idea of visits to Romania turned into the idea of moving,” the court order said.
One of Tristan’s “rules” for her in Romania was “you never talk to anyone unless I introduce you,” messages between the two show. “Romania is my world. No friends from the outside,” he wrote.
When the woman arrived in Romania, Tristan Tate told her that she wouldn’t be able to leave, and that if she managed to “he would make sure that she will return to Romania,” the court order said, citing her statement. If she asked the armed guards to leave, they told her they did not speak English, she said, according to the court order.
She said that she did not call the police because Tristan Tate “scared” her and told her that he had surveillance cameras everywhere in the house, according to the court order. He would text her when she went into the living room, she said, to show that he was watching her at all times.
Tristan Tate’s defense argued that he had a “fun week” with the woman in Miami but that he did not suggest she move to Romania.
“I really wanted to see Romania and you be the one to show it to me,” she wrote to Tristan Tate in April last year. But she also said what she didn’t want to do, according to the court order: “I can’t show my body on Only Fans — sorry. I want to keep it just for you.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/20 ... gn=wp_main
by ponchi101 
(I know what you mean)
He scammed people out of a gazillion dollars. I would say he has a very good idea of how dumb people are
(I know what you mean)
by ti-amie Spocko
@spocko@mastodon.online
Charlottesville Tiki Torch Guy Commits Suicide Before Fentanyl Trial
Teddy Landrum changed his name in 2012 to Joseph Von Nukem "He was a failure in life and just killed himself while facing trial for smuggling fentanyl across the southern border."
Von Nukem was arrested in 2021 while entering the U.S. from Mexico & possessing 15kg of fentanyl pills in his car. The little (expletive) admitted to being paid $215 to smuggle the deadly pills into the States."
https://crooksandliars.com/2023/02/cha
Every accusation is projection.
@spocko@mastodon.online
Charlottesville Tiki Torch Guy Commits Suicide Before Fentanyl Trial
Teddy Landrum changed his name in 2012 to Joseph Von Nukem "He was a failure in life and just killed himself while facing trial for smuggling fentanyl across the southern border."
Von Nukem was arrested in 2021 while entering the U.S. from Mexico & possessing 15kg of fentanyl pills in his car. The little (expletive) admitted to being paid $215 to smuggle the deadly pills into the States."
https://crooksandliars.com/2023/02/cha
Every accusation is projection.
by Owendonovan Tiny is such a magnet for sleazeballs.
Tiny is such a magnet for sleazeballs.by ti-amie
Eric Garland
@ericgarland
These allegations are explosive and specific.
Multiple Jefferson County officials tried to influence prosecutions against women in other governments to pressure them into relenting to rape.
Eric Garland
@ericgarland
These allegations are explosive and specific.
Multiple Jefferson County officials tried to influence prosecutions against women in other governments to pressure them into relenting to rape.
by Owendonovan
"Beyond belief"? To whom? This is entirely in the specter of any white guy in the south with some power. I almost expect something depraved given their history.
by ponchi101
On the money.Owendonovan wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:22 pm ...
"Beyond belief"? To whom? This is entirely in the specter of any white guy in the south with some power. I almost expect something depraved given their history.
by ti-amie Molly White
@molly0xfff@hachyderm.io
The DOJ and Sam Bankman-Fried's attorneys have come to an agreement on proposed bond modifications to submit to the judge. Among other things they would limit SBF to using a flip phone.
Full document: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .100.0.pdf
Letter – #100 in United States v. BANKMAN-FRIED (S.D.N.Y., 1:22-cr-00673) – CourtListener.com
LETTER by USA as to Samuel Bankman-Fried addressed…
CourtListener
First, they propose adopting as permanent the temporary restrictions prohibiting SBF from contacting current or former FTX employees outside of the presence of counsel, from using ephemeral call/messaging apps like Signal, and from using a VPN.
He would also be limited to "a flip phone or other non-smartphone with either no internet capabilities or internet capabilities disabled" and a new laptop with software that would restrict SBF to only visiting a list of approved websites.
The websites are grouped into ones that would help him prepare his defense, and ones just for funsies. Included: Wikipedia, blockchain explorers, mainstream and crypto media outlets, Netflix, meal delivery apps, Amazon, MLB.com, and NFL.com.
Noticeably missing: Substack, Twitter, gaming platforms.
In addition to the whitelisting software, they would install software to monitor and log SBF's activity. They would also require SBF to be kept from all devices belonging to his parents.
His parents' devices would be installed with monitoring software, including software that takes photos of the person using the device to be reviewed by pretrial services.
There's also a clause where SBF agrees to not object to pen registers on his phone, Gmail, and internet service.
I'm a little confused by this simply because there's already a pen register on his Gmail (which is how the USAO discovered SBF's VPN usage).
Personally I'm a little offended that web3isgoinggreat.com didn't make the cut of "Websites for the Defendant’s Personal Use". Bad taste, Sammy.
"the defendant’s laptop be installed with monitoring and security software that will log the defendant’s user activity, which will be stored in a cloud-based repository maintained by defense counsel"
Seems odd that the defense is in charge of maintaining that, but what do I know.
@molly0xfff@hachyderm.io
The DOJ and Sam Bankman-Fried's attorneys have come to an agreement on proposed bond modifications to submit to the judge. Among other things they would limit SBF to using a flip phone.
Full document: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .100.0.pdf
Letter – #100 in United States v. BANKMAN-FRIED (S.D.N.Y., 1:22-cr-00673) – CourtListener.com
LETTER by USA as to Samuel Bankman-Fried addressed…
CourtListener
First, they propose adopting as permanent the temporary restrictions prohibiting SBF from contacting current or former FTX employees outside of the presence of counsel, from using ephemeral call/messaging apps like Signal, and from using a VPN.
He would also be limited to "a flip phone or other non-smartphone with either no internet capabilities or internet capabilities disabled" and a new laptop with software that would restrict SBF to only visiting a list of approved websites.
The websites are grouped into ones that would help him prepare his defense, and ones just for funsies. Included: Wikipedia, blockchain explorers, mainstream and crypto media outlets, Netflix, meal delivery apps, Amazon, MLB.com, and NFL.com.
Noticeably missing: Substack, Twitter, gaming platforms.
In addition to the whitelisting software, they would install software to monitor and log SBF's activity. They would also require SBF to be kept from all devices belonging to his parents.
His parents' devices would be installed with monitoring software, including software that takes photos of the person using the device to be reviewed by pretrial services.
There's also a clause where SBF agrees to not object to pen registers on his phone, Gmail, and internet service.
I'm a little confused by this simply because there's already a pen register on his Gmail (which is how the USAO discovered SBF's VPN usage).
Personally I'm a little offended that web3isgoinggreat.com didn't make the cut of "Websites for the Defendant’s Personal Use". Bad taste, Sammy.
"the defendant’s laptop be installed with monitoring and security software that will log the defendant’s user activity, which will be stored in a cloud-based repository maintained by defense counsel"
Seems odd that the defense is in charge of maintaining that, but what do I know.
by ti-amie Thankfully this "person" is in jail. It's a disturbing read but this is an adult site.
Polygamist cult leader and self-proclaimed prophet ‘brazenly’ used jailhouse phone system to have ‘sexual discussions’ with kids: Feds
ADAM KLASFELD Mar 6th, 2023, 10:52 am
Accused polygamous cult leader Sam Bateman (Screenshot via Law&Crime Network)
Polygamous cult leader Sam Bateman, a self-proclaimed prophet awaiting trial on kidnapping and other charges, “brazenly” used the jailhouse phone system to “engage in sexual discussions with children,” federal prosecutors allege.
One of the girls, identified in court papers as “Jane Doe 4,” is a 13-year-old he allegedly conspired to kidnap, court papers say.
“All those sacred times”
During the Nov. 26 conversation, Bateman placed a video call with “some” of his adult wives, and “Jane Doe 4” had been on the other line in the custody of Arizona’s Department of Child Safety. Prosecutors say that Bateman then spoke to the teen, referring to her as his “sexy darling” and making profane sexual remarks about her breasts and his desire to sexually abuse her.
“Don’t you remember all those sacred times we spent together?” Bateman is quoted telling the girl.
The conversation violated a Superior Court’s order barring Bateman from all contact with “Jane Doe 4,” a listed victim in a child abuse case in Arizona’s Coconino County, prosecutors say.
Bateman allegedly made the same obscene and vulgar sexual remarks to 16-year-old victim “Jane Doe 10.”
In 2019, Bateman declared himself a prophet of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS), a sect whose adherents practice polygamy. The government estimates that Bateman has roughly 50 followers and more 20 wives, nine of whom are minors between the ages of 12 and 16.
“Bateman allegedly has ‘impressions of Heavenly Father’s will’ to encourage his followers, including the minor children, to engage in sexual acts and relies on that submission to do his own will,” prosecutors wrote on March 3. “Bateman is a subject in a federal investigation into the transportation of minors in interstate commerce to engage in criminal sexual activity, and travel in interstate commerce to engage in illicit sexual conduct with minors, beginning around May 2020.”
Bateman has been kept in detention since he was charged in mid-September with attempting to obstruct justice. A subsequent indictment accused him and three of his adult wives — Naomi Bistline, Donnae Barlow, and Moretta Rose Johnson — with additional obstruction-related counts and a federal kidnapping charge. Prosecutors signaled that another charging document could be imminent against him and others.
Originally slated to stand trial last November, Bateman’s reckoning has been adjourned multiple times and was recently pushed back another year, until March 5, 2024.
Bateman’s attorney Marc J. Victor claims that an order prohibiting his client from contacting anyone other than his lawyers from behind bars, using the phone system operated by contractor CoreCivic, violates the Constitution.
“The restriction on Mr. Bateman’s access to all people outside CoreCivic except counsel is excessive, suggests an express intent to punish Mr. Bateman and thus denies him Due Process of Law and his First Amendment rights,” Victor wrote.
“She picked the wrong religion to hate”
Prosecutors responded to that claim with a litany of Bateman’s alleged transgressions, justifying the measure.
“During the 77 days Bateman spent in federal pre-trial detention before his communications were restricted, he participated in the kidnapping or escape of eight children; had explicit sexual conversations with children; violated a Coconino County Superior Court no-contact order; directed others to intimidate a government witness; sought to influence potential testimony; and repeatedly misused detention facility communications systems in violation of policy,” the government says.
Before being charged federally, Bateman was arrested by Arizona Department of Public Safety for child endangerment on Aug. 28, 2022, after being discovered with three young girls between the ages of 11 and 14 during a traffic stop.
In bodycam footage of that stop, Bateman could be heard telling deputies: “I’ll tell you right now, I’m not going to tell you anything.”
During his temporary detention that day, prosecutors say, Bateman instructed his followers to “delete my Signal account now, the whole thing, delete every message, right now.”
Detailing some of the allegations behind the federal kidnapping charge, prosecutors claim that Bateman engineered that plot from behind bars.
“After Bateman’s federal arrest, nine minor girls, all believed to be wives of Bateman, were taken into Arizona Department of Child Services (DCS) custody on September 14, 2022,” prosecutors wrote. “Bateman — using communications systems at the Core Civic/Central Arizona Florence Correctional Complex (CAFCC) — then conspired with others to remove the girls from DCS custody. And on November 27, at least three of Bateman’s adult wives succeeded in removing eight of the nine children from their DCS placements. Law enforcement found the girls in Spokane, Washington, on December 1, 2022.”
Bateman also allegedly used the jailhouse phone systems to engage in witness intimidation.
On the same day he made sexual remarks to minors from jail, Bateman asked one of his wives to send a verse of scripture to a government witness: Doctrine and Covenants Section 121.
“Wo unto all those that discomfort my people, and drive, and murder, and testify against them, saith the Lord of Hosts; a generation of vipers shall not escape the damnation of hell,” the verse reads.
Prosecutors say that Bateman asked the wife to pass on that message from a blocked phone number and say “that I gave you the message to send this to her and tell her that she picked the wrong religion to hate.”
“You should also tell her that I can guarantee that her and Little Froggy have cancer already forming in their bodies,” Bateman allegedly said.
Through his attorney’s response on Saturday, Bateman didn’t appear to dispute making any of the remarks. He simply downplayed them.
“Mr. Bateman’s comments were simply venting as the messages were not intimidating and Mr. Bateman has no control over cancer,” the defense response states.
Bateman also denied that he violated the Cochino County court order, which he claims barred him from contacting “named victims,” only “if” he is able to post bond. He has been ordered detained pending trial.
Read the government’s filing https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 7.58.0.pdf
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/po ... kids-feds/
Polygamist cult leader and self-proclaimed prophet ‘brazenly’ used jailhouse phone system to have ‘sexual discussions’ with kids: Feds
ADAM KLASFELD Mar 6th, 2023, 10:52 am
Accused polygamous cult leader Sam Bateman (Screenshot via Law&Crime Network)
Polygamous cult leader Sam Bateman, a self-proclaimed prophet awaiting trial on kidnapping and other charges, “brazenly” used the jailhouse phone system to “engage in sexual discussions with children,” federal prosecutors allege.
One of the girls, identified in court papers as “Jane Doe 4,” is a 13-year-old he allegedly conspired to kidnap, court papers say.
“All those sacred times”
During the Nov. 26 conversation, Bateman placed a video call with “some” of his adult wives, and “Jane Doe 4” had been on the other line in the custody of Arizona’s Department of Child Safety. Prosecutors say that Bateman then spoke to the teen, referring to her as his “sexy darling” and making profane sexual remarks about her breasts and his desire to sexually abuse her.
“Don’t you remember all those sacred times we spent together?” Bateman is quoted telling the girl.
The conversation violated a Superior Court’s order barring Bateman from all contact with “Jane Doe 4,” a listed victim in a child abuse case in Arizona’s Coconino County, prosecutors say.
Bateman allegedly made the same obscene and vulgar sexual remarks to 16-year-old victim “Jane Doe 10.”
In 2019, Bateman declared himself a prophet of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS), a sect whose adherents practice polygamy. The government estimates that Bateman has roughly 50 followers and more 20 wives, nine of whom are minors between the ages of 12 and 16.
“Bateman allegedly has ‘impressions of Heavenly Father’s will’ to encourage his followers, including the minor children, to engage in sexual acts and relies on that submission to do his own will,” prosecutors wrote on March 3. “Bateman is a subject in a federal investigation into the transportation of minors in interstate commerce to engage in criminal sexual activity, and travel in interstate commerce to engage in illicit sexual conduct with minors, beginning around May 2020.”
Bateman has been kept in detention since he was charged in mid-September with attempting to obstruct justice. A subsequent indictment accused him and three of his adult wives — Naomi Bistline, Donnae Barlow, and Moretta Rose Johnson — with additional obstruction-related counts and a federal kidnapping charge. Prosecutors signaled that another charging document could be imminent against him and others.
Originally slated to stand trial last November, Bateman’s reckoning has been adjourned multiple times and was recently pushed back another year, until March 5, 2024.
Bateman’s attorney Marc J. Victor claims that an order prohibiting his client from contacting anyone other than his lawyers from behind bars, using the phone system operated by contractor CoreCivic, violates the Constitution.
“The restriction on Mr. Bateman’s access to all people outside CoreCivic except counsel is excessive, suggests an express intent to punish Mr. Bateman and thus denies him Due Process of Law and his First Amendment rights,” Victor wrote.
“She picked the wrong religion to hate”
Prosecutors responded to that claim with a litany of Bateman’s alleged transgressions, justifying the measure.
“During the 77 days Bateman spent in federal pre-trial detention before his communications were restricted, he participated in the kidnapping or escape of eight children; had explicit sexual conversations with children; violated a Coconino County Superior Court no-contact order; directed others to intimidate a government witness; sought to influence potential testimony; and repeatedly misused detention facility communications systems in violation of policy,” the government says.
Before being charged federally, Bateman was arrested by Arizona Department of Public Safety for child endangerment on Aug. 28, 2022, after being discovered with three young girls between the ages of 11 and 14 during a traffic stop.
In bodycam footage of that stop, Bateman could be heard telling deputies: “I’ll tell you right now, I’m not going to tell you anything.”
During his temporary detention that day, prosecutors say, Bateman instructed his followers to “delete my Signal account now, the whole thing, delete every message, right now.”
Detailing some of the allegations behind the federal kidnapping charge, prosecutors claim that Bateman engineered that plot from behind bars.
“After Bateman’s federal arrest, nine minor girls, all believed to be wives of Bateman, were taken into Arizona Department of Child Services (DCS) custody on September 14, 2022,” prosecutors wrote. “Bateman — using communications systems at the Core Civic/Central Arizona Florence Correctional Complex (CAFCC) — then conspired with others to remove the girls from DCS custody. And on November 27, at least three of Bateman’s adult wives succeeded in removing eight of the nine children from their DCS placements. Law enforcement found the girls in Spokane, Washington, on December 1, 2022.”
Bateman also allegedly used the jailhouse phone systems to engage in witness intimidation.
On the same day he made sexual remarks to minors from jail, Bateman asked one of his wives to send a verse of scripture to a government witness: Doctrine and Covenants Section 121.
“Wo unto all those that discomfort my people, and drive, and murder, and testify against them, saith the Lord of Hosts; a generation of vipers shall not escape the damnation of hell,” the verse reads.
Prosecutors say that Bateman asked the wife to pass on that message from a blocked phone number and say “that I gave you the message to send this to her and tell her that she picked the wrong religion to hate.”
“You should also tell her that I can guarantee that her and Little Froggy have cancer already forming in their bodies,” Bateman allegedly said.
Through his attorney’s response on Saturday, Bateman didn’t appear to dispute making any of the remarks. He simply downplayed them.
“Mr. Bateman’s comments were simply venting as the messages were not intimidating and Mr. Bateman has no control over cancer,” the defense response states.
Bateman also denied that he violated the Cochino County court order, which he claims barred him from contacting “named victims,” only “if” he is able to post bond. He has been ordered detained pending trial.
Read the government’s filing https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 7.58.0.pdf
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/po ... kids-feds/
by ti-amie
Faraday bags
Faraday bags are often used by law enforcement, intelligence agencies, military, and computer forensics experts to protect portable digital evidence from external meddling by blocking all radio communications from accessing the portable digital device.
by ti-amie
Notice that he's wearing handmade shoes not run of the mill house slippers...
I've expected Tiny to be wandering around in his pajamas for a long time now. Either that or the Feds making an airport interception.Owendonovan wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 5:48 pm I expect the old "mobster is too ill" to be used by many in the coming months including tiny.
Notice that he's wearing handmade shoes not run of the mill house slippers...
by ti-amie Molly White
@molly0xfff@hachyderm.io
The new team in charge of the FTX bankruptcy have released their first interim report on the failures of control at FTX and related businesses.
It's 43 pages long, let's go through it
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/65 ... ading-ltd/
The debtors reiterate the stunning lack of recordkeeping and controls at FTX: "Normally, in a bankruptcy involving a business of the size and complexity of the FTX Group, particularly a business that handles customer and investor funds, there are readily identifiable records, data sources, and processes that can be used to identify and safeguard assets of the estate. Not so with the FTX Group."
"Upon assuming control, the Debtors found a pervasive lack of records and other evidence at the FTX Group of where or how fiat currency and digital assets could be found or accessed, and extensive commingling of assets."
FTX executives "stifled dissent, commingled and misused corporate and customer funds, lied to third parties about their business, [and] joked internally about their tendency to lose track of millions of dollars in assets"
Debtors are having to cobble together financial records from what they're able to find in QuickBooks and Slack records
It sounds like the debtors are limited somewhat by the fact that laptops belonging to SBF and other high-level insiders are currently in the hands of the Bahamian Joint Provisional Liquidators, who've been less than cooperative (according to the US team, at least).
Nishad Singh, Gary Wang, and Caroline Ellison have all pled guilty and are cooperating with the DOJ, making it infeasible for the debtors to interview them for bankruptcy purposes until after the criminal trial is over. They have interviewed others, though.
FTX had "an environment in which a handful of employees had, among them, virtually limitless power to direct transfers of fiat currency and crypto assets and to hire and fire employees, with no effective oversight or controls to act as checks on how they exercised those powers."
"The FTX Group lacked independent or experienced finance, accounting, human resources, information security, or cybersecurity personnel or leadership, and lacked any internal audit function whatsoever. Board oversight, moreover, was also effectively non-existent."
“if Nishad [Singh] got hit by a bus, the whole company would be done. Same issue with Gary [Wang]."
Some new context on the sudden resignation of Brett Harrison in September 2022: he "resigned following a protracted disagreement", after which his bonus was drastically reduced.
In a separate instance, a lawyer who was hired only three months prior, who learned about the North Dimension bank accounts, was "summarily terminated after expressing concerns about Alameda’s lack of corporate controls, capable leadership, and risk management."
"At the time of the bankruptcy filing, the FTX Group did not even have current and complete lists of who its employees were."
"As a general matter, policies and procedures relating to accounting, financial reporting, treasury management, and risk management did not exist, were incomplete, or were highly generic and not appropriate for a firm handling substantial financial assets."
The small accounting firm used by FTX entities for most accounting "appears to have a small number of employees and no specialized knowledge relating to cryptocurrencies or international financial markets".
More QuickBooks shade.
"Fifty-six entities within the FTX Group did not produce financial statements of any kind. Thirty-five FTX Group entities used QuickBooks as their accounting system and relied on a hodgepodge of Google documents, Slack communications, shared drives, and Excel spreadsheets and other non-enterprise solutions to manage their assets and liabilities"
"Approximately 80,000 transactions were simply left as unprocessed accounting entries in catch-all QuickBooks accounts titled 'Ask My Accountant.'"
Sam Bankman-Fried: "Alameda is unauditable... we are only able to ballpark what its balances are, let alone something like a comprehensive transaction history. We sometimes find $50m of assets lying around that we lost track of; such is life"
"Thousands of deposit checks were collected from the FTX Group’s offices, some stale-dated for months, due to the failure of personnel to deposit checks in the ordinary course; instead, deposit checks collected like junk mail."
Transfers in the tens of millions of dollars were approved via Slack emoji, or discussed in disappearing Signal or Telegram chats.
"Only four months after the real estate purchase had closed did the employee enter into a promissory note with Alameda in which he undertook to repay the funds used to purchase the property. Other insiders received purported loans from Alameda for which no promissory notes exist."
Accounts were opened using names and email addresses that were not obviously linked to FTX, using pseudonymous email addresses, in the names of shell companies created for these purposes, or in the names of individuals (including individuals with no direct connection FTX)
"Alameda also transferred funds to insiders to fund personal investments, political contributions, and other expenditures—some of which were nominally 'papered' as personal loans with below-market interest rates and a balloon payment due years in the future."
The document reiterates known allegations about Alameda's "unique ability to trade and withdraw virtually unlimited assets [on FTX], regardless of the size of its account balance and without risk of its positions being liquidated."
@molly0xfff@hachyderm.io
The new team in charge of the FTX bankruptcy have released their first interim report on the failures of control at FTX and related businesses.
It's 43 pages long, let's go through it
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/65 ... ading-ltd/
The debtors reiterate the stunning lack of recordkeeping and controls at FTX: "Normally, in a bankruptcy involving a business of the size and complexity of the FTX Group, particularly a business that handles customer and investor funds, there are readily identifiable records, data sources, and processes that can be used to identify and safeguard assets of the estate. Not so with the FTX Group."
"Upon assuming control, the Debtors found a pervasive lack of records and other evidence at the FTX Group of where or how fiat currency and digital assets could be found or accessed, and extensive commingling of assets."
FTX executives "stifled dissent, commingled and misused corporate and customer funds, lied to third parties about their business, [and] joked internally about their tendency to lose track of millions of dollars in assets"
Debtors are having to cobble together financial records from what they're able to find in QuickBooks and Slack records
It sounds like the debtors are limited somewhat by the fact that laptops belonging to SBF and other high-level insiders are currently in the hands of the Bahamian Joint Provisional Liquidators, who've been less than cooperative (according to the US team, at least).
Nishad Singh, Gary Wang, and Caroline Ellison have all pled guilty and are cooperating with the DOJ, making it infeasible for the debtors to interview them for bankruptcy purposes until after the criminal trial is over. They have interviewed others, though.
FTX had "an environment in which a handful of employees had, among them, virtually limitless power to direct transfers of fiat currency and crypto assets and to hire and fire employees, with no effective oversight or controls to act as checks on how they exercised those powers."
"The FTX Group lacked independent or experienced finance, accounting, human resources, information security, or cybersecurity personnel or leadership, and lacked any internal audit function whatsoever. Board oversight, moreover, was also effectively non-existent."
“if Nishad [Singh] got hit by a bus, the whole company would be done. Same issue with Gary [Wang]."
Some new context on the sudden resignation of Brett Harrison in September 2022: he "resigned following a protracted disagreement", after which his bonus was drastically reduced.
In a separate instance, a lawyer who was hired only three months prior, who learned about the North Dimension bank accounts, was "summarily terminated after expressing concerns about Alameda’s lack of corporate controls, capable leadership, and risk management."
"At the time of the bankruptcy filing, the FTX Group did not even have current and complete lists of who its employees were."
"As a general matter, policies and procedures relating to accounting, financial reporting, treasury management, and risk management did not exist, were incomplete, or were highly generic and not appropriate for a firm handling substantial financial assets."
The small accounting firm used by FTX entities for most accounting "appears to have a small number of employees and no specialized knowledge relating to cryptocurrencies or international financial markets".
More QuickBooks shade.
"Fifty-six entities within the FTX Group did not produce financial statements of any kind. Thirty-five FTX Group entities used QuickBooks as their accounting system and relied on a hodgepodge of Google documents, Slack communications, shared drives, and Excel spreadsheets and other non-enterprise solutions to manage their assets and liabilities"
"Approximately 80,000 transactions were simply left as unprocessed accounting entries in catch-all QuickBooks accounts titled 'Ask My Accountant.'"
Sam Bankman-Fried: "Alameda is unauditable... we are only able to ballpark what its balances are, let alone something like a comprehensive transaction history. We sometimes find $50m of assets lying around that we lost track of; such is life"
"Thousands of deposit checks were collected from the FTX Group’s offices, some stale-dated for months, due to the failure of personnel to deposit checks in the ordinary course; instead, deposit checks collected like junk mail."
Transfers in the tens of millions of dollars were approved via Slack emoji, or discussed in disappearing Signal or Telegram chats.
"Only four months after the real estate purchase had closed did the employee enter into a promissory note with Alameda in which he undertook to repay the funds used to purchase the property. Other insiders received purported loans from Alameda for which no promissory notes exist."
Accounts were opened using names and email addresses that were not obviously linked to FTX, using pseudonymous email addresses, in the names of shell companies created for these purposes, or in the names of individuals (including individuals with no direct connection FTX)
"Alameda also transferred funds to insiders to fund personal investments, political contributions, and other expenditures—some of which were nominally 'papered' as personal loans with below-market interest rates and a balloon payment due years in the future."
The document reiterates known allegations about Alameda's "unique ability to trade and withdraw virtually unlimited assets [on FTX], regardless of the size of its account balance and without risk of its positions being liquidated."
by ti-amie Teri Kanefield
@Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
I am going to be a stickler for using words correctly.
When you lose in a civil case, you generally have to pay money.
Paying money is a consequence. Dominion sued for money.
I've attached a copy of what Dominion demanded in its lawsuit.
(The demand is always more than they think they'll get.)
The consequence may not achieve what we were hoping it would achieve, but it was still a consequence and the logical outcome of a civil case.
It means Fox lost.
We can hope that there will be more far reaching consequences to Fox as a result of this lawsuit, and the Smartmatic suit coming up, but saving democracy is tedious work and up to each of us.
My husband was looking at the numbers and just told me that Dominion's peak revenue in 2022 was 17.5 million with 100 employees.
The settlement was for $787.5 million, which will take care of Dominion employees who were harmed.
The idea behind a lawsuit isn't to punish or hurt the bad guy but to make the injured party whole.
There are punitive damages, but generally the idea is that if you cause an injury you have to pay the cost of making the injured person whole.
Sometimes it takes a lot of money to do that.
@Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
I am going to be a stickler for using words correctly.
When you lose in a civil case, you generally have to pay money.
Paying money is a consequence. Dominion sued for money.
I've attached a copy of what Dominion demanded in its lawsuit.
(The demand is always more than they think they'll get.)
The consequence may not achieve what we were hoping it would achieve, but it was still a consequence and the logical outcome of a civil case.
It means Fox lost.
We can hope that there will be more far reaching consequences to Fox as a result of this lawsuit, and the Smartmatic suit coming up, but saving democracy is tedious work and up to each of us.
My husband was looking at the numbers and just told me that Dominion's peak revenue in 2022 was 17.5 million with 100 employees.
The settlement was for $787.5 million, which will take care of Dominion employees who were harmed.
The idea behind a lawsuit isn't to punish or hurt the bad guy but to make the injured party whole.
There are punitive damages, but generally the idea is that if you cause an injury you have to pay the cost of making the injured person whole.
Sometimes it takes a lot of money to do that.
by ti-amie
Some non professional responses:
Some non professional responses:
Timothy Morgan @Coltsplaya22
And Fox is immediately back to saying they did nothing wrong as they defend the exact same suit against Smartmatic. They really learned their lesson
OldManYellsAtCloud
@CloudsAreJerks
Won't this just be seen as a cost of their business?
If they'd gone to trial and admitted they lied, got Tucker to admit it.. it could affect their future revenue for years to come.
They make money lying. This time it cost them, but the benefit seems to outweigh the cost. Sadly
Ken Cox@KenCox
Fox bought its way out of embarrassment. Murdoch has more money that he can ever spend so the financial cost was irrelevant.
@KenCoxListen occasionally, you may learn something... @LotaInsLotaOuts
I'd counter that this outcome, or something equally painful, has been clear since the depos came out, yet Fox made no efforts to change their on-air content or meter their rhetoric
Its business as usual, which suggest its not a material penalty to them.
AI-powered dogwashing startup
@EddyRobinson
What matters to Fox is what the audience believes, and they don't care about words and figures.
Video of Murdoch, Hannity, or Carlson melting on the witness stand would have got through to them. This just means slightly longer ad breaks.
by ti-amie Since he is obviously a flight risk he should be remanded. #wishfulthinking
He is set to appear in court later this afternoon, probably in time for the local news cycle that starts at 5p (yes I'm that cynical)
He is set to appear in court later this afternoon, probably in time for the local news cycle that starts at 5p (yes I'm that cynical)
by ti-amie
I swear do these people have brains? How many passports does he have and what names are they under? There are a lot of ways to cut and run between NYC/Long Island and Washington DC.NeverForget1/6Auto-Coup
@trott1073
·
2m
George Santos claims "Witch Hunt". He stole from donors and taxpayers. Judge restricted his movements to NYC, Long Island, & D.C. unless he gets permission. Had to surrender his passport & agreed to random home visits https://thedailybeast.com/george-santos ... ia=desktop via
@thedailybeast
by ponchi101 Ok. Let's see.
You are telling me that AI could actually REPLACE LAWYERS?
(Thoughts on changing my mind.... )
You are telling me that AI could actually REPLACE LAWYERS?
(Thoughts on changing my mind....
)
by ponchi101 I could cry!!
by ponchi101
by ti-amie That other criminal is busy trying to bait Judge Chutkan to respond to his attacks on her so that he can have his "lawyers" try and move the trial to West Virginia (no lie). Can't have all of those people in DC sitting in judgement of him dont'cha know.
The judge in the NYC case told him to pound sand. He was trying to get him removed because he donated $35.00 to the Democrats and the firm his daughter works for did PR work for the Dems at some point.
The judge in the NYC case told him to pound sand. He was trying to get him removed because he donated $35.00 to the Democrats and the firm his daughter works for did PR work for the Dems at some point.
by ti-amie 
by ti-amie Roger Parloff
@rparloff
JUST IN: Colo state judge finds Trump ENGAGED IN INSURRECTION but WAS NOT an “officer of the United States” within meaning of § 3 of 14th Amendment. Thus, DENIES effort to keep him off ballot.
@rparloff
JUST IN: Colo state judge finds Trump ENGAGED IN INSURRECTION but WAS NOT an “officer of the United States” within meaning of § 3 of 14th Amendment. Thus, DENIES effort to keep him off ballot.
by ti-amie Ryan Goodman
@rgoodlaw
·
6m
Wow on this part of the Colorado court ruling:
"The Court finds that Petitioners have established that Trump engaged in an insurrection on January 6, 2021 through incitement, and that the First Amendment does not protect Trump’s speech."
https://courts.state.co.us/userfiles/fi ... 0Order.pdf
@rgoodlaw
·
6m
Wow on this part of the Colorado court ruling:
"The Court finds that Petitioners have established that Trump engaged in an insurrection on January 6, 2021 through incitement, and that the First Amendment does not protect Trump’s speech."
https://courts.state.co.us/userfiles/fi ... 0Order.pdf
by ti-amie Mueller, She Wrote
@MuellerSheWrote
·
1m
BREAKING: My preliminary reading is that the Colorado court found that Trump DID incite the insurrection, but that the president as an officer of the United States under section 3 of the 14th Amendment, so he will be on the ballot.
@MuellerSheWrote
·
1m
BREAKING: My preliminary reading is that the Colorado court found that Trump DID incite the insurrection, but that the president as an officer of the United States under section 3 of the 14th Amendment, so he will be on the ballot.
by ti-amie GOP operative found guilty of funneling Russian money to Donald Trump
By Rachel Weiner
November 17, 2022 at 4:01 p.m. EST
Jesse Benton at a federal courthouse in Des Moines in 2016. (David Pitt/AP)
A Republican political strategist was convicted of illegally helping a Russian businessman contribute to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in 2016.
Jesse Benton, 44, was pardoned by Trump in 2020 for a different campaign finance crime, months before he was indicted again on six counts related to facilitating an illegal foreign campaign donation. He was found guilty Thursday on all six counts.
Elections “reflect the values and the priorities and the beliefs of American citizens,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Michelle Parikh said in her closing argument this week. “Jesse Benton by his actions did damage to those principles.”
The evidence at trial showed that Benton bought a $25,000 ticket to a September 2016 Republican National Committee (RNC) event on behalf of Roman Vasilenko, a Russian naval officer turned multilevel marketer. (Vasilenko is under investigation in Russia for allegedly running a pyramid scheme, according to the Kommersant newspaper; he could not be reached for comment.) The donation got Vasilenko a picture with Trump and entrance to a “business roundtable” with the future president.
Vasilenko connected with Benton through Doug Wead, an evangelical ally of the Bush family who was also involved in multilevel marketing. Vasilenko sent $100,000 to Benton, who was working for a pro-Trump super PAC at the time, supposedly for consulting services. Benton subsequently donated $25,000 to the RNC by credit card to cover the ticket.
Witnesses from the RNC and the firm hired to organize the event said they weren’t told Vasilenko was a Russian citizen. Benton said in an email to his RNC contact that Vasilenko was “a friend who spends most of his time in the Caribbean”; he described Vasilenko’s interpreter as “a body gal.” In fact, according to the testimony, Benton and Vasilenko had never met.
Benton argued that he followed the advice of his previous counsel, David A. Warrington, who has also represented Trump. Warrington testified that Benton contacted him at the time to ask if he could give a ticket to a political fundraiser to a Russian citizen. Warrington said he told Benton “there is no prohibition on a Russian citizen receiving a ticket to an event” and that “you can give your ticket that you purchased to a fundraiser to anybody.”
Prosecutors said Benton failed to tell Warrington that he was getting reimbursed by the Russian citizen for the donation. Benton asked for the advice only “to cover his tracks,” Parikh said.
Benton also claimed that he earned the $100,000 acting as a tour guide in Washington for Vasilenko, whose interest was not politics but self-promotion.
Wead — who died at age 75 last December after he was indicted with Benton — had previously discussed with Vasilenko the possibility of a photograph with Oprah Winfrey, Michelle Obama or Steven Seagal before suggesting Trump.
“If Oprah was available,” defense attorney Brian Stolarz said in his closing argument, “we wouldn’t even be here.”
Vasilenko posted the photograph of himself with Trump on Instagram with a banner that said “Two Presidents” and advertised his own company. He said Benton “delivered on what he was asked to do,” which was “get him in a picture with a celebrity” so Vasilenko “could brag on Instagram.” To Vasilenko, he said, Trump was not a politician but “the guy who used to be on ‘The Apprentice.’ ” At the roundtable, he said Trump appeared only briefly and “just talked about polls.”
Stolarz emphasized that there was no evidence Vasilenko ever engaged with Trump outside the single event, and no evidence the RNC ever returned the donation. Witnesses from the RNC said they were in the dark about the origin of the funds.
“He wants to be an influencer,” Stolarz said. “This is just shameless self-promotion from a guy who can afford to take this picture.”
But prosecutors said that once it was offered, Vasilenko saw the value of an introduction to Trump. He was running for parliament in Russia at the time, according to the Justice Department, and after Trump’s election was invited on Russian television.
“He’s sophisticated,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Michelle Wasserman told jurors. “He got access to someone he helped elect.”
Benton’s defense downplayed the $25,000 as “nothing” in an election that cost billions.
“This is not some nefarious backroom scheme to funnel millions of dollars from Russia,” he said.
Prosecutors argued that every dollar counted in a race where Democrat Hillary Clinton was far ahead in fundraising, and that Benton knew Trump needed money at the time.
Stolarz said Benton was also paid to organize a charity dinner Vasilenko attended on his U.S. trip, which prosecutors dismissed as a cheap meal at a chain restaurant.
“They may try to downplay it, but Maggiano’s is good,” Stolarz said.
Benton began his career on the GOP’s libertarian fringe as an aide to former congressman Ron Paul (R-Tex.), whose granddaughter is Benton’s wife. He gained mainstream credibility helping Paul’s son, Rand Paul (R-Ky.), win a Senate seat in 2010 and was hired by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) 2014 reelection campaign.
But Benton resigned before that election amid an investigation into whether an Iowa state senator was bribed to support Ron Paul in the 2012 presidential race. Benton was convicted in May 2016 of conspiracy and involvement in filing of false campaign finance reports — not long before the new scheme began.
“He knew the law,” Wasserman said. “He knew the rules.”
After the verdict, Stolarz said Benton “maintains his innocence and plans to appeal.”
Robyn Dixon contributed to this report.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va ... ko-guilty/
By Rachel Weiner
November 17, 2022 at 4:01 p.m. EST
Jesse Benton at a federal courthouse in Des Moines in 2016. (David Pitt/AP)
A Republican political strategist was convicted of illegally helping a Russian businessman contribute to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in 2016.
Jesse Benton, 44, was pardoned by Trump in 2020 for a different campaign finance crime, months before he was indicted again on six counts related to facilitating an illegal foreign campaign donation. He was found guilty Thursday on all six counts.
Elections “reflect the values and the priorities and the beliefs of American citizens,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Michelle Parikh said in her closing argument this week. “Jesse Benton by his actions did damage to those principles.”
The evidence at trial showed that Benton bought a $25,000 ticket to a September 2016 Republican National Committee (RNC) event on behalf of Roman Vasilenko, a Russian naval officer turned multilevel marketer. (Vasilenko is under investigation in Russia for allegedly running a pyramid scheme, according to the Kommersant newspaper; he could not be reached for comment.) The donation got Vasilenko a picture with Trump and entrance to a “business roundtable” with the future president.
Vasilenko connected with Benton through Doug Wead, an evangelical ally of the Bush family who was also involved in multilevel marketing. Vasilenko sent $100,000 to Benton, who was working for a pro-Trump super PAC at the time, supposedly for consulting services. Benton subsequently donated $25,000 to the RNC by credit card to cover the ticket.
Witnesses from the RNC and the firm hired to organize the event said they weren’t told Vasilenko was a Russian citizen. Benton said in an email to his RNC contact that Vasilenko was “a friend who spends most of his time in the Caribbean”; he described Vasilenko’s interpreter as “a body gal.” In fact, according to the testimony, Benton and Vasilenko had never met.
Benton argued that he followed the advice of his previous counsel, David A. Warrington, who has also represented Trump. Warrington testified that Benton contacted him at the time to ask if he could give a ticket to a political fundraiser to a Russian citizen. Warrington said he told Benton “there is no prohibition on a Russian citizen receiving a ticket to an event” and that “you can give your ticket that you purchased to a fundraiser to anybody.”
Prosecutors said Benton failed to tell Warrington that he was getting reimbursed by the Russian citizen for the donation. Benton asked for the advice only “to cover his tracks,” Parikh said.
Benton also claimed that he earned the $100,000 acting as a tour guide in Washington for Vasilenko, whose interest was not politics but self-promotion.
Wead — who died at age 75 last December after he was indicted with Benton — had previously discussed with Vasilenko the possibility of a photograph with Oprah Winfrey, Michelle Obama or Steven Seagal before suggesting Trump.
“If Oprah was available,” defense attorney Brian Stolarz said in his closing argument, “we wouldn’t even be here.”
Vasilenko posted the photograph of himself with Trump on Instagram with a banner that said “Two Presidents” and advertised his own company. He said Benton “delivered on what he was asked to do,” which was “get him in a picture with a celebrity” so Vasilenko “could brag on Instagram.” To Vasilenko, he said, Trump was not a politician but “the guy who used to be on ‘The Apprentice.’ ” At the roundtable, he said Trump appeared only briefly and “just talked about polls.”
Stolarz emphasized that there was no evidence Vasilenko ever engaged with Trump outside the single event, and no evidence the RNC ever returned the donation. Witnesses from the RNC said they were in the dark about the origin of the funds.
“He wants to be an influencer,” Stolarz said. “This is just shameless self-promotion from a guy who can afford to take this picture.”
But prosecutors said that once it was offered, Vasilenko saw the value of an introduction to Trump. He was running for parliament in Russia at the time, according to the Justice Department, and after Trump’s election was invited on Russian television.
“He’s sophisticated,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Michelle Wasserman told jurors. “He got access to someone he helped elect.”
Benton’s defense downplayed the $25,000 as “nothing” in an election that cost billions.
“This is not some nefarious backroom scheme to funnel millions of dollars from Russia,” he said.
Prosecutors argued that every dollar counted in a race where Democrat Hillary Clinton was far ahead in fundraising, and that Benton knew Trump needed money at the time.
Stolarz said Benton was also paid to organize a charity dinner Vasilenko attended on his U.S. trip, which prosecutors dismissed as a cheap meal at a chain restaurant.
“They may try to downplay it, but Maggiano’s is good,” Stolarz said.
Benton began his career on the GOP’s libertarian fringe as an aide to former congressman Ron Paul (R-Tex.), whose granddaughter is Benton’s wife. He gained mainstream credibility helping Paul’s son, Rand Paul (R-Ky.), win a Senate seat in 2010 and was hired by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) 2014 reelection campaign.
But Benton resigned before that election amid an investigation into whether an Iowa state senator was bribed to support Ron Paul in the 2012 presidential race. Benton was convicted in May 2016 of conspiracy and involvement in filing of false campaign finance reports — not long before the new scheme began.
“He knew the law,” Wasserman said. “He knew the rules.”
After the verdict, Stolarz said Benton “maintains his innocence and plans to appeal.”
Robyn Dixon contributed to this report.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va ... ko-guilty/
by ti-amie This could go under "World News" as well. 40 years this man was at it.
I read through the complaint, and it's bad - very bad.
It's a 3 count complaint:
- 18 USC 371 (conspiracy to act as foreign agent/defraud the US)
- 18 USC 951 (acting as illegal agent of foreign govt
- 18 USC 1542 (use of passport obtained via false statement)
1/
This is a big big deal.
"ROCHA consistently referred to the [US] as 'the enemy,' and used the term 'we' to describe himself and Cuba. ROCHA additionally praised Fidel Castro as the 'Comandante'"
FBI used a false flag UC posing as a Cuban DGI officer.
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... harges.pdf
Cuba has several intelligence and counterintelligence entities; the complaint identifies the Directorate of Intelligence/Dirección General de Inteligencia (commonly known as the DGI) as the entity Rocha allegedly worked for.
2/
Rocha worked for Dept of State from 1981-2002 - the entire time also allegedly working for the DGI.
He was the NSC Director of Inter-American Affairs (the FBI even traveled down to Santo Domingo to update his clearance), later at the US Interests Section in Havana.
3/
The complaint is vague as to when the FBI became aware of Rocha - "Prior to Nov 2022, FBI received information that Rocha was a covert agent of the DGI" - but on Nov 15, an FBI undercover employee contacted him on WhatsApp pretending to be a DGI representative.
4/
The UC established his bona fides with Rocha in part by noting "I know that you have been a great friend of ours since your time in Chile," with a footnote explaining Rocha lived in Chile in 1973 - 8 years before he joined State and the beginning of the alleged activity.
5/
The complaint doesn't say what happened in Chile in 1973, or what the FBI knows about it - but it set Rocha's mind at ease about the UC being DGI, or at least needing to play along in case the DGI had a mole:
"They must have told you something because you mentioned Chile"
6/
Rocha had 3 mtgs with the UC, conducting surveillance detection routes (SDRs) going to mtgs w/ the UC and telling the UC about his tradecraft training, including "I have always...received sufficient training to know that you must be on the alert to - to provocations."
Oops.
7/
Rocha helpfully notes his last contact with DGI was in 2016 or 2017 in Havana, and that he entered Cuba using a Dominican rather than US passport.
8/
And proceeds to lay out his various views about the ongoing Cuban revolution and glorious aspects of the socialist workers paradise.
9/
Rocha told the UC that “since the Dirección asked me…to lead a normal life…I have - have created the legend of a right-wing person.”
Good thing no intel service would ever think of using that legend to get someone onto the Mar-a-Lago grounds.
10/
In perhaps the most chilling part of the complaint, Rocha notes,
“They [the US] underestimated what we could do to them. We did more than they thought…What we have done…it’s enormous…More than a grand slam.”
11/
The complaint raises several troubling questions:
- did the DGI direct Rocha to join the State Department? It certainly appears so: “I knew exactly how to do it and obviously the Dirección accompanied me”
12/
- did Rocha pass classified to the DGI? The complaint doesn’t allege it, but given the depth of his devotion to Cuba, and the span of his access - he had “special responsibility” for Cuba while on the NSC, and later advised the Southcom Cdr - the USIC has to assume he did.
13/
- why did it take so long to discover Rocha, and what does that say about the reliability of other past and current sources? Great Cuban compartmentation, but this also wouldn’t be the first time Cuba played a variety of double agents against the US.
https://washingtonpost.com/archive/poli ... 7a6d0c407/
14/
I doubt we’ll ever know the extent of the damage caused by Rocha.
But it sure looks like Cuba planted an applicant into the State Department, nurtured him into the NSC, and eventually had a US Ambassador as an agent.
And ran him and kept it quiet for more than 40 years.
15/end
Pete Strzok @petestrzok"Newly unsealed court papers allege that Manuel Rocha engaged in 'clandestine activity' on Cuba’s behalf since at least 1981, including by meeting with Cuban intelligence operatives and providing false information to U.S. government officials."
1981!
I read through the complaint, and it's bad - very bad.
It's a 3 count complaint:
- 18 USC 371 (conspiracy to act as foreign agent/defraud the US)
- 18 USC 951 (acting as illegal agent of foreign govt
- 18 USC 1542 (use of passport obtained via false statement)
1/
This is a big big deal.
"ROCHA consistently referred to the [US] as 'the enemy,' and used the term 'we' to describe himself and Cuba. ROCHA additionally praised Fidel Castro as the 'Comandante'"
FBI used a false flag UC posing as a Cuban DGI officer.
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... harges.pdf
Cuba has several intelligence and counterintelligence entities; the complaint identifies the Directorate of Intelligence/Dirección General de Inteligencia (commonly known as the DGI) as the entity Rocha allegedly worked for.
2/
Rocha worked for Dept of State from 1981-2002 - the entire time also allegedly working for the DGI.
He was the NSC Director of Inter-American Affairs (the FBI even traveled down to Santo Domingo to update his clearance), later at the US Interests Section in Havana.
3/
The complaint is vague as to when the FBI became aware of Rocha - "Prior to Nov 2022, FBI received information that Rocha was a covert agent of the DGI" - but on Nov 15, an FBI undercover employee contacted him on WhatsApp pretending to be a DGI representative.
4/
The UC established his bona fides with Rocha in part by noting "I know that you have been a great friend of ours since your time in Chile," with a footnote explaining Rocha lived in Chile in 1973 - 8 years before he joined State and the beginning of the alleged activity.
5/
The complaint doesn't say what happened in Chile in 1973, or what the FBI knows about it - but it set Rocha's mind at ease about the UC being DGI, or at least needing to play along in case the DGI had a mole:
"They must have told you something because you mentioned Chile"
6/
Rocha had 3 mtgs with the UC, conducting surveillance detection routes (SDRs) going to mtgs w/ the UC and telling the UC about his tradecraft training, including "I have always...received sufficient training to know that you must be on the alert to - to provocations."
Oops.
7/
Rocha helpfully notes his last contact with DGI was in 2016 or 2017 in Havana, and that he entered Cuba using a Dominican rather than US passport.
8/
And proceeds to lay out his various views about the ongoing Cuban revolution and glorious aspects of the socialist workers paradise.
9/
Rocha told the UC that “since the Dirección asked me…to lead a normal life…I have - have created the legend of a right-wing person.”
Good thing no intel service would ever think of using that legend to get someone onto the Mar-a-Lago grounds.
10/
In perhaps the most chilling part of the complaint, Rocha notes,
“They [the US] underestimated what we could do to them. We did more than they thought…What we have done…it’s enormous…More than a grand slam.”
11/
The complaint raises several troubling questions:
- did the DGI direct Rocha to join the State Department? It certainly appears so: “I knew exactly how to do it and obviously the Dirección accompanied me”
12/
- did Rocha pass classified to the DGI? The complaint doesn’t allege it, but given the depth of his devotion to Cuba, and the span of his access - he had “special responsibility” for Cuba while on the NSC, and later advised the Southcom Cdr - the USIC has to assume he did.
13/
- why did it take so long to discover Rocha, and what does that say about the reliability of other past and current sources? Great Cuban compartmentation, but this also wouldn’t be the first time Cuba played a variety of double agents against the US.
https://washingtonpost.com/archive/poli ... 7a6d0c407/
14/
I doubt we’ll ever know the extent of the damage caused by Rocha.
But it sure looks like Cuba planted an applicant into the State Department, nurtured him into the NSC, and eventually had a US Ambassador as an agent.
And ran him and kept it quiet for more than 40 years.
15/end
by ti-amie I had to delete some of the links due to our limit. In case you don't know who Peter Strzok is. Reading between the lines tells you what you need to know about him.
Pete Strzok
@petestrzok
26 year FBI and Army veteran. Georgetown School of Foreign Service adjunct professor and alum. NYT/WP bestseller: Compromised
by ashkor87
The Colorado Supreme Court has reversed that... said it is obvious that the President is indeed a federal officer.ti-amie wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2023 12:20 am Mueller, She Wrote
@MuellerSheWrote
·
1m
BREAKING: My preliminary reading is that the Colorado court found that Trump DID incite the insurrection, but that the president as an officer of the United States under section 3 of the 14th Amendment, so he will be on the ballot.
by ti-amie Joyce Alene
@JoyceWhiteVance
Last night we learned DOJ re-arrested Smirnov after his release. Now we know why. A California judge seems to be suggesting his lawyers are complicit in his efforts to flee, in a remarkable line ordering detention for the FBI source whose lies propelled Biden impeachment efforts.
@JoyceWhiteVance
Last night we learned DOJ re-arrested Smirnov after his release. Now we know why. A California judge seems to be suggesting his lawyers are complicit in his efforts to flee, in a remarkable line ordering detention for the FBI source whose lies propelled Biden impeachment efforts.
by ti-amie This would be a seizure by the Feds not NYS and why seizing that building could be complicated.
ClearingTheFog
@clearing_fog
Not an April Fools Joke
“DOJ said an apartment at Trump Tower bought for the Congolese president’s daughter is a candidate to be seized by the federal government because it was allegedly used to launder funds stolen from the country.”
ClearingTheFog
@clearing_fog
Not an April Fools Joke
“DOJ said an apartment at Trump Tower bought for the Congolese president’s daughter is a candidate to be seized by the federal government because it was allegedly used to launder funds stolen from the country.”
WaterBluSky.bsky.social.
@MsMariaT
DOJ moves to seize the Trump Tower apartment of Denis Sassou Nguesso, former president of Congo who is accused of embezzling hundreds of millions of dollars from his country's treasury, using a Portuguese shell company https://forbes.com/sites/maryroeloffs/2 ... -treasury/
by ti-amie
What’s also ridiculous about this couple complaining about being arrested for packing bullets on their trip to Turks and Caicos is they broke U.S. law too.
In order to fly with them here in the U.S., they’re supposed to be in a checked bag in a TSA approved container.
Not in a plastic Ziplock bag like they admitted to transporting them in.
And they had to DECLARE the ammo to the airline as well, if their airline even allowed it in the first place.
So not only did he break the law there by bringing it into the country, but he did it here too.
Zero sympathy.
How did they get out of the States/past TSA? The last time I flew TSA was checking all black women's hair because we all travel concealing razor blades there.
What’s also ridiculous about this couple complaining about being arrested for packing bullets on their trip to Turks and Caicos is they broke U.S. law too.
In order to fly with them here in the U.S., they’re supposed to be in a checked bag in a TSA approved container.
Not in a plastic Ziplock bag like they admitted to transporting them in.
And they had to DECLARE the ammo to the airline as well, if their airline even allowed it in the first place.
So not only did he break the law there by bringing it into the country, but he did it here too.
Zero sympathy.
How did they get out of the States/past TSA? The last time I flew TSA was checking all black women's hair because we all travel concealing razor blades there.
by ti-amie The criming was nonstop.
Former Trump aides charged in Wisconsin over 2020 elector plot
Attorney Kenneth Chesebro is among three aides charged in Wisconsin. Separate cases related to Trump’s 2020 efforts have been filed in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada and Georgia.
By Patrick Marley
Updated June 4, 2024 at 5:33 p.m. EDT|Published June 4, 2024 at 10:33 a.m. EDT
Kenneth Chesebro, a lawyer for Donald Trump's 2020 reelection campaign, appears before Judge Scott McAfee in Fulton County, Ga., in 2023. (Alyssa Pointer/Pool/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)
MADISON, Wis. — Wisconsin’s attorney general filed conspiracy charges Tuesday against a former aide and two attorneys who advised Donald Trump over a meeting of Republicans claiming to be the state’s 2020 presidential electors even though Trump had lost the state.
The charges are the first in Wisconsin related to the meeting of electors. Prosecutors have separately charged Republicans who were involved in similar efforts in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada and Georgia.
Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul (D) charged Trump campaign aide Michael Roman and attorneys Kenneth Chesebro and James Troupis with one felony count each of conspiracy to commit forgery, according to the criminal complaints.
Kaul said at a news conference on the steps of the state Capitol his investigation could result in more charges. Asked about the possibility of charges against the former president, Kaul said, “As I said, I’m not going to speak to any specific individual, but the investigation is ongoing, and decisions will be made based on the facts and the law, not on the identity of any individual.”
If convicted, each faces a maximum sentence of six years in prison and a $10,000 fine. They are slated to make initial court appearances in September, and their cases will probably stretch past this fall’s election unless they reach plea deals.
Troupis and Chesebro did not respond to messages, and an attorney for Chesebro declined to comment. Roman’s attorney, Kurt Altman, said he and Roman just learned of the charges and are reviewing them.
After narrowly losing the 2020 election in Wisconsin, Trump sought recounts in the state’s two most Democratic areas and used that process to try to throw out hundreds of thousands of absentee ballots. The state Supreme Court rejected his efforts on Dec. 14, 2020, the day presidential electors around the country were to meet.
An hour after that ruling, 10 Republicans gathered in the state Capitol to sign paperwork claiming they were the state’s true electors. Trump allies held similar meetings in six other states and then sent official-looking paperwork claiming to be their states’ true electors to Congress, the National Archives and others.
Trump’s supporters used those filings to falsely claim the outcome of the 2020 election was in doubt and try to prevent Congress from certifying the results. Their efforts culminated with the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
Troupis, Chesebro and Roman helped develop the elector strategy, according to public records. Troupis served a brief stint as a judge and has long been a go-to lawyer for Wisconsin Republicans; he was Trump’s lead attorney for the recount and legal challenge in Wisconsin.
Chesebro helped devise the overall plan and documented the Wisconsin meeting on his cellphone, according to photos and records. He wrote memos to Troupis soon after the election that provided the framework for having Republicans meet in states that Trump lost to Joe Biden. Roman, who served as Trump’s director of Election Day operations in 2020, helped coordinate elector meetings around the country, according to documents.
Chesebro was charged last year with racketeering and other crimes in Georgia and as part of a deal pleaded guilty in October to a felony count of conspiring to file false documents. Roman has been charged with racketeering and other crimes in Georgia, and conspiracy, forgery and other crimes in Arizona. He has pleaded not guilty in Georgia and is expected to do the same Friday in Arizona.
Two days before the Republicans met as electors, Chesebro told Roman in a text message that he thought they should change the wording in the paperwork for the would-be electors in all states, according to the criminal complaints in Wisconsin. The issue arose after Republicans in Pennsylvania said they wanted the documents to specifically note they were meant to be used only if the election results were overturned.
Roman told Chesebro he didn’t support changing the language for other states in a Dec. 12, 2020, text message to Chesebro that is quoted in the criminal complaints.
In a text message the next day, Chesebro told Roman that Vice President Mike Pence or a senator acting as president of the Senate could refuse to count the electoral votes for some states and push their legislatures to decide who should serve as electors, according to the complaints. The effort could flip the presidential election from Biden to Trump.
“That’s the possible endgame I saw early on, which is why the Dec. 14 vote is so critical,” Chesebro texted Roman.
In an email days earlier, Chesebro credited Troupis with first outlining the plan to have the Republicans meet as electors, according to prosecutors.
Two days after the Republicans met as electors, Troupis, Chesebro and others met with Trump in the Oval Office. Days later, Troupis told Chesebro that “nothing about our meeting with the President can be shared with anyone,” according to the complaints.
The complaints detail the planning that went into the Wisconsin meeting and the extensive efforts to get the paperwork to Washington when it didn’t show up quickly through the mail. But the complaints do not mention Troupis’s efforts to get a copy of the paperwork to Pence through Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) on Jan. 6, 2021. An aide to Pence that day told Johnson’s chief of staff not to hand the documents over to Pence.
Wisconsin’s attorney general took a slower and more targeted approach to his investigation compared to those in other states. Unlike his counterparts, Kaul did not charge any of the 10 Wisconsin Republicans who signed the elector paperwork and instead went after those who arranged for them to meet.
Among those who signed the paperwork was Andrew Hitt, the chairman of the state Republican Party at the time. In December, he said he and the others “were tricked and misled into participating in what became the alternate elector scheme and would have never taken any actions had we known that there were ulterior reasons beyond preserving an ongoing legal strategy.”
Hitt made the comment after reaching a settlement with two of the state’s true electors who filed a lawsuit against Republicans. Under the settlement, Hitt and the others agreed not to serve as electors any time Trump is on the ballot and told the National Archives they were rescinding their false paperwork claiming to be electors.
Troupis and Chesebro reached a separate settlement in March in that lawsuit. As part of the agreement, they released hundreds of pages of documents about the endeavor.
The county clerks whose areas were targeted for recounts by Trump praised the decision to bring charges, saying they would deter others from trying to overturn elections. “Attempting to engage in insurrection or coups are deeply un-American and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law,” said a statement from Dane County Clerk Scott McDonell (D) and Milwaukee County Clerk George Christenson (D).
Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers (D) was terse about the development, releasing a one-word statement about the news. “Good,” he said.
Yvonne Wingett Sanchez in Phoenix contributed to this report.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... -electors/
Former Trump aides charged in Wisconsin over 2020 elector plot
Attorney Kenneth Chesebro is among three aides charged in Wisconsin. Separate cases related to Trump’s 2020 efforts have been filed in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada and Georgia.
By Patrick Marley
Updated June 4, 2024 at 5:33 p.m. EDT|Published June 4, 2024 at 10:33 a.m. EDT
Kenneth Chesebro, a lawyer for Donald Trump's 2020 reelection campaign, appears before Judge Scott McAfee in Fulton County, Ga., in 2023. (Alyssa Pointer/Pool/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)
MADISON, Wis. — Wisconsin’s attorney general filed conspiracy charges Tuesday against a former aide and two attorneys who advised Donald Trump over a meeting of Republicans claiming to be the state’s 2020 presidential electors even though Trump had lost the state.
The charges are the first in Wisconsin related to the meeting of electors. Prosecutors have separately charged Republicans who were involved in similar efforts in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada and Georgia.
Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul (D) charged Trump campaign aide Michael Roman and attorneys Kenneth Chesebro and James Troupis with one felony count each of conspiracy to commit forgery, according to the criminal complaints.
Kaul said at a news conference on the steps of the state Capitol his investigation could result in more charges. Asked about the possibility of charges against the former president, Kaul said, “As I said, I’m not going to speak to any specific individual, but the investigation is ongoing, and decisions will be made based on the facts and the law, not on the identity of any individual.”
If convicted, each faces a maximum sentence of six years in prison and a $10,000 fine. They are slated to make initial court appearances in September, and their cases will probably stretch past this fall’s election unless they reach plea deals.
Troupis and Chesebro did not respond to messages, and an attorney for Chesebro declined to comment. Roman’s attorney, Kurt Altman, said he and Roman just learned of the charges and are reviewing them.
After narrowly losing the 2020 election in Wisconsin, Trump sought recounts in the state’s two most Democratic areas and used that process to try to throw out hundreds of thousands of absentee ballots. The state Supreme Court rejected his efforts on Dec. 14, 2020, the day presidential electors around the country were to meet.
An hour after that ruling, 10 Republicans gathered in the state Capitol to sign paperwork claiming they were the state’s true electors. Trump allies held similar meetings in six other states and then sent official-looking paperwork claiming to be their states’ true electors to Congress, the National Archives and others.
Trump’s supporters used those filings to falsely claim the outcome of the 2020 election was in doubt and try to prevent Congress from certifying the results. Their efforts culminated with the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
Troupis, Chesebro and Roman helped develop the elector strategy, according to public records. Troupis served a brief stint as a judge and has long been a go-to lawyer for Wisconsin Republicans; he was Trump’s lead attorney for the recount and legal challenge in Wisconsin.
Chesebro helped devise the overall plan and documented the Wisconsin meeting on his cellphone, according to photos and records. He wrote memos to Troupis soon after the election that provided the framework for having Republicans meet in states that Trump lost to Joe Biden. Roman, who served as Trump’s director of Election Day operations in 2020, helped coordinate elector meetings around the country, according to documents.
Chesebro was charged last year with racketeering and other crimes in Georgia and as part of a deal pleaded guilty in October to a felony count of conspiring to file false documents. Roman has been charged with racketeering and other crimes in Georgia, and conspiracy, forgery and other crimes in Arizona. He has pleaded not guilty in Georgia and is expected to do the same Friday in Arizona.
Two days before the Republicans met as electors, Chesebro told Roman in a text message that he thought they should change the wording in the paperwork for the would-be electors in all states, according to the criminal complaints in Wisconsin. The issue arose after Republicans in Pennsylvania said they wanted the documents to specifically note they were meant to be used only if the election results were overturned.
Roman told Chesebro he didn’t support changing the language for other states in a Dec. 12, 2020, text message to Chesebro that is quoted in the criminal complaints.
In a text message the next day, Chesebro told Roman that Vice President Mike Pence or a senator acting as president of the Senate could refuse to count the electoral votes for some states and push their legislatures to decide who should serve as electors, according to the complaints. The effort could flip the presidential election from Biden to Trump.
“That’s the possible endgame I saw early on, which is why the Dec. 14 vote is so critical,” Chesebro texted Roman.
In an email days earlier, Chesebro credited Troupis with first outlining the plan to have the Republicans meet as electors, according to prosecutors.
Two days after the Republicans met as electors, Troupis, Chesebro and others met with Trump in the Oval Office. Days later, Troupis told Chesebro that “nothing about our meeting with the President can be shared with anyone,” according to the complaints.
The complaints detail the planning that went into the Wisconsin meeting and the extensive efforts to get the paperwork to Washington when it didn’t show up quickly through the mail. But the complaints do not mention Troupis’s efforts to get a copy of the paperwork to Pence through Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) on Jan. 6, 2021. An aide to Pence that day told Johnson’s chief of staff not to hand the documents over to Pence.
Wisconsin’s attorney general took a slower and more targeted approach to his investigation compared to those in other states. Unlike his counterparts, Kaul did not charge any of the 10 Wisconsin Republicans who signed the elector paperwork and instead went after those who arranged for them to meet.
Among those who signed the paperwork was Andrew Hitt, the chairman of the state Republican Party at the time. In December, he said he and the others “were tricked and misled into participating in what became the alternate elector scheme and would have never taken any actions had we known that there were ulterior reasons beyond preserving an ongoing legal strategy.”
Hitt made the comment after reaching a settlement with two of the state’s true electors who filed a lawsuit against Republicans. Under the settlement, Hitt and the others agreed not to serve as electors any time Trump is on the ballot and told the National Archives they were rescinding their false paperwork claiming to be electors.
Troupis and Chesebro reached a separate settlement in March in that lawsuit. As part of the agreement, they released hundreds of pages of documents about the endeavor.
The county clerks whose areas were targeted for recounts by Trump praised the decision to bring charges, saying they would deter others from trying to overturn elections. “Attempting to engage in insurrection or coups are deeply un-American and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law,” said a statement from Dane County Clerk Scott McDonell (D) and Milwaukee County Clerk George Christenson (D).
Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers (D) was terse about the development, releasing a one-word statement about the news. “Good,” he said.
Yvonne Wingett Sanchez in Phoenix contributed to this report.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... -electors/
by ti-amie
Judge Merchan and his family deserve a break from these people.
Judge Merchan and his family deserve a break from these people.
by ti-amie Sean Combs Is Denied Bail on Sex Trafficking and Racketeering Charges
A day after his arrest, the music mogul known as Diddy was accused of running a “criminal enterprise” that threatened and abused women. He pleaded not guilty.
Sean Combs was arrested in New York on Monday night, several months after federal agents raided his homes in Los Angeles and Miami Beach.Credit...Willy Sanjuan/Invision, via Associated Press
By Ben Sisario and Julia Jacobs
Sept. 17, 2024
Updated 6:07 p.m. ET
Sean Combs, the embattled music mogul, was denied bail on Tuesday after pleading not guilty to charges of sex trafficking, racketeering conspiracy and transportation to engage in prostitution.
In a federal indictment unsealed on Tuesday, Mr. Combs, 54, was described as the boss of a yearslong criminal enterprise that threatened and abused women, coercing them to participate against their will in drug-fueled orgies with male prostitutes and threatening them with violence or the loss of financial support if they refused.
The 14-page indictment against Mr. Combs, a producer, record executive and performer who is also known as Diddy and Puff Daddy, came a day after he was arrested in a Manhattan hotel room, following an investigation that has been active since at least early this year. Prosecutors said Mr. Combs and his employees engaged in kidnapping, forced labor, arson and bribery, and kept firearms at the ready.
In asking a magistrate to deny Mr. Combs’s request to be released on bail, prosecutors argued that he was a threat to the community. One of the prosecutors, Emily A. Johnson, called him a “serial abuser and a serial obstructer,” and said his wealth would make it easy for him to escape undetected. She noted that after Mr. Combs was arrested, law enforcement found what they suspected to be narcotics in his hotel room, in the form of pink powder.
Mr. Combs’s lawyers suggested a $50 million bond. But Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky denied their request, citing Mr. Combs’s anger issues and history of substance abuse, and ordered Mr. Combs detained while he awaits trial.
“My concern,” the judge said, “is that this is a crime that happens behind closed doors.”
As Mr. Combs walked out of the courtroom, he looked toward his supporters in the room, including his three adult sons, and put his hand on his heart.
Outside the courthouse, Marc Agnifilo, one of Mr. Combs’s lawyers, said they would appeal the denial of bail, and added, “We believe in him wholeheartedly.”
During the hearing, Mr. Agnifilo began to mount Mr. Combs’s defense against the indictment, asserting that the sex trafficking charge, which involves Mr. Combs’s former girlfriend, Casandra Ventura, was based on consensual sex over a 10-year relationship.
Editors’ Picks
Debt Was Supposed to Cure Poverty and Help Pay for College. What Went Wrong?
Why Has ‘The Power Broker’ Had Such a Long Life?
Takeaways From Hillary Clinton’s New Book, ‘Something Lost, Something Gained’
“They are coming into this man’s bedroom,” Mr. Agnifilo said of the government’s case.
The racketeering charge carries a maximum sentence of life in prison, and a sex trafficking conviction would carry a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years.
Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, shared details of the weapons found in raids at Mr. Combs’s homes.Credit...Dave Sanders for The New York Times
The charges are a stunning repudiation of Mr. Combs’s longstanding public image. He was one of the most influential figures in the spread of hip-hop as a global commercial force, produced era-defining hits for stars like the Notorious B.I.G. and Mary J. Blige, and built a business empire based largely on his raffish, street-smart personal brand. Those included the Sean John fashion line and a partnership with the liquor giant Diageo that over the years earned him more than a billion dollars.
Although he has long been trailed by accusations of violence, he was largely unscathed until a series of civil lawsuits over the past year accused him of sexual assault and other allegations of sexual misconduct. His business empire began to crumble as a federal investigation swirled around him.
The indictment, which was filed with the court last week and unsealed on Tuesday, includes graphic descriptions of what it says Mr. Combs called “freak offs”: “highly orchestrated performances of sexual activity” in hotels and other locations that were fueled by drugs and could go on for days. At these events, the government says, women were plied with drugs to keep them “obedient” and coerced to participate in sex with prostitutes.
Those coerced to participate in the orgies “typically received IV fluids to recover from the physical exertion and drug use,” according to the indictment.
Mr. Combs would watch these events, sometimes while masturbating and recording video. According to the government, Mr. Combs “used the sensitive, embarrassing and incriminating recordings that he made during Freak Offs as collateral to ensure the continued obedience and silence of the victims.”
Prosecutors asserted that the women believed they could not refuse his demands without physical or emotional abuse, or without fearing that their financial or job security would be put at risk. They alleged that Mr. Combs maintained control over women by tracking their location, dictating their appearance, monitoring their medical information and supplying them with drugs.
No victims are named in the indictment, and the government’s sex trafficking count mentions only an anonymous “Victim 1.”
But the descriptions of the events mirror accusations made in a lawsuit last year by Ms. Ventura, Mr. Combs’s former girlfriend and an artist signed to his record label, Bad Boy, under the name Cassie.
Ms. Ventura settled her lawsuit, which was filed in November, after just one day, with Mr. Combs denying any wrongdoing. But the indictment describes orgies in similar terms to Ms. Ventura’s suit, saying they involved copious amounts of drugs and other supplies.
As part of the government argument that Mr. Combs should be denied bail, prosecutors accused him of obstructing justice after Ms. Ventura’s lawsuit. They wrote in court papers that he and his associates reached out to potential victims and witnesses to “feed” them “false narratives,” including by making several calls to someone prosecutors describe as a victim of his sexual abuse.
“During the calls, the defendant repeatedly asked for the victim’s support and ‘friendship,’ and attempted to convince the victim that she had willingly engaged in acts constituting sexual abuse,” prosecutors wrote in court papers.
When federal agents raided Mr. Combs’s homes in Los Angeles and Miami Beach in March, the indictment said, “law enforcement seized various Freak Off supplies, including narcotics and more than 1,000 bottles of baby oil and lubricant.” It was in Miami Beach that agents found nine AR-15-style weapons — six with serial numbers intact, and three with them defaced.
The arrest of Mr. Combs makes him the highest-profile figure in the music world to face criminal charges for sexual misconduct since R. Kelly, the R&B singer, was sentenced in 2022 to more than 30 years in prison for child sex crimes, sex trafficking and racketeering.
In the months after Ms. Ventura sued Mr. Combs, five women filed lawsuits alleging sexual assault, and three other suits included accusations of sexual misconduct. His lawyers are fighting all of them in court.
Marc Agnifilo, one of Mr. Combs’s lawyers, addressed reporters outside the federal courthouse on Tuesday morning. “He’s going to fight this with all of his energy and all of his might,” Mr. Agnifilo said.Credit...Dave Sanders for The New York Times
After his arrest on Monday, lawyers for Mr. Combs said they were disappointed with the decision to prosecute him.
“Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs is a music icon, self-made entrepreneur, loving family man and proven philanthropist who has spent the last 30 years building an empire, adoring his children and working to uplift the Black community,” Mr. Combs’s legal team said in a statement. “He is an imperfect person but he is not a criminal.”
In seeking Mr. Combs’s release, his lawyers pointed to the fact that he had voluntarily traveled to New York in anticipation of an indictment and offered to turn himself in to the authorities at their request.
“These are the acts of an innocent man with nothing to hide,” his lawyers added, “and he looks forward to clearing his name in court.”
For more than a week, Mr. Combs had been staying at the Park Hyatt New York hotel on West 57th Street, largely hunkering down while awaiting any news but also drawing some attention on social media with a visit to Harlem, where he was born.
Speculation about the federal case against Mr. Combs has been building ever since the raids on his homes. Prosecutors have been sending subpoenas to witnesses for months.
A lawyer for Ms. Ventura, Douglas H. Wigdor, declined to comment on the government’s indictment. Lawyers for other women who have filed suits against Mr. Combs hailed the arrest.
“It’s a big, moving day for victims, but an arrest is only the beginning,” said Lisa Bloom, whose client, the singer Dawn Richard — a former member of two musical groups that were assembled by Mr. Combs — filed suit just last week.
At a news conference in Manhattan after the indictment was unsealed, Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, encouraged anyone with more information to come forward.
“This office is determined to investigate and prosecute anyone who engages in sex trafficking,” Mr. Williams said, “no matter how powerful or wealthy or famous you may be.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/17/arts ... icted.html
A day after his arrest, the music mogul known as Diddy was accused of running a “criminal enterprise” that threatened and abused women. He pleaded not guilty.
Sean Combs was arrested in New York on Monday night, several months after federal agents raided his homes in Los Angeles and Miami Beach.Credit...Willy Sanjuan/Invision, via Associated Press
By Ben Sisario and Julia Jacobs
Sept. 17, 2024
Updated 6:07 p.m. ET
Sean Combs, the embattled music mogul, was denied bail on Tuesday after pleading not guilty to charges of sex trafficking, racketeering conspiracy and transportation to engage in prostitution.
In a federal indictment unsealed on Tuesday, Mr. Combs, 54, was described as the boss of a yearslong criminal enterprise that threatened and abused women, coercing them to participate against their will in drug-fueled orgies with male prostitutes and threatening them with violence or the loss of financial support if they refused.
The 14-page indictment against Mr. Combs, a producer, record executive and performer who is also known as Diddy and Puff Daddy, came a day after he was arrested in a Manhattan hotel room, following an investigation that has been active since at least early this year. Prosecutors said Mr. Combs and his employees engaged in kidnapping, forced labor, arson and bribery, and kept firearms at the ready.
In asking a magistrate to deny Mr. Combs’s request to be released on bail, prosecutors argued that he was a threat to the community. One of the prosecutors, Emily A. Johnson, called him a “serial abuser and a serial obstructer,” and said his wealth would make it easy for him to escape undetected. She noted that after Mr. Combs was arrested, law enforcement found what they suspected to be narcotics in his hotel room, in the form of pink powder.
Mr. Combs’s lawyers suggested a $50 million bond. But Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky denied their request, citing Mr. Combs’s anger issues and history of substance abuse, and ordered Mr. Combs detained while he awaits trial.
“My concern,” the judge said, “is that this is a crime that happens behind closed doors.”
As Mr. Combs walked out of the courtroom, he looked toward his supporters in the room, including his three adult sons, and put his hand on his heart.
Outside the courthouse, Marc Agnifilo, one of Mr. Combs’s lawyers, said they would appeal the denial of bail, and added, “We believe in him wholeheartedly.”
During the hearing, Mr. Agnifilo began to mount Mr. Combs’s defense against the indictment, asserting that the sex trafficking charge, which involves Mr. Combs’s former girlfriend, Casandra Ventura, was based on consensual sex over a 10-year relationship.
Editors’ Picks
Debt Was Supposed to Cure Poverty and Help Pay for College. What Went Wrong?
Why Has ‘The Power Broker’ Had Such a Long Life?
Takeaways From Hillary Clinton’s New Book, ‘Something Lost, Something Gained’
“They are coming into this man’s bedroom,” Mr. Agnifilo said of the government’s case.
The racketeering charge carries a maximum sentence of life in prison, and a sex trafficking conviction would carry a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years.
Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, shared details of the weapons found in raids at Mr. Combs’s homes.Credit...Dave Sanders for The New York Times
The charges are a stunning repudiation of Mr. Combs’s longstanding public image. He was one of the most influential figures in the spread of hip-hop as a global commercial force, produced era-defining hits for stars like the Notorious B.I.G. and Mary J. Blige, and built a business empire based largely on his raffish, street-smart personal brand. Those included the Sean John fashion line and a partnership with the liquor giant Diageo that over the years earned him more than a billion dollars.
Although he has long been trailed by accusations of violence, he was largely unscathed until a series of civil lawsuits over the past year accused him of sexual assault and other allegations of sexual misconduct. His business empire began to crumble as a federal investigation swirled around him.
The indictment, which was filed with the court last week and unsealed on Tuesday, includes graphic descriptions of what it says Mr. Combs called “freak offs”: “highly orchestrated performances of sexual activity” in hotels and other locations that were fueled by drugs and could go on for days. At these events, the government says, women were plied with drugs to keep them “obedient” and coerced to participate in sex with prostitutes.
Those coerced to participate in the orgies “typically received IV fluids to recover from the physical exertion and drug use,” according to the indictment.
Mr. Combs would watch these events, sometimes while masturbating and recording video. According to the government, Mr. Combs “used the sensitive, embarrassing and incriminating recordings that he made during Freak Offs as collateral to ensure the continued obedience and silence of the victims.”
Prosecutors asserted that the women believed they could not refuse his demands without physical or emotional abuse, or without fearing that their financial or job security would be put at risk. They alleged that Mr. Combs maintained control over women by tracking their location, dictating their appearance, monitoring their medical information and supplying them with drugs.
No victims are named in the indictment, and the government’s sex trafficking count mentions only an anonymous “Victim 1.”
But the descriptions of the events mirror accusations made in a lawsuit last year by Ms. Ventura, Mr. Combs’s former girlfriend and an artist signed to his record label, Bad Boy, under the name Cassie.
Ms. Ventura settled her lawsuit, which was filed in November, after just one day, with Mr. Combs denying any wrongdoing. But the indictment describes orgies in similar terms to Ms. Ventura’s suit, saying they involved copious amounts of drugs and other supplies.
As part of the government argument that Mr. Combs should be denied bail, prosecutors accused him of obstructing justice after Ms. Ventura’s lawsuit. They wrote in court papers that he and his associates reached out to potential victims and witnesses to “feed” them “false narratives,” including by making several calls to someone prosecutors describe as a victim of his sexual abuse.
“During the calls, the defendant repeatedly asked for the victim’s support and ‘friendship,’ and attempted to convince the victim that she had willingly engaged in acts constituting sexual abuse,” prosecutors wrote in court papers.
When federal agents raided Mr. Combs’s homes in Los Angeles and Miami Beach in March, the indictment said, “law enforcement seized various Freak Off supplies, including narcotics and more than 1,000 bottles of baby oil and lubricant.” It was in Miami Beach that agents found nine AR-15-style weapons — six with serial numbers intact, and three with them defaced.
The arrest of Mr. Combs makes him the highest-profile figure in the music world to face criminal charges for sexual misconduct since R. Kelly, the R&B singer, was sentenced in 2022 to more than 30 years in prison for child sex crimes, sex trafficking and racketeering.
In the months after Ms. Ventura sued Mr. Combs, five women filed lawsuits alleging sexual assault, and three other suits included accusations of sexual misconduct. His lawyers are fighting all of them in court.
Marc Agnifilo, one of Mr. Combs’s lawyers, addressed reporters outside the federal courthouse on Tuesday morning. “He’s going to fight this with all of his energy and all of his might,” Mr. Agnifilo said.Credit...Dave Sanders for The New York Times
After his arrest on Monday, lawyers for Mr. Combs said they were disappointed with the decision to prosecute him.
“Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs is a music icon, self-made entrepreneur, loving family man and proven philanthropist who has spent the last 30 years building an empire, adoring his children and working to uplift the Black community,” Mr. Combs’s legal team said in a statement. “He is an imperfect person but he is not a criminal.”
In seeking Mr. Combs’s release, his lawyers pointed to the fact that he had voluntarily traveled to New York in anticipation of an indictment and offered to turn himself in to the authorities at their request.
“These are the acts of an innocent man with nothing to hide,” his lawyers added, “and he looks forward to clearing his name in court.”
For more than a week, Mr. Combs had been staying at the Park Hyatt New York hotel on West 57th Street, largely hunkering down while awaiting any news but also drawing some attention on social media with a visit to Harlem, where he was born.
Speculation about the federal case against Mr. Combs has been building ever since the raids on his homes. Prosecutors have been sending subpoenas to witnesses for months.
A lawyer for Ms. Ventura, Douglas H. Wigdor, declined to comment on the government’s indictment. Lawyers for other women who have filed suits against Mr. Combs hailed the arrest.
“It’s a big, moving day for victims, but an arrest is only the beginning,” said Lisa Bloom, whose client, the singer Dawn Richard — a former member of two musical groups that were assembled by Mr. Combs — filed suit just last week.
At a news conference in Manhattan after the indictment was unsealed, Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, encouraged anyone with more information to come forward.
“This office is determined to investigate and prosecute anyone who engages in sex trafficking,” Mr. Williams said, “no matter how powerful or wealthy or famous you may be.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/17/arts ... icted.html
by ti-amie
The drugging and abuse done by Combs apparently involves both men and women.
They've also taken the passports of all of his family members.
Diddy Denied bail AGAIN
Dumpster fire
The untreated MRSA infection currently known as Diddy (né Puffy) appealed his denial for bail today. He requested to be put on ankle monitored house arrest and pay a $50 million (almost entirely) secured bond. He offered to hire a private security company with 1 or 2 personnel monitoring his residence at all times. (Even three of they really had to!) And Diddy would give up his cellphone and the Internet.
Diddy is the definition of a flight risk and appears to have been committing obstruction of justice when he knew he was about to be arrested so the new judge stamped a big fat DENIED on that request and said the proposed bail package was "insufficient even in the risk of flight."
Inner City Press's live tweets of the hearing, my summary below (it's technically shorter):
Diddy is claiming that the reason he followed Cassie into the hotel hallway (and beat her too, I guess?), is because he thought she had taken his clothes.
(If you have an entourage that can buy you an unholy amount of lube and baby oil at a moment's notice, they can get you some new damn clothes.)
The prosecution: "The defense is arguing that anyone in a freak-off wanted to be there. That's not the law. When people are threatened with exposure, and are beaten, they cannot consent. That is trafficking. Victims' heads were slammed against car windows."
A message a victim sent to Diddy: "when you get (expletive) up, you knock me around. I'm not a rag doll. I'm someone's child."
Extra details the prosecution revealed: The drugs that were used to get the victims to continue the freak offs were "GBH, ketamine, and others." They have documentation of communication between Diddy and victims that supports the claim that he blackmailed and drugged his victims.
Diddy contacted one witness that had been given a subpoena to testify 14 times before they testified. He also contacted a witness he hasn't been in contact with in several years after the grand jury subpoena. And he wiretapped someone.
He called a victim and tried to convince her everything has been consensual. He repeatedly said he knew he wasn't supposed to be speaking to her in the phone. He offered to pay her off. (Shortly after this the judge basically told the prosecution they had hit a point of diminishing returns for the hearing and they should wrap it up.)
The defense seems to confirm that Kalenna Harper is a witness. They say that the reason Diddy called her 54 times in one day before she made a statement about his latest lawsuit was because she was worried about the press and he was trying to comfort her.
Diddy's defense attorney trying to argue that Diddy is trustworthy: "We have a letter of intend to sell his airplane. We had 3 buyers who didn't work out."
Judge: "Can you get to the point?"
When the defense argues that everything that happened with Cassie was consensual and what happened is truly tragic because they were in love:
Judge: "What does that have to do with him punching her, throwing a vase at her - what's love got to do with that?"
Defense: "That was jealousy from infidelity- in both directions, Mr. Combs & this other person. The violence is from that."
Judge: "What is your point? And you say, they invited a third person in - if that person is a commercial sex worker, and they travel across state lines, isn't that a problem?"
The defense can sense this is going terribly since the judge was probably fighting back and eyeroll, so they bring up that Diddy was a literal alter boy.
Judge: "How far back are you going?"
Defense: "He watches a sermon every day."
The drugging and abuse done by Combs apparently involves both men and women.
They've also taken the passports of all of his family members.
by skatingfan
I read this out of context of what we were talking about most recently in this thread, and I thought it was about Rudy Giuliani.mmmm8 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 24, 2024 2:45 pm I used to work with my office window overlooking their NYC flagship around 2006-2008 (during his tenure). Shirtless chiseled young male models made to stand outside greeting customers even in some of the colder months.
If it looks like a duck and it walks like a duck....
by mmmm8 
I would have said "scantily clad cousins" thenskatingfan wrote: ↑Fri Oct 25, 2024 12:25 amI read this out of context of what we were talking about most recently in this thread, and I thought it was about Rudy Giuliani.mmmm8 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 24, 2024 2:45 pm I used to work with my office window overlooking their NYC flagship around 2006-2008 (during his tenure). Shirtless chiseled young male models made to stand outside greeting customers even in some of the colder months.
If it looks like a duck and it walks like a duck....