Trump supporters and conspiracy theory - Part 2

[Rick Plant]

Newly unredacted passage in the Mar-a-Lago search warrant blows a hole in a key Trump defense: legal expert

According to former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance, a deep dive into the newly unredacted portions of the Mar-a-Lago search warrant that allowed the FBI to retrieve stolen government documents from Donald Trump's Florida resort reveals an passage that would pave the way for one of his key defenses to be shot down by prosecutors when it comes time to go to court.

On her Substack "Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance," she wrote that a passage that was previously blacked out made a key assertion about Trump's knowledge about the documents he was hoarding.

As she explained, at the bottom of paragraph 58 she uncovered some "interesting information."

According to the warrant, "Multiple documents also contained what appears to be FPOTUS’s handwritten notes.”

"This means Trump won’t be able to claim he never saw the documents—at best he could maintain the notes were written while he was in office," she explained. "But if he resorts to that argument, he still has to explain how the documents ended up at Mar-a-Lago after they were in his hands."

She added the caveat, "All in all, it’s not a lot of new information, but we’re seeing the depth in the government’s case and learning more about its strength. Perhaps most importantly, the release of these interesting pieces of information underscores just how much more there is that we don’t know."

"With the former president’s team beginning to get access to discovery, he’s in the process of learning just how strong it is. That may explain why we see him acting out even more than usual on social media," she added.

You can read more here: https://joycevance.substack.com/p/newly-unredacted-parts-of-the-mar

[Rick Plant]

Judge denies Justice Department request to block Trump deposition in lawsuits by ex-FBI officials

Lawyers for Peter Strzok want to depose Trump in hope of finding out whether he met with and directly pressured FBI and Justice Department officials to terminate their client.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/judge-denies-request-block-trump-deposition-strzok-page-lawsuits-rcna92985


Legal expert predicts Trump's upcoming deposition could be difficult: 'Lawyers have all day'



Former FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page have filed lawsuits against the U.S government after being targeted by then-President Donald Trump. It was reported last week that the Justice Department couldn't block the testimony of Trump, despite their best efforts.

Speaking about it on Sunday, former federal prosecutor Barb McQuade, co-host of the "Sisters in Law" podcast, explained that probably the worst ruling for the DOJ because Trump has a tendency to ramble about anything and everything.

Political analyst Jonathan Alter cited the recent report that Trump was trying to get the IRS to investigate Strzok and Page, which is illegal.

"It is another example of him using the powers of the presidency to strike out his perceived enemies," explained NBC's national security editor David Rohde. "Siccing the IRS on people who you dislike or suspect is what Richard Nixon did. It was made illegal because the federal government, whether the IRS, Justice Department, or FBI should not be used to punish the president's perceived enemy or to protect his friend. This is the same pattern he has talked about if he wins reelection taking tighter control of the Justice Department and the FBI and pulling special counsel to look at his enemies."

These are all things that lawyers could ask Trump about in the lawsuit from the two FBI agents.

"I imagine that is a motive lawyers would want to ask him about," McQuade said. "It is dangerous ground for him to be in a deposition. To the extent that he has damaging information, he is obligated to share it truthfully. If he fails to share it truthfully, he could be in trouble for perjury. He has often had difficulty answering questions in a straightforward matter. His method of speaking has been described by former FBI director James Comey as 'word salad.' But in a deposition, you can't get away with that. Lawyers have all day. There is no worry about whether the viewers will get bored watching. They will ask all day, pin him down and demand he answer the question. It is a peerless situation for him to be in to answer these questions under oath."

Watch:

Jack Smith might want to chat with former Homeland Security aide after bombshell book leak: ex-prosecutor



A leak from former top Homeland Security aide Miles Taylor's new book "Blowback" revealed Donald Trump was flashing classified information around to reporters. Former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner explained on Sunday that a key piece of this information can be used by special counsel Jack Smith in the classified document scandal.

Speaking to MSNBC's Yasmin Vossoughian, Kirschner explained that this isn't directly related to the classified documents that Donald Trump took upon leaving the White House. What there does appear to be, he explained, is a lot of "factual overlap."

"However, what it does is it shows Donald Trump's pattern or practice of completely disregarding the sort of sanctity of classified information and classified documents," said Kirschner. "I'm sure Jack Smith will be keenly interested in it. I would certainly subpoena Miles Taylor and put him before the grand jury to testify about what he knows, what he saw, and what he heard. Hearsay is admissible before the grand jury about Donald Trump's potential mishandling of classified information while president. Now, that's not to say that evidence will necessarily be admissible at Donald Trump's future trial in federal court in Florida. But it might be that's the kind of issue that motions will be filed about. It'll be litigated, and the judge would have to make the decision. Is this relevant in the classified documents prosecution?"

Watch:

[Rick Plant]

Fulton County is working to seat a new grand jury - and it could decide whether Trump interfered in Georgia's 2020 election

District Attorney Fani Willis previously said July 17 is the earliest a Fulton County grand jury could hear evidence related to the Trump investigation.



FULTON COUNTY, Ga. — Fulton County Superior Court Grand Jury selection will begin Tuesday, according to the sheriff's office, signaling that Georgia's case surrounding former President Donald Trump could move into its next phase.

The next seated grand jury could be the one to potentially indict Trump of criminal charges over possibly interfering with Georgia's 2020 election.

Though the grand jury could hear several Fulton County cases, District Attorney Fani Willis recently said that she plans to present evidence against Trump and his allies during the fourth term of Fulton County's Superior Court, which runs from July 11 to Sept. 1. Grand jury selection aligns with her presented timeline, signaling this summer would be crucial in the investigation of the former president and his allies.

Timeline for potential Trump indictment

"That investigation is ongoing, but the timeline that I've set out for the American people having an answer is Sept. 1," Willis previously said to 11Alive. "The American people will have the answer they want by Sept. 1."

This isn't the only deadline Willis has set for herself.

She also previously told 11Alive that July 17 is the earliest a Fulton County grand jury could hear evidence related to the Trump investigation. She also blocked off much of August for her and her team, asking judges not to schedule trials or in-person hearings from Aug. 7 to Aug. 14.

How we got here

Fulton County Superior Court judges voted in January 2022 to impanel the special purpose grand jury at Willis' request.

Its goal was to investigate alleged violations of state law committed by Trump and his allies in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election as they worked to change the outcome.

The jury began its work in May 2022 and it was dissolved in January 2023 after completing its final report.

For more than a year, the jury listened to testimony and evidence from various sources including Georgia's Gov. Brian Kemp and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger who was on the receiving end of a now infamous phone call. Former Trump attorney Rudy Guiliani and U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham were also summoned.

Beyond Fulton County, Trump faces other charges

Trump was recently indicted on 37 federal charges in relation to his handling of classified documents at his Florida estate. Trump's first indictment came in New York in March on 34 felony charges of falsifying business records.

Willis said the other criminal cases against the former president have no current impact on her investigation.

https://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/fulton-county-grand-jury-selection/85-b434ad83-292a-4cf6-812b-5306978d1609



Trump’s ‘smoking gun’ tape stokes prison fears: Co-conspirator finally gets lawyer for arraignment

Donald Trump’s indicted co-conspirator returns to court. Walt Nauta, who was charged alongside Trump in the classified documents case, pleaded not guilty to all charges. MSNBC Chief Legal Correspondent Ari Melber breaks down Nauta's arraignment and reports on the newly-unsealed evidence in the case.

Watch:

[Rick Plant]

Revealed: Mueller prosecutor suspects Trump's FBI targeted his security clearance during Russia probe

Amid conversations about Donald Trump's weaponization of the Justice Department while he was in office, a former senior prosecutor on Robert Mueller's team, Andrew Weissmann, revealed that he believe he was targeted.

Last week, former chief of staff Gen. John Kelly told an allied ex-Trump staffer that the then-president wanted to use the IRS to target the two FBI agents, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, that were on Mueller's team.

They were ultimately removed and now are suing the government.

While he made clear that he doesn't compare his experience to the severity and seriousness of what former FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page experienced, Weissmann described something he said he found suspicious at the time

"Let me actually ask you a two-part question because I know you shared with our producers that Trump's efforts to weaponize the federal government against anyone that was investigating Russia reached you," MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace said to Weissmann Monday.

Weissmann explained that reading the recent reporting about Trump using the power of the FBI and Justice Department against his perceived foes made him remember his experience and the questions he had.

"There are sort of two ways in which there are improper uses of the Justice Department," he began. "There is the one that you talked about, which is this idea of siccing the IRS on political enemies, which is also a criminal offense, if can be proved. The other thing that is — that was in the notes that John Kelly had was this idea of pulling security clearances. This is something that got a lot of attention in the middle of 2018. John Brennan was the victim of that. There was discussion of many other people, including Lisa Page and Pete Strzok and many others."

He explained it struck close to home because it happened to him.

"While I was serving on Director Mueller's team, and it was in the middle of August, the exact time that the news was breaking, I was subjected to a really unusual re-up of my clearance," Weissmann continued. "The way clearances work is they last for five years. At the end of five years, usually, six or seven, when the FBI gets around to it, there's a re-up of your security clearance. Well, in the middle of the Mueller investigation, only two to three years into my clearance — and it's way before it was up — I was subjected to a re-examination by the FBI, which I remember at the time being incredibly suspicious."

When he saw the report about Kelly's notes and the way Trump wanted to target people, it "seemed pretty clear how to connect those dots in terms of why I was subjected to that," he said.

Republicans in Congress claim that it was President Joe Biden that has weaponized the government against his so-called foes. As more information becomes available, questions are being raised about Trump's congressional allies distracting from actual weaponization in the administration before.

Watch:

[Rick Plant]

Trump just went to Nevada and called the state “disgraceful.” This is not a guy who’s trying to win anything or even running for anything. He’s just going through the motions so he can bring in donations to his “campaign” and use it to pay for his defense for his criminal trials.

Trump To Nevada: Your State 'Is Disgraceful'
Trump lost Nevada twice but claims he won both times in a landslide
https://crooksandliars.com/2023/07/trump-nevada-your-state-disgraceful

[Rick Plant]

How Republicans are engineering 'a flood of conspiracy theories' ahead of 2024



Conspiracy theorists have a long history on the far right, from the John Birch Society during the 1950s and 1960s to the rise of "Infowars" founder Alex Jones in the late 1990s/early 2000s. But conservatives of the past were more likely to push back against them.

The late William F. Buckley excluded the Birchers from his National Review. Jones was shunned by the George W. Bush Republicans of the 2000s.

But Donald Trump's presidency and the MAGA movement gave Jones and other conspiracy theorists much more prominence on the right, and conspiracy theories involving the Biden family are plentiful in right-wing media.

In a report published by The Guardian on July 10, journalist Nick Robins-Early describes a conspiracy theory that has been gaining ground in MAGA World: the claim that the Biden Administration is "attempting to silence conservative voices" on social media.

In Louisiana, Judge Terry Doughty (a Trump appointee) ruled that Biden officials cannot communicate with social media providers about content moderation matters. MAGA Republicans have been claiming that when Facebook and pre-Elon Musk Twitter removed false claims about COVID-19 in 2021, they were bullied into doing so by members of Biden's administration.

"Amid the right-wing campaign against content moderation and disinformation researchers," Robins-Early reports, "numerous social media platforms have also been peeling back restrictions. Twitter under Elon Musk, who last year engineered the release of some internal communications between Twitter and government officials, has hollowed out its content moderation teams. Meanwhile, YouTube has reversed a policy banning election denialism, and Instagram allowed prominent anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. back on the platform."

Robins-Early notes that a 2021 New York University study not only debunked "allegations of anti-conservative bias at social media companies" — it found "that these platforms' algorithms instead often work to amplify right-wing content."

AFP



A deranged ploy’: how Republicans are fueling the disinformation wars

Several actions by the far right in the last month could result in a flood of conspiracy theories before the 2024 election



A federal judge in Louisiana ruled last week that a wide range of Biden administration officials could not communicate with social media companies about content moderation issues, and in a lengthy opinion described the White House’s outreach to platforms as “almost dystopian” and reminiscent of “an Orwellian ministry of truth”.

The ruling, which was delivered by the Trump-appointed judge Terry Doughty, was a significant milestone in a case that Republicans have pushed as proof that the Biden administration is attempting to silence conservative voices. It is also the latest in a wider rightwing campaign to weaken attempts at stopping false information and conspiracy theories from proliferating online, one that has included framing disinformation researchers and their efforts as part of a wide-reaching censorship regime.

Republican attorneys general in Missouri and Louisiana have sued Biden administration officials, the GOP-controlled House judiciary committee has demanded extensive documents from researchers studying disinformation, and rightwing media has attacked academics and officials who monitor social media platforms. Many of the researchers involved have faced significant harassment, leading to fears of a chilling effect on speaking out against disinformation ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

The Republican pushback against anti-disinformation campaigns has existed for years, alleging that content moderation on major platforms has unfairly targeted conservative voices. Many tech platforms have instituted policies against misinformation or hateful speech that have resulted in content such as election denial, anti-vaccine falsehoods and far-right conspiracy theories being removed – all which tend to skew Republican. But research has found that allegations of anti-conservative bias at social media companies have little empirical evidence, with a 2021 New York University study showing that these platforms’ algorithms instead often work to amplify rightwing content.

The rightwing narrative of tech platform censorship persisted, however, intensifying as companies prohibited medical misinformation about Covid-19. It gained additional momentum last year after the Department of Homeland Security rolled out a disinformation governance board aimed at researching ways to stop malicious online influence campaigns and harmful misinformation. Republican politicians and rightwing media immediately seized on the board as proof of a leftist authoritarian plot.

Fox News hosts specifically singled out researcher Nina Jankowicz, who was tapped to be the board’s executive director, and ran numerous segments viciously mocking her. A year-long harassment campaign followed, leading to Jankowicz receiving death threats, having deepfake pornography made of her and seeing her personal information released online against her will.

The disinformation governance board suspended its operations only a month after its debut, in what Jankowicz told the Guardian earlier this week was the start of a larger rightwing campaign aimed at rolling back checks on disinformation. “They got a win in shutting us down, so why would they stop there?” said Jankowicz, who was originally named in the Louisiana lawsuit but removed on account of no longer being a government official.

The GOP takes aim at researchers

In addition to the lawsuit in Louisiana, Republicans have put pressure on researchers through a House select subcommittee investigation that launched in January and claims it will look into the “weaponization of the federal government”. The House judiciary committee chair, Jim Jordan, earlier this year issued a wide-ranging request for information and documents to multiple universities with programs aimed at researching disinformation, and has so far sent dozens of subpoenas.

Among the institutions and officials that Jordan requested emails and documents from were the Stanford Internet Observatory, the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public and the non-profit Election Integrity Partnership. Jordan last month threatened Stanford University with legal action if it did not turn over additional records. (Stanford released communications with government officials but did not send some internal records, including ones that involved students, the university told the Washington Post.)

The Stanford Internet Observatory, the Center for an Informed Public and the Election Integrity Partnership did not return requests for comment.

Democratic representatives decried the committee’s activities as an attempt to harangue researchers and institutions that its members viewed as political enemies, likening it to McCarthyism and the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

“This committee is nothing more than a deranged ploy by the Maga extremists who have hijacked the Republican party and now want to use taxpayer money to push their far-right conspiracy nonsense,” Jim McGovern, a Democratic representative from Massachusetts, said during the formation of the committee.

The committee has struggled to be seen as legitimate, with a Washington Post-ABC News poll released in February showing that a majority of Americans view it as a partisan attempt to score political points. But it has nonetheless put pressure on academic institutions and emboldened attacks against researchers, including the University of Washington disinformation expert Kate Starbird, who told the Washington Post that she has faced political intimidation and cut back on public engagement.

Starbird and other researchers are directly named in the Louisiana lawsuit for their role as advisers to a now-disbanded Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency subcommittee on disinformation. Starbird, who did not return a request for comment, has previously stated that the Republican-led lawsuit egregiously misrepresents her work.

The Louisiana lawsuit

Republicans filed the lawsuit against Biden last year, and were joined by other plaintiffs that included the conspiracy site the Gateway Pundit and a Louisiana group opposed to vaccine mandates.

The case was notably filed in a Louisiana district court where Judge Terry Doughty presides. Doughty, who was appointed by Trump and previously ruled against Biden administration mask and vaccine mandates, is a jurist Republicans specifically seek out when shopping for a favorable forum. He has overseen more multi-state challenges to the Biden administration than any other judge, Bloomberg Law reported, despite previously being a little-known justice based in a small city of less than 50,000 people.

Legal experts questioned Doughty’s injunction against the Biden administration this week, the Associated Press reported, saying that the wide scope of the ruling meant that public health officials could be prevented from sharing their expertise. Meanwhile, disinformation researchers have stated that Republican efforts to push back against content moderation and safeguards against misinformation threaten to open the floodgates for conspiracy theories and falsehoods ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

Amid the rightwing campaign against content moderation and disinformation researchers, numerous social media platforms have also been peeling back restrictions. Twitter under Elon Musk, who last year engineered the release of some internal communications between Twitter and government officials, has hollowed out its content moderation teams. Meanwhile, YouTube has reversed a policy banning election denialism and Instagram allowed the prominent anti-vaccine activist Robert F Kennedy Jr back on the platform.

The Biden administration stated this week that it objected to Doughty’s injunction in the Louisiana case, and would be considering its options. The justice department is seeking to appeal the ruling.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/10/republicans-fuel-the-disinformation-wars

[Rick Plant]

Grand jurors who will consider Trump charges to be selected Tuesday



The selection of two Fulton County grand juries will be made Tuesday, with one of the panels expected to decide whether to hand up an indictment for alleged criminal interference in the 2020 presidential election.

One set of jurors is likely to be asked to bring formal charges against former President Donald Trump and other well-known political and legal figures. In a letter to county officials almost two months ago, District Attorney Fani Willis indicated the indictment could be obtained at some point between July 31 and Aug. 18.

Willis began her investigation shortly after hearing the leaked Jan. 2, 2021, phone call in which Trump asked Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find” the 11,780 votes he needed to defeat Joe Biden in Georgia. She later convened a special purpose grand jury which examined evidence and heard testimony over an almost eight-month period. Its final report, only part of which has been made public, recommended multiple people be indicted for alleged crimes.

Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney, who oversaw the special purpose grand jury, will preside over Tuesday’s selection of the two grand juries for this term of court.

Each panel will have 23 grand jurors, plus three alternates. One panel will meet Mondays and Tuesdays, the other Thursdays and Fridays. Both will work in secret and are expected to decide whether to hand up indictments in hundreds of cases. It is unclear which one will consider the much-anticipated election-meddling case.

When a grand jury meets, at least 16 members must be present to conduct business. At least 12 grand jurors must vote to bring an indictment. The burden of proof is much lower for a grand jury to indict someone than it is for a jury to convict or acquit someone and grand jurors typically hear only from the prosecution.

“What an awesome responsibility they will have, a responsibility no other group of Georgia citizens has ever dealt with — the potential indictment of a former president,” Atlanta attorney Ed Garland said. “This is a case that has been saturated in the media with political overtones, so it is imperative for them to be fair and impartial and for our judicial system to live up to its ideals.”

If Trump is charged here, it will mark the third indictment against him. In April, a grand jury in Manhattan indicted the former president for allegedly falsifying business records involving payoffs to porn star Stormy Daniels. Last month, a federal grand jury in Florida indicted Trump for 37 counts over his alleged mishandling classified government documents and obstruction of the Justice Department’s investigation.

https://www.ajc.com/politics/grand-jurors-who-will-consider-trump-charges-to-be-selected-tuesday/R7RXC2GUFRB5JLHKKRE5LX4IZ4/



Grand jury handling potential indictments in Trump 2020 probe to be selected in Atlanta



Atlanta CNN — The Georgia grand jury that is expected to consider charges against former President Donald Trump and his Republican allies for trying to overturn the 2020 election will be selected Tuesday in Atlanta.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, an elected Democrat, launched the investigation in early 2021, after Trump tried to overturn his defeat in the Peach State with a public and private pressure campaign targeting Georgia election officials, the governor, lawmakers and prosecutors.

A special grand jury previously heard testimony from 75 witnesses, including Trump advisers, his former attorneys, White House aides, and Georgia officials. That panel issued a redacted report with charging recommendations, which will soon be weighed by the new grand jury. Willis has indicated that final decisions could come next month.

Throughout the investigation, Trump has vehemently denied wrongdoing, as have his allies who are also under scrutiny. The former president has lashed out at Willis, who is Black, calling her “racist” and a “lunatic Marxist.”

Here’s a breakdown of what to expect:

What is happening on Tuesday?

The new grand jury term begins Tuesday in Fulton County, which includes most of Atlanta and some suburbs.

Two panels will be selected at the downtown Atlanta courthouse, and each panel will have 26 participants: 23 grand jurors and three alternates. One of these panels is expected to handle the Trump probe.

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney will preside over the court proceedings on Tuesday. He oversaw the special grand jury that collected evidence in the Trump investigation, and he is also expected to oversee the grand jury that is tasked with making charging decisions in the case.

The pool of potential grand jurors will be screened for scheduling conflicts and hardships of serving. Cameras are allowed in the courtroom, though it’s unclear how much of the proceedings will be public.

President Joe Biden won about 73% of the vote in 2020 in Fulton County. It is a racially diverse county, where nearly half of the population is Black.

When might indictments come?

All signs are pointing to final charging decisions coming sometime in August.

Willis announced remote workdays for staff in August and asked judges to reduce in-person hearings, likely out of security concerns. She previously alerted local police that possible charges would be announced between July 11 and September 1.

To secure an indictment in the Trump investigation, 16 of the 23 voting grand jury members would need to be present. Once that quorum is established, 12 votes would be needed to hand up an indictment.

The Fulton County sheriff’s office is taking the possibility of high-profile indictments very seriously. They sent teams to New York and Miami to study the security protocols for Trump’s two previous arraignments this year.

Which charges might be brought?

Early on, Willis said she was investigating “attempts to influence the administration of the 2020 Georgia General Election.” Her inquiry has steadily expanded over the years, and now covers a lot of ground.

Willis has said her team was considering a wide array of potential crimes.

This included solicitation of election fraud, making false statements to state and local government bodies, conspiracy, racketeering, violation of an oath-of-office, and involvement in election-related threats.

CNN reported in March that prosecutors were eying racketeering and conspiracy charges.

Prosecutors have notified some key players that they are targets of the investigation. This includes Trump’s ex-attorney Rudy Giuliani and 16 GOP activists who served as “fake electors,” including the Georgia Republican Party chairman. As the probe picked up steam last year, multiple fake electors decided to cooperate with prosecutors.

What is the investigation about?

After Trump lost the election in Georgia, he launched a multi-pronged effort to overturn the results. This included a pressure campaign targeting key state officials who oversaw the election, including Gov. Brian Kemp and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, both Republicans. Trump wanted them to abuse their powers to “find” enough votes to flip the results, or to block Biden’s win from being certified. They refused.

When these efforts failed, Trump urged Georgia state lawmakers to convene a special session to overturn Biden’s victory. Trump allies, including Giuliani, presented bogus claims of voter fraud to the state House and Senate. The Trump campaign, along with outside lawyers who supported their cause, filed meritless lawsuits that unsuccessfully tried to nullify Biden’s victory.

At the same time, Trump tried to weaponize the Justice Department to help him intervene in the Georgia election. He tried to cajole top Justice Department officials and federal prosecutors in Atlanta into falsely claiming that the election was “corrupt” and that Biden’s victory was tainted by massive fraud.

The Trump campaign also recruited a group of GOP activists in Georgia to serve as fake electors, who were part of a seven-state scheme to undermine the Electoral College process. These fake electors played a key role in Trump’s ill-fated plot to block the election from being certified on January 6, 2021.

There were also efforts by Trump supporters to breach a voting system in Georgia, in hopes of proving that the election was rigged and somehow keep Trump in office. Some Trump supporters also allegedly tried to pressure a Fulton County election worker to falsely admit there was massive fraud in 2020.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/11/politics/fulton-county-grand-jury-selection/index.html



'A mess!' Legal expert aghast Trump could face indictments in 3 jurisdictions at once

Watch:

[Richard Smith]

Record crowds in SC for President Trump.  Meanwhile more stories about Old Joe abusing his staff.  Add that Cocainegate, strippers, and Dirty Hunter and it has been a very bad couple of weeks for Biden, Inc.