Cy Vance’s Trump case is straight from a banana republic

WELL, BIDEN’S AMERICA IS A BANANA REPUBLIC: Cy Vance’s Trump case is straight from a banana republic — punish your political enemies. “Corporations almost never get criminally prosecuted for this sort of thing, but Vance wanted the name ‘Trump’ in his indictment. You can bet that he would have indicted The Donald if he had the goods. The feds — who’ve been auditing Trump’s taxes forever — haven’t filed charges.”

Related: Trump Organization indictments are a travesty of justice. “Vance acquired years of Trump Organization tax records, yet all he’s found is an alleged failure to pay proper taxes on corporate perks like cars, tuition and apartments. Any other company and it’s a civil suit, an audit, perhaps a hefty fine. If Vance had any evidence suggesting serious fraud (as press leaks long suggested), he’d have included them already. . . . All that Vance & Co. really have is partisan hate, not evidence.”

Source: WELL, BIDEN’S AMERICA IS A BANANA REPUBLIC: Cy Vance’s Trump case is straight from a banana repub…

Trump Organization, CFO Allen Weisselberg Plead Not Guilty to Tax, Fraud Charges

The Manhattan District Attorney Office indicted the Trump Organization and its CFO Allen Weisselberg with 15 felony counts of fraud and tax evasion:

Carey Dunne, the general counsel of the Manhattan district attorney’s office, told state court Justice Juan Merchan that the charges encompassed a 15-year-long tax-fraud scheme [2005 to 2021] involving off-the-books payments at the Trump Organization. He said Mr. Weisselberg had illegally avoided paying taxes on $1.7 million in income.

“There’s no clearer example of a company that should be held to account,” Mr. Dunne said. “It’s not about politics.”

“The scheme was intended to allow certain employees to substantially understate their compensation from the Trump Organization, so that they could and did pay federal, state, and local taxes in amounts that were significantly less than the amounts that should have been paid,” states the indictment. “The scheme also enabled Weisselberg to obtain tax refunds of amounts previously withheld and remitted to federal and state tax authorities.”

It’s not about politics, but the investigation did not start until Donald Trump became president. Okay, bro. Whatever you say. The case details do not help Dunne’s declaration either:

A case solely focused on fringe benefits is unusual, former prosecutors said. Charging an individual or company for failure to pay taxes on employee benefits alone is rare, though such charges are used as part of larger cases.

Weisselberg and the Trump Organization pleaded not guilty.

Image

Source: Trump Organization, CFO Allen Weisselberg Plead Not Guilty to Tax, Fraud Charges

The charges against the Trump organization

For example, the story I reported on four days ago – that the charges New York state is preparing against Trump aren’t going to be what the left has long hoped would drive a stake through his heart – appears to be going forward as previously stated:

They investigated the Trump organization for three years and the best they could come up with is unpaid taxes on fringe benefits? This is the kind of thing you normally handle as a civil matter. In fact, as my prior write-up noted, the Times literally could not find a previous example of a prosecutor filing criminal charges in a similar case. That’s how much of a politicized witch-hunt this entire thing is.

These marginal charges come days after it was leaked that Trump himself would not be charged for anything, and you know that wasn’t from lack of trying. Per RedState’s report on that, there isn’t some other shoe waiting to drop either. This is literally all there is.

Given that, the disappointment on the left is palpable. Here a few comments from the Journal’s breaking post…”Evading taxes on fringe benefits and perks doesn’t sound like the hammer I was hoping for. Surely there’s more.”

Source: The charges against the Trump organization

Not Tired of Winning Yet CLV

I hope this will not be the last in this series, since I still am in expectation of the massive voter fraud of 2020 to be corrected, but by what means, even the wise cannot foresee.

EIGHT VINDICATIONS: Or, Eight time Trump Derangement News Stories the Fake News Finally Admits were Fake All Along.

Please note that in preparation for this column, none — I say again, not one —  of the debunked stories could be found using the Google search engine’s first page or two of results. I had to use Duck Duck Go. 

One:
Trump ordered peaceful protesters be tear-gassed for a photo-op

Two:
The ‘lab leak’ was a ‘conspiracy theory’

Three:
Trump ignored Russian bounties on US soldiers

Four:
Trump told Georgia officials to ‘find the fraud’

Five:
Trump said white supremacists were ‘fine people’

Six:
Trump referred to illegal immigrants as ‘animals’

Seven:
Trump ‘flat-out lied’ when he said his campaign was wiretapped

Eight:
Trump removed MLK Jr. bust

Last:
Trump mocked Dead Soldiers as ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’

Source: Not Tired of Winning Yet CLV

Media tale about clearing of Lafayette Park collapses [UPDATED]

For the past twelve months, the mainstream media has been peddling the view that President Trump had the U.S. Park Police use tear gas to disperse protesters in Lafayette Park so that he could have a photo-op in front of a church on the other side of the park. I never accepted this version of events because I never accept on faith the truth of anything the mainstream media says about Trump.

At the same time, the MSM version, even if true, didn’t bother me. Presidents should be permitted to cross Lafayette Park for any purpose. The protesters had had their say, and not always peaceably. They had no right to limit Trump’s movement indefinitely.

It turns out, however, that the media’s narrative was false. After an extensive investigation, the independent Inspector General of the Interior Department, Mark Lee Greenblatt, has concluded that the protesters weren’t dispersed to facilitate a Trump photo-op.

They were dispersed, instead, to allow a contractor to safely install anti-scale fencing in response to destruction of Federal property and injury to officers that the “mostly peaceful protesters” had recently inflicted. Greenblatt found that “the evidence established that relevant USPP officials had made those decisions and had begun implementing the operational plan several hours before they knew of a potential Presidential visit to the park, which occurred later that day.” (Emphasis added)

Greenblatt, by the way, held important positions in the Obama administration. He was investigative counsel at the Department of Justice’s Office of Inspector General and Assistant Inspector General for Investigations at Obama’s Commerce Department. He is not a GOP or Trump partisan.

Glenn Greenwald does a great job of cataloguing the mainstream media’s falsehoods about this matter. Among the offenders (let’s call them fabulists to be polite) he calls out are NPR, the New York TimesCNNGeorge Stephanopoulosthe Intercept, and Washington Post “fact checker” Philip Bump.

In short, a rogues’ gallery of dishonest anti-Trumpers.

And speaking of rogues, let’s not forget Kamala Harris. She said:

Last night I watched as President Trump, having gassed peaceful protesters just so he could do this photo op, then he went on to teargas priests who were helping protesters in Lafayette Park.

How did all of these outlets and individuals get it so wrong? That’s an easy one. They had no interest in getting it right. Their only interest was to trash the U.S. president because they hate him. The truth was of no concern to them.

Greenwald concludes his piece by pounding home the reality that, at least for me, has been the main theme of Power Line for 19 years:

Over and over we see the central truth: the corporate outlets that most loudly and shrilly denounce “disinformation” — to the point of demanding online censorship and de-platforming in the name of combating it — are, in fact, the ones who spread disinformation most frequently and destructively. It is hard to count how many times they have spread major fake stories in the Trump years.

For that reason, they have nobody but themselves to blame for the utter collapse in trust and faith on the part of the public, which has rightfully concluded they cannot and should not be believed.

UPDATE: The Post’s Phillip Bump says there are still “lingering questions” about this matter. He clings to the view that Attorney General William Barr is to blame.

John Sexton shows that Bump’s salvage effort is in vain.

Source: Media tale about clearing of Lafayette Park collapses [UPDATED]

Inspector General Report Debunks Claim That Trump Tear-Gassed Protesters To Clear Lafayette Park For Photo Op

The fake media narrative became a big election issue. Per the report, “the evidence we reviewed showed that the USPP cleared the park to allow the contractor to safely install the antiscale fencing in response to destruction of property and injury to officers occurring on May 30 and 31.” The post first appeared on Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion.

….

Here we are a year later, and an IG report released just today confirms Trump and Barr were telling the truth the entire time:

We found that the USPP had the authority and discretion to clear Lafayette Park and the surrounding areas on June 1. The evidence we obtained did not support a finding that the USPP cleared the park to allow the President to survey the damage and walk to St. John’s Church. Instead, the evidence we reviewed showed that the USPP cleared the park to allow the contractor to safely install the antiscale fencing in response to destruction of property and injury to officers occurring on May 30 and 31. Further, the evidence showed that the USPP did not know about the President’s potential movement until mid- to late afternoon on June 1—hours after it had begun developing its operational plan and the fencing contractor had arrived in the park.

Source: Inspector General Report Debunks Claim That Trump Tear-Gassed Protesters To Clear Lafayette Park For Photo Op

Trump Vindicated (Again) by New Study on Hydroxychloroquine

A new study shows that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), the antimalarial drug, combined with azithromycin (AZM), could increase the rate of survival by nearly three times for severely ill COVID-19 patients. The observation study analyzed 255 mechanically ventilated patients at the Saint Barnabas Medical Center in New Jersey.

“We found that when the cumulative doses of two drugs, HCQ and AZM, were above a certain level, patients had a survival rate 2.9 times the other patients,” the study, published by medRxiv. says in its conclusion.

By using causal analysis and considering of weight-adjusted cumulative dose, we prove the combined therapy, >3 g HCQ and > 1g AZM greatly increases survival in Covid patients on IMV and that HCQ cumulative dose > 80 mg/kg works substantially better. These data do not yet apply to hospitalized patients not on IMV. Since those with higher doses of HCQ had higher doses of AZM, we cannot solely attribute the causal effect to HCQ/AZM combination therapy. However, it is likely AZM does contribute significantly to this increase in survival rate. Since higher dose HCQ/AZM therapy improves survival by nearly 200% in this population, the safety data are moot.

An analysis of hospitalized COVID patients from last year in New York State’s largest health system found that the death rate of COVID-19 patients on mechanical ventilation was 88 percent, compared to 21 percent overall, when treated with the HCQ/AZM combination.

….

There have now been over 250 studies into hydroxychloroquine’s effectiveness in treating COVID-19, the overwhelming majority of them showing positive results. Studies on early treatment with the drug showed a 66% improvement in mortality rates. But the media chose to ignore those studies, instead deciding to report on a few heavily flawed studies that allegedly showed the drug was either ineffective or increased mortality.

Dr. Fauci also dismissed the drug’s potential for treating COVID patients, claiming that “valid” scientific data showed hydroxychloroquine wasn’t effective in treating COVID-19.

Last year, as data continued to show that hydroxychloroquine was actually effective in treating COVID-19, doctors who spoke out in support of the drug were censored.

And the human cost of this media assault on hydroxychloroquine was catastrophic. One analysis suggests that over 2.4 million lives worldwide have been unnecessarily lost because hydroxychloroquine was not being widely used as a COVID therapeutic. That’s a lot of people who may have died unnecessarily just because the media hated Trump.

Source: Trump Vindicated (Again) by New Study on Hydroxychloroquine

Facts do not support early claims about Capitol riot

 Reuters:

Prosecutors made some serious claims after the deadly U.S. Capitol attack, saying they had evidence rioters planned to kill elected officials, suggesting a Virginia man at the building received directives to gas lawmakers, and accusing another suspect of directing mayhem on Jan. 6 with encrypted messages.

But the Justice Department has since acknowledged in court hearings that some of its evidence concerning the riot – carried out by a mob of supporters of former President Donald Trump to try to overturn his election loss – is less damning than it initially indicated.

….

The prosecutors apparently overstated their cases early on and have now started to backtrack.  I suspect there was some animus toward President Trump by DOJ officials that led to these false and misleading charges against the alleged perps.  The media also tended to overstate the seriousness of the situation in the Capitol, including allegations of “armed insurrection.”

As a former prosecutor, I think it is always a mistake to overcharge a case.  You put yourself in the position of losing credibility with the court and the jury.

Source: Facts do not support early claims about Capitol riot

Skeptics Were Wrong About Trump’s Operation Warp Speed

It should be emphasized that OWS was launched to almost universal skepticism and even scorn. At the time of OWS’s launch in Spring 2020, a strong consensus prevailed among media, public-health experts, consultants, and betting markets that regulatory approval by the end of 2020 and the accelerated delivery of 300 million doses were unrealistic goals. Consider some typical examples:

The June 6, 2020 issue of  the medical journal Lancet opined that “on average, it takes 10 years to develop a vaccine. With the COVID-19 crisis looming, everyone is hoping that this time will be different. Although many infectious disease experts argue … even 18 months for a first vaccine is an incredibly aggressive schedule.”

The federal government’s top COVID advisor, Dr. Anthony Fauci, joined the skeptics: In February 2020 and again in April 2020 he predicted that a year to a year and a half would be required for vaccine approval — versus the half year that was actually required.

The media echoed general skepticism about OWS in the Spring of 2020. Vanity Fair in its May 28, 2020 edition characterized OWS “as dangerous and likely to fail.” CNN complained that OWS neglected “tried and true” procedures for vaccine development in favor of new and untested methods. A New York Times article dated April 30, 2020 somberly states: “Our record for developing an entirely new vaccine is at least four years — more time than the public or the economy can tolerate social-distancing orders.”

Similar skepticism was expressed by McKinsey Consulting. In its June 1, 2020 COVID report, McKinsey warned that only one vaccine had started phase 2 clinical trials and that 21 months has been the shortest time between phase 2 and 3.

Prediction and betting markets were also wagering as late as July 15, 2020 against timely approval. One of the largest public prediction markets put the odds of approval by January 2021 at less than one in three and that the best chance was after the first quarter of 2021. Another major online prediction market put the chances of a vaccine being mass-produced before January 2021 at one in five.

OWS’s critics did more than cast doubt on the FDA approval date. They also cast doubt on the ability of OWS to scale up production: Dr. Fauci cautioned that an additional year could be required to scale up production “to get enough doses to be meaningful to anyone.” In its June 1, 2020 COVID report, McKinsey warned that it usually takes five years to build a production facility for an entirely new virus vaccine.

Thus, the actual history of OWS diverges dramatically from that anticipated by its skeptics at the time it was launched. Based on their knowledge as of Spring 2020, experts, media, public health officials, and betting markets predicted FDA approval, at best, near spring or summer of 2021 (versus the actual approval in December 2020). They warned of the possibility of at least another year to scale up to large orders. In other words, our “specialists” grossly underestimated the power of OWS to accelerate vaccine approval, manufacturing, and distribution.

The New York Times recently fact-checked President Biden’s characterization of the Trump OWS program as too little, too late. Biden was particularly critical of the vaccine roll-out, not noting that the states and communities were responsible. Ignoring the speedy FDA approval and guaranteed orders to scale-up production, Biden promised a “new and improved” COVID-vaccination program that seems to me to be identical to Trump’s OWS. Notable is the nuanced fact-checker language: “… contrary to Mr. Biden’s suggestions, both administrations deserve credit for the current state of the vaccine supply.”

Source: Skeptics Were Wrong About Trump’s Operation Warp Speed

I Won’t Be Silenced by the Left

In a recent radio interview on the Joe Pags Show, I explained why I wasn’t concerned by the Trump supporters who came to Washington on Jan. 6 to protest peacefully. Thousands of protesters—no one knows the actual number—marched to the Capitol. Only about 800 people illegally entered the Capitol. Still fewer engaged in violent acts. I condemned those lawbreakers at the time and continue to do so. But I feel compelled to push back as Democrats and their media allies try to equate the two groups by implying that all present were “armed insurrectionists” determined to overthrow the government.

I told Joe Pags the truth: I honestly never felt threatened on Jan. 6. But, I added, I might have been worried if Donald Trump had won and the violent leftists who burned Kenosha, Wis., and Minneapolis last summer had come to Washington. Here’s exactly what I said: “Now, had the tables been turned—Joe, this could get me in trouble—had the tables been turned, and President Trump won the election, and those were tens of thousands of Black Lives Matter and antifa protesters, I might have been a little concerned.”

….

Leftists who want to memory hole last summer’s political violence immediately started lecturing me that the 2020 protests were mostly peaceful. Apparently they’ve forgotten that, according to the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project, 570 leftist protests became riots last year. Twenty-five people lost their lives and 700 law enforcement officers were injured. Braying about “peaceful protests” offers no comfort to those victims or the other innocent Americans whose homes, businesses and property were destroyed. The same people fail to see the damage they do by pushing a narrative designed to portray the 74 million Americans who voted for Mr. Trump as potential domestic terrorists or armed insurrectionists.

….

Their politics, together with their taste for violence—so different from the Trump supporters I know personally or the Trump rallies we all saw carried out peacefully—should concern us. There’s a reason why the boarded-up windows in the downtowns of major cities came down soon after Joe Biden won the election: Nobody was worried what Trump supporters would do if their guy lost; they were worried about what Biden supporters would do if their guy didn’t win.

Source: I Won’t Be Silenced by the Left