Weekend Update

I was a bit under the weather this week.  I eventually made my way to the doctor.  After tests were inconclusive, she told me she gave up on asking me to change my diet. She asked me instead what I had been doing this week.  When I told her she said, “Of course you’re sick. You can’t read that many White House transcripts and not vomit.”

I cannot help myself.  The amount of unchecked lying begs my attention.  Some of the lies are easy to spot.  For example:  inflation when China Joe and the Ho took office was about 1.3%.  When Joe claims it was 9.8%, even kindergarten children know he is lying.

Others, however, are more difficult to see.  For example:  when Joe claims he is imposing sanctions on China, it looks like he is adopting President Trump’s winning strategy.  In reality, Joe’s sanctions are feckless. They do not attack China’s core trade with the USA.  Joe’s “sanctions” are predicted to raise about $3 to $4 billion a year from Chinese dumping in the USA. The sanctions imposed by Donald Trump raised over $150 billion over a two-year period.

China’s trade surplus from trading with the USA is on pace to exceed $700 billion this year.  It was about $375 Billion each of President Trump’s last two years in office.  While President Trump’s sanctions recovered about 20% of the trade imbalance, Joe’s are likely to recover at best 0.4% of the trade imbalance. Do you really think paying less than one-half of 1% is going to have any effect on Chinese policy?

Yes, our trade deficit with China has almost DOUBLED under only three years of China Joe’s guidance.  It sure brings to light another of Joe’s lies: “Buy American.”

Let’s face it, China Joe as a living example of an old lawyer joke.  How do you know when he is lying? (His lips are moving.)

——

Another good example of a compulsive liar further up the East Coast, in a room where anything but Justice was being handed out.  Mike Cohen finished stating what he rehearsed with unethical prosecutors early in the week.  Then his story began falling apart.

Let me start with what should be the most obvious.  The charge against Donald Trump is for falsifying records with the specific intent to further another felony.  Against any definition of “due process,” the State of New York has not specified what felony was committed.  The only thing they did allege was that it was to interfere with the 2016 election.

That is were their case falls apart.  The  only record the State claims was falsified is the Trump Organization’s recoding of its payment to Cohen. That payment was made AFTER Trump already won the election.  He certainly couldn’t have done it to affect the outcome of the election when the record was created after the election.  Even if it was to cover up Cohen’s earlier payment, it could not have been done with the necessary specific intent of interfering with an election that already took place.  If for no other reason, the court should dismiss the case (or give a directed verdict of acquittal) upon the state closing its case.

But I doubt that will happen because New Yorkers have chosen authoritarianism and tyranny over Americanism and justice.

——

A couple years ago I took on a client I did not really like because two of my best friends begged me to do it. (Yes, you can see where this is going.)  The trial was a bench trial (no jury) that lasted three days but the judge fit it into various trial dockets so that there were seven months between the first day and the second day and another six months before the final day.

Between the second and third days, the judge had an unscheduled telephone conference with both lead attorneys.  It was unscheduled so there was no way for us to have the advance notice necessary to have a court reporter on the call. I soon learned why. He told us that he believed my client was lying her ass off on the stand.  In no uncertain terms he told me if I mentioned any of her lies in any of my arguments on the final day he will report me to the Bar Association for disciplinary proceedings. He of course also told me he would have reported me already if he thought I knew in advance that she would be lying. He was correct in all statements; I already knew I was in a jam.  Nothing like doing a favor for friends.

Anyway, I researched the issue thoroughly at the time to refresh my understanding of the Rules of Ethics.  There are cases in Florida where lawyers have been disbarred for putting on testimony they knew was a lie.  Likewise, lawyers must “immediately” notify the court if they discover false testimony (with exceptions for attorney-client privilege).

Apparently, these rules went out the window in New York.  While the prosecutors were using Wednesday to build up Michael Cohen’s lies before Thursday’s cross examination, Cohen’s previous attorney was telling Congress that Cohen was lying.  His attorney, Bob Costello, also stated that he informed the grand jury and the prosecutor that Cohen was lying and he delivered to the prosecutor E-mails to prove it.

Boy, if New York had the same ethics as Florida all five prosecutors on the Trump case would be disbarred, including the District Attorney.  What makes it worse is the prosecutors have the additional responsibility to produce exculpatory evidence. Bob Costello gave them the evidence and they hid it from President Trump’s attorneys.

This evidence was made possible because Cohen waived his privilege with Costello at the request of the US Attorney so that Cohen could avoid his jail sentence by cooperating with their investigation.   After reviewing the evidence, the US Attorney concluded that President Trump did nothing wrong and that Cohen was lying.  They refused to give Cohen a sentence reduction for cooperation.

In other words, the US Attorney, who has jurisdiction over federal crimes, knew Cohen was lying.  How in the world could all five New York prosecutors it know it?

——

Another bold-faced lie of the week came from the United States Attorney General himself.  Here is a man who thought he was qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice. This week he claimed that they would not produce the video of Joe Biden‘s interview with the special counsel based on “executive privilege.” The DOJ, however, already released a transcript of the interview. Therefore, privilege was waived. Indisputably waived.  There are two reasons for not releasing the video. Either the transcript is not the real transcript or Joe looks so bad that the AG knows its release will sink Joe’s chance of re-election.  I am betting on the former, but it could be both.

This also requires that I mention the complete breach of Donald Trump’s attorney-client privilege with his own lawyer, Mike Cohen. Nothing in oven’s testimony, including the secretly recorded conversation, falls within an exception to the attorney-client privilege.

In short, in the Democrat party’s America we don’t get to rely on attorney-client privilege but they can rely on executive privilege any time they want to hide something.

Do you still remember Joe Biden claiming he would be the most transparent president ever.  It is impossible for that guy to tell the truth about anything.

——

For me, the highlight of the week was Marjorie Taylor Greene taking on both AOC and Jasmine Crocket in the committee hearing to hold AG Garland in contempt of congress for refusing to produce the Biden video.  When Greene asked how many democrats were using the daughter of the judge in Trump’s NY trial to raise money, the two biggest offenders went off the deep end.

Their behavior reminded me of how the Sea World monkeys used to yell at each other. The next time Crocket, a black supremacist, says all white men are misogynistic, I hope someone will play the video of her meltdown.  It clearly demonstrates that she is not overly emotional because she is a woman; she is overly emotional because she is a moron.

——