Former Obama White House Ethics Czar and current legal analyst Norm Eisen has for days felt annoyed with Donald Trump's request to delay sentencing in his New York City case. But it seems that the more he's thought about it, the stronger he feels. Taking to X on Friday, Eisen said he had a "visceral reaction" to Trump's recent request to delay the sentencing in his hush-money case until after the 2024 presidential election.
"Other defendants (including of more modest means) don't get special treatment under the law, and neither should he," Eisen commented. Read Also: Hush money isn't a crime. Slush money is Eisen went on to speculate that Judge Juan Merchan had a similar reaction, and he cited the judge's recent statement that “the court appearance [for Trump's sentencing] scheduled for September 18, 2024, at 10 A.
M. remains unchanged." Eisen also thinks that Merchan is telegraphing his thoughts on a "bogus request" that is a little like Trump's three demands that Merchan recuse himself.
"Trump's effort to abuse the Supreme Court immunity ruling in Trump v. U.S.
is no basis for a new trial or delay," he said, citing a CNN editorial he wrote in July. Although the Supreme Court gave Trump total immunity from prosecution for official acts taken as president, Eisen says there is no way that Trump illegally covering up payments to an adult film star that he made prior to becoming president would fall under such criteria. The NY case isn't about the core of Trump's presidency, Eisen said, it "is about using personal and biz false documents to cover up 2016 hush money election interference.
" Eisen concluded by saying the justice system needed to sentence Trump on schedule to maintain credibility. "The Court should deter Trump from committing more election crimes by handing down its sentence ASAP," Eisen argued. "Plus American voters deserve to know what comes out at Trump’s sentencing before the election.
Trump shouldn’t receive special treatment simply because he’s running for President. To preserve faith in American rule of law and a fair justice system, Trump’s sentencing must stay on Sep 18 and not be delayed further." Read it all here.
An author who stumbled upon a discarded duffel bag containing material for the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 ended up with the police showing up at his door, The Washington Post reported on Friday. Malcolm Harris, a Marxist journalist and author, says that he found the bag on August 9. “People in Capitol Hill just leave a bunch of really nice stuff out all the time,” he said of the find.
“This is, in fact, not the nicest duffel bag I have found outside for free on Capitol Hill.” Ultimately, that bag didn't contain a lot of crucial information, but some of the documents inside, which detailed an internship program, could have potentially been embarrassing to the Heritage Foundation , which according to recent reports has been plagued with infighting over the controversial transition plan. After he posted about finding it online, he got a flurry of people asking to buy it off him — and then a staffer at the Heritage Foundation caught wind, and reported it as a theft to the D.
C. Metropolitan Police, who paid Harris a visit. ALSO READ: 'Disqualifies himself': Veterans blast Trump for 'disrespectful' remarks about war heroes As for what actually happened in his interaction with law enforcement, Harris told The Post, “I don’t talk to the police, so we didn’t have a very long conversation.
” Project 2025 is a plan crafted by the Heritage Foundation to reshape the federal government for the next Republican president, crafted with the assistance of several Trump administration alumni, that would consolidate executive power, replacing the civil service with an army of partisan loyalists, and gut programs across the federal government. Recent reports have indicated that Project 2025 has become a huge liability for Republicans as voters have become more aware of the details. Sen.
J.D. Vance's (R-OH) attempts to justify past comments linking rising crime waves to Irish immigrants raised eyebrows from film buffs who said he used the wrong Martin Scorsese movie to defend himself.
Donald Trump's running mate addressed questions about his 2021 comment on immigration and crime during a campaign address to the Milwaukee Police Association in Wisconsin on Friday. "Has anybody seen the movie 'Gangs of New York?'" Vance said in response. "That is what I'm talking about; we know that when you have these ethnic enclaves in our country, it can lead to higher crime rates.
" Vance was attempting to contextualize a recently resurfaced Skype interview in which he made a similar claim. "You had this massive wave of Italian, Irish and German immigration, and that had its problems, its consequence," Vance said during the interview. "You had higher crime rates, you had these ethnic enclaves, you had inter-ethnic conflict in the country where you really hadn't had that before.
" ALSO READ: 'Disqualifies himself': Veterans blast Trump for 'disrespectful' remarks about war heroes Washington Post analyst Philip Bump took issue with Vance's characterization of the 2002 film starring Daniel Day Lewis as the notorious anti-Irish gang leader William Poole, or Bill the Butcher. "The irony here being that the most brutal, vicious killer in that movie is the nativist who loathes immigrants," Bump replied . "Poole was a thug, a thief and a celebrity, leader of a Christopher Street gang which morphed and coalesced with others to become one of the most terrifying group of criminals in New York — the Bowery Boys," according to the New York City history podcast that draws its name from the group .
"The Bowery Boys were an instrument of the Know Nothings , a nativist movement which violently rejected the Irish newcomers." In 1846, as the Irish potato famine blighted the Emerald Isle's primary crop in a catastrophe that would claim up to 1.5 million lives — and send another 1.
5 million fleeing the starving nation — the New York Daily Herald reported Poole was gouging out a foe's eye in the street. This led national security attorney Bradley Moss to question whether Vance had ever seen the film. "Did you actually watch the movie?" asked Moss .
"Did Bill the Butcher strike you as a nonviolent person?" Matthew Gertz, a senior fellow with the Media Matters watchdog group, added, "'Bill the Butcher was correct' is a very interesting take on that film." Political analyst Drew Savicki struck a satirical note by mimicking Vance's comment but changing the movie. "Has anybody seen the movie 'Toy Story?'" Savicki wrote.
"This is what I'm talking about, with these dangerous toys, it can lead to higher crime rates." Moss was quick with a response. "Has anybody seen the movie 'Despicable Me?'" Moss replied.
"This is what I'm talking about, with people speaking languages no one has ever heard of, it can lead to someone trying to steal the moon!" Speaking at a police hall in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on Friday, Donald Trump's running mate, Sen. J.D.
Vance (R-OH), claimed the ex-president's recent comments about the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Congressional Medal of Honor were taken out of context. Trump's controversial statement came when he talked about giving the Medal of Freedom to Miriam Adelson, the widow of late GOP megadonor Sheldon Adelson. “That’s the highest award you can get as a civilian.
It’s the equivalent of the Congressional Medal of Honor, but civilian version,” Trump said. “It’s actually much better because everyone [who] gets the Congressional Medal of Honor, they’re soldiers. They’re either in very bad shape because they’ve been hit so many times by bullets, or they’re dead,” Trump said.
“She gets it, and she’s a healthy, beautiful woman. And they’re rated equal, but she got the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and she got it for — and that’s through committees and everything else.” Read Also: Harris has figured out Trump’s greatest liability Vance on Friday defended Trump and cited his relationships with veterans.
"Look, I was with a group of veterans yesterday, and trust me, the veteran community is behind Donald Trump," he claimed. "What President Trump said during the ceremony — and I haven't seen the entire remarks — President Trump said that a person who received the Medal of Freedom — he was saying some nice things about her. Donald Trump, I have seen give out a Congressional Medal of Honor.
I have seen him give out a number of awards and commendations to military veterans." "Of course, I myself am a Marine Corps veteran of the Iraq War," Vance continued. "This is a guy who loves and honors our veterans.
I don't think he complements things, and saying a nice word about a person who received a Medal of Freedom is in any way denigrating those who receive military honors. They are two different awards, and the president said some nice things about a person he liked. That is a reasonable thing to do.
" While Trump did say "nice things" about Adelson, Trump said that the civilian award was better because no one had to get shot or hurt in war to get it. This is also not the first time Trump has either implicitly or explicitly disparaged the service of veterans. Back in 2015, for example, he attacked the late Sen.
John McCain (R-AZ) for being a prisoner of war. “ I like people that weren’t captured,” Trump said then . Gen.
John Kelly and other staffers recalled in a report that Trump didn't want to go to the graves of American soldiers who died during World War II while it was raining. He called the fallen soldiers "losers" and "suckers." Trump then denied saying it.
After watching Vance's defense of Trump, conservative Bill Kristol argued that it didn't hold any water. "Trump: The Medal of Freedom is the 'equivalent' of--'actually much better' than--the Medal of Freedom. Vance: Trump didn't say what we all saw him say.
Orwell: The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." See Vance's comments below or at this link .
- YouTube www.youtube.com.
