#us justice system

[cock-holliday]

The most maddening class I took in law school was Wrongful Convictions, which went in-depth into

1. The coercive, abusive and purposefully misleading “interrogation” process for suspects

2. The pseudoscience of a number of forensic science categories used to convict people, including “signs a suspect is lying” and hair analysis; and

3. The nearly impossible challenge of freeing someone even when it is PROVEN that they are innocent

The American “justice” system is infinitely more fucked up than you can imagine. For every horrorshow act you get exposed to, there’s a very good chance you’ll be greeted with a “but wait! There’s more!”

#us politics #us legal system #us policing #us justice system

[fernreads]

A panel of three Trump-appointed judges this week upheld an excessive eight-year prison sentence handed down to climate activist Jessica Reznicek, ruling that a terrorism enhancement attached to her sentence was “harmless.”

The terror enhancement, which dramatically increased Reznicek’s sentence from its original recommended range, set a troubling precedent. Decided by a lower court in 2021, it contends that Reznicek’s acts against private property were “calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government.” The appellate justices’ decision to uphold her sentence, callously dismissing the challenge to her terrorism enhancement, doubles down on a chilling message: Those who take direct action against rapacious energy corporations can be treated as enemies of the state.

Reznicek, an Iowa-based member of the Catholic Worker Movement and a participant in the Indigenous-led climate struggle, engaged in acts of property damage in an attempt to stop the completion of the Dakota Access pipeline in 2016 and 2017. Along with fellow activist Ruby Montoya, Reznicek took credit for various acts of sabotage, which harmed no humans or animals but burnt a bulldozer and damaged valves of the pipeline. The damaged equipment was property not of the U.S. government, but of private pipeline and energy companies.

Following Reznicek’s guilty plea to a single charge of conspiracy to damage an energy facility — which brought a recommended sentencing range of 37 to 46 months — Judge Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, in allegiance with prosecutors, added the terrorism enhancement. This increased her sentencing range to 210 to 240 months, making the eight-year sentence Reznicek ultimately received fit comfortably below the accepted range, though it’s more than double the previous recommendation. (Montoya, who also pleaded guilty, has filed a motion to withdraw her plea, claiming that it was coerced.)

Both courts’ decisions on Reznicek’s sentence reflect unsurprising but deeply troubling priorities in our criminal legal system. It would be unempirical to the point of foolishness to expect the courts, stacked as they are with right-wing justices, to side with individuals taking risks to stop environmental devastation rather than those corporations making millions on the back of it. Yet Reznicek’s appeal was on a point of law: Terrorism enhancements are only supposed to be applicable to crimes that target governmental conduct; Reznicek’s targets were private corporations.

The collapsing of government and corporate interests signified by Reznicek’s terrorism enhancement is worthy of profound challenge, but the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges did not even address the substance of the activist’s appeal. In a short, unsigned opinion, the court wrote that even if there had been an “error” in applying a terrorism enhancement, it was “harmless,” because Ebinger had stated on the record that she would have imposed an eight-year sentence with or without the terrorism enhancement.

It is a cynical move indeed to sidestep the chilling effect of labeling such acts as “terrorism,” as if it carries no material consequences for the future of water and Indigenous land protection and other social movements. As Reznicek’s support team wrote in a statement Monday, “Federal prosecutors only pursued terrorism enhancements against Reznicek after 84 Congressional representatives wrote a letter in 2017 to Attorney General Jeff Sessions requesting that Reznicek and other protesters who tamper with pipelines be prosecuted as domestic terrorists.” These members of Congress, note Reznicek’s supporters, have together received a combined $36 million in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry.

Determinations over which actions are labeled “terrorism” are always political, and in this case nakedly so given the clear pressure applied on prosecutors by politicians and their industry backers. Ebinger’s claim — that she would have imposed the excessive eight-year sentence with or without the terror enhancement triggered — cannot be considered the final word here. Reporting on Reznicek’s case, ABC News — an outlet hardly aligned with the environmental left — noted that neither white supremacist murderer Dylann Roof or avowed neo-Nazi James Fields, who plowed his car into anti-fascist protesters in Charlottesville, Virginia, received a terrorism enhancement when sentenced.

Reznicek’s legal team will continue to challenge her sentence in court, especially since the question of the misapplication of a terrorism enhancement remains open, despite the judges’ decision this week. A full court hearing by the 8th Circuit, an appeal to the far-right Supreme Court, or a request for clemency from President Joe Biden are all technical options, but hardly are any of these sites of optimism.

As her legal battles continue, Reznicek, whose acts of sabotage place her firmly on the right side of history, if not the law, deserves full-throated public support. As she noted in her 2017 statement claiming responsibility for the actions against the Dakota Access pipeline: “We acted from our hearts and never threatened human life nor personal property. What we did do was fight a private corporation that has run rampant across our country seizing land and polluting our nation’s water supply.”

#article #full article #bolding mine #environmental justice #nodapl #dapl #us politics #us justice system #terrorism #state violence

[ms-cellanies]

#joe biden #us justice system #democrats #us supreme court #biden administration

[callese]

#alex jones #sandy hook #us justice system

[spaceshipsandpurpledrank]

#talkin #tik tok #us history #jury selection #racism #us justice system #shit #cobb county #georgia

[lesbienyu]

thinking back on my conviction and drug court (it was a minor in possession and DUI for those who don't know, will not defend either, esp not the DUI, no excuse for that), and I haven't really thought back on how the sex of the workers involved impacted things.

like the intake guy for community service really pushed me towards sewing blankets or cooking at the shelter. I ended up at the library, and he seemed a bit huffy. the woman who ran the community service program at the library was delightful, and overall happy to have us there. she wasn't judgmental or condescending.

the dude at the mandatory treatment center kept grilling me on if I could be pregnant. I kept telling him I was a lesbian in a committed relationship. he then grilled me on STDs. this wasn't his job- he was mainly there to sign our sheets and tell us if we needed to go to the lab for piss testing. there was a social worker, and those sort of questions were her job, but not his. it was uncomfortable.

my first lawyer was a woman. she was great- she was chill when I panicked in the bathroom before my first appearance. she made sure I was okay, which is above and beyond what her job was. my second lawyer was a man. he did fine, but constantly got my case confused with other clients and never remembered my name.

idk, I haven't thought about it deeply, but I do notice a pattern. I was also very young, nineteen, and not as aware of my rights back then. I do think counselors, probation officers, community service coordinators, and the like should be sex segregated, as it does impact your ability to complete probation requirements- you're less likely to show up for mandatory treatment if the staff are men three times your age grilling you about your sex life unprompted. obviously, a lot more about the system needs changing but I do think giving female convicts our own space, without men being given huge power over us, would be a great start.

#addiction #criminal justice #us justice system #misogyny #radblr #radical feminism

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

[h/t Scott Horton]

* * * *

The firmament has shifted.  ::  March 31, 2023

Robert B. Hubbell

         On Thursday, March 30, 2023, the Manhattan District Attorney confirmed that a grand jury has indicted Donald Trump. With that announcement, the firmament has shifted. For seven frustrating years, we were condemned to wander a landscape in which the crimes of lawless president were litigated in the press through rumors and leaks. Reckless statements and bad faith lies were given flight on cable news. Speculation and innuendo were traded on social media like cigarettes in a prison yard.

         No more. The firmament has shifted.

         The charges and defenses will be contested in a court of law in accordance with New York procedure and rules of evidence. While the landscape of rumors and lies will continue unabated outside the courtroom, statements by counsel in the courtroom must have a good faith basis. If not, the judge will punish the lawyers.

         The firmament has shifted.

         The indictment will be read word-for-word, and Trump will be required to admit or deny the charges in a plea consisting of one word or two: “Guilty” or “Not Guilty.” There will be no incoherent rambling, no oblique calls for violence, no code-words for antisemitism, and no appeals for campaign donations.

         The firmament has shifted.

         Every statement made by Trump on social media or the campaign trail will be a potential admission or effort to obstruct justice. Any rational defendant would curtail his speech to maximize chances of acquittal. Trump will either follow his lawyer’s advice (and minimize the likelihood of conviction) or he will continue apace (and subject himself to new charges of obstruction of justice).

         Of course, we do not know what charges are contained in the sealed indictment. The indictment might charge only misdemeanors. Or it might charge an array of financial crimes connected to the prosecution of the Trump Organization and Allen Weisselberg.

         Either way, the Manhattan indictment serves a necessary and valuable purpose. Trump will be indicted twice more (at least)—once in Fulton County, Georgia, and at least once in D.C. for insurrection, the false electors’ scheme, and / or unlawful retention of national defense documents. The shock of indicting a former president for the first time occurs only once. For good or ill, Alvin Bragg has accepted that burden to the relief of Fani Willis and Jack Smith.

         The scandal of Trump's indictment for paying hush money to save his presidential campaign is that the DOJ failed to indict Trump in 2018 when Michael Cohen was convicted for helping Trump commit the underlying crime. Bill Barr killed the federal investigation into Donald Trump in 2018, and Merrick Garland failed to pick up the investigation in 2021. So, yes, Bragg’s indictment is late and (according to some) ill-timed. But given the delay of Merrick Garland and Fani Willis, Bragg should not be blamed for proceeding first with the weakest charges that Trump will face.

         The reaction by Republican leaders has been lawless and antisemitic. Earlier this week, Kevin McCarthy refused to comment on the mass killing of schoolchildren in Tennessee because he wanted to “get the facts” before condemning the slaughter of innocents. But without the benefit of seeing the sealed indictment, McCarthy was quick to condemn the unknown charges and to threaten Alvin Bragg.

         McCarthy said,

Alvin Bragg has irreparably damaged our country in an attempt to interfere in our Presidential election.

The American people will not tolerate this injustice, and the House of Representatives will hold Alvin Bragg and his unprecedented abuse of power to account.

         Of course, the House of Representatives has no power to hold Bragg “to account.” McCarthy’s statement is a naked attempt to intimidate a prosecutor—and should be investigated by the DOJ as obstruction of justice.

         But the statement by Governor Ron DeSantis was much worse. He said that Florida would “not assist in an extradition request” to transfer Trump to New York “given the questionable circumstances at issue.” DeSantis’s threat was hollow because Trump had already signaled his intention to appear voluntarily in New York. But make no mistake, DeSantis was threatening nothing less than a state-sanctioned effort to harbor a fugitive in violation of state and federal law.

         A man who is running for an office sworn to uphold the US Constitution just demonstrated his manifest unfitness for the presidency. Like his ill-considered description of Russia’s war on Ukraine as a “territorial dispute,” DeSantis’s vow to break the law to protect Trump bordered on rebellion and was monumentally stupid.

         But DeSantis also invoked antisemitism in his refusal to extradite Trump to New York. He twice described Alvin Bragg as being backed by George Soros—a fact of no relevance except as a dog whistle to white supremacists and antisemites everywhere. See ADL, The Antisemitism Lurking Behind George Soros Conspiracy Theories.

         As explained by the ADL,

Even if no antisemitic insinuation is intended, casting a Jewish individual as a puppet master who manipulates national events for malign purposes has the effect of mainstreaming antisemitic tropes and giving support, however unwitting, to antisemites and extremists who disseminate these ideas knowingly and with malice.

         Of course, DeSantis’s references to Soros interfering in Bragg’s investigation were not “unintentional.”  As a presidential candidate whose every word is carefully scripted, DeSantis’s multiple references to Soros were intentional—as were the antisemitic tropes embedded in his statement.

         For the moment, Trump intends to surrender in New York next Tuesday for booking and arraignment. If that happens, it will be a singular moment for the rule of law. It will remind the world that America can hold its leaders to account for their crimes—a proposition that was sorely in need of proof. See op-ed by Dennis Aftergut in Washington Post, By indicting Trump, Alvin Bragg restores our faith in the rule of law.  

         The always-wise Josh Marshall made a point on MSNBC on Thursday evening that should be our guide in the coming days. Marshall urged that we avoid “living inside Donald Trump's drama.” We fell for Trump's dramatic ploy last week when he claimed, “I will be arrested on Tuesday.” He and others will spend endless hours drawing us into conversations that second guess Alan Bragg regarding the timing of the indictment, the charges included (or excluded), the credibility of witnesses, etc.

         The Editorial Board of the Washington Post dove head-first into the Trump psycho-drama with its editorial, The Trump indictment is a poor test case for prosecuting a former president. After listing everything that could go wrong with the prosecution, the Post Editorial Board concludes,

This prosecution needs to be airtight. Otherwise, it’s not worth continuing.

         The Editorial Board’s demand that the case must be “airtight” to be “worth continuing” invokes a standard unknown in western jurisprudence. It is a standard that exists only inside the vortex of Donald Trump's fever dreams—in which the WaPo Editorial Board has become hopelessly mired. We should not repeat their mistake.

         Setting aside the imaginary rules that apply only to the Trump melodrama, here is where we are: Trump has been indicted in New York. He will be tried before a jury of his peers. He will be convicted or acquitted, or the jury will be unable to reach a verdict. It’s that simple. Trump wants to make it a circus to upend the rule of law. Don’t fall into his trap.

         We should avoid living inside the Trumpian drama to the extent we can. The case of the People v. Donald J. Trump will take months or years to unfold. In the meantime, we have federal, state, and local elections to win . . . regardless of what happens in the (first) criminal trial of Donald Trump. Stay the course!

Meanwhile, in Congress.

         As if we needed a reminder of why we must take back the House, GOP led committees put an exclamation point after that proposition on Thursday. In the first instance, GOP. Rep. Barry Loudermilk used the first hearing of his sub-committee on Capitol security to present a sham video that allegedly cleared Loudermilk of giving reconnaissance tours of the Capitol to insurrectionists on January 5th. See MSNBC / Maddow Blog, Investigating the Jan. 6 investigation, GOP rep exonerates himself.

         Loudermilk’s self-proclaimed “exoneration” presentation failed to address crucial questions like, “Why was he giving tours of the Capitol when it was closed to the public?,” and “Why did his tour include members of the crowd that stormed the Capitol the next day?” Loudermilk must believe that his constituents are idiots who will believe anything he says . . . .

         In the Jim Jordan “weaponization” committee hearing, Jordan allowed two witnesses to “read” their testimony into the record and then walk out of the hearing without being questioned by members of the committee—including Democrats eager to discredit the witnesses. Video of the shameful episode is here, WaPo, Democrats’ anger boils over after GOP witnesses testify without taking questions.

         I urge you to watch the video so you can see for yourself the smirk that plasters Jordan’s face as he lamely tries to explain that Democrats can ask their questions even though the witnesses have departed the hearing. Jordan resorted to such bad-faith tactics because Democrats have been dismantling Republican witnesses in the Weaponization Committee hearings. Jordan decided to avoid a repeat of that embarrassment by allowing the witnesses to flee the room before Democrats were able to cross-examine the witnesses. They have no shame . . . . and we must replace every last one of them!

Republican Judge rules that ACA-mandated free testing for HIV and cancer screening is unconstitutional.

         As noted previously, the federal bench in Texas is on a mission to dismantle as much of the “administrative state” as possible. In the latest example, federal district judge Reed O’Connor ruled the ACA’s requirement of free HIV testing and cancer screening was unconstitutional. See Ian Millhiser in Vox, The lawsuit that threatens everything from cancer screenings to birth control, explained.

         As Millhiser notes,

Five years ago, Judge Reed O’Connor attempted to repeal the entire Affordable Care Act. His decision striking down Obamacare was widely mocked, even in conservative circles — in the words of one National Review article, O’Connor’s reasoning “doesn’t even merit being called silly. It’s ridiculous” — and the decision was eventually reversed by a 7-2 vote in the Supreme Court.

Nevertheless, on Thursday, O’Connor handed down a new decision that blocks a key provision of the Affordable Care Act that requires health insurers to cover a wide range of preventive health care services — ranging from cancer screenings to obesity counseling to drugs that prevent the spread of HIV.

         Millhiser explains that the re-configured reactionary majority on the Supreme Court is likely to uphold Judge O’Connor’s ruling. If that happens, large swaths of the ACA will be overruled despite the earlier decision of the Court upholding the ACA’s constitutionality.

         The case of Braidwood Management v. Becerra will be in the news for several years—and may change the face of healthcare as we know it today. Why? Because Justices Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and Barrett live in a world where premium healthcare is unaffected by their sham conservative legal principles. They get free healthcare no matter how much they gut Obamacare. Meanwhile, forty million Americans will suffer worse health outcomes, including death, because of the conservative majority’s social Darwinism approach to the law.

         What’s the solution? Enlarge the Court!

A reflection on hope and optimism

         For your weekend reading, I recommend a remarkable op-ed by Amanda Ripley in WaPo, This element is critical to human flourishing — yet missing from the news. (The link should work for everyone.) It is filled with helpful advice about remaining hopeful during difficult times.

         You may be surprised to learn that I receive fairly consistent criticism from readers (including in today’s email!) that my hopeful and optimistic outlook does a disservice to my readers. I am frequently told that I am naïve, and that my optimism lulls people into a false sense of security and inaction. As I frequently respond, “If you tell people that the future is hopeless, they will believe you”—and then what?

          Amanda Ripley addresses some of these criticism in her article, explaining why as a journalist, it is “easier” to adopt a cynical, negative view. She writes,

As a journalist, trying to look smart in story meetings, it always felt safer to remain skeptical. It was easier to pitch stories about buffoonery than about progress. It’s a strange trick of the mind, especially because it’s the news media’s relentless negativity that has led so many people to give up on institutions . . . . . Cynicism feels protective, even when it’s not.

         Being pessimistic is the easy way out—and creates a self-fulfilling doom narrative. Being optimistic is hard. As Ripely writes,

Hope is more like a muscle than an emotion. It’s a cognitive skill, one that helps people reject the status quo and visualize a better way.

         And for those critics who claim that I ignore bad news and minimize the threats we face, you haven’t been reading the newsletter closely for the last seven years. But there is a difference between recognizing bad news and surrendering to despair. As I told a reader today—with sincere affection—“I am sorry you feel that way. My best advice is that you try not to discourage other people.”

         Optimism is contagious. So is pessimism. If you choose to mediate reality by assuming the worst, that may be the best strategy for you, but it is a poor basis for rallying others to continue the struggle for a better future. If the seemingly relentless bad news of the last week has you down, read Amanda Ripley’s article. She may be able to persuade you to be hopeful, even if I have failed.

Concluding Thoughts.

          On March 7, 1965, John Lewis awoke in a hospital bed with a fractured skull suffered at the hands of white police officers who attacked 600 marchers on the Edmund Pettus Bridge. Ten days later, March 17th, he testified at a federal hearing about those unprovoked beatings—known as Bloody Sunday. Four days later, March 21st, John Lewis joined 3,200 marchers who resumed the march from Selma to Montgomery.

         In addition to his bravery, John Lewis was driven by unflagging hope. Was he foolish? Or naïve? Did he lull others into a false sense of security or inaction? I am not comparing myself to John Lewis—nor should you. But we can learn from his refusal to give in to despair—even though he had ample reason to do so.

         “Hope is more like a muscle than an emotion.” Exercise it. It will come in handy as we face the challenges to come.

Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter

#Scott Horton #Tr*** #TFG #Robert B. Hubbell #Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter #US Justice System #justice #The Rule of Law #Defending Democracy #The Trumpian Drama #Indicted Ex-President

[posttexasstressdisorder]

GOOD!

#us news #donald trump #us justice system #law #law (us)

[uboat53]

Are we guilty until proven innocent? Is it better to let ten guilty men go than to convict one innocent man?

In America, the answer is increasingly "no", and it's not the justice system or secretive elites that are to blame, it's all of us.

60% of Americans, the people who serve on juries, believe that it's equally bad to let a guilty man go free as to convict an innocent one and a disturbing amount of the rest would RATHER convict an innocent man than let a guilty one go free.

I hope none of us are charged with a crime that requires us to go before a jury of Americans, the ethos of sparing the innocent at all costs is no longer dominant in this country.

Source

#politics #us politics #equal justice under law #innocent until proven guilty #us justice system

[friendofthecrows]

Ugh I hate the US justice system so much. This week's question is "At what age are juveniles truly capable of understanding the seriousness of their actions?" like for sentencing as an adult or juvenile. And I was reading about this case where a 14-YEAR-OLD could be sentenced to 20 years in Real Adult Prison, that's more years than the girl has LIVED SO FAR. And just. That's so fucked up.

If you believe that someone with a mental illness that impaired their ability to discern right from wrong and/or the consequences of their actions at the time of committing a crime should be given help/rehabilitation rather than a long prison sentence which will Not Help At All and is arguable punishing them for something that they could not help, they DID NOT HAVE MENS REA then, you shouldn't be imprisoning CHILDREN who ALSO haven't fully developed moral functioning and a full grasp of consequences (it can take up to 17 years of age)

#us justice system #hal rambles #rant

[knarsisus]

play stupid games, win stupid prizes

#newtown shooting #us news #us justice system #us politics #law (us)

[lookmyskinisfallingoff]

If you don’t know the details on the verdict or the evidence then i suggest looking through the trial completely. It’s all there for the public to view on YouTube and the Virginia Court site online, Depp won because he was able to prove he didn't abuse this woman, Amber won 1 count because of Adam Waldman statement that was not proven completely in the trial because he also blamed the publicist and her associates in helping her start and enact this hoax from the beginning. HE NEVER ABUSED THIS WOMAN. The info we have now, you should update your knowledge on the case if you’re gonna keep throwing that Judge in the pocket NGN’s biased UK verdict around all the time.

#Johnny Depp #Amber Heard #amber heard is a husband beater #amber heard is an abuser #adam waldman #justice for johnny depp #justice for victims #UK trial #us justice system #abuse #verdict #defamation #youtube #depp v heard trial #depp vs heard

[thoughtportal]

This week, national treasure Amanda Knox talks with Sarah about what the American legal system claims to be for, what it’s actually doing, and what might be possible in the future. They entertain the most heretical ideas they can think of, which mostly seem to be about unconditional love and mercy. And at the end, Sarah’s ghost boyfriend Clarence Darrow turns up.

#What Even Is Justice? with Amanda Knox #you're wrong about #Amanda Knox #us justice system #criminal justice #justice #podcast #podcasts #crime #justice system #legal system #law #law and legislation #law and order

[callese]

Story

#us justice system #this is amerikka #us immigration #us mexico border

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

March 30, 2023

Heather Cox Richardson

The New York grand jury investigating Trump’s 2016 hush-money payments to adult film actor Stormy Daniels has voted to indict the former president. While we don’t know the full range of charges, Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg’s office confirmed that they were forthcoming tonight when it released a statement saying, “This evening we contacted Mr. Trump’s attorney to coordinate his surrender to the Manhattan D.A.’s office for arraignment on a Supreme Court indictment, which remains under seal.”

This is the first time in history a former United States president has been indicted, although it is worth remembering that it is not new for our justice system to hold elected officials accountable. Mayors have been indicted and convicted. So have governors: in fact, four of the past ten Illinois governors have gone to prison. Vice presidents, too, have been charged with crimes: Aaron Burr was indicted on two counts of murder in 1804 while still in office and was tried for treason afterward. And in 1973, Richard Nixon’s vice president Spiro Agnew resigned after pleading no contest to tax evasion to avoid prison time. That Trump’s indictment is happening in New York has likely made it harder for Trump to drum up the mobs he has been inciting to defend him. New York City notoriously dislikes the former real estate man. Voters of Tomorrow official Victor Shi was at the Manhattan district attorney’s office this evening and found no one protesting. When people did show up, he tweeted, they were not Trump supporters. They were women carrying signs that said, “‘Trump is guilty’ and ‘The Time Is Now,’” he wrote. “People in the background are chanting, ‘Way to go, ladies!’ NYC is rejoicing.” New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman, to whom Trump people feel comfortable talking, said that the Trump camp at Mar-a-Lago is “in…shock” at the news. They thought yesterday’s announcement that the grand jury will go on a break in early April indicated that nothing would happen before the jury reconvened. As Haberman points out, Trump has been afraid of indictments for many years, and while some speculate this indictment might help his political profile (I disagree with that, by the way), he is unhappy to see it finally arrive. He did, though, immediately start fundraising off it. Trump also released quite a long, antisemitic statement blaming “Radical Left Democrats” for a “Witch-Hunt” and saying this is “blatant Election interference.” House speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) also quickly reinforced Trump's argument, saying that Bragg had “irreparably damaged our country in an attempt to interfere in our Presidential election,” and a number of other Republican officials reinforced that sentiment. That is quite a position to take. The vote to indict came not from Bragg himself, but from a grand jury made up of ordinary Americans, and none of us knows what’s in the indictment, so one can hardly object to it in good faith. CNN reporter Melanie Zanona reports that Trump has been working the phones tonight, reaching out to Republican allies to shore up support. Some of them, of course, are trying to discredit Bragg’s work by investigating him. Trump is at his company’s property in Florida, Mar-a-Lago. Florida governor Ron DeSantis echoed Trump’s antisemitism and accusations, tweeting that Florida would “not assist in an extradition request.” But Article IV, Section 2, of the United States Constitution says, “A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.” So either DeSantis is planning to violate the Constitution, or he recognizes that Trump will probably return to New York voluntarily, or—and this is the most likely—he is posturing to pick up Trump voters while secretly rejoicing that this will likely make it harder for Trump to win the Republican presidential nomination. While all eyes were on Trump this evening, paperwork was filed in the Florida Senate to begin the process of revising election laws, possibly so that DeSantis can run for president without resigning as governor, as under current Florida law he must. But there was something striking about Trump’s statement. In blaming the “Radical Left Democrats” for their “Witch-Hunt to destroy the Make America Great Again movement,” he wrote, “You remember it just like I do: Russia, Russia, Russia; the Mueller Hoax; Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine; Impeachment Hoax 1; Impeachment Hoax 2; the illegal and unconstitutional Mar-a-Lago raid; and now this.” It's not a list to be proud of, but that wording—“you remember it just like I do”—jumped out. Trump always goes back to what he calls the Russia hoax, his second attempt to rewrite the way people thought about his presidency (the first was the size of the crowd at his inauguration). From the very start of his presidency, when the Federal Bureau of Investigation caught Trump's then–national security advisor Michael Flynn lying about his contact with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, more and more information has come out tying the Trump campaign to Russian operatives. As it did, Trump insisted that his followers must believe that all that information was a lie. If they believed his lies rather than the truth over the Russia scandal, they would trust him rather than believe the truth about everything. The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine has given a new frame to Russia’s attempts to interfere in the 2016 election. A piece by Jim Rutenberg in the New York Times Magazine in November 2022 pulled together testimony given both to the Mueller investigation and the Republican-dominated Senate Intelligence Committee, transcripts from the impeachment hearings, and recent memoirs. Rutenberg showed that in 2016, Russian operatives had presented to Trump advisor and later campaign manager Paul Manafort a plan “for the creation of an autonomous republic in Ukraine’s east, giving Putin effective control of the country’s industrial heartland, where Kremlin-armed, -funded, and -directed “separatists” were waging a two-year-old shadow war that had left nearly 10,000 dead.” In exchange for weakening the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), undermining the U.S. stance in favor of Ukraine in its attempt to throw off the Russians who had invaded in 2014, and removing U.S. sanctions from Russian entities, Russian operatives were willing to put their finger on the scale to help Trump win the White House. Rutenberg notes that Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine looks a lot like a way to achieve the plan it suggested in 2016 but, thanks to a different president in the U.S., that invasion did not yield the results Russian president Vladimir Putin expected. The Russian economy is crumbling, and Tuesday, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Russia's Wagner group of mercenaries is "suffering an enormous amount of casualties in the Bakhmut area.” He called it a “slaughter-fest" for the Russians. Today, Putin issued an order to conscript another 147,000 soldiers by July 15. Pressure on Putin continues to mount. The International Criminal Court’s March 17 arrest warrant against him and his children’s rights commissioner, Maria Lvova-Belova, for war crimes apparently caught Russian leadership by surprise. It isolates Russia and worries other Russian lawmakers that they will be charged as well, weakening their support for Putin. “Now proximity to the president isn’t just talk,” one political strategist said, “it’s a real step towards being prosecuted by international law enforcement.” And President of the European Commission (which is the executive of the European Union) Ursula von der Leyen today warned that as the European Union rethinks its trade policies, China could find itself isolated as well if it continues to support Russia. “How China continues to interact with Putin’s war will be a determining factor for EU-China relations going forward,” she said. Meanwhile, Turkey today dropped its opposition to Finland’s membership in NATO, a membership Finland has pursued in the wake of Russia’s recent aggression. Finland shares an 830-mile border with Russia, and now it will be part of NATO. Under such pressure, Russia today took the extraordinary step of detaining American journalist Evan Gershkovich, a reporter for the Wall Street Journal, accusing him of spying. Secretary of State Antony Blinken expressed deep concern and urged U.S. citizens living or traveling in Russia to “leave immediately.” Yesterday, another study of the Russian invasion of Ukraine invited us to look backward as well as forward. Britain’s Royal United Services Institute, a government-affiliated think tank, released a report on Russia’s “covert and clandestine operations, psychological operations, subversion, sabotage, special operations and intelligence and counterintelligence activities” designed to destabilize Ukraine and take it over. The report’s focus was on the current war in Ukraine, but as Josh Kovensky of Talking Points Memo notes, it establishes that some of the same people behind the destabilization of Ukrainian politics were part of Trump’s world. Notably, Russian operative Andrii Derkach not only worked to grab Ukraine for Russia, but also escorted Trump ally Rudy Giuliani around Ukraine in 2019 to dig up dirt on Biden. In the end, as legal dominoes begin to fall, it might be that Americans do not, in fact, remember the history of his presidency from “Russia, Russia, Russia” forward the same way Trump does.

—LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

#Letters From An American #Heather Cox Richardson #Trump Indicted #TFG #Russia #USA Political System #Rule of Law #NATO #US Justice System