Trump is ‘completely unraveling’: Former top White House aide says ‘you can see it on his eyes’
July 30, 2020, 10:33 PM ET
For customer support contact
support@rawstory.com. Report typos and corrections to
corrections@rawstory.com.
Stories Chosen For You
Watch: Jack Smith walks in stony silence as reporter tries to pry info on Trump probes
June 06, 2023
Special counsel Jack Smith, who is leading two federal probes into the potential crimes of former President Donald Trump, maintained a stony silence on Tuesday when a reporter tried to pry information from him.
NBC News' Gary Grumbach on Tuesday morning found Smith walking down the street in Washington, D.C. and proceeded to pepper him with questions about his investigations, including whether he would bring criminal charges against Trump.
Smith, however, did not take the bait and continued walking without speaking with Grumbach.
The camera footage of Smith comes as he reportedly nears a decision on whether to seek charges against Trump in the Mar-a-Lago documents case in which the former president stashed top-secret documents at his private resort and then refused to return them even after receiving a lawful subpoena for them.
IN OTHER NEWS: 'He'll do everything he can to keep Chris Christie off the debate stage': Ex gov says Trump terrified of former ally
Smith this week reportedly met with lawyers representing Trump, who made their case to him on why their client should not be indicted on federal charges.
In addition to the Mar-a-Lago documents case, Trump also faces a civil lawsuit over allegedly fraudulent business practices from New York Attorney General Letitia James; criminal charges related to his hush-money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels; and two different investigations into his efforts to illegally remain in power after losing the 2020 election to President Joe Biden.
Watch the video below or at this link.
\u201c.@NBCNEWS EXCLUSIVE: Special Counsel Jack Smith did not respond to my questions about a coming indictment or his ongoing investigation as he entered his Washington, D.C. office this morning.\n\nSmith has kept a low profile in a building far from Main Justice during his time as SC\u201d— Gary Grumbach (@Gary Grumbach) 1686066283
CONTINUE READING
Show less
‘Isn’t there a beach in Mexico waiting for you?’: Cruz mocked for claiming Garland will indict Trump over SCOTUS seat loss
June 06, 2023
U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) is being roundly mocked after claiming Attorney General Merrick Garland will indict Donald Trump because he "hates" the ex-president and because he is angry his early 2016 nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court was blocked.
"They hypocrisy is massive," Sen. Cruz declared on Fox News Monday night. "And mark my words: I believe Merrick Garland will indict Donald Trump. He wants to indict Donald Trump because he hates Donald Trump. He hates him – he’s angry – Merrick Garland is angry that he wasn’t confirmed to the Supreme Court. he wants to indict him."
Cruz, who has a law degree from Harvard, is wrong on the basic facts, and he's being widely mocked for it.
As many are pointing out, first, Attorney General Garland appointed Jack Smith as Special Prosecutor. Smith, who was appointed as Acting U.S. Attorney by Donald Trump in 2017, will make the decision on whether or not to present charges to a grand jury. The grand jury, not Garland and not Smith, will make the decision on whether or not to indict Trump.
Also, whether or not Garland has any anger about not being confirmed by the U.S. Senate, that anger would rightly be pointed to then Senate Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who took the unprecedented step of refusing to even allow a committee hearing to consider his nomination.
McConnell did that in early 2016, even before Trump was the GOP's presidential nominee. Trump had nothing to do with blocking Garland's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court.
"This is dangerous," warned foreign policy and intelligence expert John Sipher, who spent nearly three decades in the Central Intelligence Agency’s National Clandestine Service. "He knows what he’s doing and he’s risking violence."
After Cruz's Fox News appearance, he posted video of his own remarks and baselessly tweeted, "Merrick Garland is the most partisan Attorney General in American history. He has corrupted the DOJ, the FBI, and the machinery of government. And now, out of nothing but a sense of hatred and political retribution, Garland is trying to indict Trump."
Later, on Tuesday he added, "Merrick Garland has corrupted the Department of Justice and effectively turned it into an arm of the Democratic National Committee. The FBI and DOJ want to protect and insulate Joe Biden and the Biden family's corruption."
None of his allegations have any basis in publicly-known fact.
Cruz came under fire in 2021 after advising Trump's legal team during the ex-president's second impeachment, even though he would also be a juror – and supposedly impartial – in Trump's Senate trial. In December of 2020 Cruz told Trump he would "be happy" to argue a proposed Supreme Court lawsuit designed to keep Trump in power despite having lost the election one month earlier.
Author Cliff Schecter labeled Cruz's claims on Fox News, "Complete horses*t, which is Ted's brand."
"But, if true, Garland would be doing more re his SCOTUS rejection than @tedcruz did when Trump called his wife ugly," he added. "Ted doesn't get why Garland wouldn't just make hostage video phone calls for Trump's campaign."
Historian and author Kevin M. Kruse: "The line that 'they're only indicting Trump for the crimes Trump clearly did because they hate Trump' is pathetic when it comes from Trump himself, but Jesus Christ, it is twelve kinds of sad when it comes from one of his lickspittles."
Reporter and award-winning columnist David Lazarus noted, "Republicans keep insisting Trump is being investigated and prosecuted because people in power hate him. That's one theory. Or Trump is being investigated and prosecuted because he kept breaking the law."
Lincoln Project co-founder Jennifer Horn, a former New Hampshire Republican State Committee chair, blasted Cruz.
"I'm sure it has nothing to do with classified documents or inciting an insurrection," she said, referring to the two major portions of Smith's investigation. And referring to Cruz's infamous exit during a state-wide crisis when he hightailed out to Cancun, she asked: "Isn't there a beach in Mexico waiting for you?"
Watch video of Cruz above or at this link.
CONTINUE READING
Show less
Donald Trump has been here before — 35 years ago — with an investigation. Then a flood in a room with evidence.
It happened when auditors in New York City spent two years probing more than $3 million in unpaid rent the city was expecting from Trump’s Grand Hyatt hotel from operations in 1986.
That flood was reported by CBS News at the time in the context of then-candidate Trump refusing to release his tax returns, purportedly because he was being audited. It said the two-year audit of Trump’s hotel from the late 1980s involved “stonewalling, disorganization and obfuscation at every turn.”
The story has a whole new context after CNN reported that in October of last year, a drained swimming pool at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home and resort flooded a room with computer servers containing surveillance video.
Skepticism abounded immediately that it was done on purpose to damage evidence in the Justice Department’s investigation of potential obstruction. Trump is under investigation for his handling of classified documents after leaving office as president. The video could show how and when documents were moved.
In the Grand Hyatt case, city auditors filed a 73-page report, posted by CBS News. It said that Trump’s lease obligations should have required substantial documentation — “documentation (that) the Hotel — for one reason or another — could not or did not provide.”
Of particular interest today is the next sentence.
“In September, 1988, the Hotel informed us that it could not locate seven of the twelve monthly general ledgers, because they ‘were discarded after they were severely damaged by water when the room in which they were stored was flooded,’” the report said.
Two months later, the report said, “summary information” about the data being sought was found at a storage site in New Jersey.
“We determined the summaries would be sufficient for our purpose, although their use entailed substantial additional labor to reconstruct the details of the monthly transactions,” the report said.
The audit report went on to describe more delays and missing documents.
The Trump hotel’s “resistance to our review and the Hotel's lapses in record keeping had substantial impact upon our inquiry's scope and methodology,” the report said.
Trump’s rent was tied in part to the hotel’s gross revenue and profits. The report’s Executive Summary said auditors were investigating why the hotel paid $3.7 million for rent in 1985 and, although its gross revenues increased in 1986, it paid only $667,155.
After lawsuits and the bankruptcy of an accounting firm used by Trump, the case was mistakenly labeled as disposed and later reopened. Trump had sold the hotel and the new owners reached an undisclosed settlement, CBS News reported.
CONTINUE READING
Show less
Copyright © 2023 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | Manage Preferences
For corrections contact corrections@rawstory.com, for support contact support@rawstory.com.
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}