Trump outside the courthouse today:

@Acyn
Trump on Speaker Johnson: We'll see what happens with that.

FTA:

High-profile right-wing influencers were briefed on House Speaker Mike Johnson's voter registration bill well in advance of its announcement in what appears to be a coordinated social media campaign meant to drum up support for the legislation, which is dead on arrival on the Senate.

Conservative influencers posted dozens of times before Johnson, R-La., publicly announced the bill alongside former President Donald Trump at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, calling on Congress to pass the bill, which has not yet been filed, and offering policy details that are still not available to the public.

FTA:

Given all Trump has done, and given all we know, the claim that Joe Biden"whatever his failures, whatever his limitations, whatever his age"poses a greater threat to the republic than Donald Trump is delusional.

FTA:

"I think Russian propaganda has made its way into the United States, unfortunately, and it's infected a good chunk of my party's base," Representative Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told Puck's Julia Ioffe last week. Representative Mike Turner, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, went further, telling CNN's Jake Tapper a few days later, "We see directly coming from Russia attempts to mask communications that are anti-Ukraine and pro-Russia messages, some of which we even hear being uttered on the House floor."

Which Republicans might they be referring to? Representative Ken Buck didn't hesitate to point a finger at Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, saying on Monday, "Moscow Marjorie is focused now on this Ukraine issue and getting her talking points from the Kremlin and making sure that she is popular and she is getting a lot of coverage."

. . .Consider the news last week that authorities in several European countries had uncovered a vast corruption network, in which European politicians were paid to spread anti-Ukraine and pro-Russia propaganda. The network, according to intelligence sources cited by Czech media and confirmed by the country's prime minister, was orchestrated by pro-Russia Ukrainian oligarch Viktor Medvedchuk. Politicians from Germany, France, Poland, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Hungary were allegedly paid directly with cash or through cryptocurrency exchanges.

Time, and the jury, will tell.
#3 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER

MFA:

There is no guarantee that Trump will be convicted in Manhattan. As always, we should trust jurors to take their oaths seriously, to serve impartially, to determine without fear or favor whether the prosecution has proved every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. The deck is not stacked against Trump"who, like any other American, will be judged by members of the community where he committed his alleged misdeed. He may be convicted, or acquitted, or face a mistrial; what's most important, at this point, is that he stands trial now. November is looming, creating a whole new set of opportunities for criminal interference with the election. Thanks to Bragg and Merchan, Trump will have to answer for at least one of his alleged past crimes before he has the chance to commit new ones. And that is a victory in itself.

Angry Staffer
@Angry_Staffer

Hillary testified for 11 hours during a Benghazi hearing.

Biden had a five-hour interview with Robert Hur.

Trump fell asleep after an hour in court.

FTA:

Last year, I was uncertain whether this scheme, while sordid, rose to the level of a felony offense. I am now convinced that, if proved that he took these actions, it surely does. The falsification of business records is, by itself, a misdemeanor under New York law, but it's a felony when it's done with the "intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof." In his indictment, Bragg claims that Trump lied about the payments with the intent to violate election law, which is what elevates the crime to a felony. Initially, I was suspicious of this theory; what election law, exactly, was the former president attempting to violate? The district attorney's initial statement of facts was hazy on this crucial point, raising the possibility that he couldn't tie the underlying fraud to a state or federal statute.

Turns out he could. Bragg has argued, convincingly, that the former president intended to violate at least two election laws"one state, one federal. First, Bragg asserted that Trump and Cohen ran afoul of the Federal Election Campaign Act by making unlawful campaign contributions (in the form of a payoff) at the direction of a candidate (that is, Trump). Cohen already pleaded guilty for this very act in federal court, so it is hardly a stretch to accuse Trump of intending to break the law by participating in the crime. Second, Bragg argued that Trump ran afoul of a New York election law that forbids any conspiracy "to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means." The district attorney claimed that Trump intended to violate this statute by committing fraud in order to secure his own victory in 2016.

"---- even people who weren't really doing anything wrong were arrested and sent to prison."

Link?

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports

Trump "glares" at @MaggieNYT "for several seconds as he walks out," hours after she broke the news of the former president's in-court snooze.

(per @Law360's pooler @frankrunyeon)

Sleepy Donald Trump needs to be a little more woke.

He's already done that with 300 EOs regarding the border.
www.migrationpolicy.org
What's Congress going to give him that doesn't already have?
#5 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

Funding. Same thing Trump asked for.

#61 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

SAFE ABORTION ACCESS FOR ALL IN NEW YORK STATE

Abortion access is available for New Yorkers and for those coming from outside of New York State. You do not have to be a New York State resident to receive care here.

Medication abortion and in-clinic abortion is available in New York State. You can speak to a provider about your options, and your privacy will be protected every step of the way.

In New York, you can get an abortion up to and including 24 weeks of pregnancy. After 24 weeks, you can still get an abortion if your health or pregnancy is at risk.

In some states, (see New York) anytime someone requests it... The person performing the abortion need not even be a doctor. The truth is, there is nothing preventing someone like Kermit Gosnel from legally setting up shop there, because there is no criminal code pertaining to abortion any longer.
You and retarded SnoofyHurts may ask "how many times does that happen?" Well, we may never know since there isn't really any regulation on the procedure.
#61 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

What you are saying about NY state is simply not true:

Abortion policies currently in effect in New York include the following:

Abortion is banned at fetal viability, generally 24-26 weeks of pregnancy
State Medicaid funds cover abortion
Private health insurance plans are required to cover abortion
Qualified health care professionals, not solely physicians, can provide abortions
State fund helps patients pay for abortion care
State provides protections from harassment and physical harm for anyone entering an abortion clinic
State has a shield law to protect abortion providers from investigations by other states; may cover patients and support organizations

Democrats want babies "executed after birth."
What he's describing is murder. It's a bold faced lie.
What democrats want is safe, professional, easy access to abortion for women who want or need them.
Republicans, without lies, they'd have nothing.
#3 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK

Bears repeating over and over again:

Abortions at or after 21 weeks are uncommon and represent 1% of all abortions in the U.S. The procedures are expensive and often require travel and lost wages. They normally require treatment over multiple days and are only performed by a subset of all abortion providers.

Claims of abortions occurring "moments before birth" or even "after birth" are false. These scenarios do not occur, nor are they legal in the United States.

Anthony Michael Kreis
@AnthonyMKreis

A problem re: the Arizona abortion decision is that it is resurrection of a 19th century zombie law that nobody alive voted for and no person today would expect to get enforced. It should be a serious due process and political process violation to revive a law that was dead.

"If I'm understanding it correctly it's a legal default in the wake of Dobbs and if that is correct I'm surprised it took this long."

The Arizona SC has 7 Republican judges, but only 6 of them ruled because one guy recused himself. According to the 2 dissenting judges, it didn't have to rule this way:

Vice Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer, writing for the dissenters, took the same approach as the appeals court, finding that the two laws could exist harmoniously, with the 15-week ban acting as an exception to 1864's near-total restrictions. In that scheme, the 15-week ban would control abortions up to that point, and only then would the 1864 ban kick in.

After Dobbs this is a legal issue. It has a legislative remedy in Arizona. Pass a new law. Easier said than done to be sure. But the process allows for it.
#65 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

The Arizona SC didn't have to rule that the 160 year old law goes into effect in 14 days. To give the citizens of Arizona a chance to vote, they could have held off ruling or ruled that the law would go into effect after November's election if voters so decided. But, no, they had to reinstate a law that was created about 50 years before Arizona became a state and before women were allowed to vote. So I repeat:

Nothing says that Republicans care about today's women like reinstating a 160 year old law on 14 days notice. When they show you who they are, believe them.

"Politically, Democrats should first let the right cannibalize itself over a MAGA-aligned, high profile Republican woman running for U.S. Senate in an important swing state basically declaring herself a pro-choice advocate without trying to overplay the hypocrisy card."

It's a start and now Trump has a dilemma: should he run to Lake's defense on this issue and put himself at odds with the Arizona Freedom caucus?:

State Freedom Caucus Network
@SFC_Network
Unlike some Republicans, State Freedom Caucuses never back down on the issue of life

Arizona Freedom Caucus
@AZFreedomCaucus

STATEMENT ON ARIZONA SUPREME COURT'S PRO-LIFE RULING

Today, the Supreme Court of Arizona made the correct ruling, upheld the intent of the legislature, and preserved the rule of law today by ruling that the pre-Roe law will remain effective.

Protecting the lives of Arizona's most vulnerable children is not a political football to be kicked around for partisan gain as Democrats so eagerly do. Make no mistake, Democrats' advocacy for ripping children apart, limb by limb, in the womb is cruel, inhumane, and a dark stain on these pages in our future history books. Disgustingly, Democrats are ruthlessly committed to allowing unlimited abortions in Arizona, even up until the moment of full term delivery, as is the case with their current abortions on demand' ballot initiative.

Conservative Republicans have led for decades in Arizona to protect life, support women, and afford vulnerable Arizona moms and families a safety net when they need a helping hand. We will continue to fight for these priorities; however, we will not compromise on the core value of cherishing and protecting life.

As Republicans, we should be proud of the fact that today the lives of the preborn are more protected than they have been since SCOTUS' fatally flawed Roe decision more than a half century ago. As Republicans, we should be unashamed in proclaiming the value of life.

Sadly, it seems that some are choosing to reject the fundamental, core principle of protecting life. Some have chosen instead to jump on the bandwagon to legalize unrestricted abortions for the first 15 weeks of pregnancy " a position that would permit 95% of all existing abortions to continue. This is unacceptable, morally wrong, and abrasively out of step with the central tenants of the Republican Party Platform and Republican voters.

Murdering children is not a policy disagreement. Democrat politicians' infatuation with murdering children is evil. The @AZFreedomCaucus refuses to participate in, or sit idly by in the face of, that evil.

Nothing says that Republicans care about today's women like reinstating a 160 year old law on 14 days notice. When they show you who they are, believe them.

Arizona Freedom Caucus rips Kari Lake for abandoning them with her new position on abortion today.

Are these really the people Arizonians want dedicing their future on abortion (or anything else)?:

So this happened today at the #AZLeg.

#34 | POSTED BY NORTHGUY3

Are cicadis considered locusts? The Lord is sending a plague of cicadas to warn us this summer. MTG will no doubt think that means God wants Trump to be president. ;-)

The lien may be expired, but the debt remains.
#64 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

It looks like that's the catch-22.

Trump and his cronies are calling Democrats fascists (directly) and Nazis )indirectly:

Why Trump and His Supporters Keep Calling Democrats 'Fascists'

On Monday, August 14, a Georgia grand jury indicted Donald Trump and 18 allies, the most famous of which was his former attorney and New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. In an interview the next day, Giuliani shared on WABC radio's Greg Kelly Show that he was anxious to fight the case, claiming defiantly "We're going to beat these fascists into the ground."

Among Trump and his allies, the "fascist" label has been growing in popularity as an epithet for Democrats. Following his indictments, Trump has repeatedly referred to "radical left Democrats" as "fascists" And not just any old fascists. On August 1st, for example, Trump posted on Truth Social that the persecution he'd experienced from the "Biden Crime Family" was "reminiscent of Nazi Germany in the 1930s."

In our hyper-polarized national discourse, politicians calling their opponents "fascists" and comparing them to "Nazis" may seem sadly commonplace. But traditionally the labels seemed more ideologically consistent. Democrats have long compared Republicans to fascists, because the term traditionally carried with it the idea of right-wing extremism. Just as Republicans often referred to their partisan rivals as "commies" and "socialists," terms typically associated with extreme leftism. So to hear Republicans like Trump, Giuliani, and Marjorie Taylor Greene turn the "fascist" and "Nazi" labels on Democrats is a bit more curious.

I'm not following why you think that would be great? What changes are you talking about? These (two) laws have been on the books since the 90's. They haven't been changed. But I am also unsure is there are other new laws I am unaware of. It would be helpful if the articles would cite sources for the information they are providing.
#60 | POSTED BY MIRANDA7

I was wondering if state prisons were following the same statues as the county prisons with the cavaets you outlined above regarding liens disappearing after 3 years and prison authorites being about to dtermine the prisoner's ability to pay. I assumed they weren't based on what happened to the woman in the article and that perhaps changes had recently been made to fix the problem, but it looks like there is some other catch-22 operting in this woman's case and in the cases of others like her.