18
   

Monitoring Biden and other Contemporary Events

 
 
bulmabriefs144
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2022 09:07 pm
@MontereyJack,
:rolls eyes:

Do you know what the rights of the people are in the US? It turns out, we have the right to carry weapons... even against our own government. We also have the right to freely assemble, to not have troops in our house, to worship where and how we want, to write or say what we want... even against our own government. And to petition government for grievances.

Insurrection is a term they use in unfree countries.

Americans had the right to to meet Biden in person, and ask him anything. Even demand a recount. In person. The government was established as by the people, for the people, and of the people. This means that the president is not a dictator in an ivory tower. His duty is to the people. He is renting a building which the public has a right to. Instead, those who visited were arrested and one or two were actually shot on sight. These are the actions of a dictator against a free public. Not an "insurrection", the public had the right to be there. The "president" did not.

Jan. 6 wasn't an insurrection. Stop calling it what it isn’t
Quote:
Words have meaning.

The events of Jan. 6 have been described by Senator Schumer as a date that will live in infamy — harkening back to FDR’s words after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Others have compared Jan. 6 with 9-11. Some historians declared it to be the worst act of rebellion since the nation’s founding, while others believe there’s been nothing like it since the Civil War. The news media and the Left use “insurrection” to describe Jan. 6.

They’re all wrong.

Historically, Shays’ Rebellion (1786-1787), the Whiskey Rebellion (1790), and Fries Rebellion (1799) were actual acts of insurrection.

Post-Civil War, the Wilmington Insurrection (1898) is by far worse than Jan. 6. Another one, the Battle of Athens, TN (1946), involved local armed WWII GIs taking over the town, forcing the corrupt sheriff to hide in the jail clinging to the election ballot boxes, until he finally surrendered and the GIs’ candidate won the election. There were the L.A. riots of 1992.

And the BLM riots during the summer of 2020 caused 18 deaths, over $1 billion dollars in damage, including federal and state buildings, and in some cities sovereign nations were declared.

Jan. 6. caused $1.5 million in damage and, despite what was often reported, one person was killed. An unarmed woman, Ashley Babbitt, was shot by a Capitol police officer. The officer’s interview on NBC resulted in more questions than answers about why he fired his weapon and killed Babbitt.

The word insurrection is a legal term. Under federal law it’s a crime to incite or engage in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the U.S. or its laws. Black’s Law Dictionary defines insurrection as “a violent revolt against oppressive authority.” It is to be distinguished from a mob or riot based on organization of an armed uprising. Mobs and riots can involve unlawful and violent acts, but they aren’t necessarily insurrections. A revolt is an act to overthrow the government. Insurrection, therefore, requires an organized group that plans an attack to overthrow the government.

To date, a small percentage of the approximately 725 charged have been accused of violent crimes, and no charges of rebellion or insurrection have been filed. Around 165 have pled guilty to charges — mostly to misdemeanors. Only 30 were given jail time. The FBI investigation has yielded little evidence of a coordinated and organized attack. Instead, 95 percent of the participants were acting individually.

An AP story intending to link Trump to the riot published some of the comments made by participants during court appearances. None of them stated that the event was planned. Indeed, most indicated they didn’t really know why they did it. They said they felt inspired by Trump’s comments and believed the election was fraudulent, but there was no organized or coordinated plan to attack the Capitol.

Most of the Jan. 6 participants have been charged with trespass. One local man was at the Capitol dressed as George Washington for selfies. A woman from Missouri recently admitted being at the Capitol and stealing a broken sign.

Video footage shows people walking single file past idle officers as they entered the building. Afterward, most exited on their own accord.

Very few were arrested that day. Since Jan. 6, the DOJ has used a campaign of “shock and awe” to round up and detain people, again predominantly charged with misdemeanors. Compared with the BLM riots, prosecutors do seem more zealous about Jan. 6. Yet, insurrection charges haven’t been filed.

Confrontation between officers and rioters did happen. Violence definitely occurred. But, the only shot fired was, again, by the officer who killed Babbitt.

Jan. 6 was a horrible event. People who acted violently or damaged property should be prosecuted. Those who unlawfully trespassed should also be prosecuted. But as bad as Jan. 6 actually was, it was not the worst in American history. It can’t be compared to Pearl Harbor or 9-11. It’s not even the worst this century.

Because words have meaning, Jan. 6 can’t be called an “insurrection” just to satisfy the urge to convey a particular seriousness of the event or to propagate a political narrative. This type of narrative is aimed at silencing conservatives, not describing what happened that day. Most participants were not violent people. They weren’t acting as part of a coordinated rebellion. There was no intent to topple the government. They were impassioned citizens at a rally that turned into a riot. It was shameful, but not an insurrection.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jan-6-wasn-t-an-insurrection-stop-calling-it-what-it-isn-t/ar-AASOcg8

America is a free country. At least it was 15 or 20 years ago. Maybe not so much today.

I urge you to complete your education, and visit one of these Muslim countries you fawn over. And a communist country. And then head to North Korea.

I visited the UK (getting socialist at the time of visit), and saw just how nanny state they were. Traffic cams everywhere, CCTV all over the place, most houses had security systems. Blehhh. I also visited China (at the time of visit, it was economically capitalist but the government was run by communist party), it was scary when police officers came to settle something, but the overall feeling was that people had a strong ability to work toward their success. Then I come back to America, and realize that China actually has less red tape for small businesses, and I have reverse culture shock.

You need to understand the difference between a country that puts people away for speaking bad about the leaders, and countries where this speech is actually protected as part of the constitution.

Freedom of speech is absolute
Quote:
The First Amendment to the Constitution, the most important 44 words in that priceless and precious promise of liberty and freedom, does not guarantee civil, wise or even responsible speech. It guarantees free speech, however goofy, dumb or even irresponsible.

The American obsession with free speech often confounds friend and foe abroad, even those, like our British cousins, who should know better. The Europeans say they cherish free speech, and guarantee the expression of it, but what they mean is that their governments guarantee the free expression of government-approved speech. That’s a distinction with a definite difference.

This is relevant, as always, and important to keep in mind this week when the Trump administration declined to sign the “Christchurch Call,” designed to be a pledge, nonbinding at the moment, to “take action” against the spread of extremist views on the Internet. It’s the brainchild of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern of New Zealand in the wake of the deadly shootings in Christchurch by a deranged, or more likely evil, young man who published a long, rambling, barely coherent white-supremacist diatribe about why he was doing it. He live-streamed the gruesome spectacle on Facebook.

Miss Ardern and President Emmanuel Macron of France convened a summit in Paris, attended by prime ministers Theresa May of Britain, Scott Morrison of Australia and Justin Trudeau of Canada, to do something about all the free speech floating on the air, causing violent mischief around the world. Representatives of Twitter, Facebook and Twitter signed up, too. (Nobody turns down a trip to Paris to make mischief.)

“The Christchurch Call to action has a simple purpose,” says Miss Ardern. “Tech companies have both enormous power and enormous responsibilities. And so do governments. We each have a role to play in protecting an open, free and secure Internet,” and, here comes the but, “this should never be used as a justification for leaving extremism and terrorism unchecked.”

Everybody wants extremism and terrorism to be checked, but it’s a fundamental American instinct to be careful with how that is done. How will “extremism” be defined, and more important, who will define it? The Christchurch Call, well-intentioned as it may be, carries with it risks of unintended consequences. It promises a commitment to “strengthening the resilence and inclusiveness of our societies,” but it encourages Facebook and YouTube to eliminate content that gives the overly sensitive folk heartburn even if it is not hate speech.

Facebook recently proposed to create “a global oversight board,” a panel of “experts” to decide what content should be removed, and when. Facebook doesn’t say who would anoint and appoint these “experts,” but it’s not difficult to imagine who they would be. You can bet they would arrive all broke out in San Francisco values. Prime Minister Ardern says the Christchurch Call “is not about regulation,” and the focus “is very much on violent extremism.” The pledge will not limit or curtail freedom of expression, of course, and everyone will be free to express as much government-sanitized speech as they want.

If Miss Ardern and her Christchurch callers want to reassure the skeptics they should cast the pledge as something like this: “Our governments shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” That would reassure everyone, and the ghost of James Madison would surely not haunt Miss Ardern and her fellows for stealing his sentiments.

Guarding against the encroachment of good intentions is a full-time job. We all know where the road paved with good intentions leads. The Trump administration declined to sign the Christchurch Call, and we should all be grateful he did, but he can expect practiced outrage from the usual quarters, although the United States never signs such things.

Barack Obama, to his credit, declined to become a party to a United Nations resolution condemning “the glorification of the Nazis.” Mr. Obama was no fan of der fuehrer, but America’s robust and unequivocal free speech tradition renders it impossible for the president or his administration to sign anything that encourages censorship, however disguised.

There’s no shortage of advocates nibbling away at free speech, particularly in academia. Prof. Tim Wu at Columbia University Law School dissents from the White House view that the best weapon against bad speech is more good speech, arguing that in the modern era of social media even good speech is drowned by uncontrolled speech on the likes of Facebook and YouTube. Prof. James Grimmelmann of Cornell Law School dissents from the dissent: “The government should not be in the business of encouraging (such companies) to do more than they legally are required to do.”

James Madison put the First Amendment in language that even lawyers could understand. “Free” means free, and may it be forever thus.

https://www.gopusa.com/freedom-of-speech-is-absolute/

0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  2  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2022 09:41 pm
@MontereyJack,
A coup d'état, often abbreviated to coup, is the overthrow of a lawful government through illegal means. If force or violence are not involved, such an event is sometimes called a soft or bloodless coup. In another variation, a ruler who came to power through legal means may try to stay in power through illegal means, thus preventing the next legal ruler from taking power.

An insurrection is a violent uprising against an authority or government.

Sedition is the crime of creating a revolt, disturbance, or violence against lawful civil authority with the intent to cause its overthrow or destruction.

All three of these illegal act define Trump and his cohorts attempts on January 6, 2021! All being found guilty of these acts should spend a large amount of time in prison and never hold positions in US, State or Local Governments for the rest of their lives - voted in or as a government employed position.
Builder
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2022 09:46 pm
@BillW,
The first successful such coup d'etat enacted by the CIA, was the ouster of democratically-elected, and popular people's choice, Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh , when they installed their puppet Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on 19 August 1953. It was considered to be a jointly organised operation, by both the US CIA, and the British MI5, supposedly to protect British oil interests, that were likely to be "nationalised" by the incoming lawfully elected government of Iran.

Mossaddegh was under house arrest for the rest of his life, while the people of Iran eventually staged a revolution, to oust the US puppet regime, and regain control over their nation. This resulted in the largest, and wealthiest-ever, diaspora of Jewish people, from Iran to the US of A.

0 Replies
 
Builder
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2022 10:50 pm
@BillW,
I will add, William, that the constitution of the United States of America was enacted to prevent such a coup occurring, and the second amendment, in particular, was enacted to enable the people to overthrow a perceived threat to the democratic process, enacted by those outside the lawful boundaries of congress, or within, using whatever force necessary.

Strange that a foreigner has to remind you of your own nation's laws.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Second-Amendment
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  3  
Reply Fri 26 Aug, 2022 02:35 am
@BillW,
BillW wrote:


A coup d'état, often abbreviated to coup, is the overthrow of a lawful government through illegal means. If force or violence are not involved, such an event is sometimes called a soft or bloodless coup. In another variation, a ruler who came to power through legal means may try to stay in power through illegal means, thus preventing the next legal ruler from taking power.

An insurrection is a violent uprising against an authority or government.

Sedition is the crime of creating a revolt, disturbance, or violence against lawful civil authority with the intent to cause its overthrow or destruction.

All three of these illegal act define Trump and his cohorts attempts on January 6, 2021! All being found guilty of these acts should spend a large amount of time in prison and never hold positions in US, State or Local Governments for the rest of their lives - voted in or as a government employed position.


AMEN!

Especially that last part.
Below viewing threshold (view)
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Fri 26 Aug, 2022 07:56 am
@Builder,
Maybe in the tavern you keep your office barstool in, but not in this country, mate.

0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Aug, 2022 10:54 am
Somebody please straighten me out here. I don’t understand the frenzy about the affidavit. Everyone on the news is pointing to the page that tells the exact numbers of classified documents found - how many secret, how many top secret, etc. They’re acting like this is blockbuster information.

Didn’t we already know that Trump’s place was searched, and classified documents were found that he shouldn’t have?

What is all this fuss?
hightor
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Aug, 2022 10:56 am
@snood,
I don't understand why it was released in the first place.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Fri 26 Aug, 2022 11:45 am
@snood,
snood wrote:

Somebody please straighten me out here. I don’t understand the frenzy about the affidavit. Everyone on the news is pointing to the page that tells the exact numbers of classified documents found - how many secret, how many top secret, etc. They’re acting like this is blockbuster information.

Didn’t we already know that Trump’s place was searched, and classified documents were found that he shouldn’t have?

What is all this fuss?


Nothing about what has been released seems to have much relevance right now, Snood. BUT...what has not been released (what apparently has been redacted) seems to be very important.

Seems to me that the possibility of Trump being indicted and tried has gone up considerably. Stay tuned.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Fri 26 Aug, 2022 11:46 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:

I don't understand why it was released in the first place.


In 99% of all cases, this stuff would not be released in any form...redacted or not. BUT this is special...and I think the DoJ and the courts are giving Trump part of what he wants...in a sorta "Be careful of what you wish for" form.

Let's try to be as patient as possible...and see where this goes from here.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Aug, 2022 11:56 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
Let's try to be as patient as possible...and see where this goes from here.
... and suddenly I remember "The Willful Child".
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Fri 26 Aug, 2022 12:20 pm
@snood,
Apparently, what is new is that it shed light on how much resistance Trump put up turning over those documents he shouldn't have had. However, that kind of was shown with that letter one Trump allies released last week. Really, to my mind, nothing important at all. It all seems straight forward.

Why the redacted affidavit for the search of Trump’s home is so concerning

Read it here
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  4  
Reply Sat 27 Aug, 2022 02:07 pm
Inventing Anna

PALM BEACH, Fla. — For a time, Anna de Rothschild boasted of her family roots to the European banking dynasty, donning designer clothes, a Rolex watch, and driving a $170,000 black Mercedes-Benz SUV.

She talked about developing a sprawling luxury housing project on Emerald Bay in the Bahamas, a high-rise hotel in Monaco, and a Formula One race track in Miami, say people who knew her.

A pivotal moment for the woman who was fluent in several languages took place last year when she was invited to Mar-a-Lago, where she mingled with former President Donald Trump’s supporters and showed up the next day for a golf outing with Mr. Trump and Sen. Lindsey Graham among other political luminaries.

But the 33-year-old woman was not a member of the famous banking family, and is now a subject of a widening FBI investigation that has delved into her past financial activities and the events that led her to the former president’s home.

“It was the near-perfect ruse and she played the part,” said John LeFevre, a former investment banker who met her with other guests around a club pool.

In addition to the FBI, law enforcement agents in Canada have confirmed that she has been the subject of a major crimes unit investigation in Quebec since February.

A year before the FBI’s spectacular raid of the former president’s seaside home, the woman whose real name is Inna Yashchyshyn, a Russian-speaking immigrant from Ukraine, made several trips into the estate posing as a member of the famous family while making inroads with some of the former president’s key supporters.

The ability of Ms. Yashchyshyn — the daughter of an Illinois truck driver — to bypass the security at Mr. Trump’s club demonstrates the ease with which someone with a fake identity and shadowy background can get into a facility that’s one of America’s power centers and the epicenter of Republican Party politics.

Those issues have become even more critical after FBI agents seized boxes of classified and top-secret materials two weeks ago from Mar-a-Lago after executing a search warrant on Mr. Trump’s home.

Her entry — multiple trips in and out of the club grounds — lays bare the vulnerabilities of a facility that serves as both the former president's residence and a private club, and highlights the gaps in security that can take place.

“That’s his residence,” said Ed Martin, a former U.S. Treasury special agent who spent more than two decades in criminal intelligence. “She shouldn’t have been in there.”

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project learned that numerous records have been turned over to the FBI as part of the inquiry, including copies of two fake passports from the U.S. and Canada — bearing her photo and the name Anna de Rothschild — and a Florida driver’s license with the same name that shows the address of an opulent $13 million mansion in Miami Beach where she has never lived.

Ms. Yashchyshyn said in sworn statements in a legal dispute that she has never used another name and has not broken any laws. In an interview with the Post-Gazette, she said she didn’t know Anna de Rothschild.

“I think there is some misunderstanding,” she said.

She said that she was meeting with FBI agents on Aug. 19 and that passports or driver’s licenses generated with the Rothschild name and her photo were fabricated by her former business partner to harm her. “That’s all fake, and nothing happened,” she said.

Mr. LeFevre and three other guests interviewed for this story said Ms. Yashchyshyn repeatedly told people after entering the palatial Mar-a-Lago grounds that she was a Rothschild “and everyone was eating it up,” he said.

The probe into her activities comes three years after two different women from China — one of them toting two passports and a thumb drive with malicious software — were arrested in separate instances after they entered the club grounds while Mr. Trump was president.

Both were sentenced to less than a year in jail and have since been released with at least one being deported to China last year.

The Secret Service said it could not comment on whether the agency is investigating Ms. Yashchyshyn’s visits to the former president’s home in May 2021, or any other subsequent trips.

“To maintain the operational integrity of our work, we are unable to comment specifically concerning the means, methods or resources used to conduct our protective operations,” said Steven Kopek, a special agent and spokesman, in a statement.

The Secret Service more than likely didn’t run background checks to determine Ms. Yashchyshyn’s identity when she visited the former president’s home, partly because the level of protection drops significantly when a president leaves office, said four former agents interviewed for this story.

In most cases, “they are going to do a level of screening — a hand check” for weapons, said Jonathan Wackrow, a former agent who served on President Barack Obama’s detail. “He still has a full detail.”

But experts say her ability to mingle with members of Mr. Trump’s entourage raises concerns about ongoing security at the private club that continues to host some of the most powerful elected leaders in the country and serves as a storage site for some of the country’s closely guarded secrets.

“The question is was it a fraud or an intelligence threat,” said Charles Marino, a former Secret Service supervisor. “The fact that we are asking this question is a problem.”

Little information is public about Ms. Yashchyshyn, who once worked for a suburban Miami business that specializes in providing pregnant Russian mothers the option to have their babies in the U.S. to gain citizenship, court records show.

But when a bitter court dispute erupted last year between her and a close associate with whom she once lived, the details of her whirlwind trips to Mar-a-Lago and other activities over the past several years began to surface and soon reached the attention of federal agents.

Valeriy Tarasenko, 44, a Florida businessman who was raised in Moscow, said he met Ms. Yashchyshyn in 2014 and allowed her to live in his Miami condo so that she would watch his children when he traveled on business.

They have since parted ways over what he alleged was her abuse of one of his children – accusations that Ms. Yashchyshyn vehemently denies.

He said he has met twice with FBI agents and spoke to them about multiple trips she made to Mar-a-Lago and what he claims were her efforts to make inroads in the Trump family and look for new streams of money.

She used “her fake identity as Anna de Rothschild to gain access to and build relationships with U.S. politician[s], including but not limited to Donald Trump, Lindsey Graham, and Eric Greitens,” he said in a court affidavit in Miami.

Mr. Greitens is a former Missouri governor who resigned in 2018 after allegations of sexual misconduct. He held a fundraiser at a Palm Beach mansion last year where Ms. Yashchyshyn was invited.

Ms. Yashchyshyn, an officer in two Florida companies founded by Mr. Tarasenko — both devoid of any assets — claimed that whatever steps she took to gain money were directed by him.

“[E]very single move that I did, I’ve been told by Valeriy to do so,” she said in a deposition. “[A]fter a few incidents like that, I realized that he’s using me for his lifestyle and for his needs.”

Ms. Yashchyshyn said that at one point when she tried to break from him, he repeatedly struck her. “Over time, Tarasenko became more controlling and aggressive over me,” she said in an affidavit.

“I am the victim right now, that’s all I can tell you,” she said in an interview.

Mr. Tarasenko, who was once detained in Moscow for carrying a police-style baton at a metro station in 1998, denied that he physically harmed her.

In 2015, Ms. Yashchyshyn became president of a Miami charity, United Hearts of Mercy — the same name of a charity founded by Mr. Tarasenko in Canada five years earlier.

The Miami entity was promoted on social media as a vehicle to help impoverished children but was actually a source of illicit funds for organized crime, according to a statement by a certified public accountant for the charity that was provided to the FBI.

After hundreds of thousands of dollars poured into the charity’s coffers two years ago, a payment processor, Stripe Inc., suspected fraud and stopped taking in money for a campaign that was supposed to help families ravaged by the pandemic.

The Post-Gazette emailed more than two dozen of the “donors” from Hong Kong, and every email bounced back, suggesting they were fake email addresses used to trick the payment processor.

At the end of the charity drive, the accountant, Tatiana Verzilina, said she began to get calls from people who she suspected were from criminal groups, threatening violence and demanding the money.

The callers left “voice messages from unknown numbers with accents that if I do not return money, I and my family will be harmed or killed,” she wrote in her statement.

Though the charity was supposed to disclose its revenues to the public because of the amount of funds it took in, it failed to do so. Ms. Verzilina, who is now living in her native Russia, declined to talk about the case.

So far, it’s not clear where the funds went.

The FBI in Miami said it would not comment, but at least three people who live in South Florida said they have been interviewed by FBI agents in the past seven months about Ms. Yashchyshyn’s activities.

One of them, Sergey Golubev, a Russian-born U.S. citizen who was once married to Ms. Yashchyshyn, said they wed in 2011 so she could obtain U.S. residency and stay in the country, but the marriage was only on paper.

“At some point, she needed a permanent green card,” said Mr. Golubev, 48.

He said the FBI told him that agents were looking for her in connection with allegations about something “illegal — cheating people and stealing money,” but he said he didn’t know any details, and was unaware of her activities. He said he lost touch with her after their divorce in 2016.

Another person who spoke to the Post-Gazette on the condition of anonymity said a host of records, photos and videos had been turned over to the FBI of Ms. Yashchyshyn, including pictures of her posing with Mr. Trump, Mr. Graham, Donald Trump Jr.’s fiancee, Kimberly Guilfoyle, and Trump campaign donor Richard Kofoed, along with other supporters of the former president.

Mr. Kofoed, 60, who donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the former president’s campaign and had been a frequent visitor to Mar-a-Lago, declined to comment.

Ms. Guilfoyle, 53, whose name emerged in the Jan. 6 hearings after it was revealed she received $60,000 for delivering a speech to protesters on the day of the attack, didn’t respond to interview requests.

So far, the FBI’s questioning appears to hint at a widening criminal probe into a network of people that includes Ms. Yashchyshyn, who traveled under various aliases while mingling with politicians and wealthy businessmen.

She showed up at the U.S. Open in Flushing Meadows, N.Y., last year and the Austrian World Summit in 2019, where her picture was taken with the likes of celebrity rapper Ray J and Italian car designer Horacio Pagani.

“We always thought her grandfather had the money and that he was an oligarch,” said developer Paul Barton, who said his family company paid for her to fly at least three times on private jets to their resort project in the Bahamas.

She was offered a deal to sell their sprawling residential development for $55 million and receive a commission, records show, but no such sale was made.

During their discussions, he said she talked about her involvement in putting up a high-rise hotel in Monaco, a speed track in Miami and a condo project in Canada. “She talked a good game,” he said.

Though law enforcement agents in Quebec acknowledged their own inquiry of Ms. Yashchyshyn, they would not provide any details.

At some point, she met Trump supporter Elchanan Adamker, a New York financial services company founder who travels often to Miami. Mr. Adamker, who declined to comment, invited her to join him for a gathering at Mar-a-Lago, where she arrived in her Mercedes-Benz SUV on May 1.

There’s no indication she met that first day with the former president, who, along with Mr. Graham, was about to launch a $25,000-per-person golf fundraiser to raise money for the midterm elections.

But when the event was held the next day at Trump International Golf Club just a few miles from Mar-a-Lago, she gathered with the former president, who posed with her for several photos. In another frame, she stood alongside Mr. Trump and the South Carolina senator, the three smiling and gesturing with their thumbs up.

Later, a guest joked with her that he would pass the photos onto her for a hefty price. “Anna, you're a Rothschild — you can afford $1 million for a picture with you and Trump,” he said in a video.

Ms. Yashchyshyn then drove some of the guests back to Mar-a-Lago.

Mr. LeFevre, who authored a bestselling book about his years as a Wall Street banker, said several guests at the private club “fawned all over her and because of the Rothschild mystique, they never probed and instead tiptoed around her with kid gloves.”

For her part, she went beyond just dropping the family name, he said. “She talked about vineyards and family estates and growing up in Monaco.”

One frequent Mar-a-Lago guest who spoke on the condition of anonymity said an invitation was sent to Ms. Yashchyshyn to attend a fund-raiser days later for Mr. Greitens in another mansion near Mar-a-Lago and owned by the former president.

Weeks earlier, Mr. Greitens, a former Navy SEAL, had announced his bid for the U.S. Senate with Ms. Guilfoyle as his national campaign chair.

Not until this March did the Trump entourage say they discovered her real identity.

Dean Lawrence, a Florida music creative director, said he met with Trump insiders at Mar-a-Lago, where he said he surprised them with the news.

“It’s just crazy,” said Mr. Lawrence. “Who would have ever thought it would get to this level?”

Mr. Lawrence said the evening started with a dinner that included the former president, Ray J and rapper Kodak Black, who was granted clemency by Mr. Trump on a charge of giving false statements to acquire a gun. Also attending the dinner: Rudy Giuiliani and former New York police commissioner Bernard Kerik.

As the evening progressed, Mr. Lawrence said he struck up conversations with Mr. Kofoed and Caroline Wren, a former national adviser for the Trump campaign, and their talks turned to Anna de Rothschild.

Mr. Lawrence said he became acquainted with her because he was involved in a music company — Rothschild Media Label, where she was the president — to promote singers, including Mr. Tarasenko’s teenage daughter.

Mr. Lawrence told the Trump insiders that she was not the person they thought she was and warned them: “I want to clear something up with you. I want you to know that she has nothing to do with the Rothschilds. Don’t get involved in any kind of business with her.”

As he divulged the information to Mr. Kofoed, who lived in Palm Beach, “his eyes were wide open,” said Mr. Lawrence. “He said to me, ‘That’s exactly who I met. She came to my house.’”

Mr. Lawrence said he then spoke to Ms. Wren, who he said recognized Ms. Yashchyshyn from a photo that he showed her.

Ms. Wren asked to take a phone picture and then “she created a group chat” to warn others, he said.

Ms. Wren, 34, who helped organize the Stop the Steal rally that took place prior to the Capitol insurrection and was subpoenaed by the House committee probing the attack, declined to comment for this story.

t’s not clear how many trips Ms. Yashchyshyn made to the former president’s home, but Mr. Lawrence said she made enough of a splash that members of the Trump entourage recognized her photo immediately.

“She had been there more than once,” he said.

Ron T. Williams, a former Secret Service agent who is now a corporate security consultant, said there are many reasons that Ms. Yashchyshyn may have avoided detection, including the possibility that agents didn’t conduct a background check.

“Should she have been run for a background check — yes,” he said, but that “doesn’t mean it happened.”

A basic check would have shown that no such person exists with the Rothschild name and her 1988 birthdate.

In fact, an online resource devoted to the Rothschild family lists descendants dating back hundreds of years, but the name Anna de Rothschild does not appear anywhere.

Gary McDaniel, a longtime Florida security consultant, said because Mar-a-Lago is not just a private club but Mr. Trump’s home, the level of protection should be elevated beyond the security protocols typically afforded former presidents and also extend to the entire premises.

“I want to know everybody who comes into that facility, their name, date, date of birth,” he said. “And I want them somewhere on a roster because we never know when he is going to walk into that crowd. She should have been on a list” at the “pre-screening level.”

The idea that a person with a fake identity can get into the former president’s estate — even if they’re looking to find investors — “is not OK,” he said. “Who else can get in there? Who is behind that person? It’s just wrong on so many [levels].”

Mr. Marino, the former Secret Service supervisor, said the revelations of her visits to the sprawling estate underscores the challenges that his former agency faces in protecting Mar-a-Lago.

and it’s accessible to [outside members],” said Mr. Marino, who once served on the details of Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

Mr. Lawrence said he was perplexed over why he was the one who was telling Trump insiders about a potential breach, and not the people guarding the former president and his family.

“What I’m trying to understand is how did they allow this?” said Mr. Lawrence. “How could someone keep coming back — at that level? This is Mar-a-Lago.”
0 Replies
 
Builder
 
  -4  
Reply Sun 28 Aug, 2022 01:50 am
https://mysonhunter.com/
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Aug, 2022 04:52 am
@Builder,
This one's better.

Goodnight, Builder.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  5  
Reply Sun 28 Aug, 2022 09:38 am
@Builder,

Twenty plus years of the scandals, misdeeds, and corruption of Donald J. Trump and the Trump Crime Family and' you're still on about the debatable penny ante misdeeds of Hunter Biden? Get a life.












t
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Tue 30 Aug, 2022 05:35 pm
@Builder,
Crap.
BillW
 
  2  
Reply Tue 30 Aug, 2022 07:30 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
For Builder:
https://cdn.thewirecutter.com/wp-content/media/2022/03/toilet-paper-2048px-4396.jpg?auto=webp&quality=75&width=1024
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2022 05:46 am
Quote:
The big news until shortly before midnight tonight was that businesses do indeed seem to be coming home after the pandemic illustrated the dangers of stretched supply lines, the global minimum tax reduced the incentives to flee to other countries with lower taxes, and the passage of the CHIPS and Science Act and the Inflation Reduction Act spurred investment in technology.

Yesterday, Honda and LG Energy Solution announced they would spend $4.4 billion to construct a new battery plant in the U.S. to join the plants General Motors is building in Ohio, Michigan, and Tennessee; the ones Ford is building in Kentucky and Tennessee; the one Toyota is building in North Carolina; and the one Stellantis is building in Indiana. The plants are part of the switch to electric vehicles. According to auto industry reporter Neal E. Boudette of the New York Times, they represent “one of the most profound shifts the auto industry has experienced in its century-long history.”

Today, Kentucky governor Andy Beshear (D) announced that Kentucky has secured more than $8.5 billion for investment in the production of electric vehicle batteries, which should produce more than 8,000 jobs in the EV sector. “Kentuckians will literally be powering the future,” he said.

Also today, First Solar, the largest solar panel maker in the U.S., announced that it would construct a new solar panel plant in the Southeast, investing up to $1 billion. It credited the Inflation Reduction Act with making solar construction attractive enough in the U.S. to build here rather than elsewhere. First Solar has also said it will upgrade and expand an existing plant in Ohio, spending $185 million.

Corning has announced a new manufacturing plant outside Phoenix, Arizona, to build fiber-optic cable to help supply the $42.5 billion high-speed internet infrastructure investment made possible by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act. AT&T will also build a new fiber internet network in Arizona.

The CHIPS and Science Act is spurring investment in the manufacturing of chips in the U.S. Earlier this month, Micron announced a $40 billion investment in the next eight years, producing up to 40,000 new jobs. Qualcomm has also committed to investing $4.2 billion in chips from the New York facility of GlobalFoundries. Qualcomm says it intends to increase chip production in the U.S. by 50% over the next five years. In January, Intel announced it would invest $20 billion, and possibly as much as $100 billion, in a chip plant in Ohio.

This investment is part of a larger trend in which U.S. companies are bringing their operations back to the U.S. Last week, a report by the Reshoring Initiative noted that nearly 350,000 U.S. jobs have come home this year. The coronavirus pandemic, Russia’s war on Ukraine, and China’s instability were the push to bring jobs home, while the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS and Science Act were the pull. Dion Rabouin notes in the Wall Street Journal that this reshoring will not necessarily translate to blue-collar jobs, as companies will likely increase automation to avoid higher labor costs.

President Joe Biden’s record is unexpectedly strong going into the midterms, and he is directly challenging Republicans on the issues they formerly considered their own. Today, in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, he challenged the Republicans on their claim to be the party of law and order, calling out their recent demands to “defund” the FBI and saying he wants to increase funding for law enforcement to enable it to have more social workers, mental health care specialists, and so on.

He noted that law enforcement officers want a ban on assault weapons and that he would work to pass one like that of 1994. When that law expired in 2004, mass shootings in the U.S. tripled.

Then the president took on MAGA Republicans: “A safer America requires all of us to uphold the rule of law, not the rule of any one party or any one person.” He addressed Senator Lindsey Graham’s comment yesterday about how there would be violence if the Department of Justice (DOJ) indicted Trump. “Let’s be clear,” Biden said, “You hear some of my friends in the other team talking about political violence and how it’s necessary.” But violence is never appropriate, he said. “Never. Period. Never, never, never. No one should be encouraged to use political violence. None whatsoever.”

To audience applause, he called out those who supported the January 6 attack on the Capitol: “Don’t tell me you support law enforcement if you won’t condemn what happened on the 6th…. For God’s sake, whose side are you on?... You can’t be pro-law enforcement and pro-insurrection. You can’t be a party of law and order and call the people who attacked the police on January 6th ‘patriots.’ You can’t do it.”

While Biden is consolidating and pushing the Democrats’ worldview, the Republicans are in disarray. The revelation that former president Trump moved classified intelligence to the Trump Organization’s property at Mar-a-Lago has kept some of them sidelined, as they didn’t want to talk about the issue, and has forced others to try to justify an unprecedented breach of national security. Republican candidates for elected office who are not in deep red districts have been taking references to Trump (and to abortion restrictions) off their websites.

The deadly seriousness of what he has done is clear in part from the former president’s own behavior over it. Yesterday, he demanded to be made president or to have a do-over of the 2020 election; today, after constant reposting of conspiracy theories and defenses on his ailing Truth Social, he wrote: “Why are people so mean?”

The reason for his fear turned up tonight in a Department of Justice filing in response to his demand for the appointment of a special master to review the documents, and for the return of several of them to him. His requests gave the DOJ an opening to correct the record that he and his allies have been muddying.

This document replaced the economic news as today’s big story. The DOJ laid out the timeline behind the attempt of the U.S. government to recover the materials Trump took. First, officials from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) recognized that materials were missing and tried to get Trump to return them voluntarily. When he finally handed over 15 boxes, the officials recognized that some of the materials were “highly classified” and told the Department of Justice.

Trump delayed the FBI examination of the boxes, but when officials got into them, they recognized their haphazard storage threatened national security. They got evidence of more records at Mar-a-Lago, for which they obtained a grand jury subpoena. Trump’s representatives handed over a few more documents, and a lawyer certified that that was it—they had done a diligent search and now could confirm that there were no more documents left. They said there were no materials stored anywhere but a storeroom, but they refused to let agents look inside the boxes there.

It was a lie both that there were no more documents, and that materials were contained in the storeroom. The FBI learned there were still more documents, got a search warrant, and on August 8 seized from at least two locations 33 more boxes with more than 100 classified records—twice as many classified documents as Trump and his representatives had handed over under the subpoena.

The U.S. government spelled out that “those records do not belong to him”; they belong to the United States. It said that Trump never asserted that the records had been declassified or asserted any claim of executive privilege, and Trump’s representatives indicated they thought the documents were classified. It made a strong case that the former president and his lawyer obstructed the search for the documents.

Even more chilling than the words of the filing was the exhibit attached: a photo of SECRET, TOP SECRET, and SECRET/SCI files recovered from a container, spread out on a carpeted floor next to a banker’s box containing framed TIME magazine covers.

Trump has added Chris Kise, the former solicitor general of Florida, to his legal team. Although the Republican National Committee has been paying the former president’s legal bills since he left office, it will not pay the legal fees he racks up over this issue.

hcr
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 09/10/2024 at 07:53:17