Campaign staffers and associates see signs of Donald Trump's mental decline, while a leading expert says Biden's brain is "aging," and Trump's is "dementing"

Mary Trump on the Lawrence O'Donnell Show

 

A staffer on the Donald Trump campaign recently contacted a member of the Trump family out of concern over signs the candidate's mental health is declining. The staffer contacted Mary L. Trump -- a psychologist, author, Donald's niece, and an outspoken critic of her uncle's efforts to reclaim the White House. The staffer apparently knew Mary would take the concerns seriously. Here is how Mary Trump describes both the concerns expressed in the phone call, plus the general issue of Donald Trump's muddled mental state, which Mary has witnessed up close over many years

Why is Mary Trump against Donald's campaign for the presidency? As a person with a keen sense about human hehavior, and as a mental-health professional, she long has suspected her uncle has been unfit to serve in such a demanding position as the  presidency. At her Substack page, Mary Trump writes under the headline "Aide warns: Donald is losing it":

BREAKING: People close to Donald have come forward to say his mental decline is worsening. Yet, the media is largely ignoring these claims. Here is a deep look at some NEW revelations.

Over a recent weekend, Donald delivered two speeches that left viewers shocked about his health. It wasn’t just the content of his speeches — the plethora of lies and the fascistic rhetoric — that made headlines: it was his apparent aphasia (or, to be technically accurate, phonemic paraphasias). That is the type of mental confusion that might leave one saying “Venzwhere” instead of “Venezuela” or “wall mongers” instead of “war mongers.”

"Putin has so little respect for Obama that he's starting to throw around the nuclear word," Donald said on a recent Saturday night to a silent audience.

The silence likely stemmed from the fact that Obama hasn’t been president for more than seven years.

Donald’s confusion and verbal lapses are starting to get more attention from mental-health professionals who are publicly speculating about what might be going on with him. And even former members of his administration are starting to speak up.

Such moments of confusion have not gone unnoticed by the campaign staff, and those who have been close to the candidate through the years. Writes Mary Trump:

What people close to Donald are saying about his decline

 

Recently, while speaking to CNN host John Berman, former White House adviser Alyssa Farah Griffin said that Donald’s cognitive difficulties seem to be getting worse:

"He is not as sharp as he was in 2016 and not even as sharp as he was in 2020,” she said.

Griffin is a Republican who served as Donald's director of strategic communications. After Donald’s visit to Iowa, she called his apparent decline, “remarkable.”

“I'm stunned, having spent a lot of time with him in 2020 and years before — he is slowing down,” Griffin said.

"There's a lack of sharpness in what he's saying and a lack . . . of clarity," she continued. "There's another clip where he basically says he's going to overturn Obamacare, but also says that he'll fix it. Just complete inconsistencies.” Griffin, here, is saying the quiet part out loud.

Of course she could have left it at that, but Griffin still chose to take a dig at President Biden:

“For Republicans,” she added, “our strongest case against Joe Biden is the age and the decline that some of us have seen. And if I'm being honest, head-to-head, I'm not sure which is struggling more."

The truth is there’s no contest here — Biden is old but he is not “declining” in any substantive sense. Donald is also old, but he can’t even seem to remember who the current president is, and he seems to be having an increasing difficulty stringing together a coherent sentence.

Mary Trump has seen how Donald's mental acuity has changed over a period of years:

The different Donald my family knew

 

A few weeks ago, I was on MSNBC’s The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell discussing something I think more people need to be aware of: It’s not simply that Donald makes gaffes and misstatements — it’s the degree to which his ability to communicate has deteriorated in recent years.

When Donald was younger, he was reasonably adept at getting his point across. He had the ability to make a perfectly reasonable statement, and to convey information clearly. One of the main reasons my grandfather chose Donald to succeed him instead of my father, the oldest son, was because Donald had the kind of arrogance that translated into a media presence my grandfather found useful.

Donald’s early interactions with the press, as well as his performances in depositions from the 1980s and 1990s — arrogant but measured and restrained — paint a very different picture from what we’re seeing now.

As for differences between Donald Trump and his opponent, Democrat incumbent Joe Biden, both have made verbal gaffes, gotten their thoughts twisted. But Mary Trump sees a difference between the two:

A key difference between President Biden and Donald

 

President Biden, a long-time stutterer, has recently been attacked by Republicans who, with a huge assist from the corporate media, are trying to make Biden’s age an issue in this campaign. Yes, Biden is 81, but he’s been making verbal missteps for years (In 2019, Biden called himself a “gaffe machine.”)

The incessant mentions of his chronological age often overshadow what people say about his acuity behind closed doors: namely, that he is in command of facts and in good shape for his age.

In October, General Mark Milley said the following about President Biden:

“I engage with him frequently, and [Biden is] alert, sound, does his homework, reads the papers, reads all the read-ahead material, and is very, very engaged in issues of very serious matters of war and peace and life and death.”

“So if the American people are worried about an individual, who is someone who’s making decisions of war and peace and makes the decisions of nuclear weapons and that sort of thing, I think they can rest easy,” Milley concluded.

In an interview with Salon, psychologist Dr. John Gartner, said:

“There is [ ] this focus on Biden's gaffes or other things that are well within the normal limits of aging. By comparison, Trump appears to be showing gross signs of dementia. This is a tale of two brains. Biden's brain is aging. Trump's brain is dementing.”

During his administration, nobody (at least nobody who was telling the truth) would have said that Donald read his briefings or was very engaged in any serious issues. His recent public appearances make it clear that he would be even less equipped if, by some tragic circumstance, he were allowed back in the Oval Office.

Republicans for months have been trying to make an issue out of Biden's age, But Mary Trump says they are losing traction -- perhaps because their candidate is only four years younger than Biden and shows signs of passing him in the "mental gaffe" category. Writes Mary:

The Republican case against Biden is falling apart

As Trump’s former aide admitted herself, Republicans’ strongest case against Joe Biden (which, without media complicity, would be a very weak case) is his age. Any first-hand accounts of Donald’s cognitive decline threaten to diminish the salience of attacks on Biden.

At this point, Republican hypocrisy should surprise no one, but Donald is almost as old— he’s only three years younger, to be exact — and he is much less fit: President Biden is fond of riding bicycles. Donald is fond of riding golf carts.

The path is more apparent than ever

 

I know Donald, and he has no moral compass. He and his enablers have driven us into treacherous territory, and it is becoming more clear by the day that a second Trump term would be fatal to the American experiment.

I was 100 percent convinced that Donald was unfit to serve in 2016 and 2020. There are even more reasons to make this assessment now.

Despite the cost — both real and potential, I’m determined to do whatever I can to make sure Donald never gets within a million light years of the White House. Those of us who understand what’s at stake, who believe in the promise of American democracy, deserve better than the anti-democratic bigotry Donald and the Republican Party offer.

I want to thank those who choose to be a supporting subscriber to this newsletter. You are helping me to continue exposing the truth about Donald and to report on stories like this that corporate media often misses.

I currently have 187,046 free subscribers. If just a small portion joined the growing community who financially support this effort, I could reach even more voters with the truth.

Thank you for those who upgrade, it means the world to me. – Mary

Upgrade to paid

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SEC fuels Trump's Truth Social merger, which emits an overwhelming stench from all directions -- and that should prompt an investigation of all parties involved

Today's biggest U.S. news story involves a merger of Trump Media and Technology Group (which owns Donald Trump's Truth Social) and Digital World Acquisition Corp., which is described as  "a publicly-traded blank-check acquisition company." That description might sound fishy to the ears of an average person. But that's not the only foul odor that might be coming from this financial deal, which Digital World shareholders approved this morning. It supposedly will give Trump a much-needed financial boost, and today's story came with this prominent headline at The New York Times (NYT): "Trump Media Merger Provides Trump a Potential Cash Lifeline."

The key word in that headline is "potential" because the deal comes with a number of caveats that could delay any benefit to Trump for at least six months. The NYT is out front with today's coverage, but to my knowledge, the story originated with a report Wednesday (3/19/24) from Donald Watkins, a longtime Alabama attorney who has become a leading voice in online investigative journalism. Watkins wrote under the headline "Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Okays Donald Trump's 58 to 64% Ownership of a Publicly Traded Social Media Company, Despite Court Findings of Business Fraud

The words highlighted in blue in the headline are of particular importance, and they make the merger historic for the SEC -- and not in a good way. That's because the SEC apparently ignored all kinds of red flags regarding Donald Trump, his sons (Don jr. and Eric Trump) and their shaky financial standing -- and behavior. And the SEC-fueled merger becomes particularly dubious when you consider that it comes on the heels of Trump's failure to obtain a bond related to his $464-million appeal related to his New York business-fraud case -- and that came after 30 companies turned him down. Here is how Watkins put it in his Wednesday article:

On February 16, 2024, a New York state court found that Donald Trump, Donald Trump, Jr., and Eric Trump schemed for years to defraud banks and insurers by inflating his wealth on financial statements used to secure loans and make deals. The court entered a $454 million civil-fraud judgment against Trump and his sons, who are appealing this ruling.

The day before the much-anticipated court ruling in Donald Trump's case, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission approved a merger of Trump Media and Technology Group with Digital World Acquisition Corp., a publicly-traded blank-check acquisition company. Trump's media company owns Truth Social, which he founded after he was banned from Twitter (now known as X) in 2021.

Trump Media's merger deal with Digital World was valued in February at an estimated $10 billion. This valuation was purely speculative.

Digital World’s shareholders were scheduled to vote on the merger deal today, and they gave the go-ahead.

Since its founding in 2021, Truth Social has sustained massive financial losses and a limited base of users (estimated 607,000 monthly users as of July 2023). Trump has 6.61 million followers on Truth Social. Digital World says Truth Social has so far had 8.9 million signups.

Watkins says the merger makes no sense, on multiple grounds. As for that piece of SEC history, it's something the commission should not be proud of, Watkins writes:

The Commission's approval of the merger occurred despite Donald Trump's documented history of filing business bankruptcies – six to be exact -- and stiffing creditors.

The merger was approved while Donald Trump is awaiting state and federal criminal trials in New York, Washington, Atlanta, and Miami on 88 felony charges.

Donald Trump, Jr., who was also found liable of business fraud in the New York civil case, is slated to join the board of directors of the merged entity.

Despite all of these red flags, Donald Trump will own between 58.1% and 69.4% of the combined company.

When Digital World shareholders approved the deal, Trump became the first person in the history of the Securities and Exchange Commission to own a majority interest in a publicly traded company AFTER he was: (a) convicted of repeated acts of civil business fraud in court, (b) indicted by state and federal authorities on 88 felony charges, and (c) involved in six business bankruptcies.

The failed effort to obtain an appeal bond also comes into play, Watkins writes:

The Securities and Exchange Commission is supposed to be the watchdog agency that protects the investing public from fraudsters.  It rarely performs this function. Instead, the Commission has become a cleansing agent for crooked Wall Street banks, major utilities like the Southern Company, and soiled businessmen like Donald Trump.

With the Trump Media-Digital World merger deal, the Commission found a pathway to hold its nose and look past Donald Trump’s adjudicated business fraud, four criminal indictments, and six corporate bankruptcies so that Trump and his son could (a) seize control of a public social-media company and (b) save Truth Social from bankruptcy.

The Securities and Exchange Commission is as crooked as the Trumps. No other explanation makes sense for its approval of the Trump Media-Digital World merger deal.

Digital World’s share price closed at $35.57 on Monday -- the same day Trump's lawyers announced that he was unable to post a $464 million appeal bond in his New York civil fraud case. The share price is down from $50.49 in February when the Commission approved the merger.

We now know the highly touted Trump Media-Digital World stock is virtually worthless since it does not provide Donald Trump with the amount of liquidity he needs to post a $464 million appeal bond in his civil fraud case.

Yahoo! News, with original reporting from the Daily Beast,  dives into the background of Trump and his murky merger under the headline "Trump Scores Lucrative Media Merger Amid Massive Money Woes." Justin Rohrlich writes:

Truth Social, Donald Trump’s money-hemorrhaging Twitter knockoff, is going public, a move expected to serve as a necessary lifeline to the struggling business while infusing the former president’s personal coffers with billions in desperately needed funds.

On Friday, shareholders of Digital World Acquisition Corporation, a SPAC, or, so-called blank-check company, approved a merger with Trump Media & Technology Group, which has blown through much of its available cash after earning just $1.07 million in revenue during the third quarter of 2023. According to SEC filings, Trump Media generated a paltry $3.38 million in revenue over the first nine months of 2023, booking a $49 million net loss during the same period.

DWAC’s stock was trading at $44 a share prior to the merger announcement, meaning Trump Media, which will begin trading as early as next week under the ticker DJT, could launch with a market cap exceeding $5 billion. Yet, following the announcement, DWAC shares quickly plummeted, with sellers vastly outnumbering buyers, which pared its valuation nearly 10 percent by 11 a.m.

Trump’s own stake in the business, subject to a six-month lockup period during which he cannot sell his shares, may be worth upward of $3 billion on paper. However, the half-year wait means Trump will not be able to pay off his eye-popping legal debts with the just-out-of-reach windfall unless he gets special permission from the merged company’s board of directors to liquidate his position early.

Has the pathway to Trump's merger been smooth sailing? Not even close Rorhrlich writes:

The road to today's deal has been pocked with trouble, getting hamstrung at most every turn by lawsuits and accusations of self-dealing and financial malfeasance. A pair of former contestants on Trump’s NBC reality TV competition, The Apprentice, claimed in a recent lawsuit that the 45th POTUS was attempting to dilute their stake in the company and had tried to get one of them to sign over his shares to Trump’s wife Melania. DWAC and former CEO Patrick Orlando have both sued each other in similarly bitter legal feuds, with DWAC calling the ousted chief exec “reckless and irrational” and Orlando went to court to try and block the planned merger over his own claims of being shortchanged.

Today’s deal gives Truth Social, which was formed by Trump after he was booted off of Twitter, now X, for repeated and flagrant rules violations, a new lease on its young, troubled life. Trump, who will own 58.1 percent of the company, now may see a glimmer of hope in raising sufficient cash to cover a $454 million appeal bond in his New York State civil fraud case. New York Attorney General Letitia James said she is prepared to begin seizing Trump’s properties by Monday, when the deadline to post the bond expires.

At the same time, Truth Social’s user base has shrunk nearly 40 percent year-over-year, and experts say the financials, as they stand now, are highly misleading.

“The stock price is clearly a bubble,” Yale Law School professor Jonathan Macey told CNN. “No rational investor would take the stock at face value, especially if they had to hold it for any length of time.”

In short, the Trump deal emits a stench that is ovverpowering. That suggests the Trumps, their media business, the SEC, and DWAC need to be investigated. New York Attorney General Letitia James might have the courage, and the guts, to take on such a task.

Balch & Bingham's efforts to develop a significant footprint in Texas appear to be going up in flames as key players choose not to stick around and hit the exits

Only four attorneys remain at Balch office in Austin, TX

 

Birmingham's Balch & Bingham has attempted to develop a major presence in Texas, but those plans appear to be going up in smoke,, according to a report at banbalch.com.

K.B. Forbes, publisher of the Ban Balch blog and CEO of its parent organization, the CDLU public charity and advocacy group, provides details under the headline "Texas Meltdown! Balch Closes Houston Office; Austin Crumbling; Rising Star Flees Montgomery," Forbes writes:

Balch & Bingham is in a Texas meltdown and has shut down its Houston office. Balch’s website has removed Houston from the firm's footprint.

As we reported last month, Balch & Bingham partner Audrey F. Momanaee, who unexpectedly became the Office Managing Partner in Houston last June after four top partners and attorneys fled the firm, left Balch herself after eight months.

The news out of Austin is no better in that only four Balch attorneys remain.

In 2021, Balch predicted it would grow to 25 to 30 attorneys in the Lone Star State. Instead, Balch looks like it has collapsed.

The Texas exodus appears to be fatal.

Yesterday morning, a source close to Balch & Bingham said Aria Allan, a civil rights, labor, and employment attorney who joined Balch & Bingham half a decade ago, has dumped the embattled firm.

Balch has erased any traces of Aria Allan’s profile from its website.

Allan was based in Montgomery. Sources say she is headed to work at Auburn University. We wish Aria all the best in her new position. War Eagle!!

Balch & Bingham's problems have been mounting for about a decade, many of them traced to the firm's involvement in the North Birmingham Bribery Scandal. Forbes writes:

We are not surprised at the collapse and exodus as Balch has lost numerous legacy partners and seasoned professionals, only to be replaced by inexperienced junior attorneys.

Balch has been so desperate for experienced attorneys, it rehired and pulled a former partner out of retirement to rejoin the firm last August.

Reporting of ABC and George Stephanopoulos was "substantially true," meaning Donald Trump's defamation lawsuit likely will die a quick death in court

Nancy Mace and George Stephanopoulos interview on ABC

 

Just when you think Donald Trump has done all of the stupid things he can do, along comes a story like this: Trump has filed a lawsuit against ABC News and anchor George Stephanopoulos, claiming an episode of their Sunday morning This Week program included false and defamatory statements about him. 

Trump's complaint grew from an interview Stephanopoulos conducted with U.S. Rep Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), focusing on Trump's sexual-assault/defamation cases against writer E. Jean Carroll. The gist of Trump's lawsuit against ABC seems to be this: Stephanopoulos stated during his March 10 interview with Mace that a Manhattan jury had found Trump " liable for rape" in the Carroll case. 

The story becomes muddled because the jury, on its verdict form, found Trump had sexually abused and injured Carroll. But on the separate question of whether Trump had raped Carroll, the jury marked "no."

To complicate matters further, Judge Lewis Kaplan noted that the definition of rape under the New York Penal Code varies slightly from the common understanding of the offense. Kaplan then found that the jury had, in fact, found Trump "liable for rape."

A reasonable person might think that would have put an end to any legal complaint Trump might have had. But we are talking about Donald Trump here. In his mind, the jury had answered "no" on the question of liability for rape, but the judge had answered "yes." In all of that confusion, Trump somehow convinced himself that Stephanopoulos had defamed him -- even though Trump clearly is a public figures, and it is difficult for plaintiffs holding that status to win defamation cases.

The Above the Law legal website called Trump's lawsuit a "turkey" of a case. Under the headline "Trump Previews Electoral Strategy Of Shouting 'Just An ATTEMPTED Rapist' At Random Judges; Do they give a Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry? Do they?" Liz Dye explains just a few of the problems that make Trump's claim a "turkey":

Donald Trump would like to remind you that he pinned E. Jean Carroll up against the wall and forced his fingers inside her, but was unable to penetrate her with his penis. In fact, he’s so interested in driving this point home that he just sued ABC and George Stephanopoulos for eliding the distinction.

It’s not clear why the former president insists on reminding us of this at regular intervals, but it happens often enough that it can’t be an accident.

It started on the steps of the courthouse after the first jury ruled that Trump was liable for sexual assault, not rape. His attorney Joe Tacopina, was able to convince the jurors that Trump might not have been able to get his penis inside her while restraining her with his arms and his torso.

“I’m happy that Donald Trump was not branded a rapist,” the lawyer said to reporters on the courthouse steps, attempting to spin the sexual assault and defamation verdicts as some kind of win.

What's the problem with the first sentence of that last paragraph? Trump WAS branded a rapist -- by the judge. That point of fact did not slide by Liz Dye. She writes:

Trump’s longtime ally Alan Dershowitz echoed the statement, calling it a “Rorschach verdict,” since the jurors found Trump “liable on kinda molesting her,” but not for rape.

Almost immediately, Trump filed a motion for a new trial or remittitur, on the theory that the jury must have been confused when it assessed $2 million in compensatory damages for conduct which could have amounted to no more than “groping of [Carroll’s] breasts through clothing or similar conduct, which is a far cry from rape.”

Judge Kaplan denied the motion, noting that Trump is a rapist under the colloquial definition of the term, if not under New York law.

The definition of rape in the New York Penal Law is far narrower than the meaning of ‘rape’ in common modern parlance, its definition in some dictionaries, in some federal and state criminal statutes, and elsewhere,” the court noted, citing dictionaries and other jurisdictions’ laws defining “rape” as non-consensual penetration of any kind. The finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was “raped” within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump “raped” her as many people commonly understand the word “rape.” Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.

Did that stop Trump? Nope, and to no one's surprise, his lawyers could not talk any sense into him -- or perhaps they did not try. Writes Dye:

Undeterred, Trump turned around and filed a counterclaim for defamation against Carroll based on the theory that she lied about having been raped. That was also denied, and, in a separate order, Judge Kaplan reiterated that Trump was indeed still a rapist.       

Mr. Trump’s principal argument is just wrong. Indeed, the jury’s finding that Mr. Trump sexually abused  her  implicitly determined that he had penetrated her vagina with his fingers, a     form of “rape” as that word often is used.

So Stephanopoulos wasn’t too far off the truth when he repeatedly asserted on March 10 that Trump had been found liable for rape by a judge and a jury. And yet Trump filed a defamation lawsuit against him and his employer this week in the Southern District of Florida, alleging that the statements had been made with actual malice.

There are about a million potential problems with this trollsuit, starting with the fact that it was filed in the Miami division, where no party resides. But this isn’t the first rodeo for Trump’s attorney Alejandro Brito, who sued Michael Cohen for saying mean things about Trump and also took over Trump’s defamation suit against CNN for using the phrase “the Big Lie.”

The first case was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff, and the second one got booted by Judge Raag Singhal, Trump’s own appointee. But perhaps the third time is the charm for Brito, who took full advantage of the litigation privilege to repeat the defamatory statements which have cost Trump dearly, referring in the complaint to “Carroll’s false, fabricated, and defamatory allegations.”

Filing in the Miami division, as opposed to Palm Beach where Trump lives, was unsubtle — although not as unsubtle as the time he sued the Pulitzer Committee in Okeechobee County state court on the theory that you can access the prize board’s website there. But if the hope was to score Judge Aileen Cannon or another of Trump’s own appointees, the ploy failed. The case was assigned to Chief Judge Cecilia Altonaga, a George W. Bush appointee who is not noticeably insane.

On the other hand, before this turkey gets yeeted into the sun, Trump will be able to annoy ABC and fundraise off his heroic fight against the evil media, so … MAGA MAGA MAGA!

Trump doesn't seem to understand this, but there can be serious downsides to filing a baseless lawsuit: (1) ABC News and Stephanopoulos could file a counterclaim -- and they could win, costing "The Orange Man" a sizable amount of cash that he apparently doesn't have at the moment; (2) Trump and his lawyers could be hit with sanctions, the kind that can add up quickly in a court of law; (3) I'm not a lawyer, but I do know this about defamation law. There is something called the "Substantial Truth Doctrine," and it has been described this way at Digital Media Law:

"Truth" is an absolute defense against defamation. See New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), and Time Inc. v. Hill, 385 U.S. 411 (1967). Consequently, a plaintiff has to provide convincing evidence of a defamatory statement's falsity in order to prove defamation.

The law does not require that a statement must be perfectly accurate in every conceivable way to be considered "true." Courts have said that some false statements must be protected for the wider purpose of allowing the dissemination of truthful speech. The resulting doctrine is known as "substantial truth." Under the substantial truth doctrine, minor factual inaccuracies will be ignored so long as the inaccuracies do not materially alter the substance or impact of what is being communicated. In other words, only the "gist" or "sting" of a statement must be correct.

The substantial truth defense is particularly powerful because a judge will often grant summary judgment in favor of a defendant (thus disposing of the case before it goes to trial) if the defendant can show that the statement the plaintiff is complaining about is substantially true, making the defense a quick and relatively easy way to get out of a long (and potentially expensive) defamation case.

In this peculiar instance, the jury and the judge came up with what could be called a "mixed verdict"; the jury answered "no" on the question of liability for rape, but the judge answered "yes." In every court of law I've seen, the judge is The "Head Honcho," "The Big Cheese," and his word stands -- even if, like a lot of judges, his ruling runs contrary to relevant fact and law. (That's a post for another day . . . )

Here, Stephanopoulos went with "The Big Dog," and accurately reported that the judge found Trump WAS liable for rape. In fact, Judge Kaplan flat-out called Trump a "rapist."

Under those circumstances, I see no way ABC and its anchor could be found liable for defamation. Stephanopoulos was both substantially true and literally true, so it's hard to see how Trump possibly can prevail. And if the defense is granted summary judgment, Trump will not even get his day in front of a  jury.

When Donald Trump is bumbling and fumbling, the Security and Exchange Commission and U.S. Supreme Court stand ready to help a guy out of a tight spot

(Washington Post image)

Are U.S. government entities engaged in a concerted effort to help Donald Trump win the 2024 presidential election? That seems like a reasonable question after the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) took steps recently to prop up Trump's flagging finances in the wake of his failure to obtain a bond in the New York business-fraud case.

And that comes on the heels of two dubious U.S. Supreme Court decisions -- one on Trump's ballot access case (in which his actions related to the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection clearly disqualify him from appearing on the ballot or holding any public office again, federal or state) and the other on Tump's absolute presidential immunity case -- a claim that it is so outlandish there is no support for it in any provision of federal law.

How did the SEC give Trump a boost? Donald Watkins, a longtime Alabama attorney and nationally recognized criminal-defense expert explains in a post titled "Securities and Exchange Commission Okays Donald Trump's 58 to 64% Ownership of a Publicly Traded Social Media Company, Despite Court Findings of Business Fraud." Watkins writes:

On February 16, 2024, a New York state court found that Donald Trump, Donald Trump, Jr., and Eric Trump schemed for years to defraud banks and insurers by inflating his wealth on financial statements used to secure loans and make deals. The court entered a $454 million civil fraud judgment against Trump and his sons, who are appealing this ruling.

The day before the much-anticipated court ruling in Donald Trump's case, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission approved a merger of Trump Media and Technology Group with Digital World Acquisition Corp., a publicly-traded blank-check acquisition company. Trump's media company owns Truth Social, which he founded after he was banned from Twitter (now known as X) in 2021.

Does the merger, which Digital World shareholders are to vote on Friday (3/22/24, make sense? No, it does not, and Watkins provides details:

Trump Media's merger deal with Digital World was valued in February at an estimated $10 billion. This valuation was purely speculative.

Digital World’s shareholders are scheduled to vote on the merger deal on Friday, March 22, 2024.

Since its founding in 2021, Truth Social has sustained massive financial losses and a limited base of users (estimated 607,000 monthly users as of July 2023). Trump has 6.61 million followers on Truth Social. Digital World says Truth Social has so far had 8.9 million signups.

If the merger goes through, it will mark a first in SEC history, Watkins reports:

The Commission's approval of the merger occurred despite Donald Trump's documented history of filing business bankruptcies – six to be exact -- and stiffing creditors.

The merger was approved while Donald Trump is awaiting state and federal criminal trials in New York, Washington, Atlanta, and Miami on 88 felony charges.

Donald Trump, Jr., who was also found liable of business fraud in the New York civil case, is slated to join the board of directors of the merged entity.

Despite all of these red flags, Donald Trump will own between 58.1% and 69.4% of the combined company.

If Digital World’s shareholders approve the merger deal, Trump will become the first person in the history of the Securities and Exchange Commission to own a majority interest in a publicly traded company AFTER he was: (a) convicted of repeated acts of civil business fraud in court, (b) indicted by state and federal authorities on 88 felony charges, and (c) involved in six business bankruptcies.

Of course, we have this additional red flag: Just this week, Trump gave notice to a New York court that he had failed to secure a bond of $464 million to cover his liabilities in a business-fraud case. According to court documents, more than 30  companies rejected Trump's requests to cover the bond. Despite all of those glaring red flags, the SEC was willing to say, "Hey, let's help the guy out."

The SEC is supposed to be a watchdog agency, but apparently its teeth have rotted out -- at least when it comes to chicanery that might help boost Donald Trump. Watkins writes:

The Securities and Exchange Commission is supposed to be the watchdog agency that protects the investing public from fraudsters.  It rarely performs this function. Instead, the Commission has become a cleansing agent for crooked Wall Street banks, major utilities like the Southern Company, and soiled businessmen like Donald Trump.

With the Trump Media-Digital World merger deal, the Commission found a pathway to hold its nose and look past Donald Trump’s adjudicated business fraud, four criminal indictments, and six corporate bankruptcies so that Trump and his son could (a) seize control of a public social media company and (b) save Truth Social from bankruptcy.

No one should be surprised that the SEC has become toothless, Watkins writes:

The Securities and Exchange Commission is as crooked as the Trumps. No other explanation makes sense for its approval of the Trump Media-Digital World merger deal.

Digital World’s share price closed at $35.57 on Monday -- the same day Trump's lawyers announced that he was unable to post a $464 million appeal bond in his New York civil fraud case. The share price is down from $50.49 in February when the Commission approved the merger.

We now know the highly touted Trump Media-Digital World stock is virtually worthless since it does not provide Donald Trump with the amount of liquidity he needs to post a $464 million appeal bond in his civil fraud case.

Watkins also has been critical of the U.S. Supreme Court, especially in regards to Trump's absolute immunity claim. From a post Watkins wrote in early February: 

Today, a federal court of appeals in Washington confirmed for the public what most competent lawyers knew all along – there is no such thing in U.S. law as presidential immunity for criminal acts.

None of the 46 U.S. presidents has ever enjoyed such immunity.

Presidential immunity for criminal acts is not authorized in the U.S. Constitution. It is not authorized in any federal statute. It is not authorized in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Such an immunity claim is merely a figment of Donald Trump’s imagination.  This was a “bullshit” legal argument when it was first asserted by Trump’s lawyers.

We are NOT running a monarchy in America.  There is no King, Queen, or Emperor, who is above in law.

As for the SEC-fueled merger, Watkins reaches this grim conclusion:

From the public's standpoint, the Commission's approval of the merger has facilitated the nightmare scenario of stacking fraud on top of fraud.

If the deal does not benefit the public, who does it benefit? As is the case with the recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings (see here and here),  it apparently is designed to help one man -- Donald Trump.

First term proves Trump is a bad president, and NY business-fraud case shows he is a bad businessman, so why in the world would anyone vote for the guy?

Judge Arthur Engoron and Donald Trump

 

As an avowed Never Trumper, I have not spent one second thinking about voting for Donald Trump. I never watched an episode of The Apprentice -- or even a portion of an episode -- so the whole "you're fired" con man act never intrigued me.

I have, however, wondered why other people vote for Trump. What do they see in this guy who, to me at least, has so little to offer -- as a presidential candidate and a human being. The most common explanation I've heard for supporting Trump goes something like this: "Trump is a good businessman, and if we vote him into office, I look forward to watching him use sound business principles to run our country the way he runs one of his companies."

Now, we have documents from Trump's business-fraud case that indicate he is not a good businessman and probably never has been. (More on that in a moment.) On what then can one base his support for Trump? You certainly can't hang your hat on any government-related accomplishments. The closest thing that comes to mind is a fairly good economy in Trump's first two years in office as he rode on the coattails of  Barack Obama's economic recovery, which saved us from the Great Recession 0f 2009  under George W. Bush.

So, what drives some Americans to support such a flawed candidate? My best guess is that it comes from deeply internalized and conflicted feelings about race. Even the most devoted MAGAts should realize that is a bad reason to support Trump -- or any candidate. Unless they truly want to see American democracy tossed aside to be replaced by some version of Trump authoritarianism (and that is exactly what he has promised to deliver, straight from his own mouth) would-be Trump supporters need to come to their senses and realize they are supporting a man who is not deserving of their support. And if they truly want to live in a form of dictatorship, they should realize they've been living in the wrong country all these years. They can stay here, of course, but they should embrace the form of American government that has served us well for almost 250 years. Donald Trump does not support that kind of system. He wants a government that will serve his own narcissistic interests -- based mainly on being able (he thinks) to pursue revenge against his perceived enemies. How is that going to benefit everyday Americans and help our country make progress? It won't, so MAGA types should realize there is no good reason to vote for Trump.

The "Trump as a great businessman" explanation is as fine as any, I suppose. But darned if that stumbling block we call reality hasn't caused  it to run aground. No. 1, we have four years from Trump's first term (2017-2021) to realize he couldn't even "make the trains run on time." In fact, he failed so badly at a president's top job -- keeping Americans relatively safe within their own borders -- that numerous analysts have deemed his handiwork a failed presidency. Here's how we explained his hatchet job on the COVID pandemic, which cost 1.2 million American lives, and an estimated 3 to 7 million worldwide. (Public-health experts say this almost certainly is an undercount, with the real numbers likely being three times greater than those stated above, which would mean a range of 9 to 21 million actual deaths. 

Trump is a presidential candidate with blood on his hands, which should not be seen as an attractive quality in a man who seeks to be "Leader of the Free World." Here is how we have explained Trump's tortured handling of the COVID pandemic:

As for Trump's incompetence and unfitness, consider the way he botched the coronavirus pandemic. Public-health experts knew an outbreak of a deadly virus was a serious threat when Trump took office for his first term in 2017. They knew the virus likely was to originate in China and previous administrations -- led by George W. Bush and Barack Obama -- developed a step-by-step "playbook" on how to deal with such a crisis. With genuine leadership from the U.S., the virus could have been contained in China and eventually eradicated there -- saving millions of lives around the globe, including 1.2 million lives in the United States.

Trump apparently could not be bothered to read the playbook -- or pay attention to warnings from intelligence officials in daily briefings -- and he downplayed the threat in public statements. Just before the coronavirus outbreak appeared. Trump eliminated the position of Dr. Linda Quick, an American epidemiologist who had been embedded in Beijing specifically to monitor for signs of a viral outbreak. Here is more information about Dr. Linda Quick and her abrupt exit, which coincided with a Trump-fueled trade war with China.

If Trump has proven to be a failure as a president, and public records indicate he never was a good businessman, his support should evaporate to almost nothing. An article yesterday at Yahoo! Finance (with original reporting from Molly Crane-Newman of the New York Daily News) shows Trump has dreadful business instincts:

Donald Trump can’t come up with almost half a billion dollars he owes the New York attorney general for committing large-scale fraud, his lawyers told an appeals court Monday.

With one week to go before the former president’s deadline to put down at least $454 million to appeal the mammoth judgment without its consequences taking effect, Trump’s lawyers said he was unable to secure the cash. They noted he needed to find closer to $557 million as most bond agents require 120% as security.

“[Very] few bonding companies will consider a bond of anything approaching that,” Trump lawyers Alina Habba and Cliff Robert wrote, asking the First Department Court of Appeals to hear oral arguments over his effort to halt enforcement of the crushing ruling while he appeals.

“The case involves no actual victims and no award of restitution, and [the AG] is fully protected by Defendants’ real-estate holdings.”

(No real victims? I suspect the banks and insurance companies who apparently relied on Trump's inflated valuations would take issue with that.)

Judge Arthur Engoron has played rough with Trump -- as he should have, in my view -- and it will be interesting to see what direction the case takes from here. Crane-Newman provides insights:

If Trump doesn’t secure a ruling from the appeals court pausing Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron’s Feb. 16 ruling from taking effect or lowering the security deposit, he’ll have to post the total with the court by March 25 to automatically prevent the AG from beginning the collection process — whether by asking the sheriff to seize his properties, including famed New York properties such as Trump Tower, or through other means.

The GOP front-runner in the 2024 presidential race appealed Engoron’s devastating ruling on Feb. 26. He previously failed to convince the mid-level appellate court to allow him to deposit a smaller sum of $100 million while appealing.

According to Monday’s filing, Trump’s lawyers unsuccessfully asked 30 underwriters to back the eye-popping bond, and none of them were willing to accept his properties as collateral.

The ex-president, who says he’s worth billions and has at least $400 million in cash, gave up after “countless hours negotiating with one of the largest insurance companies in the world,” according to an affidavit from Gary Giulietti, a broker and longtime friend of Trump’s, who testified for the defense at trial.

The broker, whose word Trump’s lawyers asked the appeals court to rely on, was described as a questionable witness in Engoron’s ruling finding Trump liable for fraud.

Engoron said Giulietti was the first expert witness he’d encountered in 20 years on the bench “who not only was a close personal friend of a party, but also had a personal financial interest in the outcome of the case for which he is being offered as an expert,” noting he made $1.2 million in commissions from Trump’s company in 2022.

Let's hope would-be Trump voters perceive the troubled reality of his candidacy -- this is a man who takes on more debt than he can handle; sounds like a great prospect to run the U.S. economy -- and decide this is a jalopy that needs to be pushed over a cliff.

Brenda Paige Ward, Alabama civil-rights advocate, pushes for progress, but she reportedly is paid to also represent the interests of giant utility Southern Co.

Brenda Paige Ward (banbalch.com)

A prominent civil-rights activist has been "captured" by the nation's second largest utility company and is paid to represent the firm's social and political interests, according to a post at banbalch.com.

K.B. Forbes, publisher of the Ban Balch blog and CEO of its parent organization, the CDLU public charity and advocacy group, provides details under the headline "Bought and Paid For! Southern Company Criminal Enterprise Buys Civil Rights Advocates and African American Activists." Forbes writes:

In January, Refuge In Troubled Times Community Development Corporation held its fourth candlelight vigil in Birmingham to memorialize the murdered victims of violence.

AL.com reported:

Brenda Paige Ward, founder of Refuge In Troubled Times, said her goal is to bring the community together and set a path for change.

“We need to come together in unity and do something about all of the deaths, and the murders, and the homicides and all of the things that are going on around our city. This is our city and we have to do something for our children,” Ward said.

Ward created the nonprofit in 2011, after the fatal shooting of her eldest grandson, RaSheed Ali Ward, 19, on June 17, 2010. Keith Hilson, 24, was also killed in the shooting. No one has been arrested for their deaths.

But Ward is more than a heart-broken grandmother. She’s also an alleged stooge for the Southern Company Criminal Enterprise.

In 2020, self-anointed Apostle Brenda Paige Ward, rented a large van from Budget Rentals at the Birmingham Airport and showed up in the neighborhood of CDLU Chief Executive Officer K.B. Forbes.

Ward, along with a dozen or so African American actors, held a two-minute “shoot and scoot” fake protest adjacent to Forbes’ home, terrorizing neighbors and Forbes’ then-8-year-old daughter,  who cried thinking they were killing an innocent African American like George Floyd.

Ward and others were part of Southern Company’s campaign of terror and intimidation against Forbes and Burt Newsome, the attorney who took on Balch & Bingham, the sister-wife of Alabama Power, a wholly owned and most profitable subsidiary of Southern Company.

Ward, showed up, without apparently knowing who she was protesting or for what reason.

The buffoons couldn’t even spell Forbes’ last name correctly, calling him Forger, Forges, or Forgis. Even the Apostle Brenda Paige Ward couldn’t spell Forbes’ name.

Why would Ward get involved in such a fiasco? Evidence indicates she was paid to do it. Forbes writes:

The Southern Company Criminal Enterprise utilized Matrix, the obscure political consulting firm founded by the diminutive “Sloppy Joe” Perkins.

An investigation by Floodlight,  recently published in The Guardian, revealed that Matrix funneled resources to influence Civil Rights groups and leaders.

Entities controlled by Matrix paid $115,000 to Charles Steele Jr, the head of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), and about $170,000 to the Rev Deves Toon, national field director for the National Action Network (NAN), according to verified internal Matrix documents and tax records.

The SCLC was a desegregation pioneer in the South and active in the first protests against environmental racism. NAN, founded by the Rev Al Sharpton, spotlights violence faced by people of color. In 2023, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and the leader of the Environmental Protection Agency spoke at NAN events.

In an interview last year, Steele confirmed one payment from Matrix but categorized it as a contribution for civil-rights work. Neither he nor his organization responded to additional questions. Toon did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Southern Company did not try very hard to hide its involvement, Forbes reports:

Even Southern Company Chairman Tom Fanning acknowledged greasing the wheels. From Floodlight:

Tom Fanning… confirmed in a May interview with Floodlight that the company at the time was still working with Matrix and with civil-rights groups including the SCLC. The company did not respond to later requests for comment.

“There’s a real business reason why we do this,” he said, claiming a mutual benefit for the company and the civil-rights groups.

The Southern Company Criminal Enterprise has bought and paid for Civil Rights advocates and African American activists to attack other minority activists, such as Forbes.

Fanning, Perkins, Ward, and others demonstrated total ignorance about Forbes, who lived in Chile as a child, is the son of a Hispanic immigrant, and is fully bilingual.

Forbes and the CDLU were working with the U.S. Department of Justice in 2020 as informants about the misconduct in Alabama, and the criminal enterprise did not like that fact.

Now, today, Forbes and the CDLU are working to hold Fanning and the Southern Company Criminal Enterprise accountable for wasting millions of shareholder resources on campaigns of fear and intimidation that had no corporate purpose whatsoever and violated the civil rights of innocent victims, including children.

Trump goes nuts over the weekend, and former federal prosecutor calls him a "threat to democracy" and says his bond should be revoked for "bloodbath" remarks

 

Donald Trump, Republican candidate for president, called yesterday for members of the Congressional Jan. 6 committee to be jailed. That comes on the heels of a speech in Ohio, earlier in the weekend, where Trump warned of a "bloodbath" in America if he loses the November 5 election to President Joe Biden. A former federal prosecutor denounced Trump as a "threat to democracy" and called for bis bond to be revoked in the wake of the "bloodbath" statement.

These are just the latest signs that Trump's mental health is deteriorating and he is not fit to serve in any public office. It also is a sign that Americans need to take a cold, hard look at the reality surrounding Trump's candidacy. First, Trump seems to be suggesting that, if he resided in the White House, he could have the Jan. 6 committee members, arrested and jailed -- on his own whim. But for more than 50 years, U.S. policy has forbidden presidents from being involved with the charging -- or non-charging -- decisions of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ); the DOJ is to act independently of the White House. In other words, it's not the president's job to have people arrested or detained. And that's the latest of many signs that Trump has no clue how the American government works, and he apparently has no interest in learning.

We now have overwhelming evidence that Trump is both mentally unfit and incompetent in the government world. In fact, it's not clear at this point that he even was a good businessman. Incompetence and shaky mental health are a bad combination, and it's time those who claim to support Trump recognize that. 

If some Americans were slow to notice Trump's unfitness for office before, they certainly should recognize it now after his "bloodbath" remarks. Those statements should be a "bridge too far" for anyone with a few functioning brain cells. For MAGA types who don't realize that Trump is not deserving of anyone's vote, they might want to examine their own mental fitness. In fact, that could raise this question: Who has the most diseased brain, Trump supporters or Trump himself?"

For those who are just dying to experience living in an authoritarian state, I would suggest you move to Russia, Hungary, Iran, China, or North Korea. Give it a shot, and let the rest of us enjoy a democracy that has served our country well for almost 250 years.

As for Trump's incompetence and unfitness, consider the way he botched the coronavirus pandemic. Public-health experts knew an outbreak of a deadly virus was a serious threat when Trump took office for his first term in 2017. They knew the virus likely was to originate in China and previous administrations -- led by George W. Bush and Barack Obama -- developed a step-by-step "playbook" on how to deal with such a crisis. With genuine leadership from the U.S., the virus could have been contained in China and eventually eradicated there -- saving millions of lives around the globe, including 1.2 million lives in the United States.

Trump apparently could not be bothered to read the playbook -- or pay attention to warnings from intelligence officials in daily briefings -- and he downplayed the threat in public statements. Just before the coronavirus outbreak appeared. Trump eliminated the position of Dr. Linda Quick, an American epidemiologist who had been embedded in Beijing specifically to monitor for signs of a viral outbreak. Here is more information about Dr. Linda Quick and her abrupt exit, which coincided with a Trump-fueled trade war with China.

Many Americans, including yours truly,  have been concerned about Trump's mental fitness for months. For him to call for members of Congress to be jailed, even though they've committed no apparent crimes, speaks to clouded judgment. And the "bloodbath" comment is, by far, the most grotesque, outlandish statement I've heard from a public figure in my lifetime. Based on news accounts, I'm not sure anyone in attendance at the speech in Vandalia, Ohio, knew exactly what Trump meant by a "bloodbath," but a number of observers have taken it to be a call to violence among his supporters, demanding they spill blood in furtherance of his political aspirations. That is classic Trump, likely a malignant narcissist. Would MAGA types fall for this con game. They've fallen under con-game spell already, so the answer appears to be yes. Sad.

A former federal prosecutor is taking Trump's words seriously, according to a report at Newsweek:.

Glenn Kirschner condemned Donald Trump's "bloodbath" remarks and warned that the former president is a "threat to democracy."

Kirschner, a former assistant U.S. attorney and frequent Trump critic, called for the former president to have his bond revoked over his comments on Saturday.

Trump, the presumed 2024 Republican presidential nominee who was in Ohio on Saturday for a campaign stop at the Buckeye Values PAC rally, is facing mounting criticism for telling rallygoers that there will be a "bloodbath" if he loses to his Democratic rival President Joe Biden in November.

"Now if I don't get elected, it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole—that's gonna be the least of it," Trump said. "It's going to be a bloodbath for the country. That will be the least of it."

Trump's comments quickly went viral and sparked a flurry of reactions on social media. While supporters of the Make America Great Again (MAGA) leader defended his "bloodbath" remarks and argued they were taken out of context, critics accused Trump of inciting violence.

Trump, the presumed 2024 Republican presidential nominee who was in Ohio on Saturday for a campaign stop at the Buckeye Values PAC rally, is facing mounting criticism for telling rallygoers that there will be a "bloodbath" if he loses to his Democratic rival President Joe Biden in November.

"Now if I don't get elected, it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole—that's gonna be the least of it," Trump said. "It's going to be a bloodbath for the country. That will be the least of it."

Kirschner weighed in on the bloodbath remarks during Sunday's segment of his Justice Matters podcast, where he said, "Trump tried to walk it back later saying he was really talking about what would happen to the auto industry if he wasn't elected, but his words belie that; indeed they contradict that BS walk back."

The former prosecutor blasted Trump and compared Saturday's remarks to his January 6, 2021, rhetoric, for which Trump is accused of inciting the U.S. Capitol riot by spreading unfounded claims of widespread voter fraud during the 2020 election. The claims led to a deadly siege as part of an effort to block Joe Biden's 2020 Electoral College victory.

Trump was indicted on four counts by the Department of Justice (DOJ) for his alleged role in the insurrection, including conspiracy to defraud the United States; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding; and conspiracy against rights. Trump, meanwhile, has maintained his innocence, accusing prosecutors of investigating him of attempting to derail his 2024 presidential campaign.

More than 1,265 individuals have been charged by the DOJ for their alleged involvement in the violent riot, with many already convicted and serving sentences.

Kirschner also took aim at Trump for making the bloodbath comments while facing dozens of felony charges in four separate criminal indictments. The former president had pleaded not guilty to all the charges.

"He is a threat to everyone in the United States of America," Kirschner said. "He is a threat to democracy. He launched an attack on January 6 against our democracy and it turned out to be a deadly attack. And he launched it with far less inflammatory language than he just used at the rally on Saturday: 'There will be a bloodbath in this country.' Do you understand me? That's what he just said. He's actually ratcheted up the recklessness and the violence of his rhetoric. And he's on pretrial release in four felony cases."

The former prosecutor argued that Trump's comments are dangerous and said that being a former president and presumptive GOP presidential nominee doesn't give him a free pass.

"He shouldn't be allowed to endanger our nation and her people and our democracy with this kind of violence-inducing rhetoric, more reckless than his rhetoric on January 6," Kirschner said. "This is institutional insanity if the institutions of government just receive this with a shrug. Do what the law provides, revoke Donald Trump on release, detain him pending trial. And for gosh sakes, let our country begin to move forward again."