In Brief: The Real Crooked Record-Keepers
Democrats are the ones with a history of corrupting and obscuring records.
As Donald Trump’s trial nears conclusion, retired Naval officer and attorney Joseph LoBue has a few thoughts about who the truly guilty parties are. Namely this: “There is … a good deal of crooked record-keeping going on these days. But Democrats are the ones doing it.”
President Trump is on trial in New York for allegedly falsifying business records because the bookkeepers in his organization recorded certain legal expenses — specifically, a legal settlement — as “legal expenses.” According to Democrat prosecutors, the bookkeepers should have recorded these payments as campaign contributions and expenditures because, they say, the payments were “intended” to “influence” the 2016 election “unlawfully” by concealing a purported sexual encounter with a pornographer.
Convoluted and bizarre enough for you yet? It should be. Because there is absolutely nothing “unlawful” about concealing a purported sexual encounter with a pornographer.
In fact, he says:
Federal campaign finance law actually prohibits candidates from characterizing the payments at issue in the Trump case as campaign contributions and expenditures.
Brad Smith, a leading expert on campaign finance law and former member of the Federal Election Commission, was set to testify to that very thing in open court in the Trump case. Except Juan Merchan, the partisan Democrat Biden-donor judge presiding over the case, barred him from doing so.
To accept the prosecution’s case, one must conclude that New York law requires candidates to make business records that violate federal law. The supremacy clause of the Constitution does not allow that. So it is Democrat prosecutors, not the Trump organization, that conspired to falsely characterize the record-keeping issues in the case.
LoBue explains Merchan’s manipulation of the trial record through various other moves before moving on to the way the White House covers for Joe Biden even in speech transcripts. “The so-called ‘transcript’” of a recent speech to the NAACP in Detroit, LoBue says, “substantively corrected numerous significant instances of mental lapses or gibberish uttered by Biden.”
Oh, and then there’s Biden’s claims of “executive privilege” to block the release of audio recordings of Biden with Special Counsel Robert Hur in the classified documents probe.
That’s the case where Biden took highly classified documents from the government while he was a senator and vice president, “willfully” retained them openly in dilapidated boxes in his garage, and then “willfully” disclosed the classified information to his ghostwriter as part of a lucrative $8 million book deal. Biden’s Justice Department declined to prosecute Biden, concluding that he would present himself to a jury like he did in his interviews — “as a sympathetic elderly man with a poor memory” — making it difficult to prove a felony “that requires a mental state of willfulness.”
In an effort to control the damage from the special counsel’s report, the White House and its allies released redacted transcripts of Biden’s interviews with investigators, apparently hoping that presenting the cold, written version of Biden’s testimony might minimize public fears about his declining mental state. It did not. Yet, it did open the door for Congress to subpoena the audio tapes of the interviews. …
The White House’s assertion of “executive privilege” is not really a legal one — it knows it has no chance of prevailing in court. Rather, the assertion of privilege is purely political. The White House believes it can conceal the audio tapes until after the election while the issue is litigated.
He concludes with the cover-up of COVID records by Anthony Fauci and others before concluding sarcastically:
Wow, that’s bad. But you have to understand, to Democrats, booking legal expenses as “legal expenses” is the real threat to democracy.
