Indicting President Trump

 

Indicting President Trump

 This article is a scathing discussion (and condemnation) by Andy McCarthy, of President Trump’s complicity with classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, and also Trump’s efforts to prove fraud during the 2020 election.

 Andy McCarthy backed President Trump through the first impeachment but not through the “big steal” claims and the second impeachment.  Whatever his views and commentary about Trump, one cannot fault McCarthy’s legal credentials and acumen.  A brief bio:

 Andrew C. McCarthy III is an American columnist for National Review. He served as an Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. A Republican, he led the 1995 terrorism prosecution against Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman and eleven others. The defendants were convicted of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and planning a series of attacks against New York City landmarks.  He also contributed to the prosecutions of terrorists who bombed United States embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. He resigned from the Justice Department in 2003.

 During the presidency of Barack Obama, McCarthy characterized Obama as a radical and a socialist, and authored a book alleging that Obama was advancing a "Sharia Agenda". He authored another book calling for Obama's impeachment. He defended false claims that the Affordable Care Act would lead to "death panels", and promoted a conspiracy theory that Bill Ayers, co-founder of the militant radical left-wing organization Weather Underground, had authored Obama's autobiography Dreams from My Father.

 During Donald Trump's presidency, McCarthy defended Trump before his first impeachment, but before his second impeachment, wrote that he had "committed an impeachable offense."

 This article is McCarthy’s view on what he posits are most likely valid legal reasons the DOJ has for indicting Trump about his mishandling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.  McCarthy also elaborates on what he considers fraudulent claims by Trump about the stolen 2020 election.

 Missing from McCarthy’s discussion of the unsuccessful legal machinations by Trump lawyers to prove election fraud, is any mention of the anti-Trump media covering up and disparaging the news of Hunter Biden’s laptop and Joe Biden’s complicity, and the impact that this open knowledge would have had on key swing states.

 Let’s remember, if the news about Hunter’s laptop was not suppressed by the anti-Trump media just before the 2020 election, Joe Biden would never have been elected.  And all you have to do is look at the numbers.

 Biden won the electoral college in 2020 by 306 to 232, with 270 electoral votes necessary to win.  This included Arizona with 11 electoral votes with 10,457 winning popular votes; Georgia 10 electoral, 12,670 popular; Pennsylvania 20 electoral, 81,660 popular; Wisconsin 10 electoral, 20,682 popular.  These four states add up to 51 electoral votes, and would have given Trump a winning total of 283.  The total popular vote in the four states necessary to attain these 51 electoral votes would have been 125,469 out of the 18,360,000 total votes cast, or less than 7 tenths of one percent of the total votes cast in these states.

 It is pretty obvious that these small popular voter margins would have easily been overcome, and Trump would have been re-elected president, if the truth about Hunter Biden’s laptop had not been suppressed by our dishonest politicians, mainstream media and big tech.  There’s no way of proving this, of course, - and no recourse in the courts at this point, and the FBI is still sitting on Hunter’s laptop, but the numbers don’t lie.  Perhaps the full extent of the 2020 election news suppression will be revealed once the Congress becomes honest again.

  https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/09/will-trump-be-indicted/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Saturday%20New%202022-09-24&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

 Ray Gruszecki

September 25, 2022