Beg Pardon

Biden must ignore pardon myths and protect Patel’s and Trump’s targets
Patel issued unprecedented threats. Biden must respond.

Since President Joe Biden began seriously considering an amnesty for people at risk of retribution from President-elect Donald Trump and his FBI pick (who comes armed with an enemies list), the pearl clutching and myth-spinning about pardons have spread. Biden should pay attention to history and case law, not misinformed critics.

The first myth: A broad amnesty would be unprecedented, an intrusion into the rule of law.

That is categorically false. More than a dozen presidents dating back to George Washington have granted amnesty to a defined, large group of Americans. As legal scholar Frank O. Bowman III pointed out:

George Washington issued pardons in 1794 to defuse the lingering tensions of the defeated Whiskey Rebellion. President Andrew Johnson made extensive (and controversial) use of the pardon power to civilly rehabilitate former Confederates. A century later, Gerald Ford issued a conditional amnesty and Jimmy Carter a full pardon to Vietnam draft evaders.

Presidential amnesties for categories of people have been commonplace. After Washington, President John Adams issued a broad pardon for those involved in the Fries Rebellion in 1799 in Pennsylvania (i.e., prosecutions of “any person or persons by reason of their being concerned in the said insurrection”). With a small exception, President James Buchanan, for example, pardoned Brigham Young and his Mormon followers who had engaged in a conflict with the U.S. military. In the 19th century, Benjamin Harrison and Grover Cleveland also issued pardons to Mormon polygamists.

The White House Historical Association recounts that presidents from Thomas Jefferson to Warren G. Harding granted amnesty to various groups of Americans — citizens convicted under the Alien and Sedition Acts for Jefferson, and 24 political prisoners (including Eugene V. Debs) for Harding.

Moreover, the association explains, “As decided in Ex Parte Garland (1866), presidents may issue pardons at any time after the commission of a federal offense, even before federal charges have been filed or a sentence has been imposed.”)

What is entirely unique is that an incoming president and a would-be FBI director nominee have explicitly named people and groups (e.g., prosecutors) they want to go after. To meet that unique threat, Biden should issue amnesty to the most vulnerable group of Americans: witnesses against Trump whom Trump and Kash Patel have already threatened.

The second myth: Some people might not want amnesty.

Again, this is not a valid reason to refuse to extend it to those who very much do want and need protection. Some individuals enjoy immunity from prosecution on other grounds so won’t need additional protection; they would be excluded from the amnesty. House members on the Jan. 6 committee immune under the speech and debate clause, along with and federal and state prosecutors operating under the color of law, almost certainly cannot be prosecuted.

But that leaves some ordinary Americans, primarily witnesses and those who provided material to courts, grand juries, Congress and federal investigators, to twist in the wind. It’s small comfort that such people would eventually be exonerated. Criminal trials and appeals can cost millions of dollars and ruin reputations as well as likely increase the physical threats many of these figures already face.

The third myth: Amnesty would not completely protect the recipients.

It is correct that such an amnesty would not protect recipients from criminal investigation for future conduct, from civil suits or from IRS audits. It is an imperfect solution to the problem of a rogue, irresponsible president-elect empowering intended nominees to seek vengeance. However, by limiting the pardon to a discrete group of people, making clear this is essentially a witness protection program to insulate the recipients from Trump’s wrath, Biden can spare some conscientious citizens and alert the public to the dangers Trump and Patel pose.

The fourth myth: Accepting amnesty is an admission of guilt.

This is false. The most recent case on the scope of pardons, 2021’s Lorance v. Commandant, held that the defendant’s acceptance of a full and unconditional presidential pardon did not amount to an admission of guilt, and therefore the defendant did not waive his habeas rights upon accepting it.

Lorance also dealt with a common misperception concerning a Supreme Court case, 1915’s Burdick v. United States, which seemed to suggest that accepting a pardon constituted “a confession” of guilt. However, Lorance explained that that statement referred to how the pardon recipient might feel. In other words, though acceptance might make the recipient “look guilty” in the eyes of some, it does not make the recipient legally guilty.

Biden in his amnesty statement can underscore that acceptance is no admission of wrongdoing but rather confirmation that the incoming president poses extreme and unprecedented threats to political enemies — something indicative of an authoritarian regime, not a great democracy.

The fifth myth: This would open the door to pardon abuses by Trump and/or mar Biden’s legacy.

The first is laughable given Trump’s pardon track record (e.g., Michael Flynn, Sheriff Joe Arpaio) and his plans to pardon those convicted of violent crimes on Jan. 6, 2021. He needs no excuse to flout democratic norms. (By the way, Biden might not have considered amnesty had not Trump recently repeated his threats and chosen Patel for FBI director with barely a whisper of complaint from Republicans. If Trump renounced revenge and found a fit nominee, none of this might be necessary.)

As for Biden, his Hunter Biden pardon statement explained that he acted because “raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice.” It certainly follows that he should act to keep raw politics — unabashedly announced in advance — from leading to a miscarriage of justice.

If ordinary citizens face retribution for daring to testify against powerful bullies, few will do so. To preserve the justice system, to encourage people to provide evidence, Biden should grant them amnesty — in effect setting up a witness protection program. It is the least he can do for selfless Americans.

Today's Brian & Glenn

I think I get it - gotta be careful about setting precedent, and you don't wanna hand the bad guys a weapon they can use against you later (assuming of course we actually find our way outa this fucked up mess), and we have to interpret the law, and apply the law, and not try to make the law on the judiciary side - etc etc etc. I'm there. I get it.

But goddammit - I'm so fucking sick of rich people stomping around in smarmspace manufacturing loopholes - using and abusing the courts to duck responsibility.

Here's a thought: Obey the fucking law. Could we try that for a while?

Skullduggery Is Afoot

The effort to overthrow democracy in 2020-2021 didn't fail - when the movers and shakers go unpunished, it wasn't a failure - it was a rehearsal.

This piece in Wired is a long one. But it's important to remember that the Trump problem is complex and gnarly.

Synopsis:

• Constitutional Sheriffs believe they're the ultimate and absolute authority
• They get to choose which laws they enforce and which ones they can ignore
• They've been testing their theories by seizing voting gear and harassing election officials
• Some have been organizing private militias, and posses (ie: vigilantes) to patrol voting stations
• Under the guise of "election security" they're being organized to ensure Republican wins at any cost
• Their claims to power are not legit - "Sheriff" is not in the US Constitution

'Take Back the States': The Far-Right Sheriffs Ready to Disrupt the Election

Constitutional Sheriffs are duly elected lawmen who believe they answer only to god. They've spent the last six months preparing to stop a "stolen" election—by any means necessary.

Dar Leaf and Richard Mack don’t seem like they would pose a threat to US democracy.

Leaf, a sheriff from Barry County, Michigan, always has at least two pens clipped neatly to his shirt pocket and speaks softly with a Midwestern accent. When we meet at an April event in Las Vegas, Nevada, Leaf is immaculately dressed in a sheriff’s uniform, replete with the polished gold star.

Mack also wears a gold star—even though he’s no longer a sheriff. But in the Ahern Hotel ballroom in Vegas, Mack played the part. In a ten-gallon hat, Mack was genial; shaking hands with guests, joking with vendors, and taking selfies with supporters.

This wasn’t an average get-together. Leaf and Mack were at a conference for the far-right Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, or CSPOA, a group described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as an anti-government organization with links to many other extremist groups. Constitutional sheriffs are actual elected sheriffs who also believe they are the ultimate legal power in their county, and that no federal or state authority can usurp their authority. They also believe that a sheriff’s power stems directly from the constitution, and that they can disregard any laws they deem unconstitutional—a belief that is not grounded in reality.

Leaf is on the board of the group; Mack is the founder. And there are hundreds of members around the country.

In Las Vegas, Mack referred supporters and journalists to Leaf, who was, he said, “doing more than anyone to uncover election interference” in his role as sheriff.

A staunch Trump supporter, Leaf has spent the last four years investigating voter fraud in the 2020 federal election in Barry County—even though Donald Trump won decisively there. He has attempted to seize voting machines, pushed wild conspiracies, and ultimately became the focus of state investigations himself. In at least one case, Leaf appears to have inspired an election official to refuse to verify a vote—an ominous warning ahead of the 2024 US election.

The conspiracies have also taken a physical turn: According to emails shared exclusively with WIRED by the nonprofit group American Oversight, Leaf has run a militia training course advising “potential jurors, homeschoolers, ladies and gentlemen” to “get a standard AR-15 type military grade weapon” and “500 rounds of ammo.” The emails also show that, ahead of the most consequential election in a generation, Leaf is in regular contact with a wide variety of election conspiracists.

Leaf and a number of his colleagues in the Constitutional Sheriff movement say that they have “posses” to patrol polling stations, monitor for “illegal” immigrant voters, and help sheriffs respond to reports of fraud—or anything else—on election day.

Mack, meanwhile, has been the driving force behind the modern day Constitutional Sheriffs movement. In the last six months, Mack’s group has mobilized across the US, building relationships with powerful figures close to Trump, training armed militias, and laying out plans for when Democrats inevitably, in their view, try to steal the election. They’re laying the groundwork to challenge the outcome of next month’s vote—and recruiting sheriffs to help them assert control if Trump loses.

“In a swing state like Michigan or Wisconsin, where the difference in the state's outcome is 50,000 to 70,000 votes, if a sheriff becomes an obstacle, then that could undermine that state's credibility, says Will Pelfrey, a professor of criminal justice and homeland security at Virginia Commonwealth University. “In a swing state, that could undermine the entire national election.”

A WIRED investigation reviewed hundreds of documents and conducted dozens of interviews over the course of the last six months. We found that the Constitutional Sheriff movement believes it is the last line of defense to protect American elections. At conferences in Las Vegas and Florida, as well as online in group chats and Zoom meetings, their discussions often turn to how sheriffs can utilize their unique power in order to, they say, safeguard democracy.

For years, sheriffs like Leaf who believe they have unlimited power to interpret and enforce the laws of the land have operated on the fringes. But as the election approaches, they have been increasingly empowered by those close to Trump and are more committed than ever to ensuring a Republican victory up and down the ballot. At all costs.

Today, one in four sworn law enforcement officers in the US report to a sheriff. In addition to running county jails, sheriffs and their deputies make approximately 20 percent of all arrests in the nation, according to one estimate, translating to around 2 million arrests every year. In nearly one in three US counties, sheriff departments are the largest law enforcement agency, meaning sheriff’s offices are the primary law enforcement agency for 56 million people.

“Sheriffs are really beholden to nobody,” says Pelfrey. “Once elected, a sheriff has tremendous power, and there have been sheriffs who have been convicted and still hold office. It's a bizarre thing. It shouldn't exist, but sheriffs are not beholden to a governor or to a president, and the only way to enforce state or federal laws for a recalcitrant sheriff is the National Guard. And that's not a viable system.”

At the April event in Las Vegas, Mack worked the room incessantly. Together with Leaf, he built links with the leaders of the election denial movement, discussing and preparing for the recruitment of like-minded citizens to patrol polling stations and stop “illegal” immigrants from voting in the election. The event was a veritable who’s who of the right-wing election denial movement, including former Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne, pillow salesman Mike Lindell, and the de facto leader of the movement, disgraced former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

On stage, Flynn told the sheriffs they have “a huge role and responsibility in this country” and that only their local-level work will halt voter fraud. During his speech, Byrne said that constitutional sheriffs would need to play a vital role in fighting the influx of “15 million military-age men.” He also claimed that a “well-regulated militia is not a dirty phrase” and urged sheriffs in attendance to build “surge capacity” by partnering with local militias.

“The constitutional sheriffs, or any sheriff in this county, have mega power at the county level,” Lindell told WIRED in Las Vegas. He suggested that sheriffs could arrest voters for illegally voting in the wrong county, adding that they could “put a moratorium” on the voting machines if they suspect fraud is taking place. And he cited Leaf, who spoke at the event, as an example that all sheriffs should follow.

“Our job is basically to make sure that my guys are educated on the election laws, start looking for the violations, trying to get the election clerks to start paying attention if somebody drives in and they've got a whole van full of people that look like they're not from around our area, and they can say no and then make them take it through the courts,” Leaf told WIRED that week, referencing the conspiracy that “illegal immigrants” were being relocated over the border by Democrats to sway the election in favor of Kamala Harris.

To make sure his deputies follow his lead, Leaf said he is working with others to produce a guide on how to properly police elections—something he said he was going to share with all sheriffs across the country in time for the US elections.

“The role of the sheriff has always been to maintain the peace, and he's your chief law enforcement officer and chief conservator of the peace of your county,” Leaf said. “And when you get people cheating on elections, that's disturbing the peace. You violated somebody's peace.”

None of these claims of constitutional power and control are true.

“There is no constitutional basis for their claims to power, zero, it's just not in the constitution,” says representative Jamie Raskin, the congressman from Maryland who spent decades working as a constitutional law professor at American University’s Washington College of Law. “County sheriffs have no more sovereign-state political power than municipal police chiefs or mayors or county commissioners. The whole claim is completely fictional. It's a pure fabrication.”

Still, anyone paying attention is nervous: Leaf has publicly defended members of the Wolverine Watchmen militia who plotted to kidnap Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer in 2020. “It’s just a charge, and they say a 'plot to kidnap' and you got to remember that,” he told a local news outlet. “Are they trying to kidnap? Because a lot of people are angry with the governor, and they want her arrested. So are they trying to arrest or was it a kidnap attempt? Because you can still in Michigan, if it’s a felony, you can make a felony arrest.” And he has run an eight-week militia training course, called Awaken Our Constitution’s Sleeping Militia Clauses, that he openly advertised on his Facebook page as recently as January.

The contents of the course, according to emails reviewed by WIRED, are based on a 2010 booklet from Brent Allen Winters, a sovereign-citizen believer, titled “Militia of the Several States,” which outlines a belief that armed militias are granted their power not from the constitution but from God, harking back to a time during the American Revolution when men in some areas were fined for not bringing their guns to church. The booklet even cites the Old Testament as justification for organizing an armed militia.

As Winters and Leaf see it, a member of a militia has two duties: “Armed defense of the land from enemies foreign and defense of the law of the land from enemies domestic.”

In one slide, titled “Do Your Duty,” which was shown to attendees of Leaf’s training course, Winters wrote: “Get started. Get a standard AR-15 type military grade weapon. Get 500 rounds of ammo.”

“There should be militias connected with every sheriff,” Leaf told The Guardian in July.

Experts like Devin Burghart, executive director of the Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights and someone who has closely chronicled the Constitutional Sheriffs movement for years, are also tracking how the organization is now interacting with other extremist, “paramilitary” groups.

”The Vegas CSPOA conference was about more than recruiting far-right sheriffs,” Burghart claims. “It was about plotting a road map for coordinated election interference and insurrection 2.0.”

In the weeks after the 2020 election, Trump and his advisers were scrambling to challenge the election results when a relatively unknown former Army Reserve lieutenant colonel named Ivan Raiklin started tweeting. Raiklin told Trump that he should play the “Pence card” and force then vice president Mike Pence to refuse to certify the results of the election.

While Raiklin cited a real provision of the US legal code, his plan had no basis in law. Trump retweeted and endorsed Raiklin’s plan, and while it ultimately went nowhere, the “Pence card” was a precursor to the Trump internal legal team’s coup memo that laid out a plan for Pence to overturn the election result on January 6, 2021.

Four years later, Raiklin is now a superstar in the world of election denial. Ahead of the 2024 election, he has a new scheme to guarantee Trump’s win. It involves the constitutional sheriffs.

Raiklin has compiled a “Deep State target list” of more than 350 names, reviewed by WIRED, that includes elected Democratic and Republican lawmakers, FBI officials, journalists, members of the House January 6 committee, US Capitol police officers, and witnesses from Trump’s two impeachment trials. His plan is to get constitutional sheriffs to round up those people in livestreamed swatting raids so they can be punished for treason. Raiklin, who is closely connected to Flynn’s organization, also wants sheriffs to “deputize” people into armed militias or “posses” to help facilitate the arrests.

“We have hundreds of thousands that want to participate in retribution,” Raiklin said in a June video interview with Cliven Bundy, a Nevada cattle rancher who became a far-right icon after a dispute in 2014 over grazing fees led to an armed standoff with federal authorities. “Some people call it accountability.”

Raiklin met with Mack at the Las Vegas conference and tried to recruit sheriffs to his cause. In June, Raiklin and Mack met again and had “a good discussion,” according to Mack, who would not expand on what exactly the pair discussed. Raiklin refused to speak to WIRED in Vegas and didn’t answer questions sent afterward.

While Trump has not endorsed the Constitutional Sheriffs movement directly, he has spent recent years courting sheriffs around the country. In September 2018, Trump stood in the White House surrounded by almost four dozen sheriffs. Front and center was Thomas Hodgson, then sheriff of Bristol County in Massachusetts.

Hodgson was there to present Trump with a plaque, and praised him for his “strength of purpose” and “commitment to [his] convictions.” The inscription read in part: “There’s a new sheriff in town.” A supporter of the Constitutional Sheriff movement, Hodgson was tapped by Trump in late 2019 to become an honorary chairman of Trump’s Massachusetts reelection effort.

Trump held around a dozen meetings with sheriffs at the White House during his four years in office, more than any other president—and that’s not counting the regular appearances of sheriffs at Trump rallies and campaign stops. Mark Lamb, a constitutional sheriff from Pinal County, Arizona, spoke at Trump rallies in his home state and in Illinois. Trump also emboldened sheriffs by removing Department of Justice oversight that the Obama administration had put in place and restarting a program to allow sheriffs departments to buy military-grade weapons at discounted prices.

“Trump’s tough-guy, xenophobic, and conspiracy-minded persona gave sheriffs a new model in the White House,” writes Jessica Pishko, author of The Highest Law in the Land: How the Unchecked Power of Sheriffs Threatens Democracy. “Under Trump, constitutional sheriffs had a friend and protector at the highest level of government.”

While Mack’s group is at the forefront of the Constitutional Sheriffs movement, there are many other sheriffs across the US who hold similar beliefs about the power of sheriffs. The movement has also found purchase with other prominent right-wing groups. In 2021, the Sheriff’s Fellowship was launched by the Claremont Institute, an influential far-right think tank involved in the drafting of Project 2025, whose stated goal is to see the US revert to a Christian-centric nation based on principles espoused by the founding fathers. The fellowship, which was funded by Trump’s former secretary of education Betsy DeVos, is a five-day training course in “American political thought and institutions” and has featured multiple self-identified constitutional sheriffs, including Leaf.

The closer constitutional sheriffs get to the mainstream GOP, the more cause for alarm.

“The danger of authoritarian attack on the democratic process is at its peak when you get an alliance between extremist vigilante groups like [the Constitutional Sheriffs] with elements of the actual political system, like a political party,” says Representative Raskin. “That's a dangerous combination if Donald Trump is going to be leading the Republican Party into election denialism and a determination to prevail over the rule of law, and you have violent paramilitary groups backing them up.”

Richard Mack’s law enforcement career began with rejection. “My father had just retired from the Bureau a few years earlier and I wanted to follow in his footsteps,” Mack wrote in his 2009 book titled The County Sheriff. “But, this dream never happened as I had some problems with one of the Bureau's entrance tests.” He instead decided to join the Provo (Utah) Police Department in 1979, where he says he immediately became a “by-the-numbers jerk” whose primary goal was writing as many tickets as possible.

In 1982, Mack went undercover on the narcotics beat. “I had to live in the bars, drink, smoke, and act like the biggest partying druggie there ever was (something totally foreign to my conservative Mormon upbringing),” Mack wrote.

The assignment opened Mack’s eyes to what he saw as the injustice of the drug war and how it was targeting US citizens rather than organized crime groups. Disillusioned with the police force, in 1988 Mack moved home to Safford, Arizona, and successfully ran for Graham County sheriff. This was where the Constitutional Sheriff movement began.

Constitutional sheriffs claim their power comes directly from the founding fathers, even though there is no mention of sheriffs in the constitution. Many sheriffs—including Leaf—cite a quote from a Thomas Jefferson letter as their justification for the importance of the position: “The office of Sheriff [is] the most important of all the Executive offices of the county.” The line was indeed written by Jefferson, but the letter focuses on Jefferson's complaints about lifetime appointments of local judges and how they abuse their office, Pishko writes in her book.

The roots of the modern day Constitutional Sheriffs movement originate in the far-right Posse Comitatus group, which was formed in the early 1970s by William Potter Gale, a minister of a militant antisemitic, white-nationalist quasi-religion known as Christian Identity. Gale lionized the idea of the county sheriff as a protector of the ordinary citizen who had the power to call up posses or militias to root out communism, fight the desegregation of schools, and remove—or even execute—federal officials.

Over the years, the ideas popularized by Gale would inspire a variety of far-right groups, individuals, and movements, including Timothy McVeigh, who carried out the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. Incidents like the sieges at Ruby Ridge and Waco in the early 1990s, the latter of which resulted in dozens of deaths, would be used as further evidence by figures like Mack who already believed the federal government was overstepping.

At the same time, Mack coordinated with the National Rifle Association (NRA) to be a plaintiff in a lawsuit challenging the Brady Bill, signed into law by then president Bill Clinton in 1993. The law mandated federal background checks on firearm purchasers—carried out by sheriffs. For sheriffs like Mack, who almost uniformly view Second Amendment gun rights as sacred, this was too far.

In 1997, the Supreme Court sided with Mack and the NRA, finding that the provisions in the bill that forced sheriffs to perform the background checks were unconstitutional. Mack was no longer a sheriff, but he catapulted to fame on the far-right for standing up to the government. He became a regular on the militia and pro-gun speaking circuits and even did PR work for Gun Owners of America, a more hard-line version of the NRA.

Over the next decade, Mack continued to mix in far-right circles. In the early 2010s, he became a board member of the Oath Keepers, an anti-government militia led by former Army paratrooper Stewart Rhodes, who is currently serving an 18-year sentence for his role in the January 6 Capitol riot. (Mack said he left the Oath Keepers around a decade ago when it became too militant, but CSPOA continued to support the group on its podcasts and newsletters in the years since the attack on the Capitol, helping raise money for Rhodes’ legal fund.)

In 2011, Mack founded the CSPOA to “take America back, Sheriff by Sheriff, County by County, State by State.” In 2014, Mack, together with members of the CSPOA and the Oath Keepers, was part of the now infamous armed standoff between the federal government and the Bundy family in Nevada.

The popularity of the CSPOA has waxed and waned over the course of its 13-year-old history, but the Covid-19 pandemic and protests following the murder of George Floyd in 2020 brought sheriffs back to the fold.

Mack reportedly encouraged sheriffs to ignore restrictions by federal and state officials meant to curb the spread of Covid; he also helped facilitate the spread of anti-vaccine disinformation as a board member of the conspiracy group America’s Frontline Doctors, a role for which he was, at one time, paid $20,000 a month. Mack, who to this day still refers to himself as “Sheriff Mack,” has not been a sheriff for almost 30 years. He unsuccessfully ran for other sheriff positions, and even governor of Utah and US senator in Arizona.

In interviews, Mack comes across as reasonable, repeatedly pointing out that the CSPOA is a nonviolent movement. But in the private members-only webinars he broadcasts weekly to his subscribers, he portrays a much darker side. In an August webinar, he said that his group was “obsessed” with monitoring next month’s vote and the “probability” that the election will be stolen as a result of the millions of illegal aliens being shipped into the country. In another webinar earlier this summer, Mack pushed an even darker conspiracy, that Democrats will allow Trump to win to instigate a civil war:

“The only way I see Trump winning is if they decide they want Trump to be in, that those who cheated last time are actually going to make sure he gets in,” Mack said. “Why do they want Trump in? Because they want the civil war to begin, and the violence that will be happening across this country will be horrendous.”

In September, Leaf appeared in Orlando, Florida, to discuss what extremism experts say is a “far-right blueprint for the next insurrection.” He was speaking at a conference organized by the Florida Foundation for Freedom, a group run by the CSPOA. Leaf was there to show other sheriffs how to take action.

The conference’s speaker list included a variety of election conspiracists with links to Trump—including far-right figure Mark Finchem, who is currently running for a seat in Arizona’s statehouse—and Christian nationalists, including Bill Cook, the founder of America’s Black Robe Regiment. Also speaking at the conference was Mary Flynn O’Neill, a director at America’s Future, the nonprofit run by her brother, Michael Flynn.

The event was organized by Bill Mitchell, the head of CSPOA’s Florida chapter, to promote a blueprint he created for constitutional sheriffs in other states to connect with like-minded election officials. The details of the plan were outlined in a seven-page document published on the foundation’s website, on CSPOA-headed paper.

“Take back the states, one constitutional sheriff at a time,” Mitchell said during a summer presentation about the plan.

When WIRED spoke to Mitchell, he denied that his plan was focused on disrupting the election. But the document clearly calls for citizen-led, local posses aligned with the CSPOA to recruit like-minded sheriffs, county commissioners, and supervisors of elections. Should those officials refuse to take action as directed, the plan states, allied sheriffs or posse-led grand juries will relieve them of their duties.

“Instead of a January 6–style centralized mass insurrection, these Florida activists developed a blueprint for a county-by-county-style revolt,” says Burghart, who analyzed the plan on IREHR’s website.

It’s not just Florida. In Las Vegas, Bob Songer, the sheriff in Klickitat County in Washington state, shared a 32-page guide with other sheriffs on how to recruit a posse, revealing that his own has 150 members. Leaf outlined how, when his Michigan election fraud investigation was going nowhere, he created his own “election investigation posse” consisting of two cybersecurity experts and a “clerk” to gather evidence.

Mack has also espoused his view that every sheriff should have his own posse. In a recent members-only webinar, viewed by WIRED, Mack and Sam Bushman, CEO of the CSPOA, wondered about the possibility of veterans temporarily moving to Leaf’s county in Michigan and being deputized to help his investigations into election fraud.

Mack’s views on the power of posses is deep-seated: “People get all upset when they hear about militias, but what’s wrong with it?” Mack reportedly said in the wake of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing at the NRA's national membership meeting, in which Mack was honored as the organization's law enforcement Officer of the Year. “I wouldn’t hesitate for a minute to call out my posse against the federal government if it gets out of hand.”

“There's no federal constitutional prohibition against a posse,” says Will Pelfrey, a professor of criminal justice and homeland security at Virginia Commonwealth University. “It's kind of terrifying, because you're empowering a lot of fringe people to do something that they probably shouldn't be doing.”

Like lynching, maybe?

It’s not exactly clear how many constitutional sheriffs currently exist. Back in 2014, the group claimed it had 485 sheriffs signed up. In 2017, Mack told High Country News the group had 4,500 fee-paying members. By 2021, that number had risen to 10,000, Mack told VICE News, adding that his group had “trained 400 sheriffs.” Two years later, Mack told AZCIR that his groups had trained 1,000 sheriffs.

When WIRED asked Mack how many sheriffs were currently members of the CSPOA, he said 300 sheriffs could be described as “really solid.” He would not divulge how many paying members the group has.

While Mack and the CSPOA are the most prominent part of the Constitutional Sheriff movement, there are many other sheriffs who espouse the same beliefs. A 2022 survey conducted by the Marshall Project found that close to 50 percent of the sheriffs polled agreed with the constitutional sheriff mantra that “their own authority, within their counties, supersedes that of the state or federal government.”

Many sheriffs have also shied away from publicly aligning themselves with Mack, something the former sheriff readily admits. And yet Trumpworld, the election denial movement, and some of the most prominent far-right influencers are now seeking to team up with the sheriffs to influence the outcome of the US election.

In September, election denial group True the Vote told its followers that it was working with sheriffs to monitor drop boxes. While Mack told WIRED he hasn’t spoken to True the Vote about this specific plan, he has confirmed that the CSPOA is still actively working with True the Vote, though he declined to say in what capacity. Bushman also wouldn’t give details of their collaboration, but said: “It's more than just supporting what they're doing.”

In multiple conversations with Mack over the last six months, he repeatedly asserted that the CSPOA advocates only for nonviolent action in efforts to combat the alleged (and unproven) widespread voter fraud that is now the group’s driving force.

But Mack also maintains deep ties to Stewart Rhodes and the Oath Keepers and is publicly meeting with figures like Raiklin, who in August also posted an ominous threat on X referencing the recent assassination attempt against Trump: “In a duel, each side gets one shot. They missed 36 days ago. Now it's [our] turn.”

Earlier this month, the FBI and Department of Homeland Security warned that “election-related grievances” could motivate domestic extremists to engage in violence around the election.

In a recent phone conversation, Mack’s tone sounded more deflated than antagonistic; he admitted that he was “frustrated” that more sheriffs were not taking a more active role in policing elections, a practice that has led to voters feeling intimidated in the past.

“President Biden and his administration have just caused so much extra work for the sheriffs, it's really hard to get them to focus on elections,” says Mack. Every sheriff in this country should verify the security and integrity of the voting in their county. Every single one.”

Dar Leaf, for one, remains focused. As he prepares to police an election while continuing to investigate the last one, he is clear-eyed about where the threat is coming from: immigrants and Democrats. He claims that America has received “other countries’ garbage,” and as a result, he needs to act.

“Any police officer who thinks that machine is bad or something criminal is going on,” Leaf says, “we have a duty to seize it.”

50+ Years Ago

The suit against Trump University was settled for about $25,000,000.

Trump has a criminal pedigree that's pretty amazing, and don't forget:

In 1973, Trump and his daddy owned about 35,000 residential rental units.

Three-Five-Comma--Zero-Zero-Zero

8 of those 35,000 units were rented to black families.

Not eight thousand. Not eight hundred. Eight. As in 8.

0.023%

This case was settled a few years later for an unknown amount.

Case: United States v. Fred C. Trump, Donald Trump, and Trump Management, Inc.

1:73-01529 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York

Filed Date: Oct. 15, 1973
Closed Date: June 10, 1977

Case Summary

This case was brought against Fred and Donald Trump, and their real estate company, in 1973 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

In October 1973, the Justice Department filed this civil rights case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York (federal court in Brooklyn) against Fred Trump, Donald Trump, and their real estate company. The complaint alleged that the firm had committed systemic violations of the Fair Housing Act of 1968 in their many complexes--39 buildings, between them containing over 14,000 apartments. The allegations included evidence from black and white "testers" who had sought to rent apartments; the white testers were told of vacancies; the black testers were not, or were steered to apartment complexes with a higher proportion of racial minorities. The complaint also alleged that Trump employees had placed codes next to housing applicant names to indicate if they were black.

The Trumps retained Roy Cohn, former aide to Senator Joseph McCarthy, to defend them; they counter-claimed against the government, seeking $100 million in damages for defamation.

The case was assigned to District Judge Edward R. Neaher. He dismissed the counterclaim and allowed the Fair Housing Act suit to proceed.

After two years, the matter settled with a consent decree, signed June 10, 1975. It included the ordinary disclaimer of liability (the settlement was “in no way an admission” of a violation), but prohibited the Trumps from "discriminating against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling." In addition to a general injunction against discrimination, the decree prohibits specific discriminatory practices, such as lying about the availability of apartments or interfering with individuals' enjoyment of their housing rights through threats or coercion. Fred and Donald Trump were ordered to "thoroughly acquaint themselves personally on a detailed basis" with the Fair Housing Act. The agreement also required the Trumps to place ads informing minorities they had an equal opportunity to seek housing at their properties. According to a contemporary article in the New York Times, Trump Management was required to furnish the New York Urban League with a weekly list of all apartment vacancies, for two years; the League would get three days to provide qualified applicants for every fifth vacancy in Trump buildings where fewer than 10 percent of the tenants were black.

The Justice Department called the decree “one of the most far-reaching ever negotiated.” Newspaper headlines echoed that assessment. The New York Amsterdam News, for example, titled its article “Minorities win housing suit,” and told readers that “qualified Blacks and Puerto Ricans now have the opportunity to rent apartments owned by Trump Management.”

In his autobiography, Donald Trump took a different view: “In the end the government couldn’t prove its case, and we ended up making a minor settlement without admitting any guilt.”

For more information, see Michael Kranish and Robert O'Harrow Jr. Inside the government’s racial bias case against Donald Trump’s company, and how he fought it (Washington Post, Jan. 23, 2016).

In 2017, the FBI released records of its investigation into the Trumps and their real estate company in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. The documents included many pages of interviews with the company's then-current and former employees, interviews with residents of Trump properties, and people who had applied to Trump properties. The majority of interviewees were not aware of any discrimination occurring, but several contributed to the conclusion that the company was discriminating on the basis of race.

One interviewee, a black prospective tenant, noted that, in person, a leasing manager showed her several available apartments but later called her to tell her that she could not have an apartment in that complex "as they discriminated against blacks." He then asked her not to make any trouble as he needed the job.

Another interviewee, an employee of the company for two weeks, indicated that in his time at the company he fielded an inquiry from a black applicant who he judged to be an acceptable tenant but was told by another individual at the company that "they're blacks and that's that." He also indicated that he believed others working at the rental office used a code on the top of the front page of rental applications to "distinguish blacks from whites."

Also in the documents were records from the New York State Division of Human Rights and the NYC Human Rights Commission complaints and hearings about discrimination at Trump properties. The complaints were mooted when the company offered the complaining parties apartments in their properties. A 1968 hearing of the NYC Human Rights Commission, however, found that discrimination had occurred at a Trump property. The commission ordered the company to cease and desist from their discriminatory practices, pay damages to the complainant, and inform a fair housing organization whenever apartments at the property became available.

More SCOTUS

US Constitution Article 3, Section 2, Paragraph 2:

In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Convicted Felon Donald Trump

He can be president but he can’t be a nurse: The jobs Trump can’t get with felony convictions

Trump’s power and influence will help him avoid major hurdles facing millions of Americans with felony convictions trying to get back to work, Alex Woodward reports

• He cannot legally bartend in Florida, but he can be president of the United States.
• He can be legally denied certain public housing, but he could soon live at the White House.
• He cannot legally possess a firearm in any state, but he could soon command the country’s nuclear arsenal.

Donald Trump joined the nearly 20 million Americans with felony convictions when a jury in New York found him guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree on May 30.

But unlike the millions of Americans re-entering society after conviction and incarcerations, who face countless barriers to decent jobs, housing, healthcare, childcare, and the ability to vote, among other hurdles, Trump can rely on his immense wealth, influence and potential path to the presidency to avoid them.

It is unlikely he will face any jailtime (Manhattan prosecutors are not seeking any), and if he wins the 2024 presidential election, the terms of a probationary sentence – the most likely outcome – could be jammed up by his challenges in federal courts to allow him to do the kinds of things one would need to do as president, like travel out of state.

“It’s a completely different world,” according to Wanda Bertram, communications specialist with the nonpartisan nonprofit research organization Prison Policy Initiative.

“He’s not even going to think about the kind of barriers that people who are coming out of prison are going to face,” she tells The Independent.

“Donald Trump is going to be able to avoid not just the immediate consequences of a felony conviction, as they apply to most people, but also the downstream consequences,” she says. “This thing that tends to happen to people where, because of their felony conviction, they can’t get a job, they can’t get housing, they can’t get healthcare, and then, because of the combination of those things, then they’re reincarcerated or convicted for something else.”

The heaps of contradictions facing Trump’s post-conviction life – can’t have a gun but can control the nation’s military, can’t hold certain occupational licenses but can be president, can’t vote in certain states but can be the thing people are voting for – were probably not the dilemmas that the nation’s founders considered.

But they expose the wild gaps between a powerful billionaire navigating the criminal justice system and the rest of us.

Nearly four out of every 10 people in state prison were jobless in the month leading up to their arrest, according the Prison Policy Initiative. Black people (46 per cent) and women (53 per cent) in state prisons were more likely to have not had a job in that time, the group found.

More than half a million Americans return to their communities each year after incarceration, but most face job rejection and long streaks of unemployment thanks to discriminatory hiring practices, occupational license restrictions and short-term and unstable, low-paying positions.

“If you’re Donald Trump, you can kind of make your own work,” Bertram says. “That’s the privilege of having a lot of money – you can gin up some new venture.”

Many state licensing laws include blanket disqualifications for people with criminal records, meaning that state boards don’t have to scrutinize applications or think twice about revoking licenses if they come from a person with certain felony convictions.

Other state boards may have more discretion to grant licenses to applicants with a criminal conviction, but for millions of people with records, “they’re just one more applicant,” Bertram says.

“They’re just a number,” she says. “They can try to appeal the decision, and they don’t hear anything. … Trump and so many billionaires and millionaires have so many other avenues of recourse to try to pull strings. … If you’re formerly incarcerated, you probably don’t have access to even the kind of legal assistance that might be able to help you overcome this.”

Trump can be president again, but state-level occupational licensing restrictions would block any other person with felony convictions from a range of jobs across the country.

Some of those restrictions, according to the Prison Policy Initiative and the National Conference of State Legislatures: Trump can’t work for a casino in Illinois or a vet in Indiana, in pest control in North Carolina, he can’t sell a car in Mississippi, or work in any healthcare setting in Virginia.

Even in New York, if he wanted a real estate brokers license, he would need permission from the secretary of state.

In Florida, he can’t be a firefighter or legally tend bar at his Mar-a-Lago compound; Florida law prohibits bars from employing bartenders who have been convicted of a felony within five years.

And unlike many people with felony convictions, Trump will still probably be able to vote for himself in the upcoming election, as long as he is not behind bars.

He can still vote from New York or his home in Florida if he is on probation.

Voting laws in Florida – where Trump is registered to vote – defer to the rules in the state where a person was convicted. The state’s Republican Governor Ron DeSantis even announced he would personally ensure Trump could vote, despite rolling back voting rights for thousands of Florida residents with felony convictions.

In 2018, Florida voters overwhelmingly supported a measure to restore voting rights for most Floridians with convictions who had completed the terms of their sentence. But in 2019, DeSantis signed a law mandating that certain people with felony convictions can only regain their voting rights after they pay all related fines, fees and restitution.

“That would be easy for [Trump] to do,” Bertram says. “For most people who are coming out of prison, in Florida or elsewhere, they are saddled with a lot of criminal justice-related fees that are hard for them to pay off because they get in the way of other things that they need to do to get back on their feet right. … There’s a magnitude of difference between the fines that he’s paying, or the amount of money that he has, versus the amount of money that the average formerly incarcerated person or person with a felony conviction has and how much money they have to pay.”

No Go Zones

As a convicted felon (assuming a supremely fucked up Supreme Court doesn't ride to his rescue), Trump won't be able to enter these countries without some kind of "special accommodation" afforded him by the host nation:

1. Argentina
2. Australia
3. Brazil
4. Cambodia
5. Canada
6. Chile
7. China
8. Cuba
9. Dominican Republic
10. Egypt
11. Ethiopia
12. Hong Kong
13. India
14. Indonesia
15. Iran
16. Ireland
17. Israel
18. Japan
19. Kenya
20. Malaysia
21. Macau
22. Mexico
23. Morocco
24. Nepal
25. New Zealand
26. Peru
27. Philippines
28. Singapore
29. South Africa
30. South Korea
31. Taiwan
32. Tanzania
33. Tunisia
34. Turkey
35. Ukraine
36. United Arab Emirates
37. United Kingdom

I Won't Say What I'm Dyin' To Say

Yes I will - Fuck your feelings, MAGA.

Now What?

Will Trump go to jail? Can he be president? What’s next after guilty verdict?

Donald Trump was convicted Thursday on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in his New York state hush money case.

Donald Trump was convicted Thursday on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in his New York state hush money case, becoming the first former U.S. president to be tried and found guilty of a crime.

Cut through the 2024 election noise. Get The Campaign Moment newsletter.
The 12-person jury unanimously agreed on the verdict after deliberating for two days, finding that Trump falsified records to cover up a $130,000 payment before the 2016 election to an adult-film actress to keep her quiet about an alleged sexual encounter with him years earlier.

Trump is the presumptive Republican nominee in this year’s presidential race.

New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan scheduled Trump’s sentencing for July 11. Trump is required to report to the New York City Department of Probation for an interview about his background, his mental health and the circumstances of his case that will be used to help compile a presentencing report.

Will Trump go to jail?

The charges against Trump are nonviolent Class E felonies, the lowest level in New York, and they are punishable by 16 months to four years in state prison. Legal experts said it is unlikely that Trump, 77, would be incarcerated, given that he had not previously been convicted of a crime.

Other options for Merchan include sentencing Trump to probation, which would mean he would need approval from a parole officer to travel outside the state. Trump also could be fined or granted a conditional discharge pegged to the requirement that he stay out of further legal trouble, legal experts said.

Can Trump still become president after being convicted?

Trump remains eligible to campaign for the presidency and serve if elected. The U.S. Constitution requires that presidential candidates be at least 35 years old, a natural-born U.S. citizen and a resident in the country for at least 14 years. The 14th Amendment, passed by Congress after the Civil War, bars anyone who participated in an insurrection from running for the presidency, but Trump has not been charged with insurrection in the three other criminal prosecutions that remain active against him.

If I may, and IMHO: the 14th amendment doesn't require the guy to be charged with, tried for, or convicted of insurrection. A Colorado court has judged him to have engaged in insurrection, and both the Colorado Supreme Court and SCOTUS have let that judgement stand.

Trump is an insurrectionist,

so he can't serve as POTUS.

And also too:

A convicted felon can't get

security clearance.

We have some serious shit we have to work out.

Can Trump appeal?

Trump’s legal team will have 30 days from the New York verdict to file notice of appeal and six months to file the full appeal. Any appeals process would probably extend beyond the Nov. 5 presidential election. Legal experts said it is plausible that an appeals court would agree to stay Trump’s sentence until after the appeal is adjudicated.

How does this verdict impact his candidacy?

Polls before the guilty verdict Thursday had shown an often small but potentially decisive drop in Trump’s support if he were to be convicted of a crime. As of late 2023, polls showed that a conviction would shift the margins by between five and 14 points in President Biden’s favor. A recent Reuters-Ipsos poll last month showed just a two-point shift toward Biden if Trump is convicted, with a larger six-point shift if Trump is incarcerated as a result.

Say It With Me, Kids

1. Guilty
2. Guilty
3. Guilty
4. Guilty
5. Guilty
6. Guilty
7. Guilty
8. Guilty
9. Guilty
10. Guilty
11. Guilty
12. Guilty
13. Guilty
14. Guilty
15. Guilty
16. Guilty
17. Guilty
18. Guilty
19. Guilty
20. Guilty
21. Guilty
22. Guilty
23. Guilty
24. Guilty
25. Guilty
26. Guilty
27. Guilty
28. Guilty
29. Guilty
30. Guilty
31. Guilty
32. Guilty
33. Guilty
34. Guilty

Today's Trumpy Bullshit

The law requires the presiding judge to query the defendant regarding his understanding of what's going on. This generally happens twice. Once when the accused is arraigned and enters a plea - guilty or not guilty or no contest. And again on the first day of the trial - before the lawyers lock horns and duke it out.

• Do you understand that you've been charged with (insert bad actor shit here)?
• Do you understand these charges?
• Do you understand that you've entered a plea of (guilty, not guilty, nolo contendre)
• Do you want to change your plea?
• Do you understand that you have the right to directly participate in your defense - to testify if you choose, but that you can't be compelled to do so?

Trump has answered in the affirmative on every occasion, but he makes bank by playing on the fear and ignorance of low-wattage MAGA cult members:

"THERE IS NO CRIME!" has been a constant chant every time Trump has crossed the line.

Yes, there's a crime - there's always a crime - there's always a vast multitude of crimes everywhere Trump goes, and every time he does anything.

Here's the list:

First count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about February 14, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated February 14, 2017, marked as a record of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

Second count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about February 14, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher number 842457, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

Third count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about February 14, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher number 842460, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

Fourth count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about February 14, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, a Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust Account check and check stub dated February 14, 2017, bearing check number 000138, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

Fifth count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about March 16, 2017 through March 17, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated February 16, 2017 and transmitted on or about March 16, 2017, marked as a record of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

Sixth count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about March 17, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher number 846907, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

Seventh count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about March 17, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, a Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust Account check and check stub dated March 17, 2017, bearing check number 000147, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

Eighth count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about April 13, 2017 through June 19, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated April 13, 2017, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

Ninth count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about June 19, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 858770, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

10th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about June 19, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, a Donald J. Trump account check and check stub dated June 19, 2017, bearing check number 002740, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

11th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about May 22, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated May 22, 2017, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

12th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about May 22, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 855331, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

13th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about May 23, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, a Donald J. Trump account check and check stub dated May 23, 2017, bearing check number 002700, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

14th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about June 16, 2017 through June 19, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated June 16, 2017, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

15th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about June 19, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 858772, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

16th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about June 19, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, a Donald J. Trump account check and check stub dated June 19, 2017, bearing check number 002741, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

17th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about July 11, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated July 11, 2017, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

18th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about July 11, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 861096, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

19th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about July 11, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, a Donald J. Trump account check and check stub dated July 11, 2017, bearing check number 002781, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

20th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about August 1, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated August 1, 2017, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

21st count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about August 1, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 863641, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

22nd count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about August 1, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, a Donald J. Trump account check and check stub dated August 1, 2017, bearing check number 002821, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

23rd count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about September 11, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated September 11, 2017, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

24th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about September 11, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 868174, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

25th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about September 12, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, a Donald J. Trump account check and check stub dated September 12, 2017, bearing check number 002908, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

26th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about October 18, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated October 18, 2017, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

27th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about October 18, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 872654, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

28th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about October 18, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, a Donald J. Trump account check and check stub dated October 18, 2017, bearing check number 002944, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

29th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about November 20, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated November 20, 2017, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

30th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about November 20, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 876511, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

31st count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about November 21, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, a Donald J. Trump account check and check stub dated November 21, 2017, bearing check number 002980, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

32nd count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about December 1, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated December 1, 2017, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

33rd count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about December 1, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 877785, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

34th count: Falsifying business records in the first degree

“The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about December 5, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, a Donald J. Trump account check and check stub dated December 5, 2017, bearing check number 003006, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”

Trump is probably not going to prison - not for any length of time anyway. But it's crazy stupid important to get a conviction or two or nine or twenty-five in order to finally tear away Trump's cloak of invisibility - to prove he's not bulletproof - to make it clear that no on is above the law.

It sounds trite and stale, because we've been hearing it for ages, and we've grown weary and a little cynical listening to the same old song while watching these rich pukes get away with fucking murder.