Orange Duce

[SCLaxAttack]

Dictatorship 101. Destroy all evidence. https://www.rawstory.com/2020/08/fbi-sa ... er-robert/

[MDlaxfan76]

Dictatorship 101. Destroy all evidence. https://www.rawstory.com/2020/08/fbi-sa ... er-robert/

What would the FBI have been investigating re Robert Trump?

[njbill]

And why would the file be destroyed? I can’t think of a legitimate reason for that, unless the file is, say, 30 years old and was destroyed as part of standard procedures to get rid of old files.

[CU88]

Jim Gaffigan

What I’ve Learned Since I Lost My Mind

Before you start reading this let me be clear. You do not have to read this. I’m not asking you to. I wrote this for myself, mainly. No need to tell me this is poorly written. I know. I’m sure there are grammatical errors also. I’ve known for a long time I probably have an undiagnosed learning disability. My goal in writing this down is a hope that I can organize and explain to you and myself why I did what I did and decide what we will do over the next 60 or so days. To be clear upfront I don’t think anyone is going to let an actor or a comedian tell them who to vote for despite the fact that the current President is essentially both and actor and a comedian. However, I’d be lying if I didn’t say I want to change some minds. Of course I do, I feel strongly about what is going in our country. I’ll get to that shortly, but I also don’t believe I’m an expert on politics or how the world works. I’d much rather be making jokes about some strange food I ate in Estonia.
So let’s set the stage. On the Thursday night I went on a twitter rant about the RNC and Trump. (I did) I must have been drunk? (I wasn’t) I was angry, cursing (I was) while tweeting out things that contradicted everything I stood for as a so-called “clean Catholic comedian” (I disagree). In reality, I’ve made jokes about Trump in my last three specials and have repeatedly expressed support for gay rights and Black Lives Matter on social media. Regardless of any of that I am perceived as apolitical. That is somewhat intentional. I learned early in my stand-up career people don’t want to hear about politics from me. I knew me talking politics wasn’t changing any minds and was only alienating half of the audience.
Okay, fine- so why now? The answer is simple. Trump is a great salesman. Possibly the best salesman I’ve seen in my lifetime. I don’t care how many businesses he has driven into the ground or contractors he’s screwed over. Trump is charming, funny and comes across as sincere. I watched Trump speak on Thursday night like I had many times before. I knew he was going to lie. I even knew some of the lies he was going to say. By the way, I’m not naïve. I understand all politicians lie or bend the truth. When Bill Clinton said, “I feel your pain” I gagged a little, but I did figure his heart was in the right place. I may lose you on this, but I believe MOST politicians are motivated by the best intentions. I might not have agreed with Bill Clinton, George W, or Jimmy Carter on a lot of things but I do believe they had the best intentions. I don’t think Trump does. This isn’t just a feeling. This is something I’ve known for a long time.
So if I believe I won’t sway any voters, why speak out like I did? Honestly, I feel I had no choice at this point. I think Trump is ruining and possibly has already ruined my country. For me this isn’t a debate about the size of government, taxes, health care or even abortion. I miss the days when those were the topics I would discuss with friends. I feel a responsibility to coming generations, my children but selfishly I didn’t want to explain to my grandchildren that I didn’t fight to stop Trump. Maybe they will see that I stood up for decency, rule of law, and equality. That’s way more important to me than selling out an arena. Additionally, please understand I’m no saint. I can be lazy, selfish and grumpy but somehow that works in the entertainment industry. Come to think of it, that seems to work pretty well for politicians, too. I also believe many of the people who support Trump are good, decent people that have been fed lies and misinformation (yes, from Fox News and conspiracy theorists). It’s obvious I’m not going to change a loyal Trump voter’s mind but on Twitter Thursday night I was trying to reach a different group. Having grown up in a small town in the Midwest and having traveled the around the country for last 20 years I know there are people that really don’t like Trump but they do like what Trump is selling. Like many of these people I do feel the “flyover states” are condescended to by the coastal folks. These people own or work for a small business destroyed by Covid. They have friends and siblings that are police officers and youth ministers. They believe in equality and truly care about their neighbor. These people know Trump is a con man but in the end they simply want what is best for the their community and the people they love. Nobody wants anarchy. I realized Thursday night if these people were frightened enough by Trump and the GOP lies, they would pinch their nose and vote for Trump. Maybe by stepping out of my presumed lane I could help inspire them to do what they already know is right and consider what they are actually voting for rather than feel they had no other choice than to vote for Trump. Did I make a difference? I don’t know.
So let’s go over what I’ve learned since I lost my mind or “My Thursday Night Tweet Storm.”
• It felt liberating. Obviously, I can only speak for myself, but I know many of us are tired of censoring everything we say so we don’t offend our politically correct friends but this also applies to our passionate Trump friends, relatives and peers. There was a time when civil political disagreement took place, even if you vehemently disagreed. It’s like after Thanksgiving 2016 we all decided to let the crazy relative decide the discourse and context of every argument. It was refreshing to let four years of frustration boil over and offer some straight talk on what Trump has done to our country or our democracy.
• There are bots. A lot of them. On Thursday night I knew I would anger some followers with what I was saying and was prepared for their feedback. There was tons. I assumed some of the feedback was from bots. Not that I necessarily understood the technology, I knew that there were computer generated messages sent to me by an algorithm. On Friday night rather than talking to everyone on Twitter like I did on Thursday I thought it might be constructive if I directed my reasons of why Trump needs to go to one person. I noticed a woman @bekebrede had tweeted at me “You just lost a lot of fans”. I proceeded to tweet a bunch of things to her hopefully trying to be funny and persuasive. Eventually another person on twitter saw my series of tweets to her and informed me that the woman I was tweeting at was in fact a bot. While equally hilarious and frightening, this was revealing to me. Why was I the target of bots? Was it a Russian bot? A Trump bot? Is Trump a bot?
• Hollywood is Pedophile ring. Through numerous messages I learned that while Trump wished Epstien’s partner/groomer “Well”, the Democrats are the ones who are supposedly pro-pedophile. It became abundantly clear that many, many people really do believe Hollywood and the entertainment industry is an enormous pedophile ring. I know that sounds absurd, but I received dozens of messages from people convinced this was true. That isn’t as much of a fringe belief as you might think. Pizzagate wasn’t a one off. It was the tip of the iceberg.
• Republican talking points work. One person’s entertainment is another person’s fact. As funny as some might find the reasoning of Republicans, Trump supporters really do believe that Biden is a radical and/or a Trojan horse for America being turned into a Socialist state. As ridiculous a Biden/Harris ticket being super left may sound to my Progressive friends the feedback I received on all social media platforms would indicate that the Trump messaging is working great. And let’s not forget we laughed Trump all the way into the White House in 2016. That’s why I think we shouldn’t make that same mistake twice. The stakes are too high.
• Career Suicide/ Career Move. As with many of the messages I received, the accusations were often contradictory. Many people announced that my career was over while some thought my tweets were a career stunt to bolster my career. If it were a stunt, I would have done it years ago. I fully did expect and still do expect my career to take a hit but as I mentioned earlier, I’m okay with that. Some people actually think I was paid or coerced into tweeting out those commonly known facts about Trump and the GOP. For those of you that think this was a publicity stunt please remember there is no work to pander for as an out of shape, straight Catholic, clean comedian/father of 5 I learned a long time ago I’m not going to be “the sexy choice” or “the tastemaker’s darling. I do however understand this suspicion which is why I have turned down all press requests surrounding my Twitter rant. I’m posting this on my socials in hopes of reaching one those rare undecided voters who might still be following me.
• Threats – The image that is connected to this post is one of the many messages I received that are quasi threatening or flat out threatening. I have friends that have received much worse and I’m sure this guy is just engaging in some bluster. We all know Trump is not a unifier but remember he and his cronies stoke hatred and violence. He may say he is the Law and Order candidate, but he wants chaos so can pretend to provide security. I’m not saying that both Kenosha shootings wouldn’t have happened with a different President I’m just saying there would have been leadership to solve the issue rather than capitalize on it.
• It’s about Trump: It doesn’t matter that Trump and his folks are breaking laws, trying to kill Obamacare, pre-existing conditions or that his handling of the pandemic was disastrous, to Trump voters he is THEIR guy. More importantly he’s “THEIR president” and disagreeing with them is a personal insult. For many Trump voters this isn’t about any other issue except Trump himself. To me that is not only weird but kind of scary.
I’m still digesting the whole experience (and still apologizing to my wife, Jeannie, for my profanity) but if you are still on the fence I encourage you to vote not for who I want you to vote for but for who your grandchildren would be proud you heck voted for. (Sorry, Jeannie.)

[ToastDunk]

Is there a point we should expect a statement from our President? Maybe strong words at the very least directed at the Russians? Something from the White House?

From our veteran friends here on the forum, does this have an impact on moral for those currently serving?

https://taskandpurpose.com/analysis/pen ... sion-syria

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/air-for ... e376a5831d

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/russian ... -maneuvers

[CU88]

IMPOTUS trying to throw another muck issue out for consumption, and bait Joe into a defensive posture on the Environment. AKA HRC coal is dead.

Forest Service Plan Would Fast-track Fracking on National Forests, Grasslands

WASHINGTON— The U.S. Forest Service released a proposal today that would fast-track fracking and drilling across the country’s 192 million acres of national forests and grasslands.

The proposed rule would reduce requirements that the Forest Service approve oil and gas leasing plans, sidestep National Environmental Policy Act review, and prevent public involvement before the public lands are leased out for fossil-fuel extraction.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspect ... -18518.pdf

[njbill]

Interesting article on New York’s tax fraud case against Trump. Goes into everything in a lot more detail than I have seen before.

I have thought for a long time that New York’s investigators already have Trump’s state income tax returns. So why do they need the federal returns? One answer could be that the federal returns include more detailed information than the state returns (I’m not familiar with New York returns).

But this article suggests there is another reason. The subpoena covers not just Trump’s federal tax returns, but also the accountant’s work papers, notes, communications with the client, etc. In other words, apparently the entirety of the accountant’s files. The contents of that file may help prove criminal intent on Trump’s part and undercut any attempt by Trump to blame any “mistakes” on his accountant.

The article says that Vance is not bound by the DOJ’s legal opinion that sitting presidents cannot be indicted. I agree with that, but Vance’s attorney told the Supreme Court during oral argument that he did not intend to indict Trump while in office. I think the Court’s opinion also references that representation.

I doubt Vance would renege on that representation, but that doesn’t mean the Trump organization, itself, couldn’t be indicted.

There’s also the question of sealed indictments. I believe the DOJ opinion says those aren’t permitted either, but that seems very suspect to me. I think it might be consistent with Vance’s representation to the Supreme Court for New York to indict Trump, but then seal the indictments.

Would sealed indictments leak out? They shouldn’t, but who knows these days.

https://www.justsecurity.org/72227/does ... x-returns/

And, of course, Trump’s motion for a stay is being argued today before the Second Circuit. I would expect a quick ruling.

[Brooklyn]

riots, violence, plague, and all forms of chaos - somehow this is "Biden's America":






typical right wing delusionalism

[CU88]

An interesting read:

Cutting Off a Classic Tax Fraud Defense

It is a routine internal procedure for agents of the New York state tax authority assigned to criminal tax investigations authorized by the New York Attorney General’s (AG) office (of which the Manhattan DA is a part) to obtain business and personal state tax returns that are material to their inquiry. It is likely that the experienced criminal tax investigator on the DA’s team has followed this routine protocol, and obtained the state tax returns early in their investigation.

But the tax returns alone would not be sufficient to establish criminal tax fraud. Criminal tax investigators for New York traditionally include retired Internal Revenue Service (IRS) criminal investigators working towards a second pension. These experienced forensic accountants would be most concerned with the classic tax fraud defense historically posed by the accused, wherein the taxpayer attempts to shift responsibility for the alleged fraud to the accountants who prepared the tax returns in question. Tax crooks have long raised their hands in innocence and then pointed their fingers at the hired hands claiming, “it was all their idea” with regard to any alleged tax fraud.



https://www.justsecurity.org/72227/does ... x-returns/

[njbill]

The Second Circuit has said they will rule later today on Trump’s request for a stay.

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/wir ... t-72745852

[njbill]

The Second Circuit grants Trump a stay.

The court set oral argument on the merits for September 25.

I’m surprised he got a stay. The vagaries of litigation as they say.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/fe ... x-returns/

[Peter Brown]

The Second Circuit grants Trump a stay.

The court set oral argument on the merits for September 25.

I’m surprised he got a stay. The vagaries of litigation as they say.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/fe ... x-returns/

Shouldn't Cyrus Vance be focused on violent crime in Manhattan?

(also the only thing Trump's returns will show is he isn't as wealthy as he wants you to believe)

[AOD]

Interesting article on New York’s tax fraud case against Trump. Goes into everything in a lot more detail than I have seen before.

I have thought for a long time that New York’s investigators already have Trump’s state income tax returns. So why do they need the federal returns? One answer could be that the federal returns include more detailed information than the state returns (I’m not familiar with New York returns).

But this article suggests there is another reason. The subpoena covers not just Trump’s federal tax returns, but also the accountant’s work papers, notes, communications with the client, etc. In other words, apparently the entirety of the accountant’s files. The contents of that file may help prove criminal intent on Trump’s part and undercut any attempt by Trump to blame any “mistakes” on his accountant.

The article says that Vance is not bound by the DOJ’s legal opinion that sitting presidents cannot be indicted. I agree with that, but Vance’s attorney told the Supreme Court during oral argument that he did not intend to indict Trump while in office. I think the Court’s opinion also references that representation.

I doubt Vance would renege on that representation, but that doesn’t mean the Trump organization, itself, couldn’t be indicted.

There’s also the question of sealed indictments. I believe the DOJ opinion says those aren’t permitted either, but that seems very suspect to me. I think it might be consistent with Vance’s representation to the Supreme Court for New York to indict Trump, but then seal the indictments.

Would sealed indictments leak out? They shouldn’t, but who knows these days.

https://www.justsecurity.org/72227/does ... x-returns/

And, of course, Trump’s motion for a stay is being argued today before the Second Circuit. I would expect a quick ruling.

One thing the workpapers will reveal is complicity on the part of the accountants. That in turn will make them (the accountants) the government's best witness. Yes, they have Allen Weisselberg already but he likely didn't sign the returns as preparer. Based on information in the public arena, it appears the returns in question contain fraudulent entries. Now the return preparers will be forced either to admit their fraud or to establish Trump lied to them.

[MDlaxfan76]

The Second Circuit grants Trump a stay.

The court set oral argument on the merits for September 25.

I’m surprised he got a stay. The vagaries of litigation as they say.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/fe ... x-returns/

Seems to me that it makes some sense for them to allow the temporary stay, given that they'll hear and presumably decide the issue on the merits soon (Might have been better if they set the date for next week though). I'd think they already know what they're likely to rule on the merits as the issues have been so fully litigated already, so the stay, while perhaps frustrating, may be a fair procedural ruling to preserve at least the possibility that they could rule with Trump and, thus, release would not have been appropriate.

Or do I misunderstand?

[RedFromMI]

The Second Circuit grants Trump a stay.

The court set oral argument on the merits for September 25.

I’m surprised he got a stay. The vagaries of litigation as they say.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/fe ... x-returns/

Shouldn't Cyrus Vance be focused on violent crime in Manhattan?

(also the only thing Trump's returns will show is he isn't as wealthy as he wants you to believe)

White collar crime against the state which may involve a lot of fraud should not get a pass. That much smaller wealth might shrink more if Vance can show fraudulent behavior leading to improperly lowered taxes.

[njbill]

Interesting article on New York’s tax fraud case against Trump. Goes into everything in a lot more detail than I have seen before.

I have thought for a long time that New York’s investigators already have Trump’s state income tax returns. So why do they need the federal returns? One answer could be that the federal returns include more detailed information than the state returns (I’m not familiar with New York returns).

But this article suggests there is another reason. The subpoena covers not just Trump’s federal tax returns, but also the accountant’s work papers, notes, communications with the client, etc. In other words, apparently the entirety of the accountant’s files. The contents of that file may help prove criminal intent on Trump’s part and undercut any attempt by Trump to blame any “mistakes” on his accountant.

The article says that Vance is not bound by the DOJ’s legal opinion that sitting presidents cannot be indicted. I agree with that, but Vance’s attorney told the Supreme Court during oral argument that he did not intend to indict Trump while in office. I think the Court’s opinion also references that representation.

I doubt Vance would renege on that representation, but that doesn’t mean the Trump organization, itself, couldn’t be indicted.

There’s also the question of sealed indictments. I believe the DOJ opinion says those aren’t permitted either, but that seems very suspect to me. I think it might be consistent with Vance’s representation to the Supreme Court for New York to indict Trump, but then seal the indictments.

Would sealed indictments leak out? They shouldn’t, but who knows these days.

https://www.justsecurity.org/72227/does ... x-returns/

And, of course, Trump’s motion for a stay is being argued today before the Second Circuit. I would expect a quick ruling.

One thing the workpapers will reveal is complicity on the part of the accountants. That in turn will make them (the accountants) the government's best witness. Yes, they have Allen Weisselberg already but he likely didn't sign the returns as preparer. Based on information in the public arena, it appears the returns in question contain fraudulent entries. Now the return preparers will be forced either to admit their fraud or to establish Trump lied to them.

Agreed. Even if they weren’t complicit in any legal wrongdoing, they likely know where the bodies are buried. Manafort’s accountant was a very damaging witness against him at his trial.

[MDlaxfan76]

Interesting article on New York’s tax fraud case against Trump. Goes into everything in a lot more detail than I have seen before.

I have thought for a long time that New York’s investigators already have Trump’s state income tax returns. So why do they need the federal returns? One answer could be that the federal returns include more detailed information than the state returns (I’m not familiar with New York returns).

But this article suggests there is another reason. The subpoena covers not just Trump’s federal tax returns, but also the accountant’s work papers, notes, communications with the client, etc. In other words, apparently the entirety of the accountant’s files. The contents of that file may help prove criminal intent on Trump’s part and undercut any attempt by Trump to blame any “mistakes” on his accountant.

The article says that Vance is not bound by the DOJ’s legal opinion that sitting presidents cannot be indicted. I agree with that, but Vance’s attorney told the Supreme Court during oral argument that he did not intend to indict Trump while in office. I think the Court’s opinion also references that representation.

I doubt Vance would renege on that representation, but that doesn’t mean the Trump organization, itself, couldn’t be indicted.

There’s also the question of sealed indictments. I believe the DOJ opinion says those aren’t permitted either, but that seems very suspect to me. I think it might be consistent with Vance’s representation to the Supreme Court for New York to indict Trump, but then seal the indictments.

Would sealed indictments leak out? They shouldn’t, but who knows these days.

https://www.justsecurity.org/72227/does ... x-returns/

And, of course, Trump’s motion for a stay is being argued today before the Second Circuit. I would expect a quick ruling.

One thing the workpapers will reveal is complicity on the part of the accountants. That in turn will make them (the accountants) the government's best witness. Yes, they have Allen Weisselberg already but he likely didn't sign the returns as preparer. Based on information in the public arena, it appears the returns in question contain fraudulent entries. Now the return preparers will be forced either to admit their fraud or to establish Trump lied to them.

It would be disappointing, but not unheard of, if the accountants were knowingly complicit in an act of fraud. More likely they too were lied to, and the papers will support their own defense.

I agree that there's a lot already in the public realm that suggests serious fraud committed, whether tax or banking or both, so this ain't likely to just be that Trump isn't actually worth $10 Billion as he's claimed. Nor that he gives so little to charity, nor that he pays very, very low tax rates. Any of that may also be true, but the fraud aspects are what the prosecutors have ample reason to expect to find.

[njbill]

The Second Circuit grants Trump a stay.

The court set oral argument on the merits for September 25.

I’m surprised he got a stay. The vagaries of litigation as they say.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/fe ... x-returns/

Seems to me that it makes some sense for them to allow the temporary stay, given that they'll hear and presumably decide the issue on the merits soon (Might have been better if they set the date for next week though). I'd think they already know what they're likely to rule on the merits as the issues have been so fully litigated already, so the stay, while perhaps frustrating, may be a fair procedural ruling to preserve at least the possibility that they could rule with Trump and, thus, release would not have been appropriate.

Or do I misunderstand?

No. I agree.

I haven’t studied the DA’s case(s) against Trump in depth, but as I understand it, one of the key statutes of limitations is five years. If they are focusing on the Stormy Daniels payment, I don’t think that was made until the fall of 2016. Any information relating to that payment would have been included on tax returns filed the following October (Trump always gets extensions). So, at least for this issue, I don’t think the prosecutor is running into any statute issues at the moment.

While the DA has a pretty good argument that he could simply destroy or return any documents produced if Trump ultimately wins, it certainly is the safer approach in ensuring that nothing gets out to stay matters for three weeks.

The stay ruling today was decided by a three judge panel made up of one judge appointed by HW, one by Clinton, and one by Obama.

Let’s assume this panel rules against Trump on the merits following the September 25 oral argument. Let’s assume the decision comes out within a week (although it could certainly take much longer).

Trump could then seek en banc review and a stay from the full Second Circuit. Or he could go straight to the Supreme Court.

The fact that two judges appointed by Democratic presidents were willing to grant a stay today suggests to me that Trump might have some success down the road (or up the judicial ladder) in getting additional stays as long as the statute of limitations is truly not implicated.

Now, the DA could be looking into other charges for which the statute is close to running. I think that could perhaps change the complexion of things.

Then you have Vance’s agreement not to indict Trump while he is president. So what does Vance do if Trump wins reelection and the statute is starting to come up on some of the crimes for which Vance decides to indict him? Sealed indictments? I think they would toll the statute, but I am not sure.

[seacoaster]

None of this would have happened if Mexico had just paid for the f*cking wall:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/31/nyre ... st-popular

"Federal prosecutors have seized “voluminous” emails and other communications in their case against Stephen K. Bannon, the former adviser to President Trump who is charged with defrauding donors to a private group that promised to build a wall on the Mexican border, the government said on Monday.

Mr. Bannon and three other men have been accused of stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars in the scheme. The campaign, known as “We Build the Wall,” raised more than $25 million from private donors by promising to build portions of the wall, the president’s signature political initiative.

Prosecutors have said that while thousands of investors were led to believe all their donations would go toward the project, Mr. Bannon diverted over a million dollars and used some of it for personal expenses. He pleaded not guilty on Aug. 20 and declared as he left federal court in Manhattan, “This entire fiasco is to stop people who want to build the wall.”

The government outlined the materials it had seized during a virtual court hearing in Manhattan Monday that also highlighted the charged, election-year atmosphere surrounding the case.

Prosecutors had complained to the judge about Facebook posts by one of Mr. Bannon’s co-defendants, Brian Kolfage, a disabled Air Force veteran who founded the group and in recent days has proclaimed on the social network that the prosecution was “political,” a “witch hunt” and an effort to take “political prisoners.”

In the hearing on Monday, the judge, Analisa Torres of Federal District Court, set a trial date of May 24 for the four men, all of whom are charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

Mr. Kolfage, 38, and two other defendants, Andrew Badolato, 56, and Timothy Shea, 49, pleaded not guilty during the hearing. None of the defendants were physically in court. Because of the pandemic, they, the judge, the prosecutor and defense lawyers appeared remotely from different locations on video screens, with five images visible at a time.

According to the indictment, Mr. Bannon and Mr. Kolfage “repeatedly and falsely assured the public” that all the money raised would go to the project and Mr. Kolfage would “not take a penny in salary or compensation.”

But Mr. Kolfage secretly took more than $350,000 in donated funds and used them for home renovations, boat payments, a luxury car, a golf cart, jewelry, credit card debt and cosmetic surgery, the indictment charged.

Mr. Bannon, 66, received more than $1 million through a nonprofit he controlled and then used it to pay Mr. Kolfage and also to cover hundreds of thousands of dollars in personal expenses, the indictment said.

He was arrested early on the morning of Aug. 20 as he was on the deck of a 150-foot yacht off Westbrook, Conn. It belonged to the fugitive Chinese billionaire Guo Wengui, officials have said.

During the proceeding, Judge Torres asked the prosecutors when they would turn over the evidence and other materials they have gathered to the defense, so defense attorneys can prepare for trial.

One of the prosecutors, Alison G. Moe, characterized the material as “voluminous,” and told the judge that investigators obtained some of it as far back as January after executing search warrants for email and cloud storage accounts.

She said investigators executed more search warrants in July and August, seizing various devices that store emails — presumably phones, tablets or laptops — and searching several locations, which law enforcement officials said included the homes of the defendants.

Ms. Moe also said on Monday that Mr. Kolfage’s comments on social media had violated local rules governing the behavior of parties in federal court in New York. The prosecutors have said such posts could taint the potential jury pool.

In a letter to the judge last week, prosecutors had referenced “a steady stream” of “highly inflammatory” public statements that Mr. Kolfage had made since his arrest, including claims that the prosecution was an assault on the freedom of donors, made for “political reasons.”

Mr. Kolfage, an Air Force veteran from Miramar Beach, Fla., who lost both legs and an arm in a mortar attack in Iraq, initially created the wall project as a GoFundMe page in December 2018.

In one Facebook post cited by the government, Mr. Kolfage wrote that the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan “will ruin innocent people’s lives in order to have a war trophy pinned to the wall just before elections.”

Mr. Kolfage’s lawyer, Harvey A. Steinberg, argued in court that it was the prosecution that had made improper statements, not his client. He pointed out that one law-enforcement official had said in a news release that the indictment should serve as “a warning to other fraudsters that no one is above the law, not even a disabled war veteran.”

Mr. Steinberg added that the government reminded him of a bully “who picks on, if you will, the person who he perceives to be the weakest, and then when the weakest hits him back he runs to the teacher.”

Judge Torres warned that she expected the parties to abide by the local rules governing what may be said publicly without interfering with a fair trial. If necessary, she suggested, she would hold a hearing on the matter."

[njbill]

When I first heard that some of the money had been spent plastic surgery, I thought, boy, can Bannon get his money back? Didn’t notice until later that it was one of the other defendants who spent money on cosmetic surgery.