Conservative Blogger
Wednesday, June 26, 2024
Donald Trump to Newsmax: Preparing For Debate 'My Entire Life'
Donald Trump told Newsmax on Tuesday night he doesn't need to lock himself in a room with advisers to prepare for Thursday night's huge debate with President Joe Biden, the first presidential debate this election cycle and the earliest in U.S. history. "I've been preparing for it for my whole life, if you want to know the truth," Trump told "Prime News" and guest host Corey Lewandowski. "And I'm not sure you can lock yourself in a room for two weeks, or one week, or two days, and really learn what you have to know. "I've been through it." This will be Trump's sixth presidential debate, including the three he had with Hillary Clinton in 2016 and two with Biden in 2020, and not counting the numerous debates he had during the Republican primary season each year. CNN will host the debate in Atlanta, and it will be simulcast on Newsmax. "I know the subject [matter]," Trump said. "Now, you know, they may get cute because it's obviously at CNN, and I've called it fake news for a long time. We'll see how they do it. They have a lot at stake to be fair. I think they have to be fair. But we'll see how we do. I think we'll do very well. We've done well in the past, and I think we'll do very well. I know the subject matter." Biden has holed himself up in Camp David this week in preparation for the debate. There have been reports Biden, who has shown signs of cognitive decline, has been trying to stand for 90 minutes as part of his prep. "If I have to practice standing, we have ourselves a big problem now," Trump said. "I had heard that too, he's practicing how to stand or something standing. And now, look, let's see what happens. I hope everybody does well. I hope we all come out as a nation, but our nation is in trouble; we've never been in trouble like this. We've never been so embarrassed as this. And we have to change presidents. "He's the worst president in history. … What they've done and what they've unleashed, the Democrats, Biden, whoever's running the government for him, because I don't think he's running it, but whoever's running government, what they've done to this country will never be forgiven." Earlier Tuesday, New York Judge Juan Merchan partially lifted a gag order against Trump after he had been convicted of 34 felony counts for falsifying business records to cover a payment made by disgraced former attorney Michael Cohen to Stormy Daniels. Trump can now speak about witnesses and jurors, but others involved in the case are shielded until his sentencing July 11. "Partial is very unfair because there are things we have to say, especially in my case," Trump said. "I'm going into a debate, and I'm going to have to talk about a gag order. What does partial mean? "It's not fair. We've had a gag order long after the trial [ended]. The trial was ridiculous. Every legal scholar said it should have never been brought. The whole thing is ridiculous, and now they lift just a piece of the gag order, not all of it. The gag order has to be lifted in its entirety." Trump also touched on several other subjects:
© 2024 Newsmax. All rights reserved. |
Gavin Newsom Delivers Dark State of the State Speech, Obsesses Over Gender Politics, Abortion
 |
California Gov. Gavin Newsom couldn’t be bothered to show up at the state Capitol in Sacramento Tuesday to deliver his State of the State address; instead, for the fourth year in a row, he aired a pre-recorded message. Appearing somber, his speech was anything but uplifting, and like Joe Biden, he painted his political opponents as dangerous zealots who hate progress. He tried to depict the Golden State as some sort of utopia despite the crime epidemic, the explosion in the number of homeless people, and the unaffordability of the state. He obsessed over abortion, as that is one of the few issues that Democrats believe they can win on. However, since he will be termed out in 2027, his heart didn’t really seem to be in it and he lacked energy. Ignore all California’s very real problems, Newsom seemed to say, and instead let's focus on the evils of the conservatives: He returned to his familiar rhetoric regarding abortion, in effect saying that it was California’s number one issue:
Related: Where Newsom really went off the rails, though, was when he tried to make differences of opinion into some sort of “Star Wars” scenario where the armies of the Good must use The Force against the battalions of the Darkness:
That last line was possibly his most laughable, “The economic prosperity, health, safety, and freedom that we enjoy are under assault.” What economic prosperity, health, safety, and freedom are you talking about, Governor? The state is an absolute disaster, and people are leaving in droves. The assault you describe is the one that you and your one-party rule have sicced upon us. Newsom seems to have pretty much lost interest in the job and clearly is angling for a position on the national level—perhaps in Biden’s Cabinet, or maybe even as a presidential candidate in ’24 (depending on whether Biden lasts) or ’28. In the meantime, he’s headed to Atlanta to be at the presidential debate Thursday night. He’s expected to do interviews before and after the event, during which he can be counted on to further attempt to gaslight the public about what’s going on in California and continue to describe anyone who doesn’t agree with his extremism as a “threat to democracy.” But the reality is, Gov. Newsom: the state of the state is very, very bad. |
EXCLUSIVE: Details Emerge About CNN Defamation Case
 |
“Dispute,” Jake Tapper said, with a twist of his head, the derision he delivered obvious to viewers. Tapper was hosting his CNN show “The Lead” and reading Fox News' statement following the network's settlement with Dominion Voting Systems. Tapper’s mockery was on display as much as it was heard in his delivery of the prepared words. “We are pleased to have reached a settlement of our dispute…,” and he repeated the word with a chuckle, “…with Dominion Voting Systems. We acknowledge the Court’s rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false.” His theatrics continued.
Then, the professional host lapsed into mockery with a forced laugh.
This was Jake putting on a show, looking to be heard above the chorus of other news outlets scorching Fox News, condemning the rival network with condescension. The delivery implying that Fox could no longer be considered a news network was evident. It was also delusional, as we were to believe that CNN was above such issues, as it is a reputable outlet that adheres to rigid journalistic standards. We just needed to bypass the fact that his network had previously been embroiled in a defamation case of its own, settling with high school student Nick Sandmann. FLASHBACK: Student Provides Video, Says Classmate Did Not Mock Native American Vietnam-Era Veteran Now, RedState has exclusive new details regarding how CNN is dealing with another defamation case, one involving a report that was seen on none other than “The Lead: With Jake Tapper.” There's scant coverage of this potentially massive case across those previously hectoring outlets that were so critical of Fox, despite the fact that it could carry a judgment figure eclipsing the $787 million settlement Fox News reached with Dominion. The compensatory and punitive damages may very well approach the $1 billion level. As we previously covered, a Florida appellate court recently ruled that Zachary Young, a private contractor who worked to evacuate U.S. citizens from Afghanistan during the disastrous 2021 withdrawal, had presented sufficient evidence to pursue punitive damages in his defamation suit against CNN related to a report filed by CNN's Alex Marquardt. A Defamation Case Against CNN Moves Forward;
During the disaster-ridden expulsion of American troops from Afghanistan, Young was a contractor-for-hire who offered to evacuate U.S. citizens from the country. Marquardt’s report framed Young as reckless and opportunistic, and Young seeks to show in his defamation suit that aspects of Marquardt's report were not only deeply factually flawed but malicious. These details were found by the court to be sufficient enough to move forward to a trial. In an exclusive interview with Young and his attorney, more specifics about the case came to light, tending to show that Tapper's condescension may have involved a severe case of projection. Young explained:
This indicates how the CNN production was engaged in what is a too-common practice in journalism: spending time to build a story about a subject, and then only contacting that subject (or person) very late in the process. Young’s lawyer explained this in the presentation to the court, stipulating how once Young was finally contacted — for the story about him and his work — he was only given hours before a deadline. As we previously reported, there are two glaring realities concerning CNN. Internal communications at the network, obtained by Young’s team, showed there were concerns with Marquardt’s report lacking factual substance, and yet it was pushed onto the airwaves. Then there are the instances where it appears that voices in the production, including Marquardt, sought to negatively impact Young’s work. Young stated that at one point, he sought out Marquardt to correct a number of portions of his reporting, but he was rebuffed. The internal communications showed a number of those inside CNN questioned the veracity of the report and even called to delay it for broadcast until more could be fleshed out. Instead, it appears to have been rushed onto the air. Some of the voices questioning the story even declared there was not sufficient content for the report to run on the CNN digital side. With the complaint of malicious intent, the court activity shows some revealing components. Of particular concern was the use of the term “black market” to describe Young’s business operations. Despite having a legitimate operational business at the time — Nemex Enterprises Inc. — Young’s argument in the summary judgment is that CNN presented him as working in the black market to imply directly he was an illegal operator. This is where CNN lawyers were focused in their defense. In their argument (heard in the video above) the CNN legal team insisted the use of “black market” was to suggest Young’s work was unregulated, not illegal. This was countered by the submission of not just numerous dictionary terms but also those in judicial records, which also uniformly recognized the term as an indication of illegal activity. This argument by CNN was so roundly dismissed that one member of the appellate panel asked of the editorial vetting at the network, “So these are lawyers and professional writers that — you know — are used to dealing with words and have dictionaries, and know how precise, what words mean?” Then things turned desperate, as the CNN lawyer stated how “black market” was not actually used during the discussions within the editorial teams, attempting to say that, in the context of punitive damages, it was the “plaintiff’s burden” to show the intended meaning behind the use of the term. Making this an odd defense is that editorially discussed or not, the fact is the various reports concerning Young and his business described him as a black market worker, with on-screen graphics under his image also stating this to be the case. The CNN lawyer ultimately had to admit to it being “a poor choice of words” on their behalf. This mischaracterization also falls in line with the various communications unearthed in the discovery phase, where Marquardt and his producers shared exchanges where they were targeting Zachary Young. He is referred to in vulgar terms, and the intent appears to be to bring him down professionally. These are much like the very activities Jake Tapper was noting about Fox News to denigrate that network as not a legitimate news outlet. Here, we appear to have evidence of virtually the same activity taking place not only on his network but on his own program. All of this points to a case with enough validity to move forward toward a trial for both compensatory and punitive damages. The fact that the sum involved could reach such a stratospheric level would indicate a possible motivation for CNN to reach a settlement with Young before going to trial. This would be done to both stem the exorbitant penalty and to avoid widespread exposure of defamatory practices. But this does not sound like an option. “We have no desire to settle with them," Young said to me. “We intend to follow this all the way through the punitive process.” |
Squad Member Down: Jamaal Bowman Loses Primary to George Latimer 👍
 |
On Tuesday night, just a little over 20 minutes after the polls closed in New York, Decision Desk HQ called the NY-16 Democratic primary in favor of Westchester County Executive George Latimer, dealing a serious blow to Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), a member of the Squad, who has now lost his seat. Latimer looked to be leading from the start of the vote count on Tuesday. He had also been leading in the polls leading up to the primary, including internal and non-internal ones. In addition to a lead in the polls, Latimer also enjoyed endorsements from high profile New York Democrats like Hillary Clinton and former Rep. Mondaire Jones, which certainly put the Squad members in disarray. Latimer also was endorsed by pro-Israel groups such as the Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI) and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Especially with Bowman and the Squad overall taking such anti-Israel stance, the Israel-Hamas war in the days following the October 7 attack were often at the forefront of this primary race, the most expensive House primary race in U.S. history. Bowman had been particularly aggressive in railing against AIPAC's role in the race, and was even prone to using antisemitic tropes when claiming the group has "full control of this district, just like they now have full control of Congress--as they fund everyone in Congress." Bowman's campaigning was also characterized by not just going after AIPAC but also by playing the victim, as the now soon to be former congressman claimed on multiple occasions that they were attacking him because he was a black man. As Latimer brought up during a debate with Bowman, AIPAC also supports black Democrats, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), but Bowman wasn't having it. Bowman responded that "just because you’ve got a few black friends doesn’t make you an anti-racist organization," which seems to be painting not just AIPAC but also Republicans as racist. It's particularly rich that Bowman would use the "black friends" narrative when it was recently revealed by Jewish Insider that he asked a local Jewish leader in 2022 for pictures of the two of them so he could "show the world I’m friends with Jewish People." Still another complaint that Bowman has had against AIPAC is that they dare to support both Republicans and Democrats who are pro-Israel. Although it was a talking point that Bowman repeated at length through his campaign, it certainly doesn't look to have paid off. That text from 2022 isn't the only part of Bowman's past to come back to haunt him. In late March, comments of his at an event from last November surfaced in which he called it a "lie" and "propaganda" to say that Israeli women had been raped by Hamas on October 7. He made such claims despite how there were already reports and testimonies of such atrocities taking place at the time Bowman made these claims. He's since apologized, including last week, though he didn't do so when initially confronted by POLITICO in March, and rather did so with a statement from his office. In addition to his anti-Israel views, Bowman also has come under fire for his conspiracy theories, including about 9/11, with his YouTube account interacting with some particularly bizarre accounts in recent months. Many also still continue to mock the Squad member for how he pulled the fire alarm late last September when Congress was voting to avert a government shutdown, despitw how there was no fire. It's not just mere mockery, though, as many have also demanded that Bowman be held more accountable than he actually has been, which amounted to being let off easy by DC and the House Ethics Committee. Despite lamentations from the Squad about supposed threats to democracy, especially from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who campaigned for Bowman, this primary taking place was the democratic process in action. Further, Bowman himself came into office when he beat an incumbent in the primary from 2020, unseating thenRep. Eliot Engel in the process. Responses have already come quickly pouring in, including from Jewish groups and individuals such as former Rep. Lee Zeldin and StopAntisemitism. "The anti-American, Jew-hating Squad will be short one radical member in January 2025. Democrats nationwide have been put on notice. Americans do not support the antisemitic, pro-criminal, high-tax, open border, and anti-business policies championed by the likes of Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Jamaal Bowman," said Zeldin in a statement. "Our nation will be stronger with a Congress no longer disgraced by his presence." StopAntisemitism also posted a reminder that another Squad member, Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO), is also facing a primary challenger, DA Wesley Bell. Bush, who similarly has anti-Israel sentiments and has also ranted and raved against AIPAC, is likewise performing poorly in the polls and looks likely to lose her primary in August. With an estimated 71 percent of the vote reporting, Latimer has 55.8 percent of the vote to Bowman's 44.2 percent of the vote. |
What Ever Happened to the Gay Activists Accused of Abusing Their Adopted Kids? We Have All the Answers.
 |
WARNING: This article contains graphic descriptions of child sexual abuse. Reader discretion is advised. Remember the self-avowed LGBTQ+ activists accused of sexually abusing their adopted sons? Long after the mainstream media dropped the shocking story, refusing to touch it with a ten-foot pole, Townhall has been the only outlet closely covering the Zulock case hearing-by-hearing, never missing a motion or a court filing. To recap, William Dale Zulock and Zachary Jacoby Zulock, frequent faces at the Atlanta Pride Parade, are accused of forming a child-prostitution ring in the Atlanta suburbs. The couple was arrested overnight on July 27, 2022, allegedly in the midst of amassing pedophile members, whom they met off of the gay hook-up app Grindr and to whom they would pimp out their elementary-aged children.
Among the slew of child sex crimes they're facing, the Zulocks are charged with producing and distributing "homemade" child pornography with the two boys they had adopted locally through a Christian special-needs adoption agency, All God's Children, Inc. The now-defunct business prioritized placing children who have "waited the longest" for a family. Many of the kids already came from broken homes. Others were either older or part of a sibling pair bonded together. Some suffered from physical, mental, or behavioral challenges. In 2018, the same-sex newlyweds apparently passed the "faster than expected" adoption process "with flying colors," despite the fact that one of the adoptive fathers was previously accused of raping a young boy in another child rape case from years ago. Within months of the children moving in with the alleged child predators, Georgia's courts made the "forever family" official in early November of that year.
The biological brothers, reportedly born to heroin addicts, were only ages 6 and 8 when the years-long sexual abuse allegedly started in late 2019. According to court documents obtained by Townhall, the children were "routinely" raped "at least once a week." Per the probable cause affidavit, William and Zachary confessed to anally penetrating both boys, forcing the two children to perform oral sex, and doing the same to them. The men acknowledged that the boys would cry out that it hurt when they were being abused, but they'd walk them through "how to handle the pain." The older child, who sustained physical injuries from being brutally raped, told police that Zachary, the cameraman, would be in bed recording when William was abusing him. "I'm going to f**k my son tonight," Zachary allegedly bragged to potential clients, instructing them to "Stand by." He'd send unsolicited messages describing "what he would do to his son," the Walton County Sheriff's Office says.
Authorities were ultimately tipped off by a Snapchat video Zachary allegedly filmed at home in one of the bathrooms. The pornographic clip depicted "an adult male penis was repeatedly being put in the mouth of a prepubescent male." A ball gag, a blindfold, and bindings were visible in the video, says the search warrant executed on the Zulock house, the so-called "Gayest Place in Town," according to a welcome mat that adorned the front entryway. Jurassic Park footy pajamas found in the child's bedroom and a DVR set taken from the in-home "theater room" were on the laundry list of items seized and stored away as evidence. "Our business is our business. What happens in our home, stays in our home," the men allegedly told the boys. The children said that they were threatened each time they left the house and directed not to tell anyone about the sexual abuse or "there would be consequences." In a midnight search-and-rescue mission the morning of July 28, 2022, an armed SWAT team descended on the property, tackling Zachary to the foyer floor and busting William butt-naked in bed, as the couple recounted in recorded jailhouse tapes shared with Townhall. Both boys are back in foster care. If convicted, the couple faces multiple life sentences. Though there's been much talk about a trial since the summer 2022 arrests, the Zulock case has seemingly ground to a halt, except for some status conferences that have been few and far between. Here's what we know so far: Judge Jeffrey L. Foster, who's presiding over the proceedings, is eyeing the end of August to set a tentative trial date. The next hearing, another status conference after several sprinkled sparingly over many months, is slated for Wednesday, June 26. "We will be six weeks out from about the ballpark time of the end of August—when I am looking at a trial calendar," Foster said. At a March 20 status conference, Foster mentioned scheduling the June hearing in order to navigate setting up a special session for the Zulock case. "I'm plotting—I mean planning now," Foster said. The purpose of this previous proceeding was to decide what to do with the defense's special demurrer. A special demurrer, a.k.a. a motion for more definitive dates, challenges the charges by asking for additional details or specificity, such as specific dates of when the crimes were committed. Currently, each charge against the Zulocks alleges an "expansive" date range of when the sexual abuse took place; therefore, that's too "broad" and "practically impossible" to prepare a defense, including raising an alibi, the Zulocks are arguing in an effort to toss out the 17-count indictment brought by a Georgia grand jury. The charges are as follows:
As explained by Brody Law Firm, a boutique Atlanta-area criminal defense firm specializing in sex offense allegations, when "the accusers" are children, kids tend to have difficulty recalling dates or pinpointing time periods, especially if the victims are in the earlier stages of development. For example, a child may say that the sexual abuse happened "when I was in 2nd grade." The local law firm advises that the special demurrer is an "indispensable tool" to defend against accusations involving young children. While Georgia law does allow for the prosecution to allege that the crime occurred between two dates, the timespan must be narrowed down as much as possible. If the evidence shows that the state did not do so (i.e. failing to sufficiently particularize the dates), then the indictment could be successfully dismissed by a special demurrer. The defendant would subsequently be entitled to an evidentiary hearing requiring the prosecution to prove that it cannot narrow down dates. The government can re-indict the case, though, if the indictment is quashed by the court. However, this could afford the defense an opportunity to demonstrate the case's weakness, ultimately leading to a dismissal of the charges. In the event that the case is indicted again, and the second indictment is found defective, the government is barred from further prosecution of the defendant, per state statute. The indictment, as it is, is sufficient statutory language-wise and explains exactly what the sexually abusive acts were, Foster ruled. "It doesn't just say an act of sodomy. It specifies whose mouth or whose rectum, whose sexual organs." At this time, they were discussing whether or not to seek a re-indictment of the criminal charges with more counts added on after the defense's request for specific dates sparked a forensic investigation into the surveillance system that the Zulocks had installed in the interior of their home. A formidable four terabytes of data, which investigators are continuing to comb through, was extracted from the 16 security cameras stationed all over the house in every single room. The cameras were recording 24 hours a day, seven days a week, capturing everything, including the sexual assaults. "They are all on video filmed throughout multiple rooms in the house," the prosecution says.
So, the prosecution can now specify "hundreds of allegations," matching the metadata to timeframes, as the defense unwittingly welcomed. As of March, the prosecution was waiting on an official report from the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI)'s crime lab, where the forensic examination is underway, but had only received a four-paragraph summary of the GBI's findings. On May 20, the prosecution provided the defense with the GBI Cyber Crime Center (GC3)'s 18-page investigative report detailing some of what was discovered in that extraction. In court, the prosecution indicated that these are individual write-ups and that further reports are forthcoming spanning "hundreds of pages." Astounded by the volume of data, William's defense attorney John E. Haldi said, "I had to look up terabytes on Google. One terabyte is, depending on the quality of the video, roughly the length of anywhere between 100 to 150 two-hour movies at the movie theater." In accordance, Haldi asked that the GBI provide some assistance with cross-referencing dates to timestamps of the security footage to help mount his defense. "They aren't obligated to do that," Assistant DA Lacey Majors of the Walton County District Attorney's Office countered. To which, Haldi responded, "Then I need months to review it." The dispute prompted a fed-up Foster to interject. "Here's what's going to happen. We are going to trial in August. So either you are going to trial on a new indictment that has, as I understand it, hundreds of counts, because now that they can specify dates and timestamps, they will re-indict [...] or do you want time to process that evidence and specifically focus on the smaller 17-count indictment that is pending now," Foster told Haldi. Majors clarified that the charges, as they stand, stem from child pornographic photographs and videos—taken primarily on Zachary's iPhone—that are presently in the DA's possession. A folder, labeled "US," was allegedly found on Zachary's cell phone containing videos of William sexually abusing their one son. "Those things have been available for inspection two years..." Foster added. "I think we are right at two years from the actual arrest." Turning it on the other party, Haldi said that throughout the two-year wait, the prosecution has not been able to provide exact dates. "It has taken them [the investigators] that long because your client saved that much data," Majors fired back. Foster reiterated to Haldi that the GBI only conducted its labor-intensive, months-long analysis because he requested that the state be specific in its charging instrument. Accordingly, the state is then inclined to charge each instance of sexual abuse as investigators find them in the footage, Foster explained. As they await the GBI's reports, Haldi was instructed that the digital material can only be seen in a secured location on-site. Incensed by the stringent stipulations, an aggravated Haldi said, "I have to do it in their offices on their schedule," harping on how reviewing the exorbitant quantity of evidence could take up a significant amount of his time. "Well, that is the law," Majors stated matter-of-factly. "When the law is contrary to my client's interests, I have to stand up for that," Haldi replied. "We can't create and copy child pornography for you," Majors said. Pivoting, she said, "Mr. Haldi, we have evidence that you have never asked to come see." "That's not true," Haldi rebutted. "I have been to your office several times. I have never asked to come see it? Good gravy!" Foster, weighing in, asked Haldi if he actually inspected the evidence himself. "Three times, judge," Haldi answered immediately. He recounted sifting through a three-ring binder containing still images and delving into the contents of a number of thumb drives. "I have got to make sense of it myself again in your office at your disposal," Haldi griped.
Foster said that Haldi did not have to announce whatever his plans are that very day—that is, his decision to continue with the demurrer or not. "If we are going forward on a demurrer in this case [...] we will indict..." Majors declared. "There will only be more counts, not less. I can say that," Majors said. "Your Honor, I'm getting these implicit threats: 'Hey, if you look at the evidence, we're gonna charge your client with more. We're gonna try to send him to jail for 100 life sentences instead of 20' [...] In all my years at the bar, I have never been presented with that dilemma [...] I have never had the state say, 'I have hundreds and hundreds of hours of evidence. Good luck finding it.' I have never had that," Haldi said. Foster said in his 17 years of criminal defense, he never had a prosecutor hand him "a handwritten map." In the past, he's been given a file or a data dump or a printout "that thick," Foster said, gesturing with his hands. "It is a pain," he conceded, adding that he used to have to drive to GBI's headquarters in Augusta. Again, Haldi asked that "benchmarks" be highlighted in the GBI's reports so that he can efficiently examine the evidence. "I am happy to comply with that. But if they dump the equivalent of 600 full-length movies on me and say, 'Figure it out yourself,' you can bet I'm going to object to that." This week, we will see where the case stands and how much of the evidence Haldi has been able to "plow through," as Foster phrased it. The Alcovy Judicial Circuit judge told Haldi he can submit a waiver in writing, if he does decide to drop the demurrer. Haldi had appeared via video conference instead of in person. The case's slow-walking can be blamed, in part, on Haldi's prolonged leave of absence lasting from August through November 2023, which he had designated on the court calendar for physical therapy and rehabilitation. Last year, Haldi fell and broke his hip, rendering him immobile and unable to drive anywhere, including to the Walton County courthouse. As Zachary was transported out of the holding room by the bailiff and William was ushered in, Foster bantered with Haldi for a bit about his recovery. "You'll hear the metal detector when I finally do make it to court," Haldi joked. Piling on, Foster mentioned how he has a pacemaker and oft-experiences trouble going through security at the airport. "I've been groped in every airport and courthouse in Georgia," Foster joked offhandedly at the March hearing in the sprawling child sexual abuse case. Majors laughed, observing that the court stenographer didn't transcribe that tidbit. "You didn't take down that he's been groped in airports?" she asked. "Really, I've been groped in more courthouses than I have in airports," Foster continued. Although Haldi's "slightly more mobile" now, propped up haphazardly by a walker-and-cane combo, his lack of mobility, coupled with cardiac issues, is still interfering with his work defending William. "Mr. Haldi, let's be realistic. Because of the nature of the information you got to review," Foster worded it euphemistically, "your mobility is currently hindering your ability to get out here. I am certainly not insensitive. In fact, I am rather sympathetic to that." Previously, the judge joked about Haldi and him crossing paths at Emory's electrophysiology clinic. In the interim, Foster instructed Haldi to keep the court "in the loop" between then and when they reconvene Wednesday. For half a year, Haldi was unreachable; even his client couldn't get ahold of him. "We are just not sure if he is even representing, Mr. [William] Zulock," the prosecution said around Christmastime. At a December 20 status conference, after his leave of absence elapsed, the ever-inaccessible Haldi had "not been in communication with anyone," not responding to emails or phone calls from prosecutors. They tried texting him and leaving voicemails to no avail.
William hadn't heard from him either and neither had his parents, who are footing his legal fees. "I think they want to fire him," William, unaware of Haldi's medical incapacitation, told Foster. Saddled with the accruing court costs, William's side of the family has spent at least $50,000 on William's criminal defense. Haldi's indisposed state has left Foster unwilling to rule on anything substantive without William having proper representation first. "We're not going to let it fall through the cracks," Foster vowed to William. Also absent from the courtroom was Zachary's court-appointed defense attorney, Reginald L. Winfrey, who just so happens to serve as general counsel for New Birth Missionary Baptist Church, a black megachurch whose senior pastor has publicly spoken out against same-sex marriage and preached that "homosexuality is a sin." Notably, Winfrey also works at his wife's law firm, the Law Office of Earnelle P. Winfrey, who is a deputy district attorney in Fulton County DA Fani Willis's administration, specifically spearheading her Human Trafficking and Internet Child Exploitation Unit. Prior to the mid-March proceeding, Winfrey informally sent the prosecution team a lengthy text message in a group chat, which Haldi was a part of, indicating he's "not prepared to announce ready for trial" because he also intends to come in and physically review evidence. Winfrey, who adopted Haldi's motion, has since withdrawn from the special-demurrer request in lieu of an impending wider-ranging indictment. Back at a May 17, 2023, motion hearing, Foster addressed a flurry of pre-trial filings. There, Foster granted the station's motion to sever the co-defendants, who were jointly indicted. Objecting to the severance motion, Winfrey implored that Foster allow them, the Zulocks, to go to trial together. Winfrey cited no legal basis, other than claiming that the alleged child rapists are asking out of concern for the abused boys being re-traumatized. "My client would prefer not to put the children on the stand twice," Zachary's counsel claimed. Haldi agreed. "We also have no desire to have the children go through two separate trials, so I parrot what Mr. Winfrey said." Foster noted that under the child hearsay statute, the defense attorneys may be the ones to control whether the children will have to testify more than once. The kids could also offer testimony on video to "minimize impact," Foster mentioned. As for spousal privilege, Foster decided it's best deferred until the surveillance footage's metadata is returned.
Foster did permit the prosecution to compel the Zulocks to testify against one another under grants of immunity, which means nothing that they say on the witness stand can be used against them in their own individual trials. Even though they're immunized against self-incrimination, they are still subject to penalties for committing perjury and making false statements. The prosecution intends to call on William as a witness in Zachary's trial and vice versa, though it's not yet known who will be tried first. Their testimonial statements to police "clearly implicate" the other defendant, the state says. Haldi, unprompted, questioned the judge: "Would, Your Honor, anticipate recusing yourself in a second trial?" "No," Foster retorted tersely. "I simply don't know how you could un-hear some of the things," Haldi ventured further. "Well, I am not a fact-finder. So, no. I would not recuse myself because I will not be making any findings of guilt or innocence," Foster said, presuming they're not bench trials and the cases go before separate sets of 12-person juries. To ensure a fair and impartial jury, out of "an abundance of caution," Foster signed a gag order restricting extra-judicial statements following Townhall's publication of the couple's out-of-court commentary. The men had enthusiastically blabbed about the case to a relative, who then captured the confessions in a series of tell-all texts, sent on jail-issued tablets, and phone calls from behind bars. However, the court order only applies to attorneys and law enforcement officials. It's not a restraint on members of the media or third parties, Foster clarified, as they are protected under the First Amendment. At issue was also Zachary's string of confessions in police custody and whether he actually invoked his constitutional right to counsel. Winfrey, who filed a motion to suppress his incriminating statements, argued that his admissions were inadmissible. A portion of Zachary's police interrogation was played in court, around the one-hour mark. According to the videotape of Zachary's in-custody interview, he said: "So, I guess I need a lawyer first then." "I didn't say I am unwilling. I just asked for my lawyer because you mentioned it at the very very beginning."
Foster noted that the Miranda warnings were read beforehand. The issue came down to whether there was a "clear invocation of counsel" after Zachary previously waived the right to legal representation. DA Randy McGinley cited a Georgia case where the defendant similarly said he "might need a lawyer." Comparing the cases, McGinley argued that Zachary, too, made an ambiguous assertion. Next, the chief prosecutor pointed to a 2019 Georgia Supreme Court opinion and quoted the ruling: "When a Defendant makes an equivocal reference to counsel [...], interviewing officers are not always required to clarify their request but they can." That decision cited a U.S. Supreme Court case, which says, "Of course when a suspect makes an ambiguous or equivocal statement, it would often be good practice for the interviewing officers to clarify whether or not he actually wants an attorney." That was the procedure followed in the Zulock case, McGinley said. The detective asked Zachary follow-up questions for clarity's sake, such as "Do you want to talk to us?" In response, Zachary said he was not "unwilling" to talk.
Since it's a constitutional matter, not a question of state statute, McGinley moved to reciting case law in other jurisdictions beyond Georgia. In a 2022 Illinois case, a defendant was asked whether he wanted to speak to detectives or an attorney. "An attorney, I guess," the defendant said. The court deemed the defendant's statement equivocal. Out of Texas, in a 2016 appeal case, the defendant said, "I guess I'd like a lawyer." The court found that that was equivocal "Wondering about an attorney is not invoking your right to an attorney and wanting to stop questioning," McGinley argued, urging Foster to find that Zachary's statements were voluntarily made. Winfrey relied on Wheeler v. State, a 2011 Georgia case involving aggravated sexual battery, cruelty to children, and child molestation. The defendant said, "You know, I'm not trying to be hard to get along with, but the seriousness of my charges and everything, I need to discuss it with a lawyer before I, you know, talk to you." He was convicted at trial and the appellate court affirmed it. The case went all the way to the state's Supreme Court, which reversed it. "Well, if I recall Wheeler, the context of the statement in Wheeler was not an expression of a willingness or unwillingness but rather that he was not trying to be difficult or hard to get along with," Foster replied. Rejecting Winfrey's comparison, Foster found the Zulock case akin to Willis v. State. In that case, the state's Supreme Court determined the invocation was not clear and was, at best, equivocal. The detective asked, "Do you want an attorney before you talk to us?" Willis, the defendant, said, "No, I'm saying I don't have any problem answering any questions, but I still do want an attorney." There were these "countervailing things, which is the equivocation," Foster remarked. Applying it to the Zulock case, Foster said Zachary asked, not stated decisively, "So, I guess I need a lawyer first then?" That was an "equivocal question," Foster ruled, "not an invocation." He was advised by the detective, "That's your choice." They then talked until Zachary said, "I didn't say I am unwilling." Of Zachary's second statement, Foster heard it as, "I just asked about my lawyer because you mentioned it at the very very beginning." Even if he had said, "I just asked for," that implied past tense, Foster said. "He sandwiches it between two statements that he is willing to talk [...] two expressions of a willingness to talk, and the only other reference was a question about 'I guess I need.' This was not a clear, unambiguous invocation of right to counsel." Foster found that Zachary was advised of his Miranda rights, expressed that he understood them, and that he voluntarily waived them. His statements were equivocal and, "really, more questions," Foster said. Therefore, his admissions are admissible at trial. RecommendedTrending on Townhall Videos |
Judge Changes Trump’s Gag Order, Allowing Him To Discuss Witnesses And Jury: The Details
 |
On Tuesday, a Manhattan court overturned Donald Trump’s gag order, allowing the former president to speak freely about jurors and witnesses in the “so-called” hush money trial that resulted in his conviction. However, other parties involved in the case will remain off-limits until July 11th. Judge Juan M. Merchan’s ruling allows the Republican nominee, Trump, to call out his disgruntled lawyer-turned-foe Michael Cohen, former porn star Stormy Daniels, and other trial witnesses, just days before Trump and President Joe Biden debate on Thursday. Merchan wrote in a five-page decision that the gag order was purportedly intended to “protect the integrity of the judicial proceedings” and that since the trial was over and the jury was cleared, the rights of the witnesses and jurors were no longer applicable. Merchan stated that while he couldn’t defend it, it had been his “strong preference” to keep preventing Trump from making remarks regarding the jurors—the identities of whom have not been disclosed. The judge did, however, maintain a separate order that forbade Trump and his attorneys from revealing the names or addresses of certain jurors. Following the verdict, Todd Blanche, the attorney for Trump, stated that the defense team had disposed of the material.
Merchan also imposed a restriction on him speaking about the prosecution team, court employees, or their families. He wrote that these parties must “continue to perform their lawful duties free from threats, intimidation, harassment, and harm.” Trump is also still free to speak on the judge or the office of District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who brought the case, without being restricted by these limits. After the trial, Trump’s attorneys asked for Merchan to fully lift the gag order, arguing that there was no need to limit Trump’s First Amendment rights. According to Trump, the gag order kept him from defending himself while Cohen and Daniels continuously persecuted him.
The gag order, according to Cheung, “will immediately challenge today’s unconstitutional order,” since it still forbids him from discussing the judge, whom he claims has a conflict of interest, or from reiterating his baseless accusations that Biden oversaw the prosecution. The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office had requested that Merchan maintain the gag order’s prohibition on remarks regarding the jury and trial personnel until Trump is sentenced, but they announced last week that they would be comfortable with Trump making remarks regarding witnesses now that the trial has concluded. Cohen responded to the ruling, saying: “For the past 6 years, Donald and acolytes have been making constant negative statements about me. Donald’s failed strategy of discrediting me so that he can avoid accountability didn’t work then and won’t work now.” A few weeks before the trial began, on March 26th, Merchan issued Trump’s gag order in response to concerns expressed by the prosecution regarding the presumed Republican presidential nominee’s history of discussing those connected to his cases on Truth Social. Merchan later extended it to forbid remarks about his own family following Trump’s public comments on the judge’s daughter, a known Democrat party political strategist, on social media. The judge threatened to put Trump in jail if he broke the gag order again. In an attempt to get the ban lifted, Trump’s attorneys, Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, contended that, given Biden’s remarks regarding the verdict in public as well as Stormy Daniels and Cohen’s consistent attacks, Trump had a right to “unrestrained campaign advocacy.” Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts |
Trump Open To Taking Drug Test Before Debate If Biden Does
 |
45th President Donald Trump has signaled his willingness to take a drug test before he faces off with President Joe Biden
on the debate stage in Georgia. Trump took to Truth Social on Monday, there he stated that he would immediately agree to be tested if Biden was tested as well.
The Republican’s remarks come as speculation about Biden’s capability to endure a 90-minute debate has run rampant. Reports have indicated that he has been practicing standing as part of preparations. Biden’s team has kept him holed-up at Camp David since last week, as they seek to ensure he won’t have any embarrassing or confusing moments as he’s been known to have during public events. Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Tit for Tat ? ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) — A statue of abolitionist Frederick Douglass was ripped from its base in Rochester on the an...
-
NEW YORK (AP) — As New York City faced one of its darkest days with the death toll from the coronavirus surging past 4,000 — more th...
