Former Rep. Liz Cheney (R- WY) reportedly drew a "big crowd" in Iowa on Wednesday. Cheney, a frequent critic of former president
Donald Trump , recently told a story of the ex-president's "depravity" on Jan. 6 that she said should show why he must be defeated. Trump commonly boats about the importance of crowd sizes, including inflating his own. ALSO READ: ‘Don't have enough’: Wealthy Trump allies balk at helping Donald pay legal bills But Cheney did no such thing. Instead, it's outside reports and photos suggesting the large speech crowd. Conservative Heath Mayo said, "Looks like a lot of [Principles First] folks are out in force in Iowa tonight." He linked to a video of the crowd from Kevin Cavallin, who said he was waiting to hear Cheney speak at
Drake University's Bucksbaum Lecture Series in Des Moines. Another user on X, @Kara_ahern, said, "Big crowd in Des Moines tonight to hear Liz Cheney." @SacksRosie wrote, "Full house...a lot more people in this crowd than Trump could attract...Liz Cheney always said she would make it her business that Trump would never get back into the WH..this is impressive." There's something rotten in MAGA country: some supporters are being scammed into donating funds beyond a one-time offering to bankroll former President Donald Trump's legal efforts. Tim Miller, the former communications director for the Jeb Bush's 2016 campaign, appeared on MSNBC's "Alex Wagner Tonight" to suggest that some of these fervent backers of MAGA being suckered could help
Democrats make their case in the upcoming election. "They are making one donation and actually they are having a monthly withdrawal taken from their accounts," he said. "This has been happening over and over again so you know there are plenty of these supporters that are getting scammed and I think that this is potentially a useful political issue for Democrats, frankly, because it undermines a core message of Donald Trump that he cares about these people." ALSO READ: ‘Don't have enough’: Wealthy Trump allies balk at helping Donald pay legal bills Miller appears to be touching on a 2021 story in The
New York Times exposing a so-called "money bomb" to squeeze out more money from an unsuspecting loyalists' contributions The story suggested those taken sometimes for "thousands of dollars" in the maneuver were "retirees,
MILITARY veterans, nurses and even experienced political operatives." Ever since fleeing the
White House for Mar-a-Lago in 2021 after suffering a defeat by President
Joe Biden, former President Donald Trump has burned through $100 million on lawyers and residual costs dealing with his many investigations, indictments and both civil and criminal trials, according to The Times. It's estimated the 45th president is spending on average more than $90,000 a day in legal-related costs out of other peoples' money and has been doing it for three years running. The Times found that Trump "has relied almost entirely on donations made in an attempt to fight the results of the 2020 election." Miller noted that these supporters may be fine with backing his legal defense efforts, keep his jet fueled, or float his "fancy dinners at Mar-a-Lago." He said, "they don't care because it's their way to give the middle finger to the people they don't like." But there are others who are sore about it. These "other people" Miller contends that are "donating really believed that that money was going to an
election defense fund, that there was fraud in the election, that literally believe that the country is under threat; it's under some invasion and the little $10 donation they give is part of the effort to stop that vision and to support candidates that are going to put in policies that they care about." He suggested this pool often are elderly with less internet savviness "who are literally getting conned." Watch below or click here. CONTINUE READING Show less A judge recommending disbarment for a Trump-aligned attorney who allegedly participated in 2020 election subversion efforts included one line in the ruling that stood out to political and legal experts. JustSecurity reporter Adam Klasfeld highlighted the line from the disbarment recommendation filing for John Eastman. Eastman was indicted alongside former president Donald Trump for his alleged role in a scheme to overturn the results of Georgia's presidential election in 2020. "A blistering line from John Eastman's disbarment recommendation: The Bar finds that the 'scale and egregiousness' of Eastman’s 'unethical actions far surpasses the misconduct' by Nixon henchman Donald Segretti, who coined the word 'ratf------' for political dirty tricks," Klasfeld wrote on his
Social Media. ALSO READ: ‘Don't have enough’: Wealthy Trump allies balk at helping Donald pay legal bills In a follow-up post, Klasfeld said, "Unlike Segretti, who served jail time after pleading guilty to Watergate-related misdemeanors, Eastman refuses to admit wrongdoing, the order states." The order further says: "This is an important factor, as it constitutes a fundamental breach of an attorney's core ethical duties." Former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissmann said on Wednesday, "Clear and convincing evidence of engaging in election fraud... and, yes, worse than Watergate." CONTINUE READING Show less Former President Donald Trump's sprawling network of ostensibly independent political groups raising money for him, much of it in service of paying legal expenses , seems to walk right up to the line of
BREAKING the law, former prosecutor Kristy Greenberg told MSNBC's Alex Wagner — and may in fact cross it. "Kristy, how is this legal?" asked Wagner. "How can he keep saying this one thing and doing another?" "Well, I think the big question here will be looking behind all of this as to who is coordinating it," said Greenberg. "If Donald Trump is coordinating between his campaign and these PACs that are supposed to be third parties and independent — the Save America PAC is independent, even though he directs it, independent third-party — if there is sufficient coordination, you could prove that, then maybe you would have something to say these expenditures are not purely personal, these are really campaign contributions. And therefore they should be subject to the limits of $5,000 that campaign contributions are subject to." ALSO READ: ‘Don't have enough’: Wealthy Trump allies balk at helping Donald pay legal bills What it looks like, Greenberg went on, is that Trump and his allies are "just trying to do an end-run around these various regulations, and it seems so transparent." "[Special counsel] Jack Smith ... had served some subpoenas in connection with that nonexistent, as it turns out, election defense fund," Greenberg said. "He served some subpoenas and then he withdrew them and it was unclear why, because that seemed like such a clear-cut fraud. I questioned why that happened. Perhaps it was optics. Perhaps he thought like he had such strong cases, the January 6 case and the national security case, that he didn't want to seem as though he was trying to drain Trump of the ability to legally defend against those cases. Hard to say. But I questioned it at that time because that seemed like such a clear wire fraud case that it seemed like it should be looked into, but maybe they just had limited resources and didn't like the optics of it." "But I agree with you, this raises a lot of questions," she added. "Someone, somewhere, even if not the special counsel's office, because they are pretty busy — some prosecutors should be looking into this." Watch the video below or at the link. Kristy Greenberg on the legality of Trump's PACs www.youtube.com CONTINUE READING Show less