Skip to main content
News

OVERSIGHT CHAIR JAMES COMER JOINS THE INSURRECTION PROTECTION COMMITTEE

By September 28, 2023No Comments

The witnesses House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer have brought to testify in his first impeachment stunt further show this is all just a politically motivated circus intended to help Republicans in the 2024 elections.

Eileen O’Connor, in contrast to numerous legal experts and former prosecutors, wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal criticizing the plea deal that Hunter Biden made with the Justice Department. A deal that was the product of five years of federal investigations. Former federal prosecutors and experts agreed that the plea deal was “if anything harsh, not lenient” and the charges likely would not have been pursued against an average American. She is actively involved in leadership positions on numerous conservative advocacy groups, including the Republican National Lawyers Association, which is led by a staunch pro-Trump advocate and the Federalist Society, which according to Politico has apparently started questioning “the wisdom of deferring to democratic majorities as a matter of principle.” She served on Donald Trump’s Treasury Department presidential transition team and has given campaign contributions to support him. On her LinkedIn profile, she has also posted content that perpetuates conspiracy theories about the 2020 election and immigration. O’Connor is not an impartial expert; her views are biased from the start.

Jonathan Turley is a paid Fox News media contributor where he regularly appears to defend former President Trump and bash the many, many indictments brought against him. His commentary has been frequently criticized by legal experts and lawyers, with one calling him the “poster child for Trump apologists with legal credentials.” When he was last called to testify as Republicans’ star witness during Trump’s first impeachment, he made a complete flip-flop on comments he had made in the late 1990s while testifying during impeachment proceedings. Turley clearly can’t make up his own mind about his views on impeachment, he certainly can’t be trusted to advise others on it.

Comer has once again demonstrated that this impeachment inquiry is sham, he has not conducted good faith efforts to get the truth, he has destroyed what little remained of his credibility, and the facts speak for themselves.

Eileen O’Connor: Impartial Witness Or Republican Political Operative?

WHILE EXPERTS AGREED HUNTER BIDEN’S PLEA DEAL WAS “HARSH,” EILEEN O’CONNOR WROTE AN OP-ED CRITICIZING IT

Eileen O’Connor Went On Fox News After Her Op-Ed About Hunter Biden’s Plea Deal Was Published And Said She Originally Titled It, “Corruption, Collusion, Or Mere Incompetence?” “A former head of the Justice Department’s Tax Division described her shock Wednesday after reading testimony from an Internal Revenue Service whistleblower, saying there was “malfeasance” in the probe of Hunter Biden. […] ‘I want to throw a bouquet to Special Agent Shapley for bringing this forward,’ [Eileen] O’Connor said. ‘It is so important malfeasance in the administration of justice be brought forward and Congress be able to perform its oversight function, do something about it. What is so disturbing here is – well, let me mention I want to thank ‘The Wall Street Journal’ for publishing my op-ed and giving it a catchy title. My title had been ‘Corruption, Collusion, or Mere Incompetence?,’ because any of those might actually describe what caused what happen here to happen here.’” [Daily Caller, 6/29/23]

  • OP-ED: “Throw Hunter Biden’s Plea Deal In The Trash” [Wall Street Journal, Eileen O’Connor Op-Ed, 6/27/23]

Former Prosecutors And Experts Agreed That Hunter Biden’s Plea Deal, Which Was The Outcome Of Five Years Of Federal Investigation, Was “If Anything Harsh, Not Lenient”

HEADLINE: “Did Hunter Biden Get Off Easy? Republicans Think So—Here’s What Legal Experts Say” [Forbes, 6/20/23]

  • Former Federal Prosecutor And New York University Professor Andrew Weissman Described Hunter Biden’s Penalties In Both The Tax And Gun Case As “If Anything Harsh, Not Lenient.” “NYU Law professor and former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissmann also described Biden’s penalties in both cases as ‘if anything harsh, not lenient,’ noting prosecutions for first-time tax offenses and false applications for a gun purchase seldom lead to jail time or even prosecutions.” [Forbes, 6/20/23]
  • Ohio State Law Professor, Douglas Berman, Argued Prosecutors Brought Forward Charges Because Hunter Is The President’s Son, And To Prevent Claims Of A Two-Tiered Justice System.” “Ohio State University law professor Douglas Berman suggested that prosecutors may have brought the charges because Biden is the president’s son, telling The New York Times that in most instances, the charges he faces are typically attached to more serious offenses, but in this case, ‘failure to bring some charges when there is no factual dispute . . . could create the impression of a two-tiered system of justice.’” [Forbes, 6/20/23]
  • Michael Weinstein, Former Federal Prosecutor, Predicted Hunter Biden Was “Not Going To Prison” For The Tax Charges Given His Status As A First-Time Offender. “Michael Weinstein, a former federal prosecutor and chair of the White Collar Criminal Defense & Government Investigations Practice at Cole Schotz, predicted Biden is also ‘not going to prison’ for the tax charges, he told Reuters, given his status as a first-time offender, his willingness to plead guilty and the amount of back taxes he owed, which reportedly totalled $1.2 million that he has since paid back.” [Forbes, 6/20/23]

HEADLINE: “Did Hunter Biden Get Off Easy? We Asked The Experts.” [Politico, 6/21/23]

  • Former IRS Lawyer, Maggie Abdo-Gomes, Argued It Was Rare For People To Face Criminal Charges For Failing To Pay Taxes And “The Laws Were Enforced As If It Had Been Anybody Else. ‘I Would Say Probably A Little Stricter, Because Failure To Pay Is Very Common.” “The Truth “Maggie Abdo-Gomez, a Miami tax attorney and former IRS lawyer, said it’s rare for people to face criminal charges for simply failing to pay their taxes. ‘I’ve only seen them — one time — prosecute someone for failure to pay taxes,” she said. ‘Because the truth is, if we prosecuted for failure to pay taxes, the jails would be full. Forget the drug dealers and the murderers and everybody else. I have a small practice, and I’ve got tons of people that owe taxes.’ ‘The laws were enforced as if it had been anybody else,’ she added, regarding Hunter’s case. ‘I would say probably a little stricter, because failure to pay is very common.’” [Politico, 6/21/23]
  • Obama Justice Department Tax Division Head Caroline Ciraolo Said The DOJ Typically Would Have Brought Tougher Charges If It Had The Evidence That Hunter Biden Lied, But “That’s Not The Case Here” And Five Years Of Investigations Under Two Administrations Investigated The Issue. “Caroline Ciraolo, acting head of the Justice Department’s Tax Division for the last year of the Obama administration, said the case’s resolution didn’t strike her as outside the norm. If the Justice Department had found evidence that Hunter Biden lied or took other ‘affirmative acts’ to dodge his taxes, he likely would have faced tougher charges, she said. ‘If there was evidence of affirmative conduct, then under DOJ policy the charge would have been felony evasion of payment,’ she added. ‘And that’s not the case here. And after five years and an investigation that crossed two administrations on different sides of the aisle, I would imagine that if there was evidence of affirmative conduct, we would not be looking at the information we’re looking at right now.’” [Politico, 6/21/23]

HEADLINE: “Legal Experts Cast Doubt On GOP Claims Of A ‘Sweetheart Deal’ In Hunter Biden Case” [CNN Politics, 6/21/23]

  • Martin Sheil, Former Supervisory Special Agent For The IRS Criminal Investigation, Argued If Hunter Biden’s Name Was John Doe, No Criminal Tax Prosecution Would’ve Been Contemplated. “‘If Hunter Biden’s name was John or Jane Doe, no criminal tax prosecution would have ever been contemplated and he would have almost certainly been slotted into a pre-trial diversion program, saving the government the time and expense of a trial,’ said Martin Sheil, a former supervisory special agent in the IRS Criminal Investigation.” [CNN Politics, 6/21/23]
  • Former Federal Prosecutor, Shan Wu, Argued If Hunter’s Last Name “Was Not Biden I Don’t Think He Would’ve Been Charged.” “‘If his last name was not Biden I don’t think he would have been charged,’ Shan Wu, a former federal prosecutor and CNN contributor, told CNN’s Kate Bolduan on ‘CNN News Central.’ ‘Typically in tax cases where the person has paid back the taxes, appetite for going after them criminally is low.’” [CNN Politics, 6/21/23]
  • Former U.S. Attorney, Michael Moore, Argued Hunter Biden Was “Probably More Severely Looked At” And That Hunter Was “Treated Differently To His Detriment.” “There’s nothing to this and they’re just trying to make much ado about nothing. He was probably more severely looked at. And remember this was a Trump-appointed prosecutor who remained in place to finish this case,’ Michael Moore, a former US attorney, told Bolduan on ‘CNN News Central.’ ‘You know, he was treated differently,” Moore said. ‘But he was treated differently to his detriment.’” [CNN Politics, 6/21/23]

Experts Said The Charges Filed Against Hunter Biden Likely Would Not Have Been Pursued Against An Average American

Former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman: “A Prosecution Of A Defendant Who Committed Tax Crimes During A Period Of Drug Addiction, And Then Turned His Life Around And Paid The Taxes, Would Be Very Losable.” According to an op-ed by former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman: “The bottom line is that both sides had plenty to gain or lose from the Hunter Biden case, and that may well have helped produce a sensible bargain.  The proposed deal, which is subject to approval by a judge, would allow Biden to avoid going to jail and turn the page on an extremely dark chapter of his life. And it would enable Weiss and his department to obtain a conviction and avoid trying a case with dubious prospects before a jury. A prosecution of a defendant who committed tax crimes during a period of drug addiction, and then turned his life around and paid the taxes, would be very losable.” [Los Angeles Times, Harry Litman Op-Ed, 6/20/23]

Former Federal Prosecutor Shan Wu: “For The Facts We Are Seeing Here, What He’s Pleading Guilty To, I Think Someone Other Than The Child Of A Sitting President Would Not Have Been Charged Based On The Facts That We’re Seeing Here.” FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR SHAN WU: “It seems very reasonable actually and my reaction is kind of the opposite of what we’re hearing and going to be hearing about complaints that there is favoritism, or a sweetheart deal given to Hunter Biden. My reaction to it actually is that for the facts we are seeing here, what he’s pleading guilty to, I think someone other than the child of a sitting president would not have been charged based on the facts that we’re seeing here.” [ABC News, Live, 6/20/23] (video)

Sources Said It Was Common For Prosecutors To Strike Deals With Defendants Where The Defendant Pleads Guilty To A Small Subset Of Potential Charges

Sources Told CNN It Was Common For Prosecutors To Strike Deals With Defendants Where The Defendant Pleads Guilty To Small Subset Of Potential Charges They Could Have Faced. “Sources familiar with the criminal probe told CNN in April that prosecutors were still actively weighing a felony tax charge against Hunter Biden. And it is common for prosecutors to strike deals with defendants where they plead guilty to a small subset of the possible charges they could’ve faced.” [CNN, 6/22/23]

Vox Reported That Hunter Biden Admitted To Committing Federal Crimes And Will Plead Guilty And In Exchange More Serious Charges Will Not Be Brought Against Him, Which Is “How The System Often Works.” “Yet it should be noted that Hunter was not let off the hook — he admitted to committing federal crimes and will plead guilty. In exchange, some more serious charges will not be brought and prosecutors will recommend a lighter sentence than they otherwise might have. That is how the system often works. Furthermore, the investigation into him isn’t yet over.” [Vox, 5/12/23]

  • Vox: “If [Trump] Had Simply Returned The Documents When Repeatedly Asked By Government Officials, He Would Likely Have Been Spared Charges. But He Did Not Do So.” “Trump, on the other hand, has shown no sign that he ever seriously considered admitting any criminal behavior or agreeing to any plea deal in the documents case. If he had simply returned the documents when repeatedly asked by government officials, he would likely have been spared charges. But he did not do so.” [Vox, 5/12/23]

EILEEN O’CONNOR FLIP-FLOPPED ON WHETHER DAVID WEISS SHOULD BE SPECIAL COUNSEL OR NOT

June 2023: Eileen O’Connor Criticized Attorney General Merrick Garland For Not Making U.S. Attorney David Weiss A Special Counsel

June 2023: Eileen O’Connor Criticized Attorney General Merrick Garland For Not Making David Weiss Special Counsel. “‘As early as June 2021, the prosecution team understood that because crimes must be prosecuted in the district where they occur, Attorney General Garland’s failure to make U.S. Attorney Weiss a special counsel guaranteed Hunter Biden would not be prosecuted for his tax crimes,’ O’Connor, who wrote an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal calling for the judge hearing the case to throw out the plea deal, said.” [Daily Caller, 6/29/23]

  • Once David Weiss Asked To Be Made Special Counsel, Merrick Garland Granted His Request. “Attorney General Merrick Garland announced Friday that he was appointing David Weiss as special counsel for the Hunter Biden probe, giving the U.S. attorney increased authority in his investigation. Weiss, who was already overseeing the probe, requested on Tuesday that he be given the special counsel title, Garland said.” [NBC News, 8/11/23]

Eileen O’Connor Reposted Empower Oversight’s Press Release Criticizing The Appointment Of David Weiss As Special Counsel

On LinkedIn, Eileen O’Connor Reposted Empower Oversight’s Press Release About David Weiss Being Appointed Special Counsel.

[Eileen O’Connor, LinkedIn, accessed 9/26/23]

  • 8/11/23: Empower Oversight Criticized The Appointment Of David Weiss as Special Counsel And Claimed His Appointment Was The “Wrong Choice To Reassure The American People That The Probe Will Now Be Independent And Thorough.” According to Empower Oversight’s press release about David Weiss being appointed special counsel: “Nevertheless, Weiss is the wrong choice to reassure the American people that the probe will now be independent and thorough. As the IRS whistleblowers have testified, it was under his leadership over the last five years that the President’s son was given preferential treatment, and an unprecedented plea agreement with the President’s son was almost implemented before a federal judge scrutinized it. […] The appointment at this late date raises more serious questions about whether Congress and the American people were intentionally misled. Sworn testimony and multiple letters to Capitol Hill claiming that Mr. Weiss already had all the authority he needed are now contradicted by the Department’s public actions, as well as Mr. Weiss’s private admission that he didn’t have the final say.” [Empower Oversight, Press Release, 8/11/23]

EILEEN O’CONNOR IS ACTIVELY INVOLVED WITH CONSERVATIVE ADVOCACY GROUPS AND HAS TIES TO DONALD TRUMP

Eileen O’Connor Serves On The Advisory Council Of The Republican National Lawyers Association, Which Is Run By A Staunch Pro-Trump Advocate

Eileen O’Connor Is On The Advisory Council Of The Republican National Lawyers Association. According to the affiliations page on Eileen O’Connor’s website: “Organizations  • Chairman, Executive Committee of the Administrative Law Practice Group of the Federalist Society for Law & Public Policy Studies  • Vice-Chairman of the Board, & Chairman of the Legal Committee, Americans United for Life  • Fellow, American College of Tax Counsel  • Member, National Association of Former United States Attorneys  • Advisory Council, Republican National Lawyers Association  • Member, American, Federal & District of Columbia Bar Associations  • Former Member, Tax Executive Committee, American Institute of Certified Public Accountant  • Former Member, Tax and Fiscal Affairs Committee, Associated General Contractors of America” [Eileen J. O’Connor, accessed 9/26/23]

  • Harmeet Dhillon Serves As Chair Of The Republican National Lawyers Association. According to the Republican National Lawyers Association website, Harmeet Kaur Dhillon, of San Francisco, CA, serves as Chair of the Executive Committee. [Republican National Lawyers Association, Leadership, Accessed 9/27/23]
  • Harmeet Dhillon Co-Chaired A Number Of Pro-Trump Groups And Defended Trump’s Legal Efforts After The 2020 Election. “Dhillon became a Trump supporter, co-chairing or joining a slew of pro-Trump organizations, including Women for Trump, Sikhs for Trump, and Lawyers for Trump. During the Trump years, she also founded a conservative non-profit, the Center for American Liberties, and became chair of the Republican National Lawyers Association. After the 2020 election, she defended Trump’s legal efforts in the press, telling Fox Business the day after the election: ‘We’re waiting for the United States Supreme Court—of which the President has nominated three justices—to step in and do something.’ The high court later rejected hearing Trump’s election challenge cases.” [TIME, 1/25/23]
  • Harmeet Dhillon Twice Represented Trump, First On A Case Involving Stormy Daniels And Second Against The January 6th Committee’s Subpoena For Trump To Testify About The Insurrection. “Dhillon later represented Trump as an attorney in two cases—one involving the pornographic film actress Stormy Daniels, who filed a lawsuit against the former President in California, and another against the Jan. 6 Committee’s subpoena for Trump to testify about his role in the Capitol attack. Daniels lost her suit and was ordered to pay Trump $300,000 in legal fees. Trump’s subpoena was eventually withdrawn after the panel disbanded.” [TIME, 1/25/23]

Eileen O’Connor Worked On President Donald Trump’s Transition Team

Eileen O’Connor’s Federalist Society Biography Says She Had A Role On The Trump Treasury Department Transition Team. According to Eileen O’Connor’s Federalist Society biography: “After nearly 30 years as a national tax specialist with the IRS and major accounting firms, Eileen J. O’Connor, now an attorney in private practice, was Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Tax Division for six years during the administration of President George W. Bush and a member of then-President-elect Trump’s Treasury Department Transition Team.  She focuses on federal administrative and tax law.” [Federalist Society, accessed 9/26/23]

Eileen O’Connor Has Given Nearly $5,000 To Republican Candidates, Including To Support Donald Trump

[FEC Database, accessed 9/26/23]

Eileen O’Connor Serves In A Leadership Position With The Federalist Society, A Conservative Legal Group That Had Reportedly Started Questioning “The Wisdom Of Deferring To Democratic Majorities As A Matter Of Principle”

Eileen O’Connor Serves As Chair Of The Executive Committee Of The Administrative Law Practice Group At The Federalist Society. According to the affiliations page on Eileen O’Connor’s website: “Organizations  • Chairman, Executive Committee of the Administrative Law Practice Group of the Federalist Society for Law & Public Policy Studies  • Vice-Chairman of the Board, & Chairman of the Legal Committee, Americans United for Life  • Fellow, American College of Tax Counsel  • Member, National Association of Former United States Attorneys  • Advisory Council, Republican National Lawyers Association  • Member, American, Federal & District of Columbia Bar Associations  • Former Member, Tax Executive Committee, American Institute of Certified Public Accountant  • Former Member, Tax and Fiscal Affairs Committee, Associated General Contractors of America” [Eileen J. O’Connor, accessed 9/26/23] 

  • Politico Described The Federalist Society As A “Conservative Legal Behemoth.” “It was the start of the second day of the Federalist Society’s National Student Symposium — an annual gathering of conservative and libertarian law students hosted by the conservative legal behemoth  — and as I sidled up to one group of attendees, I got the sense that they were caught off guard to find a reporter in their midst.” [Politico, 3/17/23]
  • Politico Reported That The Federalist Society Was The Republican Party’s “Go-To Clearinghouse For Major Judicial Appointments.” “The Federalist Society was founded by law students, and advancing the careers of ambitious, right-leaning lawyers has remained a major element of its work. That work begins on law school campuses, where local chapters host speakers and events, and it extends all the way to Washington, where the Federalist Society has become the GOP’s go-to clearinghouse for major judicial appointments. Although much of the national media attention has focused on the organization’s role in supporting Republican Supreme Court nominations, its presence on law school campuses has also been a source of controversy, especially since the Dobbs  Just last week, a Federalist Society event at Stanford Law School made national headlines after protesters heckled U.S. Circuit Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan, a Trump appointee to the Fifth Circuit, causing him to cut his remarks short.” [Politico, 3/17/23]

Eileen O’Connor Has Participated In At Least 16 Events For The Federalist Society.

  • Are IRS Defenses Crumbling? 7/21/22
  • Hollywood’s Recent Best Picture Winner Shines a Spotlight on the Harms of the Administrative State 5/12/22
  • Talks with Authors: The Dictatorship of Woke Capital 12/9/21
  • Can Congress Forbid A State from Cutting its Taxes? 9/27/21
  • The Equal Rights Amendment: Then and Now 6/1/21
  • Would a Wealth Tax Pass Constitutional Muster? 4/16/21
  • Litigation Update: City of Boise v. Martin 2/4/20
  • How Texas Killed EEOC “Guidance”—in the Fifth Circuit, with a Gavel 11/5/19
  • Balancing Executive and Legislative Branch Interests in Congressional Oversight 6/15/18
  • Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges from Transforming America 9/19/16
  • Disinherited: How Washington Is Betraying America’s Young 7/14/15
  • Extortion: How Politicians Extract Your Money, Buy Votes, and Line Their Own Pockets 11/7/13
  • Terms of Engagement 10/10/13
  • The Bucks Start Here 10/3/13
  • City of Arlington – How much Deference? 5/20/13
  • 2003 National Lawyers Convention 11/13/03

[Federalist Society, accessed 9/26/23]

Politico Reported That There Was A “Spirited Debate” Happening Within The Federalist Society About “The Wisdom Of Deferring To Democratic Majorities As A Matter Of Principle”

HEADLINE: “The Federalist Society Isn’t Quite Sure About Democracy Anymore” [Politico, 3/17/23]

Politico Reported That A Spirited Debate Was Underway Within The Federalist Society About “The Wisdom Of Deferring To Democratic Majorities As A Matter Of Principle.” “That approach made sense for conservatives when they still saw the federal judiciary as a liberal force dragging the country to the left. But now that conservatives have secured a solid majority on the Supreme Court — and voters in several red states have soundly rejected hard-line positions on abortion — a spirited debate is underway within the Federalist Society about the wisdom of deferring to democratic majorities as a matter of principle.” [Politico, 3/17/23]

EILEEN O’CONNOR REPOSTS CONTENT ON LINKEDIN THAT SPREADS FAR RIGHT CONSPIRACIES ABOUT THE 2020 ELECTION AND IMMIGRATION

Eileen O’Connor Reposted William Perry Pendley, Who Posted An Op-Ed From Jeff Clark, The Trump Justice Department Lawyer Who Reportedly Embraced 2020 Election Conspiracies

Eileen O’Connor Reposted A Post From William Perry Pendley Highlighting An Article Written By Former Trump Justice Department Official Jeffrey Clark.

[LinkedIn, accessed 9/26/23]

  • January 2022: Jeff Clark Wrote An Op-Ed In The Spectator Defending His Tenure In Trump’s Justice Department And His Role In 2020 Election Conspiracy Theories. According to an op-ed written by former Trump Justice Department official Jeff Clark: “In late January 2021, a group of anonymous leakers, violating their duties of confidentiality, went to the New York Times claiming that they had wisely restrained former President Trump in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. I was painted as the villain in their narrative because of what they asserted about my legal advice, ignoring that the President wields constitutional power to consult as he sees fit with his inferiors in the Executive Branch, especially with those confirmed by the Senate. Senate-confirmed officials wield larger spheres of discretion than those who are not confirmed — subject at all times, of course, to the President’s unitary command and power to decide.” [The Spectator, Jeffrey Clark Op-Ed, 1/16/22]
  • Fulton County District Attorney Charged Jeff Clark With Violating Georgia’s Racketeering Laws And Making False Statements. “Clark is charged with violating Georgia’s racketeering law, known as RICO, and attempting to make false statements. He has pleaded not guilty. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, a Democrat, opposes Clark’s bid to move his case. Attorneys from her office argued during Monday’s hearing that even if Trump told Clark to get involved in 2020 election matters, his actions still would not have been within the scope of his federal duties.” [CNN, 9/18/23]
  • After Trump Lost The 2020 Election, Jeff Clark Reportedly Embraced Far-Fetched Conspiracy Theories About An International Scheme To Rig Voting Machines Against Republicans. “After Trump lost the 2020 election, Clark started embracing far-fetched conspiracy theories about an international scheme to rig voting machines against Republicans, according to two congressional reports and past CNN reporting. He also violated Justice Department policy by speaking directly with Trump on several occasions.” [CNN, 9/18/23]
  • Former President Trump Reportedly Considered Installing Jeff Clark As Acting Attorney General So He Could Send A Letter To State Officials Falsely Claiming That The Justice Department Found Widespread “Irregularities” In The 2020 Election. “He also violated Justice Department policy by speaking directly with Trump on several occasions. As part of these conversations, Trump considered installing Clark as acting attorney general so he could send a letter to the state officials falsely claiming the Justice Department found widespread ‘irregularities’ in the 2020 election.” [CNN, 9/18/23]

Eileen O’Connor Reposted A Political Cartoon From The Right-Wing Gateway Pundit That Seemed To Cast People Who Were Part Of Trump’s “Fake Elector” Scheme In Michigan In A Positive Light

Eileen O’Connor Reposted A Political Cartoon That Showed Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel As A Villain Stepping On The Necks Of An Old Woman Meant To Represent The 16 People Involved In Trump’s “Fake Elector” Scheme 

[LinkedIn, accessed 9/26/23]

  • The Michigan Attorney General Is Prosecuting 16 People Who Were Part Of President Trump’s “Fake Elector” Scheme In His Efforts To Overturn The Results Of The 2020 Election. “The cases against Ms. Maddock and Ms. Henry, who previously pleaded not guilty, are part of a broader prosecution of 16 purported Trump electors in Michigan that was announced last month by the state attorney general, Dana Nessel, a Democrat. […] Other slates of false pro-Trump electors in swing states won by Mr. Biden, including Arizona and Georgia, are being investigated as part of a sprawling attempt to reverse the results of the 2020 election. Some Republicans hoped that the false-electors plan, which was led largely by lawyers close to Mr. Trump, would persuade Vice President Mike Pence to accept the slates of false electors during the joint session of Congress on Jan. 6, 2021, and by doing so, keep Mr. Trump in office for another term. Mr. Pence refused, even as a mob stormed the U.S. Capitol and delayed the certification of the election.” [New York Times, 8/4/23]

Eileen O’Connor Used Language Common Among White Supremacists To Talk About Immigration And The Border, And Posted A Cartoon That Spread Conspiracy Theories About Voter Fraud

On Her LinkedIn Profile, Eileen O’Connor Reposted Content That Suggested Democrats Were Registering Undocumented Immigrants In Order To Win Elections And That The Biden Administration Was “Enabling An Invasion”

[LinkedIn, accessed 9/26/23]

  • HEADLINE: “Immigrant Advocates Say Using The Word ‘Invasion’ Fuels Extremism” [NPR, 5/22/22]
  • NPR Reported That Replacement Theory Was A “Baseless And Racist Conspiracy Theory That Powerful Elites Are Trying To Replace White Americans With Nonwhites And That These Elites Are Allowing A So-Called Invasion Of Nonwhite Immigrants.” AYESHA RASCOE, HOST: “Last week’s mass shooting in Buffalo has turned attention once again to something known as the replacement theory. It’s a baseless and racist conspiracy theory that powerful elites are trying to replace white Americans with nonwhites and that these elites are allowing a so-called invasion of nonwhite immigrants. That word, invasion, has been used a lot lately by some Republicans and immigration hard-liners. And as NPR’s Joel Rose reports, some are resisting calls to drop it.” [NPR, 5/22/22]
  • Anti-Defamation League Said A Key Tenant Of White Supremacy Was Asserting That White People Were In Danger Of Becoming Extinct Because Of An “Invasion” Of Non-Whites. “Some of the key tenets of white supremacy according to the Anti-Defamation League, an international Jewish non-governmental organization focused on exposing extremism beliefs, are that white people of European descent are genetically superior to other non-white people, that their own ‘culture’ is superior to other cultures and that the white race is in danger of extinction due to a rising ‘flood’ or ‘invasion’ of non-whites.” [ABC News, 8/19/19]
  • New York Times: “Voter Fraud Is Exceptionally Rare, And Allegations That Widespread Numbers Of Undocumented Immigrants Are Voting Have Been Repeatedly Discredited.” “But the resurgence of the issue on the right has come with a new twist: Republican leaders and candidates are increasingly claiming without basis that unauthorized immigrants are gaining access to the ballot box. Voter fraud is exceptionally rare, and allegations that widespread numbers of undocumented immigrants are voting have been repeatedly discredited. Yet that fabricated message — capitalizing on a concocted threat to advance Mr. Trump’s broader lie of stolen elections — is now finding receptive audiences in more than a dozen states across the country, including several far from the U.S.-Mexico border.” [New York Times, 4/28/22]

Jonathan Turley, Known Trump Apologist, Can’t Make Up His Own Mind On Impeachment Let Alone Be Trusted To Advise Others On It

JONATHAN TURLEY DOESN’T EVEN KNOW HIS OWN MIND WHEN IT COMES TO IMPEACHMENT

 HEADLINE: “Jonathan Turley’s amazing impeachment flip-flop” [CNN, 12/5/19]

HEADLINE: “The Republicans’ Star Impeachment Scholar Is a Shameless Hack” [The Nation, 12/5/19]

Jonathan Turley’s Comments At The First Trump Impeachment Stood In Stark Contrast To What He Said During Bill Clinton’s Impeachment. “In 1998, testifying in front of the House Judiciary Committee during the Clinton impeachment hearing, Turley said, ‘No matter how you feel about President Clinton, no matter how you feel about the independent counsel, by his own conduct, he has deprived himself of the perceived legitimacy to govern. You need both political and legal legitimacy to govern this nation, because the President must be able to demand an absolute sacrifice from the public at a moment’s notice.’ It’s impossible to explain the shameless hypocrisy of Turley’s conflicting statements without concluding that his testimony, in both hearings, was offered in bad faith. Can Turley really expect us to believe that he would support impeachment if Trump lied about what he got on Volodymyr Zelensky’s blue dress, but would also support Bill Clinton’s right to extort a foreign power to influence an American election? Turley can’t square his Trump testimony with his Clinton testimony; all he can hope for is that people are too polite to call him a hypocrite to his face.” [The Nation, 12/5/19]

  • During The First Impeachment Of Donald Trump, Jonathan Turley Argued Trump Had Actually Committed No Crime, And It Was House Democrats Who Were Simply Blind With Rage. “They [House Republicans] tapped Turley to do the easy work of poisoning the well with more misinformation. Turley did not disappoint. He told Republicans what they wanted to hear right from his opening statement: ‘I’m concerned about lowering impeachment standard to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger. I believe this impeachment not only fails to satisfy the standard of past impeachments, but would create a dangerous precedent for future impeachments…. This would be the first impeachment in history where there would be considerable debate, and in my view, not compelling evidence, of the commission of a crime.’” [The Nation, 12/5/19]

JONATHAN TURLEY IS A FREQUENT FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR WHO REGULARLY USES HIS PLATFORM TO DEFEND TRUMP

Jonathan Turley Is A Paid Contributor For Fox News. “Turley, who acknowledges that he is a paid Fox News contributor, began to regularly pop up on the Fox shows that purport to be journalistic, but also the clownishly right-wing Fox & Friends in the morning and then the demagogic right-wing propaganda evening programming. He presented himself as a kind of Alan Dershowitz with table manners—his stance was that of one of the last remaining ‘principled liberals’ speaking truth to leftist power.” [Slate, 11/18/22]

HEADLINE: “Jonathan Turley’s Deceptive Trump Defense” [Washington Post, Philip Bump, 8/25/23]

  • OP-ED: “Georgia Indictment Of Trump Is The Same Flawed Product In A Different Package” [The Hill, Jonathan Turley Op-Ed, 8/26/23]
  • HEADLINE: “Trump’s Georgia Indictment Is ‘Excessive,’ ‘Dangerous’: Jonathan Turley” [Fox News, 8/15/23]
  • HEADLINE: “Georgia Prosecutor Showed ‘No Semblance Of Restraint’ Against Trump, Says Turley: ‘Excessive And Dangerous’” [Fox News, 8/15/23]
  • HEADLINE: “Trump Indictment Would ‘Bulldoze’ The First Amendment If It Succeeds: Turley” [Fox News, 8/5/23]
  • HEADLINE: “Jonathan Turley Concerned About ‘Chilling’ New Trump Charges: ‘When Is The Price Too High?'” [Fox News, 8/2/23]
  • HEADLINE: “Trump indictment will face ‘strong constitutional headwinds’: Jonathan Turley” [Fox News, 8/2/23]
  • HEADLINE: “Turley: Trump indictment is ‘legally pathetic’” [Fox News, 3/30/23]
  • HEADLINE: “Jonathan Turley slams potential Trump indictment as ‘deeply flawed’: ‘Undignified process’” [Fox News, 3/21/23]
  • HEADLINE: “Trump NY prosecutor is ‘outside of his lane’: Jonathan Turley” [Fox News, 3/18/23]

LEGAL EXPERTS AND LAWYERS HAVE CRITICIZED JONATHAN TURLEY’S COMMENTS AND ACCUSED HIM OF BEING A “POSTER CHILD FOR TRUMP APOLOGISTS”

HEADLINE: ““Disgrace To My Profession”: Legal Experts Blast Prof. Jonathan Turley For Excusing Away Trump Call” [Salon, 8/25/23]

HEADLINE: “What Happened To Jonathan Turley, Really?” [Slate, 11/18/22]

Legal Analyst Elie Mystal Called Jonathan Turley A “Poster Child For Trump Apologists With Legal Credentials.” “George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, best known for going on TV and arguing that Trump cannot be held accountable for whatever crimes were most recently revealed, is essentially the poster child for Trump apologists with legal credentials. He won’t go all in with the Trumpists, the way, say, Sidney Powell or Alan Dershowitz have. Instead, his role is defending or sanitizing the wildly illegal or unprecedented behavior of Trumpworld.” [Balls and Strikes, 11/20/22]