Reposted by John Helling
These ads go in the same category as brazen, easily disproven lies after ICE killings. It’s not about persuasion. It’s a display of power.
They could have passed them off as PAC-funded. They added “paid for by the U.S. government” because they want us to know they can break the law with impunity.
![```
other matter attending a grand jury proceeding.” C.P.L. § 190.25(4)(a); Penal Law § 215.70. The reasons are several and include “protection of an innocent accused from unfounded accusations if in fact no indictment is returned.” Troy Pub. Co. v. Dwyer, 110 A.D.2d 327, 329 (3d Dep’t 1985).
“So strong are the principles of grand jury secrecy and the policies underlying it that unauthorized disclosure of grand jury evidence is a felony in New York.” Matter of James, 130 A.D.3d at 1036; see also Trump v. Vance, 140 S. Ct. 2412, 2427 (2020) (“But those who make unauthorized disclosures regarding a grand jury subpoena do so at their peril.” (citing Penal Law § 215.70)). Violations of grand jury secrecy rules can warrant dismissal of an indictment. See C.P.L. §§ 210.20(1)(c), 210.35(5), 210.40. One relevant factor is whether the “disclosure” was “in the form of a stealthy leak designed to gain tactical advantage over an adversary or to manipulate the press or public opinion.” People v. Sergio, 16 Misc. 3d 1127[A], 1127A (Sup. Ct, Kings Cnty. 2007).
B. Discussion
Public reporting, including the Pomerantz Inside Account, strongly suggests that grand jury information was leaked to the public during the investigation of President Trump. For example:
• In May 2021, the Washington Post and Associated Press reported that DANY had convened a special grand jury to investigate President Trump. The Associated Press story was attributed to a “person familiar with the matter [who] was not authorized to speak publicly and did so on condition of anonymity.”
• On November 24, 2021, the New York Times ran an article, “Trump Investigation Enters Crucial Phase as Prosecutor’s Term Nears End.” The article referenced grand jury subpoenas for records, disputes over document production and sealed litigation on that topic, and a recent Deutsche Bank interview. The Times reported that the developments, as described by “people with knowledge of the matter,” showed that the Manhattan prosecutors had shifted away from investigating
```](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:vqtakzi5bityrtbjj4cfan4l/bafkreiexo4hv7ux2zrqvt6nrhi34dmkbraegkx5fhubo6oxga7afzes72y)
