Letitia James may be winning lawfare but losing the war

by Jonathan Turley, Opinion Contributor - 09/28/24 10:30 AM ET1/2

(Memories of some powerful men and Conservative causes James tried or did take down)

In an age of lawfare, New York Attorney General Letitia James hasalways embraced the total war option. Her very appeal has been her willingness to use any means against political opponents.

James first ran for her office by pledging to bag Donald Trump on something, anything. She did not specify the violation, only thatshe would deliver the ultimate trophy kill for Democratic voters. James follows the view of what PrussianGeneral Carl von Clausewitz said about war, law is merely politics “by other means.”

Yet, thepolitical successof James in weaponizing her office has been instark contrastwith her legal setbacks in courts.

James earlier sought to use her office to disband the National Rifle Association, the most powerful gun rights organization in the country, due to self-dealing and corruption of executives. James notably did not target liberal groups accused of similar violations.The ridiculous effort to disband the NRA collapsed in court.

It did not matter. James knew that suchefforts were performativeand that New York voters did not care if such attacks failed. She will continue to win the lawfare battles, even if she loses the war.

This week, two of James’s best-known campaigns were struggling in court.

James is best known for her fraud case against Trump, in which she secured a $464 million fine and a ban on Trump from the New York real estate business for three years. That penalty, which has now risen to $489 million with interest,was in a case where no one had lost a dime due to the alleged inaccurate property valuations in bank loans securedby the Trump organization. Not only where the banks fully paid on the loans and made considerable profits, but they wanted to make additional loans to the Trump organization.

In appellate arguments this week, James’s office facedopenly skeptical justiceswho raised the very arguments that some of us have made for years aboutthe ludicrous fine imposed by Judge Arthur Engoron.

Justice David Friedman noted that this law “is supposed to protect the market and the consumers — I don’t see it here.”

His colleague Justice Peter Moulton told her office “The immense penalty in this case is troubling” and added, “How do you tether the amount that was assessed by [Engoron] to the harm that was caused herewhere the parties left these transactions happy?”

The answer, of course, is the case was never about markets. It was about politics. The fact that the banks were “happy” is immaterial.Happiness in New York is a political, not legal calculus. The justices did not rule this week, but an opinion could be issued within a month.

In the same week, Jamesfaced a stinging defeatin another popular cause. James hadtargeted pro-life organizations for spreading supposed “disinformation” in not just opposing the use of mifepristone (the abortion pill used in the majority of abortions in the United States), but in advocating the use of reversal procedures if mothers change their minds before taking the second drug in the treatment regimen.

Critics charge that, while there are some studies showing successful reversal cases, the treatment remains unproven and unapproved. It remains an intense debate.

James, however, wanted to end the debate.She targeted pregnancy centersand was then sued by two pro-life ministries, Summit Life Outreach Center and the Evergreen Association.

Judge John Sinatra Jr. blocked James‘s crackdown as a denial of free speech. Notably, these centers were not profiting by sharing this information or advocating such reversal treatment.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/4904634-attorney-general-letitia-james-lawfare/

>>22920048

2/2

James merely declared that people advocating such reversal treatments are engaged in “spreading dangerous misinformation by advertising…without any medical and scientific proof.”

It is a familiar rationale on the leftand discussed in my latest book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.” It is the same rationale thatled to the banning and blacklisting of experts during the pandemicfor views that have now been vindicated on the efficacy of masks and other issues. They were silenced by those who declared their viewpoints as dangerously unproven or unapproved, but who were themselves wrong.

James claimed a right to crack down on views that she deemed unproven, even by those who were seeking only to disseminate information rather than sell products.

It did not seem to matter to her that, in the 2018 in NIFLA v. Becerra, the Supreme Court rejected the effort by California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (now the secretary of Health and Human Services) to require crisis pregnancy centers to refer abortions. The court refused to create an exception for requiring speech from licensed professionals.

After the effort failed to force doctors to disseminate pro-abortion information in California,James sought to prevent others from disseminating pro-life information in New York. The court ruled that, under theFirst Amendment, government officials cannot simply declare certain views as “disinformation” as a pretext to censor disfavored speech.

If there are harmful or fraudulent products or practices, the government has ample powers to target businesses and professionals involved with them.James, however, was seeking to silence those who advocate for a treatmentthat is unproven but not unlawful.

James’s legacynow includes an effortto disband a civil rights organization, deny free speech and secure confiscatory fines against her political opponents. Yet she is lionized by the media and politicians in an election that is billed as “saving democracy.”

In the end, James knows her audience, and it is not appellate judges. It does not matter to her if she is found to be violating the Constitution or abusing opponents.She has converted the New York legal system into a series of thrill-kills.

For some judges, however, the thrill may be gone.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/4904634-attorney-general-letitia-james-lawfare/

I have a feeling that many staff in the NYAG office will be whistleblowing on Letitia. She's a completely hateful woman, think what she did to her own staff. Think about all the laws they broke on her orders. How many were terminated for not breaking the law?

>>22920089

YES definitely, anything they can do to help America, they will jump on board. KEK

U.S. Aid Cuts Leave Ukraine's Media Defenseless Against Kremlin Lies | Opinion Apr 14, 2025 at 7:00 AM EDT By Muhammad Tahir 1/3

(Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center and (CIA agent). Propaganda taught the Ukrainian to develop the most vocal, hateful against Russia and their enemies are begging for money for the US to refund them.)

In late 2022, I stood outside a bombed-out TV station in Kyiv. Windows shattered. Walls cratered by Russian shells. Inside, a handful of journalists huddled in the dark—no heat, no power—still reporting, still telling the truth.

That newsroom survived not on ads or subscriptions, but on foreign aid—largely from the United States. Today, that lifeline is vanishing. Quietly. Systematically. And with it, Ukraine's independent media is being pushed to the edge of extinction.

In January, the U.S. abruptly halted 90 percent of its humanitarian and development assistance to Ukraine. (All foreign country’s media were cut off, not just Ukraine) No press release. No justification. Just a freeze—including funding for local media—channeled through USAID and its implementing partners. That silence is costing lives. And it's collapsing Ukraine's information front.

A Press on the Brink

Frontline outlets—Ukraine's last defenseagainst Kremlin disinformation—have been hit the hardest.Three months into the freeze, they're not just struggling—they're sinking. (Great!!!)

TakeVgoru in KhersonandNikVesti in Mykolaiv, a city in southern Ukraine.Both are days away from going dark. And when they do, silence won't follow. Russia's voice will.Because the Kremlin is already filling the void.

On April 4, the Russian Ministry of Defense published a Telegram post claiming a "high-precision strike" in Kryviy Rih had killed 85 Ukrainian servicemen and Western instructors. It went out to 630,000 followers and was instantly echoed by Russian state outlets and pro-Kremlin Telegram channels—often the only "news" available in occupied Ukrainian territories.

But the truth was very different. (No it actually wasn’t)

The missile actually struck a children's playground and family restaurant in President Volodymyr Zelensky's hometown. Twenty civilians died—nine of them children. Local journalists were on the scene within minutes, documenting the chaos. Their videos, like this one, told the real story—a war crime, not a military strike.

"Imagine if there were no local media," said Oleh Dereniuha, co-founder of NikVesti. "This was a normal neighborhood. No soldiers. No targets. Without local coverage, people in the U.S. and beyond would be left asking—do we believe Kyiv or Moscow?" (Even the city admitted there was military there, for a celebration set up for the city of Ukraine military)

Russia's Digital Propaganda Machine

That strike is just one example of Russia's growing disinformation war. With deep pockets, Moscow is building fake Ukrainian media channels across social platforms.One such channel, Truthful Mykolaiv, pretends to be local but pushes Kremlin narratives. "The tone is measured, the language familiar," said Dereniuha. "But the message is always the same: trust Moscow, doubt Kyiv."

That's why NikVesti—founded in 2009and with 4.5 million visits in 2024, mostly from Odesa, Kherson, and Mykolaiv—is vital. Butit's on life support. "We're burning through our final reserves," Dereniuha said. "If funding doesn't return, we won't make it past April."

Another local publication in Kherson, Vgoru, faces the same fate. It's one of just three independent outlets still standing in a region largely under Russian occupation. (He’s pointing out all the propaganda outlets funded by USAID)

"We've stopped freelance work, slashed salaries, and suspended major projects," said editor Ilona Korotitsyna. "No more documentaries. No more investigations. Just survival."

https://www.newsweek.com/us-aid-cuts-leave-ukraines-media-defenseless-against-kremlin-lies-opinion-2058177

>>22920340

2/3

Journalism Is Dying in Ukraine

Since Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022, Ukraine has lost 329 media outlets—destroyed by bombs or starved by economics. Fifty-seven journalists have been killed. Ad revenue is gone. Newsrooms are rubble. And grant funding is their only hope.

"In Ukraine, nine out of 10 media outlets rely on grants—primarily from USAID," said Jeanne Cavelier, head of the Eastern Europe and Central Asia desk at Reporters Without Borders.

"Thirty-five percent receive more than three-quarters of their funding from American sources. Half depend on U.S. support for at least half their budget. Without renewed aid in the next six months, most will be forced to shut down."

The West Is Ceding the Narrative

As Ukrainian newsrooms fade, Moscow steps in. The Kremlin spends billions on RT, Sputnik, and legions of Telegram influencers to shape public opinion. Every day, they blame Kyiv for the war and cast Western support as futile.Now, by pulling media funding, the West is helping them.

This isn't just a policy mistake—it's an information surrender. We're handing Russia the narrative while standing on the sidelines.

It's a devastating blow to Western credibility. We're telling Ukrainians risking their lives for democracy that our support can disappear with a budget line. We're also abandoning the core pillars of democratic resilience—truth, accountability, and a free press—and dismantling a media ecosystem we helped build.

And make no mistake—when these outlets vanish, they won't bounce back. Journalists will leave the profession. Local audiences will drift toward Russian-dominated platforms. Disinformation will fill every gap.

The Clock Is Ticking

I spent 18 years with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, (CIA) a U.S.-funded outlet with a once-robust Ukrainian service—until it too was gutted by budget cuts under President Donald Trump. I've reported from war zones and autocracies. I've seen truth suppressed in real time. But nothing is more demoralizing than watching your allies walk away from the fight.

It's not too late to act.

The U.S. can restore funding. It can stabilize Ukraine's crumbling media landscape. It can recognize that journalism in wartime isn't optional—it's armor. Truth is a shield. It protects civilians as surely as helmets or flak jackets.

Because when truth falls silent, only lies remain.

We must not abandon Ukraine's media. We must not abandon the truth.Not now. Not ever.

Muhammad Tahiris a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center and a former executive at Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. He has spent over two decades reporting on democratic movements, information warfare, and authoritarian regimes.

https://www.newsweek.com/us-aid-cuts-leave-ukraines-media-defenseless-against-kremlin-lies-opinion-2058177

>>22920358

Author of the Ukraine article BEGGING FOR MONEY FROM USAID.Why doesn't the Atlantic Council fund the Ukraine Media Propaganda?

3/3

Muhammad Tahir

• Nonresident Senior Fellow

Eurasia Center

Contact

Issues

Civil Society Media Resilience & Society

Regions

Central Asia Europe & Eurasia

Languages

English Pashto Persian Turkish Urdu Uzbek

AboutRelated Content

Muhammad Tahir is a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center. Tahir is an accomplished journalist and media executive focusing onCentral Asia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Turkey. (So he’s never been to Ukraine, what is he doing there?) After 20 years in the media sector, he recently entered the humanitarian sector as the Senior Manager for Media and Public Relations at Corus International.

From 2016 to 2022, Tahir was RFE/RL’s Central and South Asia liaison in Washington DC, responsible for elevating the organization’s regional portfolio. Among other initiatives at RFE/RL, he launched and produced the acclaimed weekly Majlis and AfPak File podcasts, respectively focusing on Central Asia and Afghanistan/Pakistan.

Prior to that, from 2012 to 2016, he was RFE/RL’s broadcast news director for the Turkmen Service out of the organization’s headquarters in the Czech Republic. There, he led the transformation of his unit from radio to a multimedia channel leading to an unprecedented 40,000% growth in online audience and established a network of correspondents throughout Central Asia.

From 2010 to 2011, Tahir was RFE/RL’s foreign affairs correspondent in Washington DC, covering Central and South Asia, and from 2003 to 2010, he was a broadcast journalist and Central Asia editor in the organization’s head office in Europe.In 2008 he was appointed as an Osher Fellow at the Hoover Institution, researching the correlation between Central Asia’s Soviet legacy and growing authoritarian tendencies in the region.

Tahir’s journalism career started in 1999 as a foreign affairs correspondent in Istanbul, with subsequent appointments as bureau chief in Islamabad and later in Kabul; he covered major events, including the rise and the fall of the first Taliban regime in Afghanistan and the invasion of the country by coalition forces.

He is fluent in all local languages in Central and South Asia, has decades of first-hand experience covering the region in the regional and global context and is a sought-after speaker in his areas of expertise.

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/expert/muhammad-tahir/

© 2025 Atlantic Council

A Four-(and More) Wheeled Reason Russian Can't Win in Ukraine | Opinion

Apr 14, 2025 David Axe Reporter and filmmaker1/2

More Newsweek Propaganda(This whole story is completely made up, even Western news don’t report these fairy tales.)

As the war in Ukraine grinds through its fourth year,Russian military might is a shadow of what it was on the eve of the invasion. (KEK) Its mechanized forces, central to its strategies for victory, are bleeding out and now include museum-grade military trucks, civilian cars, vans, all-terrain vehicles and motorcycles …and even donkeys. This is not a force poised for victory.

To win, by any rational definition of the term "win," Russia must capture more of Ukraine than the 20 percent of the country it currently occupies. At the very least, Russia must consolidate control over the biggest oblasts in eastern Ukraine: Donetsk and Luhansk. It's still tens of miles away from achieving even this modest aim.

Advancing those tens of miles is increasingly difficult for the roughly half-million-strong Russian and North Korean force in Ukraine—and only vanishingly likely as Russia's wider war on Ukraine grinds into its 38th month.

And that's for one main reason. The kinds of forces the Russian military traditionally depends on for swift marches deep into enemy territory are becoming an endangered species on the mine-seeded, artillery-pocked, drone-patrolled front line—700 miles or more from north to south—of the terrifically bloody wider war. (He’s actually telling the story of the Ukrainians and saying its Russians.)

Russia's regiments and brigades of tanks, tracked fighting vehicles, mobile howitzers, and lots and lots of supply trucks simply don't exist anymore. For generations of Russian planners, "the aim was to penetrate [the] enemy front line and follow this with a powerful mechanized second echelon that exploited the initial breakthrough," Dutch army officer Randy Noorman wrote for West Point's Modern War Institute.

Those plans may now be completely trampled by the wayside, now. (Why are Ukrainians Generals asking for 30,000 soldiers per month, and they can’t get any because they are too young and have left the country?)

Advancing many miles per day into the lightly defended rear of the enemy's shattered front-line forces requires protected mobility. But that protected mobility may have been rendered largely obsolete by weapons old and new: artillery and mines that haven't changed very much in 100 years, and explosive drones that are being deployed on a scale that practically no one imagined just a few years ago.

Mines, artillery, and especially drones are now so dense along the front line that tanks and other armored vehicles "simply don't reach the line for launching an attack," according to one Russian military blogger. They get blown up miles from enemy positions.

While it's a problem that afflicts both sides, it vexes the Russians more than it does the Ukrainians, because the Russians cannot "win" without gaining ground. By contrast, merely containing Russian and allied forces represents a significant victory for the Ukrainians. Hold the Russians at their current positions and Ukraine's government, economy, and culture—and potential for future military action—would endure.

https://www.newsweek.com/four-more-wheeled-reason-russian-cant-win-ukraine-opinion-2058805

(Something fishy about that tanks shown by the Ukrainians, being so rusted when Ukraine only got to Kursk in mid 2024, and if they destroyed the tank such a short while ago, why does it look like it years old?)

>>22920519

2/2

While it's true the Russians made meaningful gains in eastern Ukraine early last year during an abrupt—and temporary—freezing of U.S. aid that deprived Ukrainian forces of urgently needed ammunition, a year later, the Ukrainians have replenished their ammo stocks, secured new European supply lines and even broken ground for new munitions factories in Ukraine (though there is a recent report that one of them has been destroyed).

Even as American intransigence deepens under President Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress, Ukraine is in a much better position to resist Russian attacks today than it was in early 2024. Every Russian attack meets a avalanche of firepower.

The numbers tell the story. As the war lurched into its fourth year, Russian losses of tanks, fighting vehicles and other heavy equipment had exceeded 20,000, according to the analysts at the Oryx intelligence collective, which confirms each loss with imagery from the front line. That's more vehicles than the British military has in its entire inventory.

New production adds just a few hundred fresh vehicles a month. The Russians have recovered thousands of Cold War vehicles from rust-stained storage yards; but even these once-plentiful stocks are running low. In 2022, Russia had 2,700 old MT-LB armored tractors in storage. By now, it's already sent most of them to Ukraine—and written off nearly 1,300 of them, according to Oryx.

As of last year, Russia intended "to initiate further offensive operations to make significant—if slow—gains on the battlefield," according to Jack Watling and Nick Reynolds, analysts with the Royal United Services Institute in London. These gains were "intended to be used as leverage against Kyiv to force capitulation on Russian terms."

That didn't happen. And it's even less likely to happen this year or next as Russian losses deepen.

David Axe is a reporter and filmmaker in South Carolina and the author of the graphic novel WAR IS BORING.

https://www.newsweek.com/four-more-wheeled-reason-russian-cant-win-ukraine-opinion-2058805

That tank looks like we saw on the roads in Ukraine early on, all kinds of tanks and gears was blown up in Ukraine territory. Remember how many tanks Russians took out in mid summer the year before last?

Look closely at that tank, is there a guy standing up on the inside?