Posts

“Hush Money” Trial Judge May Force Trump to Miss His Son’s Graduation

/7 Comments/in , /by

New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan is yet to decide whether former President Donald Trump can attend his son Barron Trump’s upcoming high school graduation. Merchan has refrained from ruling on Trump’s request to be excused from trial proceedings scheduled for that day.

The commencement of the criminal trial, orchestrated by Democrat Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, unfolded on Monday. Bragg has charged Trump with 34 felonies, alleging falsification of business records in connection to payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. Notably, Trump is not facing accusations related to concealing a sex scandal. Trump vehemently denies all allegations against him, but if found guilty, he could potentially face incarceration.

While the jury selection process has commenced in the criminal trial, Trump’s legal team has proactively sought permission for him to forego trial proceedings on May 17, citing his son Barron’s impending high school graduation in Florida, the former president’s home state. Although Merchan has acknowledged the request, he has deferred making a definitive decision.

Merchan remarked, “It really depends on if we are on time and where we are in the trial,” indicating the possibility that Trump may have to forego attending his youngest son’s significant milestone due to the trial.

Observers have characterized the situation as another instance of perceived political targeting against Trump. Jason Miller, an advisor to Trump, lambasted the trial, labeling it a “disgusting” episode of political persecution. Trump himself, addressing reporters prior to entering the New York courtroom on Monday, decried the trial as a form of “political prosecution” and an unprecedented assault on the nation.

“This case was brought as political persecution,” Trump asserted, condemning it as an unwarranted attack on the country. He further criticized the involvement of what he described as an “incompetent man” in the proceedings, insinuating nefarious motives behind the trial.

Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) echoed similar sentiments, characterizing the trial as a form of “election interference.”

Former Trump Attorney Tells CNN: Irish Woman Critical of Trump Not Deemed ‘Dangerous Juror’

/1 Comment/in , /by

Criminal defense attorney Bill Brennan, who previously represented former President Donald Trump, told CNN Monday that an Irish woman who went off about her dislike of Trump was not a “dangerous juror.”

Jury screening for Trump’s hush money trial began Monday as concerns emerge about jurors with bias against the presumptive 2024 Republican nominee. Brennan told CNN’s Jake Tapper that an outspoken woman who made her “hate” for Trump undoubtedly was less “dangerous” to the jury pool than someone less vocal.

“We had a lady come up as a prospective juror. I’ve been picking juries for about 35 years. Uh, she looked good to me, a lady in her mid-40s, uh, of Irish extraction. She spoke with a brogue, she worked in an Irish pub and on our questionnaire, questions 29 and 30 said, ‘Do you have any former — do you have any strong feelings about the former president and if so, would they affect your ability to be fair?’” Brennan said.

“And she checked them, so I said, ‘Well, ma’am, would they be positive or negative feelings?’ And she says, ‘Oh, I despise that man,’ he continued, imitating the woman’s Irish accent. “And I said, I guess it was late in the day, Jake, and I said, ‘Oh, come on, don’t sugarcoat things for me. Speak your mind.’ She says, ‘Oh, Speak me mind? I hate him!’”

Brennan was recalling a potential juror from the time he defended Trump during a tax fraud case against the Trump Organization in 2022. New York Justice Juan Merchan, the same judge presiding over the hush money case, fined the Trump Organization $1.6 million in Jan. 2023, according to The Associated Press (AP). (Read more from “Former Trump Attorney Tells CNN: Irish Woman Critical of Trump Not Deemed ‘Dangerous Juror'” HERE)

Supreme Court to Deliberate on Case with Potential to Impact Hundreds of Jan. 6 Prosecutions

/4 Comments/in , /by

The upcoming Supreme Court hearing of Fischer v. United States has drawn significant attention due to its potential ramifications for both the prosecution of Jan. 6 defendants and the ongoing legal challenges involving former President Donald Trump. At the heart of the case lies the interpretation of an obstruction statute, Section 1512(c)(2), which carries penalties of up to 20 years in prison for those found guilty of corruptly obstructing official proceedings.

Joseph Fischer, a defendant in the Jan. 6 Capitol breach, argues that his prosecution under this statute represents an unprecedented expansion of its scope. Fischer’s legal team contends that Section 1512(c)(2) was originally intended to target evidence tampering in corporate fraud cases, rather than obstruction of Congress’ certification of electoral results.

Fischer’s case underscores broader concerns about the application of the statute to Jan. 6 defendants, many of whom face felony charges under its provisions. Should the Supreme Court rule in Fischer’s favor, it could potentially affect the outcomes of numerous cases and even prompt early releases for some defendants.

The government, however, maintains that the statute’s language encompasses all forms of corrupt obstruction of official proceedings, without limitation to evidence tampering. This interpretation was upheld by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision, which deemed the meaning of the statute unambiguous.

Nevertheless, dissenting voices, including Judge Gregory Katsas, have criticized the government’s interpretation as overly broad and potentially unconstitutional. They argue that such a reading could criminalize constitutionally protected activities such as advocacy and protest.

The Fischer case also intersects with the legal challenges facing former President Trump. Two of the charges in Trump’s election interference case hinge on the same obstruction statute under review. Critics contend that a correct interpretation of the statute could undermine a key aspect of the indictment against Trump.

However, Special Counsel Jack Smith has defended the charges, asserting that they would remain valid irrespective of the Supreme Court’s decision on Section 1512(c)(2). Smith argues that the use of falsehoods or creation of false documents constitutes evidence impairment, thus satisfying the statute’s requirements.

As the Supreme Court prepares to hear oral arguments in April, the outcome of Fischer v. United States holds significant implications for the legal landscape surrounding Jan. 6 prosecutions

Trump, Johnson Link Arms in a Move to Require Proof of Citizenship to Vote

/3 Comments/in , /by

House Speaker Mike Johnson and former President Donald Trump on Friday projected unity and vowed to push election integrity legislation requiring every voter to prove they are a U.S. citizen.

Speaking at a joint press conference at Mr. Trump’s Mar-A-Lago estate, they said something must be done to ensure the nation’s elections are on the up-and-up and to stop illegal immigrants from casting ballots that could swing elections.

“We cannot wait for widespread fraud to occur,” Mr. Johnson said.

The Lousiana Republican said a vote on the measure would show voters where elected leaders stand on the issue.

“You will see Republicans stand for election integrity,” he said. “Democrats are going to have to go on the record.” (Read more from “Trump, Johnson Link Arms in a Move to Require Proof of Citizenship to Vote” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Black Supporter to Donald Trump at Chick-Fil-a Stop: ‘I Don’t Care What the Media Tells You… We Support You’

/0 Comments/in , /by

Former President Donald Trump was greeted by enthusiastic supporters at a Chick-fil-A in Atlanta, Georgia, while on the campaign trail and ordered 30 milkshakes and chicken for everybody.

Video shows the former president speaking to workers at the location, asking, “Can I have 30 milkshakes and also some chicken? We’re going to take care of the customers.” He then asks if business is good, to which the workers reply, “Yes.”

(Read more from “Black Supporter to Donald Trump at Chick-Fil-a Stop: ‘I Don’t Care What the Media Tells You… We Support You’” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Biden: I’ll Consider Further Unilateral Action on Guns, Can’t Believe Trump Said ‘No One’s Going to Touch Your Guns’ (VIDEO)

/4 Comments/in , /by

During an interview with Univision that took place last Wednesday and aired on Tuesday, President Joe Biden stated that he would consider taking further executive action on guns and criticized 2024 Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump because Trump “famously told the NRA that, don’t worry, no one’s going to touch your guns” if Trump won.

Interviewer Enrique Acevedo asked, “[G]un violence remains the number one cause of death for children in America. Latinos have made it a top priority across the country, especially in places like El Paso and Uvalde in Texas. Your administration called on Congress to pass common-sense gun laws, but that’s unlikely to happen in the next few months. If you’re re-elected, would you consider taking further executive action on this issue?”

(Read more from “Biden: I’ll Consider Further Unilateral Action on Guns, Can’t Believe Trump Said ‘No One’s Going to Touch Your Guns’ (VIDEO)” HERE)

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

Biden’s ‘You Ain’t Black’ Comment Bites Him as President Mocked for Leaking Minority Voters

/0 Comments/in , /by

During the 2020 presidential campaign, Biden told black voters that they “ain’t black” if they had trouble deciding who to vote for between him and then-President Donald Trump. Though he later apologized for the comments, Republicans have continued to seize on them, with the latest round coming from Scott.

“Biden: ‘If you have a problem figuring out whether you are for me or Trump, then you ain’t Black,’” Scott quoted Biden as saying. “In 2024, 40% of African American men aren’t Black enough for Joe Biden. Why? It’s simple. We were better off under Donald J. Trump.”

Last week, Scott launched a talk show with fellow black Republicans Reps. Burgess Owens (R-UT), Byron Donalds (R-FL), John James (R-MI), and Wesley Hunt (R-TX). Scott, Owens, James, and Hunt mocked Biden’s “you ain’t black” comments in their show on Monday, a clip of which was shared on X. (Read more from “Biden’s ‘You Ain’t Black’ Comment Bites Him as President Mocked for Leaking Minority Voters” HERE)

Jack Smith Tells Supreme Court to Keep Trump Charges

/0 Comments/in , /by

Special counsel Jack Smith called on the Supreme Court on Monday to reject a bid by Donald Trump to invoke presidential immunity to avoid a trial over an alleged effort to subvert the 2020 election results, saying the “Framers” never intended such privileges for former presidents.

The Supreme Court is poised to weigh Trump’s arguments on April 25 that he should not be prosecuted for acts taken while he was still president, namely Smith’s four-count indictment alleging an effort to upend President Joe Biden‘s 2020 election victory. Smith told the justices in a court filing that even if they find that former presidents enjoy some form of immunity, at least some of Trump’s actions were “private conduct” and should be prosecuted.

“The Framers never endorsed criminal immunity for a former President, and all Presidents from the Founding to the modern era have known that after leaving office they faced potential criminal liability for official acts,” Smith told the high court in a 66-page filing.

Smith took aim at several of Trump’s claims that have been made in an effort to convince the court that he should be immune from charges in the case. He pointed out that Trump “suggests that unless a criminal statute expressly names the President, the statute does not apply.”

“That radical suggestion, which would free the President from virtually all criminal law — even crimes such as bribery, murder, treason, and sedition — is unfounded,” the filing said, adding that the text of “nearly all” federal criminal laws covers all individuals, including the president. (Read more from “Jack Smith Tells Supreme Court to Keep Trump Charges” HERE)

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

Pro-Life Organizations Have Mixed Reactions to Donald Trump’s Abortion Position (VIDEO)

/0 Comments/in , /by

Former President Donald Trump says abortion is an issue that should be left to individual states — a position accepted by some leading pro-life organizations and not others.

Trump officially announced his position on abortion Monday, ending months-long speculation about how he would handle the issue should he be elected in November. In a video posted to Truth Social, Trump said the issue of abortion is about “the will of the people” and should be left up to states to decide. The 45th president touted his role in nominating the Supreme Court justices who ultimately overturned Roe v. Wade in their Dobbs decision — ending 50 years of an invented constitutional right to abortion and sending the issue back to individual states and their elected representatives.

“My view is now that we have abortion where everybody wanted it from a legal standpoint, the states will determine by vote or legislation, or perhaps both, and whatever they decide, must be the law of the land,” Trump said.

“This is all about the will of the people. You must follow your heart or in many cases, your religion or your faith. Do what’s right for your family, and do what’s right for yourself,” he continued. “Do what’s right for your children. Do what’s right for our country, and vote — so important to vote. At the end of the day, it’s all about the will of the people.”

Trump also noted that while the issue of abortion is often a deep moral choice for many voters one way or another, Republicans must “also win elections to restore the culture.” Democrats, as well as President Joe Biden’s campaign, have been heavily banking on driving voter turnout around the topic of abortion, using the issue to paint Republicans as “extreme” and a threat to women.

(Read more from “Pro-Life Organizations Have Mixed Reactions to Donald Trump’s Abortion Position” HERE)

Trump Prosecutors Release Jury Screening Questions Ahead of Landmark Trial

/0 Comments/in , /by

A New York Court hearing former President Donald Trump’s upcoming hush money trial released questions for prospective jurors Monday.

The questions delve into various aspects of the jurors’ lives, notably their affiliations with groups either in support of or opposition to groups such as the QAnon movement, Proud Boys, Oathkeepers, Three Percenters, Boogaloo Boys, and Antifa are highlighted. Furthermore, the court asked about their views on a former president facing criminal charges in state court and their opinions regarding Trump’s treatment in the criminal case.

The questions included in the questionnaire included media consumption habits and social media preferences.

(Read more from “Trump Prosecutors Release Jury Screening Questions Ahead of Landmark Trial” HERE)