‘Trial By Ambush’: Former Federal Prosecutors Say Alvin Bragg’s Strategy Is Unlike Anything They’ve Seen Before thumbnail

‘Trial By Ambush’: Former Federal Prosecutors Say Alvin Bragg’s Strategy Is Unlike Anything They’ve Seen Before

/in , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

When defendants go on trial, the allegations against them are generally clear. Not so with former President Donald Trump and his “hush money” case.

Prosecutors in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office offered new transparency not only to the public, but seemingly also Trump’s defense attorneys on Tuesday when, one year after indicting the former president, they finally pulled back the curtain to reveal the motivating crime in their case: a violation of state election law. Former federal prosecutors told the Daily Caller News Foundation Bragg’s lack of clarity is unfair to the defense, who can’t prepare to argue against a charge they don’t know, and unlike what they’ve seen before.

“I don’t recall ever having a trial where the defense didn’t know what the government was trying to prove,” former federal prosecutor Jonathan Fahey told the DCNF, likening Bragg’s approach to a “trial by ambush.”

Bragg’s indictment last April charged Trump with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records allegedly related to a $130,000 paid to keep porn star Stormy Daniels from telling her story of an alleged affair ahead of the election. To charge the eight-year old misdemeanor offenses as a felony, he argued it was done to commit or conceal another crime — presumably, a federal campaign-finance violation. But he never specified.

That is, until Tuesday, when it came out after defense attorneys objected to prosecutor Joshua Steinglass’ line of questioning that they were claiming Trump violated New York Election Law § 17-152. The statute makes it a misdemeanor for any two or more people to “conspire” to influence an election using “unlawful means.”

During opening statements Monday, Matthew Colangelo, senior counsel for the district attorney and a former top official in the Biden Department of Justice, argued that the records Trump allegedly falsified in relation to Daniels’ payment are part of a broader “conspiracy” to influence the 2016 election involving Trump, his former attorney Michael Cohen and former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker.

Prosecutors are seeking to demonstrate that conspiracy — which they clarified is rooted in the election statute, though it is not named in the indictment — through witness testimony.

Former federal prosecutor Andrew Cherkasky said the theory put forward by Bragg under the statute is “bizarre.”

“The misdemeanor statute of limitations is expired on this offense, just as it is expired on the underlying offense, raising a significant legal question about the propriety of this approach,” he told the DCNF.

“One of the biggest issues in this case is that the prosecution has essentially withheld this theory until trial has started,” Cherkasky continued. “The defense has complained about this the entire time, but the judge has refused to require identification of the felony escalator at an earlier stage. This amounts to another form of ‘trial by fire,” which is not how the American criminal justice system is supposed to work.

John Malcolm, vice president for the Heritage Foundation’s Institute for Constitutional Government and former deputy assistant attorney general in the DOJ’s Criminal Division, said there are three things about the revelation that “amaze” him as a former prosecutor.

“First, that Alvin Bragg’s office did not provide advanced notice of the precise allegations in order to enable former President Trump’s legal team to prepare an adequate defense,” he said. “Second, that the statutory code section cited by the lead prosecutor (New York Penal Code Section 17-152) prohibits a conspiracy ‘to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means …,’ but Bragg has still not divulged what those ‘unlawful means’ were.”

“And third, and most shockingly, that penal code section is a misdemeanor, which means that Alvin Bragg is claiming that committing a misdemeanor (making a false business entry) in order to conceal the commission of another misdemeanor (conspiring to promote someone’s candidacy in an unlawful manner) can – like magic – be converted into 34 felony offenses,” he continued.

Fahey told the DCNF that everything about the case “stinks to high heaven.”

“If this was anyone other than Donald Trump, this would be laughed out of court,” he said.

AUTHOR

KATELYNN RICHARDSON

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: Prosecutor Finally Reveals Key Details Of ‘Crime’ Alleged In Alvin Bragg’s Indictment Of Trump

POSTS ON X:

Trump cannot get a fair trial in NYC: Matt Whitaker pic.twitter.com/tkhuoCpOus

— Mornings with Maria (@MorningsMaria) April 16, 2024

“WE LOVE TRUMP!”: President Trump meets with New York City construction workers. pic.twitter.com/iT0i61QWV7

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) April 25, 2024

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Biden Admin Mulling Plan To Give Legal Status To Illegal Alien Spouses: REPORT thumbnail

Biden Admin Mulling Plan To Give Legal Status To Illegal Alien Spouses: REPORT

/in , , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

The Biden administration is reportedly mulling over a plan that would give legal status to hundreds of thousands of migrants living in the country unlawfully and married to American citizens.

Officials within the White House and Department of Homeland Security(DHS) have been discussing how to give new deportation relief or work permits to illegal aliens who have been living for a long time in the United States, and they have honed in on one particular demographic: mixed status families, according to a report from The Wall Street Journal.

These mixed status families typically consist of one illegal alien parent with a spouse and children who are U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents.

The strategy most favored by the administration on how to make this happen is to use an immigration tool known as “parole in place,” according to The Wall Street Journal.

Parole in place is a program that already exists and used on a smaller scale to allow the spouses of military veterans to remain in the country. The program, granted on a case-by-case basis by an immigration officer, generally allows a foreign national who entered the U.S. illegally to stay for a limited period of time.

Granting these illegal alien spouses parole in place would make many of them eligible for work permits and could erase much government red tape in their green card applications, which would clear a pathway to citizenship.

There are well over 10 million illegal aliens estimated to be living in the U.S. currently. Roughly 1 million illegal aliens are married to a U.S. citizen, according to an estimation by FWD.us, an immigration advocacy group. However, not all illegal aliens married to a U.S. citizen would necessarily be eligible. Advocates told The Wall Street Journal that fewer than 700,000 of them would qualify.

Much like young undocumented aliens known as “Dreamers,” Biden administration officials reportedly believe this demographic makes for a sympathetic audience, even during a time when many Americans are growing more hawkish about the southern border.

The Biden White House has been forced to address an uptick in illegal border crossings during its tenure, with over 2 million migrant encounters at the southern and northern borders in fiscal year 2023 and another 1 million in the first five months of fiscal year 2024, according to the latest Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data. The crisis has pushed the issue to the forefront of concerns for voters in 2024.

News of the White House plan has already generated pushback from immigration hardliners.

“Proposals like this show just how lawless the Biden administration really is. The Immigration and Nationality Act very clearly states that people who enter the country illegally are not eligible for employment authorization or permanent resident status,” Matt O’Brien, director of investigations at the Immigration Reform Law Institute, said in a statement to The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“Neither marriage to a US citizen, nor being a parent to a US citizen child, entitles anyone to an exemption from the INA. And any changes to that legal reality would require Congress to pass new statutes,” O’Brien continued, adding that this is “mass amnesty without Congressional authorization.”

The DHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the DCNF.

AUTHOR

JASON HOPKINS

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: Man Arrested In Car Crash That Killed Democratic Staffer Entered US Illegally, ICE Confirms

POST ON X:

🚨People flood the streets of NYC for Trump pic.twitter.com/r59XAlOlA4

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) April 23, 2024

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Military Could Hit Troops With Courts-Martial For Refusing To Use Preferred Pronouns, Experts Say thumbnail

Military Could Hit Troops With Courts-Martial For Refusing To Use Preferred Pronouns, Experts Say

/in , , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

The military could seek to formally punish service members for refusing to use another service member’s preferred pronouns under existing policy, according to military experts.

A 2020 Equal Opportunity law opened the door for commanders to subject someone who refuses to affirm a transgender servicemember’s so-called gender identity to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for charges related to harassment, Capt. Thomas Wheatley, an assistant professor at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. Such a move would likely infringe on a servicemember’s constitutional rights to uphold their conscience, but it might not prevent leaders from employing more subtle ways of disciplining service members.

Military experts told the DCNF Congress should step in before it’s too late.

The military “is right to want to protect the rights and welfare of its transgender service members. But it owes the same protection to those who share a different perspective on the issue, especially when that perspective is a deep-seated expression of personal conscience,” Wheatley told the DCNF.

None of the military’s rules explicitly prohibit so-called “misgendering,” when someone uses pronouns to describe a transgender person which do not correspond to the person’s new gender identity, Wheatley explained. However, existing guidance implies that using pronouns rejected by another person violates Military Equal Opportunity (MEO) regulations against sex-based harassment and discrimination.

The UCMJ enforces those regulations.

Service members could conceivably be court-martialed for “refusing to use another person’s self-identified pronouns, even when their refusal stems from principled religious conviction,” Wheatley told the DCNF. “This law applies to service members at all times and in all locations, even when they’re off duty and in the privacy of their off-post residence.”

The UCMJ also prohibits “conduct unbecoming of an officer” under Article 133 and activity that could be seen to discredit the military institution under Article 134 — the same article the military uses to prosecute child pornographers and other acts of sexual deviance, he explained.

“Is it now ‘unbecoming’ and incompatible with service as a commissioned officer to openly hold sincere religious convictions surrounding the act of creation and the nature of human sex?” Wheatley asked.

Wheatley said his interest in the issue was sparked four years ago, when the Army updated its MEO policy stating “violations of MEO and Harassment Prevention and Response policies may result in disciplinary action under the UCMJ.”

The possibility of levying a criminal trial on a servicemember for perceived harassment if that person “misgendered” another service member troubled Wheatley, he said. The Supreme Court had just ruled on Bostock v. Clayton County in favor of the gay and transgender plaintiffs alleging their employers fired them on the basis of their self-described sexual orientation, or gender identity. Conservative justices warned the case could have far-reaching consequences for organizations operating based on religious belief and free exercise of religion in the workplace.

“I knew, given the cultural gap between the civilian world and the military, the issue would be overlooked as it concerned service members. So, I got to work,” he told the DCNF.

In a peer reviewed article recently published in the Texas Review of Law and Politics, Wheatley argued that, despite the existing EO policy, Articles 133 and 134 of the UCMJ are not strong enough to prosecute troops for spurning another’s preferred pronouns.

Under a legal doctrine that “obligates military courts to avoid interpreting the UCMJ in a way that brings it into conflict with the Constitution if possible, that would normally be the end of the analysis,” he wrote. But, the national security imperatives inbuilt with military service often justify curtailing a servicemember’s constitutional rights — for example, the UCMJ’s Article 134 “indecent language.”

Wheatley countered in the article that the military’s special mission can inform judicial analysis but does not require a separate standard.

“A court that applies a standard lower than strict scrutiny would be placing not just a thumb on the scale in the government’s favor, but an anvil — one which virtually guarantees victory for the government in every case where a service member asserts his or her First Amendment rights,” he wrote. It would be “tough” for the military to prove it had a strong enough mission-related argument to mandate gender-pronoun usage.

Arguments that might be considered, such as preserving harmony within military units and safeguarding transgender troops’ emotional and psychological well-being, are certainly important, he wrote. But the former relies too heavily on the vicissitudes of individual interpretation to survive judicial review, while the latter does not take into account the health of the servicemember seeking to live out their religious convictions.

“Preserving unit cohesion and safeguarding the mental and emotional health of transgender service members, though compelling government interests, do not justify the sweeping prior restraints on speech,” made possible in the Army policy, Wheatley wrote.

Previous case law shows that even in military contexts, the standard for what may be prohibited compelled speech is strong, he found.

Looking at previous cases of public employment law governing speech, where free speech has been more frequently challenged than in military-specific case law, he likewise found no strong case for mandating pronoun use.

“The use of one pronoun over another reflects the speaker’s private views on human sex and gender” and isn’t conditioned on the person’s employment, Wheatley argued.

The Pentagon referred the DCNF to the services, which did not respond to requests for comment by deadline.

This Lieutenant Colonel is in charge of acquisitions for the U.S. Space Force.

Lt. Col. Bree Fram is in charge of developing, designing and acquiring space craft.

“I have people staring at me and basically asking, ‘Are You Real’?” pic.twitter.com/LXJgBkHYnp

— Oli London (@OliLondonTV) April 12, 2024

Wheatley’s research highlights ongoing concerns about the military’s respect for matters of conscience.

Pentagon leaders have pushed diversity and inclusion as an indispensable component of warfighting effectiveness. Opponents say the focus focus on race, gender and sexual identity has distracted the military from more important issues and unfairly privileged minorities. DEI priorities have now overtaken matters of conscience in multiple domains. 

In lawsuits over the slow-rolling of religious waivers to the COVID-19 vaccine, for example, victims argued the services issued blanket denials rather than considering each request individually, as they are legally required to do.

Defense Department documents, including the 2022 Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Strategic Plan, discuss the freedom to “speak candidly” about issues as a “readiness imperative,” ensuring troops feel included as part of a whole.

“The military policy and legal infrastructure clearly exist to wage war on Americans with deeply-held traditional beliefs about man and woman,” William Thibeau, director of the Claremont Institute’s American Military Project, told the DCNF. Wheatley’s article “should be a red flag to policy makers and elected officials to end this tyranny of liberalism before it is formally levied against American Soldiers preferring to live in reality.”

Experts were not aware of any incidents where a branch of the armed services had attempted to use the UCMJ to punish a servicemember for refusing preferred pronouns.

Commanders do have a wide berth to discipline servicemembers in ways that do not involve a criminal trial but can still have serious implications for a servicemember’s career, possibly including separation from the military under less than honorable circumstances, Wheatley said. Such measures resolve more quickly, have a lower burden of proof than “are almost always shielded from public scrutiny.”

Instead of leaving it to chance, Congress could force the military to establish a servicemember’s “unqualified” right to use pronouns consistent with their religious convictions, a one-pager provided by Claremont suggested. The experts advocated stronger measures too, including decriminalizing unspecified MEO violations and to narrow its scope so that it only applies to activities a servicemember performs while on normal duty hours or contributing to an official military mission.

Congress should develop a public record of incidents in the military where religious freedom is seen to come under threat, the document stated.

Claremont suggested the military conduct regular training on the importance of religious freedom throughout the armed forces and study ways to strengthen protections on service members’ religious expression.

Wheatley also said service chiefs could consider demands for a service member to speak in violation of his or her religious convictions as harassment.

AUTHOR

MICAELA BURROW

Investigative reporter, defense.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pentagon Won’t Respond To New Research Casting Doubt On Studies Supporting Military’s DEI Push

Last Straw-Title IX Abolishes Gender!

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Texas Border Operation Captures Half a Million Illegal Immigrants, Thousands of Felons thumbnail

Texas Border Operation Captures Half a Million Illegal Immigrants, Thousands of Felons

/in , , , , , , /by

By Judicial Watch

The Biden administration’s failure to secure the Mexican border forced Texas officials to establish a security initiative that has endured heavy criticism from Democrats and the media despite its success in apprehending hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants—including thousands of criminals—and seizing millions of lethal doses of fentanyl. It is known as Operation Lone Star, and it was launched by Governor Greg Abbott in March 2021 as the illegal immigration crisis gripped his border state. Under the program, the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) and the Texas National Guard pick up the slack for the federal government, which is charged with protecting the famously porous southern border but has failed miserably to do so. Operation Lone Star works to stop the smuggling of drugs, weapons and people into Texas, and interdict transnational criminal activity between ports of entry.

This month the state published an update on the security initiative’s work. Since it was put into place, over 507,200 illegal immigrants have been captured and more than 41,500 criminal arrests have been made with more than 36,900 felony charges filed. Additionally, Texas officials have transported over 100,000 illegal aliens to sanctuary cities throughout the country that openly welcome and protect migrants. New York received the largest chunk—42,000—of relocated migrants caught entering Texas illegally, followed by Chicago (34,400), Denver (18,000), Washington D.C. (12,500), Philadelphia (3,400) and Los Angeles (1,500). “Operation Lone Star continues to fill the dangerous gaps created by the Biden Administration’s refusal to secure the border,” reads the statement announcing the latest figures. “Every individual who is apprehended or arrested and every ounce of drugs seized would have otherwise made their way into communities across Texas and the nation due to President Joe Biden’s open border policies.”

Among the examples offered in the latest update is the arrest of an illegal immigrant from Mexico by the DPS after a brush team working the Rio Grande Valley saw the man get picked up by a human smuggler while crossing the Rio Grande River on a jet ski. After vetting the migrant, Gabriel Gutierrez-Perez, the law enforcement agency found that he was wanted in Florida for sexual assault on a child, sexual battery on a child and child molestation. In another case a DPS trooper busted a smuggling operation during a traffic stop after observing two passengers, illegal immigrants, attempting to conceal themselves in the rear of the vehicle. Two more migrants were in the car’s trunk and the driver was arrested and charged with smuggling of persons. All four were Mexican nationals. During a separate traffic stop a DPS trooper noticed multiple people crammed in the rear of a large sports utility vehicle. It turns out five illegal immigrants were smuggled in the vehicle and the driver and passenger were both charged with smuggling of persons. The passenger was also charged with evading arrest and resisting arrest.

Texas is not the only state to take matters into its own hands in the absence of federal immigration enforcement. A handful of others, such as Arizona, Montana, and North Dakota, have enacted measures to help mitigate the mess caused by the president’s open border policies, though Texas has been the most proactive and its initiative has had the biggest impact. As we delve deeper into the Biden presidency, the situation is only getting worse, leaving local governments on their own to deal with national security threats, elevated crime, and other detrimental impacts of lawlessness along the southern border. In fiscal year 2021 a then record-setting 1.73 million illegal aliens entered the country through Mexico only to be topped the following year with 2.4 million. In fiscal year 2023 a ghastly 2.48 million illegal aliens entered the U.S through Mexico and, unbelievably, 2024 is on track to surpass that. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) records recently published in a congressional report show that the agency recorded 256,094 encounters nationwide in February alone, accounting for the worst February for illegal immigration in decades.

RELATED ARTICLES:

FBI Records Indicate Fauci Agency Funded Gain-of-Function Wuhan Lab Research ‘Would leave no signatures of purposeful human manipulation’

Jailed Felons among Thousands who Scammed COVID Relief Program out of Billions of Dollars

Patronis flips script on Whitehouse, demands any records related to wife and Citizens Insurance

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

MARC MORANO: Biden May Declare ‘Dictatorial U.S. Climate Emergency’ Bypassing U.S. The Constitution thumbnail

MARC MORANO: Biden May Declare ‘Dictatorial U.S. Climate Emergency’ Bypassing U.S. The Constitution

/in , , , , , , /by

By Marc Morano

Morano on Fox talks Biden’s access to ‘COVID-like powers’ if he declares a national ‘Climate Emergency’ – ‘Dictatorial Powers’

Fox Business – The Bottom Line w/ Dagen McDowell & Sean Duffy – Broadcast April 19, 2024

Sean Duffy: The White House told Fox Business that it is now considering declaring a national ‘climate emergency.’ If the President declares a climbing emergency, what impact would that have?

Marc Morano: This is the serious story of the day. NBC News has reported that if Joe Biden declared a national climate emergency, he would have COVID-like powers under that emergency and NBC also compared the climate emergency powers to the 911 emergency powers. The Center for Biological Diversity has estimated Joe Biden would get about 130 wartime-like powers by which to bypass democracy and impose the Green New Deal on America without a single vote of Congress. This is truly a  Halloween story, not a story for Earth Day. This is a truly frightening story, and he might just be desperate enough to declare it.

This is being widely reported in the media. The Biden White House is leaking this out. This might happen, and it is going to give Joe Biden these kind — you want to say the words dictatorial powers. He doesn’t need no stinking democracy to impose the Green New Deal if he does this.

Fox Business – The Bottom Line w/ Dagen McDowell & Sean Duffy – Broadcast April 19, 2024 – White House weighs declaring a national climate emergency: Climate Depot executive editor Marc Morano reacts to President Biden reportedly planning to block millions of acres in Alaska from oil and gas drilling on ‘The Bottom Line.’

Sean Duffy: Here now reaction, ClimateDepot.com, executive editor Marc Morano. Marc, good to see you so. As we talk about Joe Biden taking millions of acres out of exploration in Alaska. …

Marc Morano: They are doing everything possible to make our country more expensive to live in, disrupt supply chains, create inflation, harm economic growth, and impact our national security. In addition to just the obvious oil and gas drilling limits, this affects a copper mine access road that would have helped us directly compete with China, which has record copper production and is now a top-three country in the world with its copper Mining. The Republic of Congo is number four, which China largely dominates. And the Biden administration’s going after the rare Earth mining, oil, gas, at the same time, they’re claiming it’s all for the climate. The climate’s not going to notice one bit, but this is going to hammer Americans. I can’t imagine, other than cheap politics for their environmental base, why they thought this was a good idea six months before the presidential election. …

Dagen McDowell: Do these dumb asses know that an oil derrick here is the same as an oil derrick over there when it comes to well emissions and the climate because? It’s called global warming, not national warming, you deep dongs.

Marc Morano: Well, it’s even worse than that because if we’re outsourcing now to these other nations in the Middle East or Venezuela, the Biden administrations beg them for more oil, and whether it’s the Mining from China, they have lower environmental standards, lower human rights, so it’s actually not only are. We are outsourcing our emissions to virtue signal and say we meet our climate goals. Instead, we’re actually raising global emissions, much higher than they would have been had we done the energy production here in the United States — It takes half a million pounds of materials to make one 1000 pound EV battery. By shutting down oil and gas and shutting down this exploration of copper in Alaska, we just made energy a lot more expensive and made the U.S. much more reliant on China. Donald Trump’s 2000 2012 tweet about climate change benefiting China comes true every single day.

Sean Duffy: The White House told Fox Business that it is now considering declaring a national ‘climate emergency.’ If the President declares a climbing emergency, what impact would that have?

Marc Morano: This is the serious story of the day. NBC News has reported that if Joe Biden declared a national climate emergency, he would have COVID-like powers under that emergency and NBC also compared the climate emergency powers to the 911 emergency powers. The Center for Biological Diversity has estimated Joe Biden would get about 130 wartime-like powers by which to bypass democracy and impose the Green New Deal on America without a single vote of Congress. This is truly a  Halloween story, not a story for Earth Day. This is a truly frightening story, and he might just be desperate enough to declare it.

This is being widely reported in the media. The Biden White House is leaking this out. This might happen, and it is going to give Joe Biden these kind — you want to say the words dictatorial powers. He doesn’t need no stinking democracy to impose the Green New Deal if he does this.

Dagen McDowell: Marc Morano, thank you so much.

End transcript

Background: 

April 17, 2024: Bloomberg News: White House Renews Internal Talks on Invoking ‘Climate Emergency’ Before 2024 Election – ‘Could be used to halt exports, drilling’

2023: Watch: NBC News: ‘Biden urged to declare climate change a national emergency’ – ‘Can unlock special powers for a president in a crisis without needing approval from Congress’ – Similar to COVID & 9/11 Emergency Powers
Hallie Jackson of NBC – Aug. 22, 2023: “So what would that even do? Declaring an emergency can unlock special powers for a president in a crisis without needing approval from Congress, thanks to a law passed nearly 50 years ago. Since then, every President has declared at least one emergency during their time in office. Former President Trump for example, signing one in the pandemic. Former President George W. Bush declaring one after 911.”

2022: What it would mean for Biden to declare a national ‘climate emergency’ – ‘Triggers ability for him to deploy around 130 different powers’ – Center for Biological Diversity

Watch: The Weather Channel demands to know why Biden hasn’t declared a ‘climate emergency’ – Presses White House Climate Advisor Ali Zaidi

If Biden declares a ‘Climate Emergency,’ he would seize 130 new powers – Seeks repeat of COVID-style lockdowns with bypassing of democracy – Morano Responds

2023: LA TIMES EDITORIAL: Biden says he’s ‘practically’ declared a climate emergency. – ‘He should’ do it for real – ‘With GOP-controlled House blocking climate action, the country needs the executive branch to respond more aggressively’

August 27, 2023

Biden Admin Announces Massive Restrictions On Alaskan Oil Reserve And Hampers Key Mining Project In One Fell Swoop – The Department of the Interior (DOI) finalized a plan that will restrict future oil leasing and development on about half of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A), an area in the state’s north approximately the size of Indiana first designated by former President Warren Harding as an emergency source of fuel for the U.S. Navy, according to Bloomberg News. The DOI also moved to all but shoot down the Ambler Access Project, a previously-approved proposal for a mining company to build a 211-mile long road needed to mine copper reserves potentially worth billions of dollars.

Copyright © 2024 Climate Depot, All rights reserved. .

‘That Is Not a Religion’: DeSantis Bars Satanists from Florida School Chaplaincy Program thumbnail

‘That Is Not a Religion’: DeSantis Bars Satanists from Florida School Chaplaincy Program

/in , , , , , , /by

By Family Research Council

The Sunshine State is now welcoming chaplains into public schools, but Satanists need not apply. On Thursday, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) signed a bill into law allowing chaplains to volunteer to offer counseling at public and charter schools. However, the Catholic governor warned that Satanists would not be accepted into the program, as some Christian and conservative groups had feared.

“Now some have said if you do a school chaplain program that somehow you’re going to have Satanists running around in all our schools,” DeSantis said in a press conference. “We’re not playing those games in Florida. That is not a religion. That is not qualifying to be able to participate in this. We’re going to be using common sense when it comes to this, so you don’t have to worry about that.”

The Florida Senate version of the Bill was approved in February and the House version approved early last month. The legislation’s text states, “Each school district or charter school may adopt a policy to authorize volunteer school chaplains to provide supports, services, and programs to students as assigned by the district school board or charter school governing board.” The new law requires volunteer chaplains to pass a background check and would require school administrators to publicize each volunteer chaplain’s religious affiliation and obtain parental consent before a student begins counseling.

“Any opportunity that exists for ministers or chaplains in the public sector must not discriminate based on religious affiliation,” said The Satanic Temple’s (TST) “Director of Ministry” Penemue Grigori in February. “Our ministers look forward to participating in opportunities to do good in the community, including the opportunities created by this bill, right alongside the clergy of other religions.” Ryan Jayne of the Freedom From Religion Foundation’s Action Fund added, “I think there is a 100% chance you see satanic chaplains, and also of course other religious minorities that the majority-Christian population might not be a fan of. The Satanic Temple is a church, whether people like it or not.”

“It is wonderful to have such a strong statement denying the legitimacy of Satanism as a religion or church from Governor DeSantis. But I worry that appeals to common sense will not hold in the most ideological school systems, even in Florida,” Family Research Council’s Senior Fellow for Education Studies Meg Kilgannon commented to The Washington Stand. “Regardless, this is an important step in acknowledging the role that faith plays in our lives and how important it is that the big questions students have about morality, life and death, and God’s plan for their lives are best answered by a parent or priest, pastor, or chaplain.”

DeSantis has criticized Satanism in the past, arguing that it is not a religion. In December, after military veteran and outspoken Christian Michael Cassidy toppled and beheaded a Baphomet idol erected in the Iowa state capitol building by TST, the Florida governor declared, “Satan has no place in our society and should not be recognized as a ‘religion’ by the federal government. … Good prevails over evil — that’s the American spirit.”

On its website, TST responds to the question “Do you worship Satan?” The organization states, “No, nor do we believe in the existence of Satan or the supernatural.” TST adds, “Satan is a symbol of the Eternal Rebel in opposition to arbitrary authority, forever defending personal sovereignty even in the face of insurmountable odds. … Our metaphoric representation is the literary Satan best exemplified by Milton and the Romantic Satanists from Blake to Shelley to Anatole France.”

Now that it has been signed by DeSantis, Florida’s new law goes into effect on July 1.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Largest Christian University in the U.S. Was Fined $37 Million. Coincidence or Targeted Attack?

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Mayorkas Shrugs Over Americans Murdered By Illegal Aliens thumbnail

Mayorkas Shrugs Over Americans Murdered By Illegal Aliens

/in , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

And Senate Democrats killed his impeachment trial.

The ruling party hates you.

By: Tristan Justice, The Federalist, April 19, 2024

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., lambasted Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas in a Senate hearing Thursday, highlighting Americans killed as a direct result of the administration’s open borders policies.

Hawley began by pressing Mayorkas about the case of Jose Ibarra, who was arrested in February and charged with felonies related to the murder of Laken Hope Riley.

“You know what he did?” Hawley asked.

“I know what he’s accused of doing,” the secretary responded.

“And that wasn’t the first crime that he committed in this country, was it?” Hawley questioned.

Mayorkas cited the ongoing criminal investigation related to Ibarra’s alleged crime as his reason not to comment. Hawley went on to ask Mayorkas whether the Homeland Security secretary had read Ibarra’s parole file.

“I do not want to speak to the particulars of the case,” Mayorkas said.

“It looks like to me, you just don’t want to answer the question,” Hawley replied. The Missouri senator brought up the secretary’s answers to the same question asked in a House hearing earlier this week. “You were asked the same question,” Hawley said. “‘Jose Ibarra, why was he paroled?’ You said, ‘I don’t know!’” After recounting the DHS chief’s previous non-answers to lawmakers regarding the Ibarra case, Hawley outlined details from the suspect’s parole file.

“Now we do have the parole file, and now we all know that the reason he was paroled into this country was because lack of detention capacity, which, as you and I both know, is not a valid reason under the statute,” Hawley said. “And now that we know that for sure … you don’t want to talk about it. This is extraordinary. It’s also a pattern with you.”

Hawley accused Mayorkas of lying to Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., and Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., in earlier testimony this month when lawmakers asked why Ibarra was given parole. Mayorkas told Britt there was no “derogatory information” known to federal law enforcement to warrant detention and claimed this week in a House hearing that parole was applied legally. Hawley clarified the circumstances surrounding Ibarra’s case with the Homeland Security secretary Thursday, however, emphasizing that Ibarra was paroled into the country because of lack of detention space, despite having a criminal arrest record.

On Sept. 8, Hawley said, “[Ibarra] was encountered by United States Border Patrol in El Paso, Texas, and was paroled into the United States due to lack of detention capacity. … You and I both know you know this. You knew it when you were talking to Congressman Bishop. You knew it when you were testifying to Sen. Britt.”

Read more.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Democrats Move to Strip Trump of Secret Service Protection thumbnail

Democrats Move to Strip Trump of Secret Service Protection

/in , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

Now the Democrat party of treason wants to kill Trump. Just to be clear, all living former presidents (and their spouses) after receive lifetime Secret Service protection.

Democrat Rep. Bennie Thompson on Friday introduced legislation that would strip Secret Service protection from ‘convicted felons’ sentenced to prison, a bill clearly aimed at President Donald Trump.

How long do good people stand by and do nothing?

Democrats Move to Strip Trump of Secret Service Protection

By Cristina Laila, Gateway Pundit,  Apr. 19, 2024:

Democrats want Trump dead.

House Democrats on Friday moved to strip President Trump of his Secret Service protection if he is convicted.

Democrat Rep. Bennie Thompson introduced a resolution that would terminate Trump’s Secret Service protection. The legislation dubbed the “Denying Infinite Security and Government Resources Allocated toward Convicted and Extremely Dishonorable (DISGRACED) Former Protectees Act would apply to all Secret Service Protectees convicted and sentenced under felony charges.

“The DISGRACED Former Protectees Act would terminate Secret Service protection for individuals who otherwise qualify for it upon sentencing following conviction for a Federal or State felony,” the announcement said.

Critical Medications Every American Can Have On Hand (Including Ivermectin) – And How To Get Them Prescribed

“It is regrettable that it has come to this, but this previously unthought-of scenario could become our reality. Therefore, it is necessary for us to be prepared and update the law so the American people can be assured that protective status does not translate into special treatment —and that those who are sentenced to prison will indeed serve the time required of them,” Democrat Rep. Bennie Thompson said according to the Washington Times.

“Obvious subtext here is that removing USSS would make it easier for someone to kill Trump, which is arguably the goal of Thompson’s bill, H.R. 8081,” Byron York said.

Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson ran the January 6 committee, which mixed elements of show trial and reality series. Focused solely on Trump, of course. Now, Thompson wants to take away Trump’s Secret Service protection if Trump is convicted on any of the 88 felony charges…

— Byron York (@ByronYork) April 19, 2024

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

POSTS ON X:

The swamp is hellbent on keeping Trump out of office. First they sued him. Then they prosecuted him. Then they tried to take him off the ballot. None of it worked & now they’re trying to strip his Secret Service protection. I wonder what they’re rooting for? pic.twitter.com/3fdnM7eXUi

— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) April 20, 2024

Translation:

Biden Democrats are now plotting to get Trump killed.

* * *

Democrats look to strip Secret Service protection from Trump if he’s convicted https://t.co/mjEuIj09zS

— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) April 20, 2024

Elon Musk calls Democrat bill aimed at stripping Trump of Secret Service protection ‘assassination by legislation’

Has this been their plan all along? pic.twitter.com/aZaNJID2CW

— John R Hobbs (@apg_rocks) April 20, 2024

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Planned Parenthood Committed 392,712 Abortions, Received $699.3 Million in Taxpayer Funding in 2023 thumbnail

Planned Parenthood Committed 392,712 Abortions, Received $699.3 Million in Taxpayer Funding in 2023

/in , , , , , , /by

By Family Research Council

Despite seeing fewer patients and reducing bona fide health care services, Planned Parenthood received a record-breaking amount of taxpayer funding last year, according to Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson in the organization’s most recent annual report, which she describes as a “love note” to abortionists.

Planned Parenthood committed 392,712 abortions and received a record-breaking $699.3 million in taxpayer funding in the 2022-2023 fiscal year, according to its most recent annual report released on Wednesday.

The Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s affiliates perpetrated an average of 1,076 abortions every day of the year, as they amassed $1.8 billion in revenue and $2.5 billion in net assets.

Government funding for the abortion giant increased, although Planned Parenthood saw 80,000 fewer patients (2.05 million) last year than in 2022 (2.13 million), according to PPFA’s annual report, titled “Above & Beyond,” which covers the fiscal year which ran from July 2022 to June 2023.

Despite complaining of about half the country enacting pro-life protections for children since the Dobbs decision, the number of abortions Planned Parenthood carried out surged in the last year. Abortions increased by 18,557 over last year — when Planned Parenthood committed 374,155 abortions and received $670.4 million in taxpayer funding, during its 2021-2022 fiscal year — an increase of 9,252 abortions over pre-Dobbs levels.

“This report is our love note” to abortionists, writes Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson.

Pro-life advocates observed Planned Parenthood has inflicted a ponderous number of deaths on innocent Americans last year. “This is a record number of abortions for the organization and represents approximately 40% of the abortions performed in the United States,” said Michael New, a senior associate scholar at Charlotte Lozier Institute, in a statement emailed to The Washington Stand. “This puts abortions performed by Planned Parenthood in the top four leading causes of death in the United States, after heart disease, cancer and COVID-19,” SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser told TWS.

Taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood surged by $28.9 million over last year and $65.9 million since 2021. Taxpayer revenue accounts for one-third (34%) of Planned Parenthood’s revenue. “Planned Parenthood dropped this bombshell report while many Americans are still recovering from Tax Day,” said Dannenfelser. “Bidenomics has turned into abortionomics.”

“Meanwhile, while your average American’s annual income is down,” wrote Hugh Brown, executive vice president of the American Life League, in a statement emailed to TWS. “We can barely afford necessities — and our government’s answer? Funnel $700 million to the elite baby killers.”

The funding increase comes although a majority (53%) of Americans oppose funding abortion in the United States, and larger majorities oppose foreign abortion funding. Although presumptive Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has yet to announce he will protect U.S. taxpayers from funding Planned Parenthood in his second term, he released a Protect Life rule preventing Title X family funding recipients from referring women for abortions in July 2019, his third year in office. Planned Parenthood withdrew from the Title X program rather than curtail or redirect its abortion business.

However, President Joe Biden reversed Trump’s order in October 2021 and subsequently opened multiple funding avenues to the abortion franchise. “The federal government should not be funding the facilitation of abortion in any form or fashion — at home or abroad,” Family Research Council President Tony Perkins has noted.

More Money, Fewer Health Care Services

The increased funding comes despite the fact that the number of genuine health care services Planned Parenthood offers has fallen precipitously. “Between 2022 and 2023, preventive-care visits fell by 31.0%, pap tests fell by 13.5%, cancer screenings fell by 1.4%, and adoption referrals fell by 4.5%. Interestingly, for every adoption referral in 2023, Planned Parenthood performed over 228 abortions,” explained New. “In the past 10 years, the number of abortions performed by Planned Parenthood has increased by 20%. Meanwhile, cancer screenings fell by more than 58%, and prenatal services declined by more than 67%.”

The report highlights PPFA’s commitment to selling women on abortion, say critics. “Once again, pregnant women who walk into Planned Parenthood are sold an abortion 97% of the time, rather than helped to keep their child or make an adoption plan. Meanwhile, they saw 80,000 fewer patients, provided 60,000 fewer pap tests and breast exams, and even gave out less contraception,” Dannenfelser told TWS.

PPFA increased its bottom line by working on the logistics of abortions in pro-life states. Some “90 patient navigators across 41 Planned Parenthood affiliates helped more than 33,000 people get the transportation and travel support, financial assistance, and referrals they needed to get abortion,” its report states.

Planned Parenthood compared its abortion-expansion activities to the miracles wrought by faith in Jesus Christ. “For Planned Parenthood [abortion] staff, this was a year of moving mountains: finding appointments in other states and the resources to get patients there, building as much capacity as possible for abortion appointments, fulfilling increased demand in some places for birth control, and much more,” the organization writes. PPFA claimed it provided financial support to 15,000 people for travel for out-of-state abortion and funding for 50,000 mothers to have an abortion. It did not state how it raised these funds.

Transgender Procedures, Abortion Advocacy, and Abortifacients

The latest update reveals that the abortion business’s concerted drive to profit from expanded transgender procedures advanced in 2023. Planned Parenthood refused to specifically disclose how many transgender procedures the abortion franchise carried out in the last fiscal year, lumping its transgender business among 177,237 “Other Procedures.” PPFA reported a mere 15,902 “other procedures” in its 2020-2021 report.

The report revealed that 45 of Planned Parenthood’s 49 affiliates perpetrated transgender procedures in 2022 — up from 41 the previous year and just 30 in the 2020-2021 fiscal year. This year’s report includes first-person testimonials praising PPFA for administering life-altering, sterilizing, and bone-depleting hormone injections. “As a trans woman, the services provided to me saved my life. I am so grateful for the services you provide to ALL women,” wrote the man.

Planned Parenthood and its international affiliate, Planned Parenthood Global, committed tens of millions of dollars to abortion expansion at home and abroad. Planned Parenthood boasts of its 30 open lawsuits against pro-life protections, winning injunctions preventing seven states from defending unborn children from abortion. Its U.S. affiliates spent $46.7 million on “public policy” and $14.8 to “engage communities.”

Planned Parenthood Global dedicated $113 million to abortion “advocacy,” partnering with 80 organizations in nine countries. Its activities included “community-based access to misoprostol,” the second pill in the chemical abortion cocktail, which can be used on its own to induce abortion (with varying degrees of harm to mothers). The abortion business directed 90% of its efforts toward nations that protect unborn children’s lives in the law, such as Mexico, where its efforts led to “the legalization of abortion in Quintana Roo up to 12 weeks — a decision affecting 470,000 women of reproductive age in the state.”

Contraception remained a cornerstone of the PPFA business model in 2023. PPFA distributed contraception 2,250,913 times, including implanting long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) in 1,548,022 people and distributing 552,721 so-called “Emergency Contraception” kits. All hormonal contraception may potentially act as an abortifacient by making it impossible for a newly conceived/fertilized child to implant in the uterine wall.

PPFA shapes the way young people see sex both through partnerships with public schools and online influencers. “Planned Parenthood is proud to be the nation’s largest sex educator,” writes McGill Johnson in the report’s opening summary. Planned Parenthood’s videos were viewed three million times, and PPFA reached 1.2 million people through education or training sessions. “PPFA launched a national campaign across platforms to destigmatize abortion,” the report notes.

PPFA also plans to shape academic views by producing “scientific” studies promoting its view of the abortion controversy. In all, “34 Planned Parenthood affiliates participated in 47 studies” last year, including one focusing on “potential logistical, financial, and other burdens of travel faced by patients who are forced to travel for their” abortion, the report states.

Planned Parenthood’s report also raises concerns over possible censorship. A section of the annual report titled “Shifting Culture” states PPFA is “leading tech companies to discuss how to improve corporate accountability and address health care misinformation.”

The report takes on added importance as abortion has emerged as the dominant theme of the Biden-Harris reelection campaign and Democratic campaigns generally. “Vice President Kamala Harris even made a campaign stop at a Planned Parenthood abortion center,” noted Dannenfelser. Harris called pro-life laws “immoral” during the visit. “In turn, their political arm spends more than any other abortion-related group to lobby the federal government against commonsense policies like protecting babies born alive after failed abortions.”

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

RELATED VIDEO: Planned Parenthood Killed a Record 392,715 Babies Last Year | TIPPING POINT

POST ON X:

Planned Parenthood kills humans. pic.twitter.com/KfVXkppz0l

— Bryan Kemper 🇺🇸 (@BryanKemper) April 16, 2024

RELATED ARTICLE: Poll: Supermajority of American Voters Oppose Abortion Past 12 Weeks

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Here Is What We Know About The Twelve Jurors Selected For Trump Trial thumbnail

Here Is What We Know About The Twelve Jurors Selected For Trump Trial

/in , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

All twelve jurors have been selected for former President Donald Trump’s trial relating to Democratic Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s allegations he falsified business records to hide a payment to pornstar Stormy Daniels.

The jurors include an investment banker, a security engineer with three children, a retired man from Lebanon who enjoys fly fishing, a speech therapist, a worker at an eyewear company, a woman from California who works in product development and a physical therapist, according to Politico. The panel is comprised of seven men and five women, according to NBC News.

The seven jurors sworn in Thursday join five who were selected on Tuesday, completing the panel that will weigh Bragg’s 34 count indictment against the former president. Six additional jurors are needed to serve as alternates, and Judge Juan Merchan said he is “hopeful” that selection will finish tomorrow, according to NBC News.

One alternate has already been selected, according to multiple reports. The alternate is a female asset manager who “likes to run, hang out with her friends and eat,” according to NBC News.

NEWS

A 12-person jury has been selected for Trump’s first criminal trial in New York.

After a flurry of peremptory and for-cause challenges, jury selection progressed in a fast and furious fashion.

An alternate already has been chosen.

— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) April 18, 2024

The jury’s foreperson, selected Tuesday, works in sales and is originally from Ireland, according to Politico. He’s married, likes “anything outdoorsy,” lives in West Harlem and reads The New York Times, Fox News and MSNBC, according to NBC News.

The second juror is a married investment banker who says he follows Trump’s posts on Truth Social, according to NBC News.

The third juror is a young corporate law attorney from Oregon who lives in Chelsea. He’s unmarried and says he gets news from The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and Google, according to CNN.

The fourth juror has three children and likes woodworking and metalworking, according to NBC. He’s a security engineer without any social media accounts, according to CNN.

The fifth juror is a young, female English teacher who lives with her boyfriend in Harlem, according to NBC News.

The sixth juror is a recent college graduate who works as a software engineer. She lives in Chelsea with three roommates and does not have strong feelings about Trump, according to CNN.

The seventh juror is a civil litigation attorney from North Carolina who lives on the Upper East Side in Manhattan. He has two kids and is married, according to CNN.

The eighth juror has two kids and used to be a wealth manager. He’s retired now and enjoys hobbies that include skiing, fly fishing and yoga, according to NBC News.

The ninth juror is an unmarried woman who lives alone, works as a speech therapist and said she likes reality TV podcasts, according to CNN.

The tenth juror, originally from Ohio, works in commerce and enjoys podcasts on behavioral psychology, according to CNN.

The eleventh juror, who Trump tried to remove after she said she did not like his “persona,” is a product development manager, according to CNN.

The twelfth juror is a female physical therapist who listens to sports and faith-based podcasts, according to NBC News.

Seven jurors were initially selected on Tuesday, though two were released earlier Thursday, according to reports. One said she did not believe she could be impartial after friends and colleagues asked her if she was a juror. Another was dismissed after prosecutors questioned the truthfulness of his answer on the jury selection questions.

Merchan directed the media Thursday not to report physical details about jurors or information about their employers.

AUTHOR

KATELYNN RICHARDSON

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: Trump Case Judge Directs Media Not To Report Certain Details About Jurors

POST ON X:

BREAKING: Vocal Philly voter trashes Biden for supporting immigrants over Americans.

“We need Trump back.” pic.twitter.com/vcovLXVNzb

— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) April 18, 2024

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Democrat Senate Kills Mayorkas Impeachment Trial thumbnail

Democrat Senate Kills Mayorkas Impeachment Trial

/in , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

Consider this, these same venomous snakes impeached a President for making a phone call about investigating Ukraine corruption.

Senate rejects Mayorkas impeachment charges at trial, ending GOP bid to oust him

By Kaia Hubbard

Washington — The Senate quickly dispensed with the two impeachment charges against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, convening a short-lived trial Wednesday that brought an end to a months-long effort to punish the secretary for his handling of the southern border.

The Senate’s 51-member Democratic majority voted to dismiss both charges as unconstitutional over the objections of Republican members. The entire proceeding lasted just three hours.

Mayorkas became just the second Cabinet secretary in U.S. history to be impeached when the House charged him in February with “willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law” and a “breach of public trust.” Democrats strongly opposed the impeachment effort, decrying it as a political stunt and saying the allegations constituted a policy disagreement that fell far short of the constitutional threshold for impeachment.

“We felt very strongly that we had to set a precedent that impeachment should never be used to settle policy disagreements,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Wednesday evening. “If we allowed that to happen, it would set a disastrous precedent for Congress — could throw our system of checks and balances into cycles of chaos.”

Under the Constitution, the Senate is responsible for holding a trial to determine if impeached officials are guilty and should be removed from office. The House transmitted the articles on Tuesday, and senators were sworn in as jurors Wednesday afternoon. Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat and the president pro tempore of the chamber, presided over the trial. Senators took turns signing an oath book, an indication of the gravity of the proceedings.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Democrats One Step Closer to Mob Rule: Maine Joins Blue States To Abolishing Electoral College

MONSTROUS: Senate Democrats Blocks Israel Aid Bill

Hamas-Tied CAIR Urges Attorney Generals, Prosecutors to Lock Up Journalists Exposing Hamas Supporters

California Senate Democrats Reject Bill to Make Purchasing Children for Sex a Felony

POSTS ON X:

Harlem love for Trump is undeniable pic.twitter.com/zeggg04xL5

— Brandie with a 🐝 (@BrandieWithABee) April 17, 2024

Black Chicago voters say they are done supporting Democrats:

“We gonna vote and we gonna get you out!”pic.twitter.com/6gtNkqEkGl

— Proud Elephant 🇺🇸🦅 (@ProudElephantUS) April 18, 2024

EDITOR NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

High Court’s 9-0 Ruling Lowers Bar for Filing Anti-DEI Discrimination Lawsuits thumbnail

High Court’s 9-0 Ruling Lowers Bar for Filing Anti-DEI Discrimination Lawsuits

/in , , , /by

By The Daily Signal

A low-profile case decided Wednesday by the Supreme Court could have big implications for employers’ diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.

Muldrow v. City of St. Louis was a case about a female police officer who alleged that she was transferred from one department to another because of her sex. She argued that the transfer violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which forbids “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin” discrimination with respect to employment “compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges.”

She lost in the lower court because she could not show that the transfer caused her “significant” harm. The lower court held that the transfer “did not result in a diminution to her title, salary, or benefits” and caused “only minor changes in [her] working conditions.”

A unanimous Supreme Court reversed, holding that any harm—whether significant or insignificant—satisfies Title VII.

Writing for the court, Justice Elena Kagan said that the policewoman “does not have to show … that the harm incurred was significant. Or serious, or substantial, or any similar adjective.”

The take-away is that the policewoman gets to sue, and so do a lot of other people. And not just over sex discrimination or transfers.

The opinion covers a lot more.

Title VII applies to all compensation, terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. If you have been fired, transferred, denied a bonus, or forced to attend (or excluded from) a training program, mentorship program, or retreat, on the basis of your race, sex, or religion, you can sue.

And now, you need not prove that you suffered any significant sort of harm.

As Justice Brett Kavanaugh explained in his concurring opinion, if there’s no floor on the amount of harm you must suffer, then the harm requirement is satisfied by any change in “money, time, satisfaction, schedule, convenience, commuting costs or time, prestige, status, career prospects, interest level, perks, professional relationships, networking opportunities, effects on family obligations, or the like.”

The ruling applies to sex-based transfers, like the policewoman’s, but it also applies to many corporate DEI programs.

It’s fashionable for corporate employers to create race- and sex-based employment conditions and privileges as part of their DEI initiatives.

Some cases are obvious and egregious. For example, Novant Health fired a white male executive in order to replace him with two women—one black, the other white. And Starbucks fired a former manager because she was white.

Other cases are subtle yet ubiquitous. LinkedIn’s “employee resource groups” and mentoring and training programs for “systemically marginalized” groups are representative examples. LinkedIn gives employees access to official programs organized on race and sex lines and creates special mentorships for members of certain groups.

These are all “privileges of employment” under Title VII.

LinkedIn also provides the leaders of these groups special pay on top of their salaries, which is “compensation” under Title VII.

Similarly, other companies, such as the law firms Morrison Foerster and Perkins Coie, provided race-based fellowships until they were sued. Other companies, like Twilio, consider race during layoffs.

Still more companies—including Starbucks, Morgan Stanley, McDonald’s, Hershey, BlackRock, Disney, and many others—administer programs and engage in practices that appear to give or deny special preferences and detriments on the basis of race and sex.

All of these programs and practices are celebrated as part of what Microsoft, for example, calls its “Diversity and Inclusion Journey,” which aims to “intentionally shift behavior” so that “everyone is accountable for change.”

Until Muldrow, cases challenging these programs faced the hurdle of having to prove “significant” harm. A judge might say, “Yes, you were discriminated against, but you didn’t really suffer.” To this, Kavanaugh and others would answer “discrimination is harm,” but that claim wouldn’t have gotten you anywhere.

A judge or jury sympathetic to DEI programs could easily say that a black person who was forced to work on certain projects to meet a client’s racial quota hadn’t suffered “significant” harm. Or that an Asian person denied the benefits of a mentorship program given to black employees hadn’t suffered “significant” harm. Or that a white person forced to undergo training telling her to “be less white” hadn’t suffered “significant” harm.

Today, that hurdle is gone. The harm requirement may now be satisfied by anything as simple as discomfort, status, or interest level. Functionally, discrimination alone is all that must now be proved.

That means that anti-DEI lawsuits just got a lot easier.

AUTHOR

GianCarlo Canaparo

GianCarlo Canaparo is a legal fellow in the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

Judicial Watch Statement on Prosecution of President Donald Trump in the ‘Hush Money’ Trial thumbnail

Judicial Watch Statement on Prosecution of President Donald Trump in the ‘Hush Money’ Trial

/in , , , /by

By Judicial Watch

Washington, D.C. – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the unprecedented prosecution of President Donald Trump by Democrats in New York:

It will be nearly impossible for Trump to receive a fair trial in a courtroom run by biased, anti-Trump Democratic Party politicians. Today’s kangaroo court proceedings in the Manhattan Supreme Court mark the first-ever criminal trial of a U.S. president. Today is a sad day that will go down in infamy. This is a dangerous attack on the rule of law and a brazen attempt to rig the 2024 elections for President Biden and Democrats. Judicial Watch denounces Alvin Bragg’s corrupt attempt to make former president Donald Trump a political prisoner.

Trump committed no crimes, and this is a prosecution about “nothing.” These and other Democratic Party political prosecutions of Trump are an abomination under law and are destabilizing to our nation.

Judicial Watch will continue to expose in court the truth about these attacks on the rule of law, free and fair elections, and the U.S. Constitution.

Judicial Watch has several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits related to the prosecutorial abuse targeting Trump:

In March 2024, Judicial Watch filed a Georgia Open Records Act lawsuit against District Attorney Fani Willis and Fulton County, Georgia, for records of any communication Willis and the county had with Special Counsel Jack Smith and the House January 6 Committee. The lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of Fulton County after Willis and the County denied having any responsive records.

In February 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice asked a federal court to allow the agency to keep secret the names of top staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office that is targeting former President Donald Trump and other Americans.

(Before his appointment to investigate and prosecute Trump, Special Counsel Jack Smith previously was at the center of several controversial issues, the
IRS scandal among them. In 2014, a Judicial Watch investigation revealed that top IRS officials had been in communication with Jack Smith’s then-Public Integrity Section about a plan to launch criminal investigations into conservative tax-exempt groups. Read more here.) 

In January 2024, Judicial Watch filed  lawsuit against Fulton County, Georgia, for records regarding the hiring of Nathan Wade as a special prosecutor by District Attorney Fani Willis. Wade was hired to pursue unprecedented criminal investigations and prosecutions against former President Trump and others over the 2020 election disputes.

In October 2023, Judicial Watch  sued the DOJ for records and communications between the Office of U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith and the Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney’s office regarding requests/receipt of federal funding/assistance in the investigation of former President Trump and his 18 codefendants in the  Fulton County indictment of August 14, 2023. To date, the DOJ is refusing to confirm or deny the existence of records, claiming that to do so would interfere with enforcement proceedings. Judicial Watch’s litigation challenging this is continuing.

Through the New York Freedom of Information Law, in July 2023, Judicial Watch received the  engagement letter showing New York County District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg paid $900 per hour for partners and $500 per hour for associates to the Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher law firm for the purpose of suing Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) in an effort to shut down the House Judiciary Committee’s oversight investigation into Bragg’s unprecedented indictment of former President Donald Trump.

RELATED VIDEO: Devin Nunes – [DS] Is Trying To Destroy Truth Because It’s The People’s Voice, We Are Winning

POSTS ON X:

🚨BREAKING: Kevin O’Leary GOES OFF about the Trump Trial.

“This is an American president. This is the United States of America’s highest office–and we’re doing this?

This is about the American brand…We look like clowns. I hate this”

pic.twitter.com/0E6yRwZt7t

— Ian Jaeger (@IanJaeger29) April 18, 2024

Bill Barr on why the New York hush money case is a bunch of nonsense, and why he’s voting for Trump in November. Now this is a surprise! pic.twitter.com/3TK5ddHSkf

— Dinesh D’Souza (@DineshDSouza) April 17, 2024

NOW: President Trump welcomes Poland President Andrzej Duda to Trump Tower in Manhattan

pic.twitter.com/1rJBiDw1wD

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) April 17, 2024

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch statement is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Man Arrested In Car Crash That Killed Democratic Staffer Entered U.S. Illegally, ICE Confirms thumbnail

Man Arrested In Car Crash That Killed Democratic Staffer Entered U.S. Illegally, ICE Confirms

/in , , , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

A man involved in a hit-and-run accident that killed a top Democrat staffer entered the United States illegally, federal immigration authorities have confirmed.

Elmer Rueda-Linares was arrested on hit-and-run charges following a two-vehicle crash in the early morning of April 6 in Reno, Nevada, that resulted in the death of Kurt Englehart, a senior advisor to Nevada Democrat Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has confirmed that he entered the United States illegally.

“Officers with Enforcement and Removal Operations in Reno, Nevada, placed an immigration detainer April 8 on Honduran national Elmer Rueda-Linarez, 18, who is being held at the Washoe County Jail in Reno for felony hit and run causing death,” ICE  stated to The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“Rueda entered the United States March 12, 2021, at or near the Rio Grande City, Texas, Port of Entry without inspection by an immigration official. United States Customs and Border Protection arrested him, and he was later released on his own recognizance June 22, 2021,” ICE stated.

Immigration detainers are requests made from ICE to local and state law enforcement agencies, requesting that they be notified promptly when a removable alien is due to be released from their custody.

Impairment was suspected by authorities at the time of Rueda-Linares’ arrest.

Since his arrest, the charge of hit-and-run against the Honduran national has been changed to failing to stop at the scene of an accident, according to local media. He remains in custody on $100,000 bail.

The DCNF reached out to the Washoe County Sheriff’s Office, asking if they plan to honor the detainer request if Rueda-Linares posts bail, but they did not immediately respond.

Englehart served as a state senior advisor to Masto. He had worked for the senator’s campaign and her official office for the past eight years. He was 38 at the time of his death.

“Sen. Cortez Masto looks forward to justice being served and has confidence in the local police and prosecutors,” Cortez Masto spokesperson Lauren Wodarski stated to local media.

AUTHOR

JASON HOPKINS

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: Biden Admin Has Flown Over 400,000 Migrants To Airports Across U.S.

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch Grills Biden DOJ Over Extreme Jan. 6 Sentences thumbnail

Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch Grills Biden DOJ Over Extreme Jan. 6 Sentences

/in , , , /by

By Amil Imani

Truth Press reports,

“Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch grilled Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar over the extreme prison sentences handed down to January 6 defendants when compared with similarly situated left-wing protesters and rioters, the overwhelming majority of whom face slaps on the wrist if they face any accountability at all.

The court is currently hearing oral arguments in a case brought forward by former Pennsylvania police officer Joseph Fischer, one of several hundred January 6 defendants charged with an obscure felony for “obstruction of an official proceeding.” The novel legal theory draws from the Enron corruption scandal and has been exclusively deployed against January 6 defendants.”

Justice Gorsuch Grills Biden DOJ Over Extreme Jan. 6 Sentences – Truth Press

Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch grilled Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar over the extreme prison sentences handed down to January 6 defendants when compared with similarly situated left-wing protesters and rioters, the overwhelming majority of whom face slaps on the wrist if they face any accountability at all.

The court is currently hearing oral arguments in a case brought forward by former Pennsylvania police officer Joseph Fischer, one of several hundred January 6 defendants charged with an obscure felony for “obstruction of an official proceeding.” The novel legal theory draws from the Enron corruption scandal and has been exclusively deployed against January 6 defendants.

While January 6 defendants are charged with the felony statute, in addition to a handful of misdemeanors, the vast majority of left-wing protesters are not even charged when engaging in similar conduct. There has been no four-year manhunt to hunt down trespassers from the 2020 riots — thousands of whom trespassed on federal property — nor has the DOJ hunted pro-Palestine protesters who have stormed the White House, abortion protesters, far-left militants who attacked federal courthouses in 2020, and thousands of other left-wing protesters who have occupied federal buildings and obstructed proceedings.

During Wednesday’s arguments, Gorsuch pressed Prelogar over the disparities in sentencing while referencing a number of examples, including the protests against Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination. “Would a sit-in that disrupts a trial or access to a federal courthouse qualify? Would a heckler in today’s audience qualify or at the State of the Union address?” Gorsuch questioned.

“Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify for 20 years in federal prison?” he continued, referencing the incident where Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) pulled a fire alarm and caused Congress to pause a vote. Bowman was given a slap on the wrist where he avoided jail time and was merely required to write an apology essay about his actions.

Prelogar responded by referring to real world examples cited by Gorsuch as “hypotheticals.” She went on to state that proving intent is a key aspect of the statute and insinuated that malicious intent was evident in the case of Trump supporters on January 6, though this is not the case with “minor disruptions” from left-wing protesters.

“So that means that if you have some minor disruption or delay or some minimal outburst, we don’t think it falls within the actus reus to begin with,” she said.

“My outbursts require the court to reconvene after the proceeding has been brought back into line, or the pulling of the fire alarm, the vote has to be rescheduled, or the protest outside of a courthouse makes it inaccessible for a period of time. Are those all federal felonies subject to 20 years in prison?” Gorsuch followed up.

Read full article.

©2024. Amil Imani. All rights reserved.

NGO Camp in Mexico Urging Illegals to Vote for Biden thumbnail

NGO Camp in Mexico Urging Illegals to Vote for Biden

/in , , , /by

By The Geller Report

These are fliers at an NGO camp in Mexico encouraging illegals to vote for Biden.

The camp has ties to both DHS Secretary Mayorkas and George Soros.

This is why the Democrats have thrown open our borders to millions of unvetted illegals. Fair elections would vanquish the Democrat party.

Flyers distributed at NGO in Mexico encouraging illegals to vote for President Biden

The flyers reads:

“Reminder to vote for President Biden when you are in the United States. We need another four years of his term to stay open.”

These are fliers at an NGO camp in Mexico encouraging illegals to vote for Biden.

The camp has ties to both DHS Secretary Mayorkas and George Soros.

Share the hell out of this. pic.twitter.com/fgvoHwsKSV

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) April 16, 2024

Alejandro Mayorkas is fully in bed with the open borders lobby.

Until 2020, he served on the board of HIAS — a radical left-wing group that is actively ferrying illegals into America.

He was never serious about border security.

The Senate must impeach.https://t.co/yTlpQYHeAQ pic.twitter.com/w36fGap0NX

— America 2100 (@America_2100) April 15, 2024

🚨BREAKING – Flyers distributed at NGO in Mexico encouraging illegals to vote for President Biden

The flyers reads:

“Reminder to vote for President Biden when you are in the United States. We need another four years of his term to stay open”

A MUST READ CRITICAL THREAD 🧵 pic.twitter.com/Mod4IeROXf

— Oversight Project (@OversightPR) April 16, 2024

RCM founder Gaby Zavala implied to @realmuckraker that she wants to help as many illegals as possible before President Trump is reelected pic.twitter.com/foIVJGMM3C

— Oversight Project (@OversightPR) April 16, 2024

According to documents obtained by @JudicialWatch, Secretary Mayorkas himself recently met with some of these entities, including Team Brownsville and Angry Tias and Abuelas pic.twitter.com/8NBkv2vZQ6

— Oversight Project (@OversightPR) April 16, 2024

Gaby Zavala was previously an organizer for La Union del Pueblo Entero (LUPE), which listed the Open Society Institute as a partner pic.twitter.com/p6ABDzzodG

— Oversight Project (@OversightPR) April 16, 2024

Yep — and Alejandro Mayorkas is a former board member of that very same NGO.

A lot of Americans don’t understand just how much Mayorkas is in bed with open borders lobby.

This video breaks the whole thing down in detail:https://t.co/dxYRMaLStZ

— Nate Hochman (@njhochman) April 16, 2024

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

WATCH: Thousands of Illegals Flood New York City Hall To Protest Move Out Of Luxury Hotels thumbnail

WATCH: Thousands of Illegals Flood New York City Hall To Protest Move Out Of Luxury Hotels

/in , , , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

You can’t make this stuff up. New Yorkers can’t pay their bone crushing taxes …. for this. They are trying to occupy the building and are demanding to have luxury hotel rooms provided to illegals instead of the shelters that NYC has provided. Other demands include work permits, assistance, etc.

NOTE: Mostly military-age males!

WATCH:

Migrants are now flooding NYC City Hall to protest being moved to shelters instead of the luxury hotels. pic.twitter.com/Cy5L16MDP2

— Ashley St. Clair (@stclairashley) April 16, 2024

🚨#BREAKING: Swarms of Hundreds, possibly thousands, of undocumented immigrants have gathered outside New York City Hall for a meeting centered on their experiences

📌#Manhattan | #NewYork

Currently, hundreds, if not thousands, of undocumented immigrants are currently… pic.twitter.com/TAORpducJW

— R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) April 16, 2024

Hundreds of illegals from Africa who don’t speak any English are currently protesting outside City Hall & demanding more free handouts.

Just as our Founding Fathers intended.

pic.twitter.com/jt2ehONJ2Q

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) April 16, 2024

BREAKING: HUNDREDS of illegal migrants are gathering outside of NY City Hall. Most of the crowd is military-age African men.

pic.twitter.com/AHE6PePjAa

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) April 16, 2024

🚨BREAKING: Hundreds of illegal aliens line up outside of New York City Hall for a meeting to discuss their living conditions and work permits.

The City Council has chosen “diverse set of experts” created New Arrivals Strategy Team to improve illegal aliens’ experience in the… pic.twitter.com/VMs5tWp8Tj

— I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸 (@ImMeme0) April 16, 2024

Happening now: Hundreds of criminal illegal aliens swarmed City Hall in NY reportedly to protest their housing accommodations and demand more assistance. Appears to be mostly military-age males.pic.twitter.com/dc1uJgSD9s

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) April 16, 2024

Illegals have just swarmed NYC City Hall and have surrounded it.

They’re trying to occupy the building and are demanding to have luxury hotel rooms provided to illegals instead of the shelters that NYC has provided.

This is only going to get worse.pic.twitter.com/y8nEkI3DG4

— Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸 (@Bubblebathgirl) April 16, 2024

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

NGO Camp in Mexico Urging Illegals to Vote for Biden

The Phantom Voter: How the Democrats Will Steal 2024 with Phony Ballots

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

National Guardsman Shoots Migrant Who Allegedly Stabbed Two Others thumbnail

National Guardsman Shoots Migrant Who Allegedly Stabbed Two Others

/in , , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

A National Guard soldier fired at a migrant who stabbed two individuals at the Texas-Mexico border, according to a document obtained by NewsNation.

The incident occurred on Sunday afternoon along the Rio Grande River in El Paso’s Lower Valley, NewsNation reported. A member of the Indiana National Guard — deployed to the area as part of Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s Operation Lone Star – witnessed an individual stab a fellow migrant and fired their weapon in response, according to the outlet.

The stabbing reportedly took place on the U.S. side of the river.

“Early on the afternoon of 14 April, a National Guard service member assigned to Operation Lone Star discharged a weapon in a border-related incident. The incident is under investigation,” the Texas Military Department said in a statement to the Daily Caller News Foundation on Monday.

The individual crossed back onto the Mexican side of the border after being shot at, NewsNation reported. The document did not make clear if the attacker was struck by the shot.

Investigators later determined that two individuals were stabbed during the incident, according to NewsNation. A local fire and rescue crew responded shortly after and treated both migrants for “superficial wounds” that were not deemed to be life-threatening.

“More information will be made available as the investigation progresses,” the Texas Military Department continued in their statement.

The Texas Department of Public Safety did not immediately respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

JASON HOPKINS

Contributor

RELATED ARTICLES:

Blue City Plans To Defund Its Police Force To Pay For Illegal Immigrants

‘That’s A Joke’: Biden’s Demand For More Border Agent Funding Misses The Point, Former CBP Commissioner Says

Buckle Up For The ‘Most Terrifying Poll Result’ To Emerge Ahead Of 2024 Election

POST ON X:

7.2 MILLION

That’s how many illegals have entered the United States under the Biden Administration— more than the population of 36 states.

Over 1,000 of them took over NYC City Hall Park here to protest being sent to shelters and they are demanding permanent housing. pic.twitter.com/O9LRNrJ0Rn

— Ashley St. Clair (@stclairashley) April 16, 2024

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

ELECTION RIGGING: Corrupt Biden-Donor Judge Says He Will Arrest Trump If He Skips One Day of Months Long Trial thumbnail

ELECTION RIGGING: Corrupt Biden-Donor Judge Says He Will Arrest Trump If He Skips One Day of Months Long Trial

/in , , , /by

By The Geller Report

If you can’t beat him, arrest him.

They banned him from attending his son’s graduation. And far more broadly, they are deliberately keeping him off the campaign trail.

Murderers, rapists, looters, illegal criminals roam our streets with impunity but Trump will be arrested.

More footage of Trump supporters gathering outside NYC courthouse.

pic.twitter.com/1rK3xZi6zg

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) April 15, 2024

Story by Brian Bushard, Forbes Staff

New York Judge Juan Merchan on Monday warned former President Donald Trump could be arrested if he disrupts proceedings or skips the trial in his hush money case in Manhattan, as prosecutors claim Trump violated his gag order.

Key Facts

Trump, who faces 34 felony charges for allegedly falsifying business documents stemming from hush money payments to former adult film star Stormy Daniels, appeared in the Manhattan court Monday morning for a trial expected to last six weeks, despite Trump’s efforts to delay the proceedings.

Trump attorney Todd Blanche argued on Monday that Trump wants to be present for trial proceedings including sidebar conferences during the trial and voir dire—the initial examination of a witness or a juror…

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Here are the 42 Questions Trump Jury Pool Must Answer (To Skew The Jury) in Rigged Trial

POSTS ON X:

Trump speaks after being told by the crooked judge he’s not allowed to go to Barron’s graduation. Screw him, Mr President. Go to your son’s graduation. Let the Commie try to arrest you. There will be the biggest uproar you’ve ever seen. I’m livid. pic.twitter.com/FgEBVzAskw

— PAMELA HENSLEY🇺🇸 (@PamelaHensley22) April 15, 2024

JUST IN — “If you do not show up there will be an arrest.”

Judge Merchan tells President Trump he has to be in court every single day of his hush money trial.

This is election interference. https://t.co/YRqwNl9Nan

— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) April 15, 2024

New York Judge Merchan to Trump: “If you do not show up, there will be an arrest.”

During peak election season, Trump will be forced to appear in court every day.

To be clear this is infinitely worse election interference than anything that the MSM accused Russia/Putin of…

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) April 15, 2024

BIDEN DONOR JUDGE MERCHAN JUST SAID HE WILL ARREST TRUMP IF HE DOESN’T SHOW UP TO COURT EVERY DAY FOR THE NEXT FEW MONTHS!

The Democrats are trying to take away Trump’s ability to campaign in the middle of a Presidential election!

ELECTION INTERFERENCE!

— Alex Bruesewitz 🇺🇸 (@alexbruesewitz) April 15, 2024

🚨 EXCLUSIVE@ABC, @NBCNews and @CBS fail to identify Trump prosecutors as “Democrats” at least 90% of the time. @briansflood https://t.co/ShYbozoRBP

— Media Research Center (@theMRC) April 15, 2024

BREAKING: Corrupt Judge Merchan, a Biden donor whose family member has profited off this case & who illegally gagged President Trump just said “If you do not show up, there will be an arrest.”

A 6-8 week show trial… Total election interference.

RT if you agree!#SaveAmerica

— Elise Stefanik (@EliseStefanik) April 15, 2024

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Supreme Court To Weigh Case That Could Upend Hundreds Of Jan. 6 Prosecutions thumbnail

Supreme Court To Weigh Case That Could Upend Hundreds Of Jan. 6 Prosecutions

/in , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

The Supreme Court will hear a case Tuesday that could have major implications for hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants — as well as special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of former President Donald Trump.

The case, Fischer v. United States, asks the Supreme Court to weigh the scope of an obstruction statute, Section 1512(c)(2), which penalizes anyone who corruptly “obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding” with up to 20 years in prison. Joseph Fischer, who entered the Capitol on Jan. 6, argues that his prosecution under the law for obstructing Congress’ certification of the 2020 election was an “unprecedented expansion” of the statute.

The law, enacted as part of the Corporate Fraud and Accountability Act of 2002, was intended to target evidence tampering, focusing on “deterring fraud and abuse by corporate executives,” Fischer argues.

“Before the January 6 cases, no court had applied Section 1512(c)(2) to conduct not intended to affect the availability or integrity of evidence,” Fischer’s attorneys argued in a brief. “Nor had a defendant ever been convicted of an obstruction-of-Congress offense outside the context of a legislative inquiry or investigation.”

Fischer stated he was in the Capitol for less than four minutes —  after Congress had already recessed — and “was not part of the mob that forced the electoral certification to stop.” He was arrested in February 2021 on several charges, including assaulting Capitol police.

Should the Supreme Court agree with Fischer, it could impact not just his case, but hundreds of defendants the Department of Justice (DOJ) charged with a felony under the statute. Over 353 of the nearly 1,387 Jan. 6 defendants have been charged with “corruptly obstructing, influencing, or impeding an official proceeding,” according to the DOJ.

Several defendants have already been granted early release ahead of the ruling, including Kevin Seefried, Alexander Sheppard and Thomas B. Adams Jr., according to The Washington Post.

“It takes four justices to grant certiorari and, although this court will not attempt to read tea leaves, the Supreme Court’s decision to review Fischer means, at a minimum, that this case poses a ‘close question,’” District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta wrote in the January decision granting Adams’ release.

The government argues that the text “is not limited to conduct that affects the integrity or availability of evidence.”

“Instead, Congress adopted a traditional catchall clause, reaching all forms of corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding,” it said in a brief.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals favored the government’s interpretation 2-1 in an April 2023 ruling, finding that the “meaning of the statute is unambiguous.”

“Under the most natural reading of the statute, §1512(c)(2) applies to all forms of corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding,” Judge Florence Pan, a Biden appointee, wrote in the majority opinion.

But Judge Gregory Katsas, a Trump appointee, wrote that the government’s interpretation was “mistaken,” making it “implausibly broad and unconstitutional in a significant number of applications.”

“Among other things, that construction would sweep in advocacy, lobbying, and protest—common mechanisms by which citizens attempt to influence official proceedings,” he wrote. “Historically, these activities did not constitute obstruction unless they directly impinged on a proceeding’s truth-seeking function through acts such as bribing a decisionmaker or falsifying evidence presented to it.”

“The government’s reading is also hard to reconcile with the structure and history of section 1512, and with decades of precedent applying section 1512(c) only to acts that affect the integrity or availability of evidence,” he wrote.

Republican Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton, House Judiciary Committee Chair Rep. Jim Jordan and 21 other members of Congress wrote in an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court that the lower court’s ruling “will only reward and incentivize politically motivated uses of ill-fitting criminal statutes with harsh penalties.”

Just when you thought Jack Smith’s J6 case against Donald Trump couldn’t get any more laughable–it just did.

In one week, SCOTUS will hear arguments on DOJ’s (ab)use of 1512c2, post Enron document shredding “obstruction of an official proceeding” statute passed in 2002.

My… pic.twitter.com/1MNLAWSHnp

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) April 9, 2024

While the Supreme Court will weigh Trump’s bid to dismiss his election interference case based on presidential immunity in April, the Fischer case could also jeopardize part of the indictment.

Two of Trump’s charges in his election interference case are centered on the obstruction statute. Smith’s indictment alleges Trump used “knowingly false claims of election fraud to obstruct the federal government function by which those results are collected, counted, and certified.”

New York University law professor Richard A. Epstein wrote for the Hoover Institution in March that a correct reading of the statute “torpedoes a key part of the Smith indictment.”

“Trump never entered the Capitol building, and he never made any statement urging rioters to enter the building,” he wrote. “His despicable conduct consisted of watching the proceedings before asking the rioters and trespassers to leave the premises, which does not count as obstruction under any legal authority of which I am aware.”

Smith addressed this in the footnote of his brief filed this week in Trump’s election interference, claiming the charges would still be valid regardless of the Supreme Court’s decision on how to read the text of Section 1512(c)(2). He wrote that the “use of falsehoods or creation of ‘false’ documents satisfies an evidence-impairment interpretation.”

Trump’s case is currently on hold at the district court pending the justices’ decision. Oral arguments will be held April 25 to consider Trump’s presidential immunity argument.

AUTHOR

KATELYNN RICHARDSON

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden DOJ Warns Jan. 6 Defendants May Still Face Heightened Sentences Despite SCOTUS Case Challenging Key Charge

Before and After, Iran Communicated Attack to Biden Regime

‘All For Show’: Biden’s Newest Potential Executive Order For Border Crisis Doesn’t Hold Water, Experts Say

GOP Rep Blasts Squad Dems For Trying To Block Sale Of F-35s Israel Used To Defend Against Iran Attacks

Kari Lake Tops $4 Million In First Fundraising Quarter Of 2024

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

STAY INFORMED

Receive regular news, commentary, and analysis straight to your inbox.

POWERED BY

DrRichSwier.com | ThePricklyPear.org

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.