Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito on Thursday questioned if the criminal prosecution of an incumbent β who narrowly lost an election β could lead to the destabilization of the country as a whole as opposed to the incumbent knowing he could leave office peacefully.
The post Justice Samuel Alito Questions if Criminal Prosecution of Former President βDestabilizes the Functioning of Our Countryβ appeared first on Breitbart.
A majority of the Supreme Court justices appeared to sympathize with Trump's attorneys' arguments that a president does enjoy some level of immunity that continues past the term of office.
The post Justice Samuel Alito Cites βOld Saw About Indicting a Ham Sandwichβ in Trump Immunity Case appeared first on Breitbart.
A majority of Supreme Court justices sympathized with Trump's lawyers' argument that a president does enjoy some level of immunity past the term of office.
The post Justice Alito Presses Jack Smithβs Team on Claim That Former Presidents Lack Immunity appeared first on Breitbart.
Harvard Law professor emeritus Laurence Tribe said Friday on MSNBC's "Andrea Mitchell Reports" that he believes theΒ Supreme Court is following former President Donald Trump's "strategy of delay, delay."
The post Tribe: Shameful Supreme Court βHas Gone Along with the Trump Strategy of Delay, Delay Delayβ appeared first on Breitbart.
Representative Jamie Raskin (D-MD) saidΒ Thursday on MSNBC's "The ReidOut" that the Supreme Court should be moved to the Republican National Committee (RNC) headquarters after their questions during the oralΒ arguments on immunity for former President Donald Trump.
The post Raskin: Supreme Court Should Be Moved βOver to the RNC Headquartersβ appeared first on Breitbart.
This is the "whirlwind" Schumer sought to unleash against the Supreme Court, and against conservatives in particular.
The post Blue State Blues: Schumer βReaps the Whirlwindβ with Protests at His House appeared first on Breitbart.
Democratic strategist Donna Brazile said Sunday on ABC's "This Week" that after listening to oral arguments, the Supreme Court was close to "election interference" with their consideration of former President Donald Trump's immunity claim.
The post Brazile: Supreme Court Close to Election Interference, βJustice Delayed Is Democracy Deniedβ appeared first on Breitbart.
Retired Federal Judge J. Michael Luttig saidΒ Sunday on MSNBC's "Velshi" that the Supreme Court was fiddling as former President Donald Trump's immunity claims are an "existential threat to America's democracy."
The post Luttig: Supreme Court Fiddling While Trump Is an βExistential Threat to Americaβs Democracyβ appeared first on Breitbart.
The left-wing Arabella Advisors network has raked in more money than either of the two major political parties and affects almost every element of public policy and elections, argues Scott Walter, president of the Capital Research Center, a Washington-based investigative think tank.Β
Walterβs new book βArabella: The Dark Money Network of Leftist Billionaires Secretly Transforming Americaβ shows that in the 2020 election cycle, Arabella Advisorsβ nonprofits took in $2.4 billion. Thatβs $1 billion more than the combined fundraising of the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee.
That amount rose to $3 billion in the 2022 election cycle, Walter says. Moreover, he adds, nothing on the Right comes close to competing.Β
βArabella does not discriminate. It is working on arcane regulatory issues β¦ but it also isΒ running Facebook ads, attacking certain congressional candidates and boosting others. It plays in environmental issues. It plays in abortion issues. It plays in election policy,β Walter says on βThe Daily Signal Podcast.β
Walter is set to testify Tuesday before the House Natural Resources Committee about what he calls βleft-wing dark money [used] to influence environmental policy.β
βArabella also continues to be very active in the environmental policy area in all sorts of ways,β he adds.
Arabella-backed organizations have been involved in battles over abortion and Supreme Court nominations and advocated that biological males compete in womenβs sports.Β
Walterβs book details how two Arabella-aligned groups, the Center for Secure and Modern Elections and the Institute for Responsive Government, are involved in shaping election policy at the local level.Β
He notes that an Arabella-sponsored group funded by billionaire financier George Soros helped formulate the Biden administrationβs recent change in Title IX policy to make it easier for biological males to compete in girlsβ scholastic sports.Β
βThat was plotted through a highly secretive group in the Arabella network, funded entirely with Soros money,β Walter said. βGoverning for Impact, which they started in 2019, two years before the Biden administration was even sworn in. And they worked with Harvard Law School folks to do very sophisticated legal strategy memos of how to overturn dozens of regulations in the federal government, the most famous being Title IX.β
Whatβs differentiates Arabella from other major donors on the Left is the level of secrecy, Walter says. The network is more secretive than most nonprofits financed by Soros and his family, he says.Β
βWe have tracked the institutional donors, and we can tell you that for almost all of the Arabella nonprofits, Fidelity Charitable Gift Fund, which provides donor-advised funds to wealthy people, is the largest,β Walter said. He added, βOther really big donors to the Arabella network have [included Microsoft co-founder] Bill Gates. He is one of the largest, mostly through his foundation. [Facebook founder] Mark Zuckerberg has given tens of millions, mostly for criminal justice reformβquote unquoteβ[that results in] letting criminals back on the streets.β
A spokesperson for Arabella Advisors didnβt respond to The Daily Signalβs request for comment for this report. Β
Listen to Walter outline Arabellaβs reach in a discussion of his book in the podcast below:Β
The post Arabella Networkβs Leftist βDark Moneyβ Influence Expanding, Author Reveals appeared first on The Daily Signal.
Eight Democrat-nominated judges shoved transgender surgery closer to becoming a constitutional right via their decision Monday in a federal appeals court.
The post Appeals Court Says States Must Fund Transgender Surgeries appeared first on Breitbart.
A mob of angry students attacked German Ambassador to the Palestinian Authority Oliver Owcza at Birzeit University in the West Bank.
The post Palestinian Mob Attacks German Ambassador in West Bank appeared first on Breitbart.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Tuesday that Israel would reject any attempt by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to indict Israeli officials over the war in Gaza -- and that it would destroy Hamas regardless.
The post Netanyahu Blasts ICC, Vows to Destroy Hamas β Deal or No Deal appeared first on Breitbart.
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is taking lawsuits against the Illinois "assault weapons" ban and the ban in Maryland into conference.Β
The post U.S. Supreme Court Taking Gun Ban Challenges to Conference appeared first on Breitbart.
There are many reasons why legal experts are questioning the legitimacy of the criminal prosecution of former President Donald Trump. But the major reason is that the main claim in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Braggβs caseβthat Trumpβs $130,000 settlement payment of a potential claim by Stormy Daniels was a campaign-related expenseβis totally bogus.Β
Hereβs a quick tutorial on why Bragg doesnβt have a legal leg to stand onβcall it βFederal Campaign Finance Law for Dummies 101ββan apropos title, given whatβs going on.
Daniels claims that she had a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006, fully 10 years before the 2016 presidential election, which Trump denies. For the payment, Daniels agreed to sign a nondisclosure agreement, which is a standard provision in many settlement agreements of personal injury cases and other claims.
Bragg contends that Trump falsified business records, a misdemeanor, when this payment was listed as legal expenses instead of a campaign expense.
Supposedly, according to Bragg, that converted the misdemeanors into felonies because Trump was concealing another crime. That other crime, according to prosecutors, is a violation of Section 17-152 of New York law, which makes it a misdemeanor to βpromote β¦ the election of any person to public office by unlawful means.β
Besides the fact that itβs very strange to allege that the commission of a misdemeanor for the purpose of covering up the commission of another misdemeanor is enough to allege a felony, the only plausible theory that Bragg is pushing for the alleged βunlawful meansβ was a violation of federal law by concealing a campaign-related payment.Β
With me so far?Β
But Trump was running for president. The raising and spending of money for campaigns for president and Congress is governed by federal law, the Federal Election Campaign Act, not state law. Any wrongdoing related to federal campaign financing falls under the enforcement authority of federal officials, not a local prosecutor like Bragg.Β
In fact, the Federal Election Commission, on which I served as a commissioner, has civil enforcement authority and the U.S. Department of Justice has criminal enforcement authority over violations of this law.
For the nuisance-value settlement payment to Daniels to fit within Braggβs rickety legal structure, it would have to be a crime under federal law. In other words, it would have to be considered a campaign-related expense that was falsely reported under the Federal Election Campaign Act.Β
If you want an example of such a violation, just look at the $113,000 civil penalty the Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee agreed to pay in 2022. They listed the payments for the opposition research that formed the basis for the infamous Steele dossier, which fabricated the entire Trump-Russia collusion hoax, as legal expenses instead of opposition research.
But opposition research on the opposing candidate is obviously a campaign-related expense under applicable federal law, so the FEC had authority to investigate and enforce the law against this deception.
Thatβs not the case with the Danielsβ payment. For starters, the incident in question that led to the payment is alleged to have happened 10 years before the 2016 campaign. More importantly, the payment fails the test the FEC applies to determine whether an expense is campaign-related.
Under federal law and corresponding regulations, the FEC applies the βirrespective testβ to βdifferentiate legitimate campaign and officeholder expenses from personal expenses.β As the FEC explains on its website, under the irrespective test, βpersonal use is any use of funds β¦ to fulfill a commitment, obligation, or expense of any person that would exist, irrespective of the candidatesβ campaign.βΒ
In other words, if the expense would exist even if the individual were not a candidate, then itβs personal and not a campaign expense.
The payment to Daniels clearly fails that test. Trump was a celebrity long before he ran for office, and celebrities get these kinds of nuisance claims all the time. In fact, the prosecutionβs first witness in the New York case, David Pecker, said he had helped settle similar claims to avoid legal costs and embarrassment by suppressing stories for numerous other celebrities, including Arnold Schwarzenegger and Tiger Woods.Β Β
The easiest way to understand this test is to take the example of a personal injury claim.
Candidate A has a car accident several years before he runs for Congress that injures another driver. After the campaign has started, the candidate decides to settle the personal injury claim made by the other driver by paying that driver $130,000 in exchange for a nondisclosure agreement.Β
Settling and paying the claim may help the candidate in his campaign by avoiding personal embarrassment. But that doesnβt make it a campaign expense. Itβs a claim that would exist even if the candidate were not running for office and is thus considered a personal expense under federal law.Β
Danielsβ claim is also a personal claim that existed long before Trump ran for the presidency and, given his celebrity status, would have continued to exist even if he never ran for president.
Thatβs no doubt why neither the FEC nor the Justice Department ever filed an enforcement action against the Trump campaign or Trump personally over the payment; specifically, because it was not a campaign-related expense.Β
You know what would have led to enforcement actions? If Trump had actually claimed this was a campaign-related expense and had used campaign funds to make the payment, I have no doubt he would have been prosecuted by the feds for the illegal use of campaign funds to pay a personal expense.
Thatβs what former Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill., went to prison for after he pleaded guilty in 2013 to spending $750,000 on personal expenses.
Keep in mind that Braggβs entire manufactured case of 34 counts of falsifying business records depends entirely on the legitimacy of his contention that the settlement payment should have been listed as a campaign-related expense.
It shouldnβt because it wasnβt.Β
And all of the other testimony from the prosecutionβs witnesses about this payment and other settlement payments that are obviously intended to blacken the character of the former president and prejudice the jury doesnβt change the fact that none of these payments were campaign-related expenses. Period. End of storyβor at least it should be.
The post Trumpβs NY Prosecution Is a Bogus Case by a Bogus Prosecutor appeared first on The Daily Signal.
A convicted sex offender is asking the Norwegian Supreme Court to declare that social media access is a human right.
The post Sex Offender Who Contacted Young Boys Online Wants Social Media Access Declared a Human Right appeared first on Breitbart.
The government of Turkey announced on Wednesday that it is seeking to become a party to a case accusing Israel of "genocide" against the terrorist organization Hamas at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
The post Islamist Turkey to Join South Africaβs βGenocideβ Complaint Against Israel at the Hague appeared first on Breitbart.
Legislation adopted Wednesday by the House of Representatives would restore a question about U.S. citizenship to the 2030 census, potentially reshaping congressional representation and the Electoral College.
Lawmakers voted, 206-202, to pass the Equal Representation Act, a bill championed by Reps. Chuck Edwards, R-N.C., and Warren Davidson, R-Ohio. (See how your representative voted.) Sen. Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn., introduced the Senate version, which Republicans overwhelmingly supported in a March vote.
With millions of illegal aliens residing in the United Statesβa problem exacerbated by the Biden administrationβs border policiesβthe legislation aims to protect Americansβ electoral power and congressional representation by ensuring foreign citizens arenβt counted in the census.
βIf you are an illegal immigrant, you should not be represented in the U.S. Congress,β House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., told The Daily Signal. βItβs a shame that House Democrats are allowing their open-borders agenda to get in the way of common sense.β
One of those Democrats openly acknowledged the benefits of counting illegal aliens. Rep. Yvette Clarke, D-N.Y., admitted, βWe have a diaspora that can absorb a significant number of these migrants. β¦ I need more people in my district just for redistricting purposes.β
After being in all but one census from 1820 to 2000, the citizenship question was abandoned in the 2010 questionnaire during the Obama administration. The Trump administration attempted to restore the citizenship question for the 2020 census, but a divided Supreme Court ruled against its approach, and the idea was abandoned.
The Equal Representation Act would require the citizenship question on the 2030 census and each decennial census that follows.
Heritage Action, an independent partner of The Heritage Foundation, advocated for passage of the Equal Representation Act. The organization scored Wednesdayβs vote on HR 7109. (The Heritage Foundation created The Daily Signal in 2014.)
Ryan Walker, Heritage Actionβs executive vice president, faulted the Obama administration for undoing nearly 200 years of precedent. Walker said the consequences of inaction are significant, given the ongoing border crisis.
βIllegal immigrants and other noncitizens cannot vote, and should not be given the power to sway our elections or congressional mapsβespecially in light of Joe Bidenβs border crisis that has brought more than 10 million people into our country,β Walker said. βThe Equal Representation Act puts electoral power back in the hands of those with the right to voteβAmerican citizensβsomething every member of Congress must protect.β
The House version amassed 114 co-sponsors and was approved by the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability in April on a 22-20 vote.
βMembers of Congress represent U.S. citizens, not foreigners,β said Davidson, the billβs co-sponsor. βUnder the Democratsβ open-border policies, sanctuary cities and states inflate their population with illegal aliens. Then theyβre rewarded with more congressional representation by a census that counts illegals. The inflated count is then used to draw congressional maps, undermining fair representation for our citizens.β
Edwards stressed only American citizens can legally vote, βso, only American citizens should be counted when determining federal representation.β
Hagerty forced a vote on the Equal Representation Act in March. It ultimately failed, 51-45, although only one Republican, Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, voted against it. Three other Republicans didnβt vote.
The post House Passes Bill to Restore Citizenship Question to Census appeared first on The Daily Signal.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saidΒ Thursday on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" that the Supreme Court is doing a "grave disservice" to the nation by delaying its ruling on former President Donald Trump's presidential immunity claim.
The post Clinton: Supreme Court Doing βGrave Disserviceβ by Not Deciding Trump Immunity appeared first on Breitbart.
An attorney for Steve Bannon, the former White House chief strategist for former President Donald Trump, issued a statement in response to an appeals court upholding a contempt conviction for defying a subpoena from the January 6 Select Committee.
The post Attorney for Steve Bannon Responds to Appeals Court Upholding Contempt Conviction: βDecision Is Wrongβ appeared first on Breitbart.
Having served on three Manhattan juries, I would not be surprised if the 12 men and women hearingΒ New York v. Donald J. TrumpΒ acquit him of all charges.
During two civil actions and one criminal case, my fellow jurorsΒ were serious, professional, and movingly civic-minded. A quiet, solemn patriotism infused our deliberations. Several jurors said that we should respect the justice system because, someday, we might needΒ it to respect us.
My first case was a medical-malpractice lawsuit involving a botched abortion. We empathized with a woman wounded by her doctors, but her lawyer did not prove negligence. So, we backed her physicians.
βBut weβve got to give her something,β one juror insisted.
Others instantlyΒ rebuked him.
βThatβs not how it works!β one said. βI feel sorry for her, too,β another admitted. βBut her lawyerΒ neverΒ madeΒ her case.β
So,Β we sent the plaintiff home without a penny.
Next, we deliberated intensely for almost three days before concluding that a Harlem drug counselorΒ neverΒ demonstrated his defamation-of-character claim against his employers. MyΒ sympatheticΒ pleas went unheeded, and he leftΒ empty-handed.
Finally, in her closing argument,Β a criminal prosecutorΒ displayedΒ a CD-ROM of a police dispatcherβs βBe on the lookoutβ announcement after an armed robbery. When we asked the judge toΒ playΒ that recording, heΒ told us that it was not in evidence.Β
Disgusted by this prosecutorial deception, we instantly and angrilyΒ acquitted the defendants. Minutes later, as foreman, I proudly announced our verdict in court.
These three cases confirm that Manhattan juries are sober and perfectly capable of fairness.
That is good news for Trump.
A jury ofΒ levelheadedΒ Manhattanites would appreciate these facts that verify the profound vacuity and fundamental unfairness of District Attorney Alvin Braggβs βcaseβ against Trump:
βThe Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over civil enforcement,β the memo says.
Nowhere does thisΒ federal ruleΒ grant local prosecutors authority to enforce federal election laws. Thus, Braggβs case is a shack built atop a cloud of helium.Β
With 48% of registered voters telling Reuters-Ipsos last month that Trumpβs Kafkaesque cases are βexcessive and politically motivatedβ (41% disagree) even a Manhattan jury could scrap Braggβs contraption.
My memories of jury duty, including within the Stalinesque building in which Trump is being persecuted, tell me that deliberating jurors could think, βI wonβt vote for Trump. But I cannot convict him beyond a reasonable doubt in a shaky case about actions that areΒ lurid,Β but legal.β
If just one juror agrees, this case will end with a hung jury. A second trial would be unlikely before Election Day.
And if βlurid, but legalβ reflects the opinions of 12 of my fellow Manhattanitesβwho tend to be tough, but fairβthen Trump will be acquitted on all charges and go back to where he belongs: The campaign trail.
The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.
The post Could a Manhattan Jury Acquit Trump? appeared first on The Daily Signal.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., in New York on Tuesday, condemned the so-called hush-money criminal trial of former President Donald Trump.
Johnson blasted the trial as a βshamβ and said that itβs being used to manipulate the 2024 presidential election.
βIβm an attorney. Iβm a former litigator myself. Iβm disgusted by what is happening here,β the Louisiana lawmaker said. βWhat is being done here is being done to our entire system of justice overall.β
Johnson said the American people are βlosing faithβ in the U.S. justice system and our institutions because they see them being βabused.β
The House speaker said the facts in Trumpβs case are important, as they always are in a trial. The former presidentβs actions were βpreviously reviewed, and no charges were filed. Why is that?β Johnson asked rhetorically.
βBecause thereβs no crime here,β he said, answering his own question.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg started up this case eight years after the crime was allegedly committed, Johnson said, because βitβs painfully obvious, weβre six months out from an election day, and thatβs the reason they brought these charges here and across the country.β
Johnson noted that the legal officials in this case are all partisan Democrats.
βWhat weβve got here is a partisan Democrat district attorney. We have a [President Joe] Biden donor judge, and we have an [assistant district attorney] who was recently a top official at the Department of Justice, Bidenβs DOJ, and recently received over $10,000 in payments from the Democratic National Committee,β he said.
Bragg, who brought the charges against Trump, also is a Democrat.
Johnson said the βstar witnessβ in the Trump trial, former Trump attorney Michael Cohen, is simply out for retribution.
Cohen is βclearly on a mission for personal revenge,β the Louisiana Republican said, adding that Cohen is known to be a witness who βhas had trouble with the truth.β
Cohen admitted to lying to Congress in 2017, which was among the crimes that led to his disbarment.
βThereβs nothing he presents here that should be given any weight at all by a jury and certainly not by this judge,β Johnson said.
The charge against Trump is falsification of business records, he said, βbut I think everyone knows that he is not the bookkeeper of his company.β
The House speaker said Trump is βinnocentβ in the case and that βanyone with common sense can see whatβs happening here.β
On top of everything else, Johnson said, the court has issued a gag order against Trump, which deprives the former president of his right to free speech during an election campaign. The whole trial represents a clear case where the judicial system has been weaponized against Trump, he said, and is punishing one presidential nominee while providing βcoverβ for another.
βThe American people are not going to let this stand,β Johnson said. βElection Day cannot get here soon enough, and we will continue to shine a light on all of this in Congress because we have that constitutional responsibility.β
The post βSHAMβ: House Speaker Johnson Condemns Trial of Trump as βPolitically Motivatedβ appeared first on The Daily Signal.
It's a dream scoop for the New York Times: Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito displayed a "Stop the Steal" symbol outside his house! Unfortunately for the Times and reporter Jodi Kantor, there isn't any real evidence for that headline -- only a heaping helping of BlueAnon fever-swamp paranoia.
The post Dulis: NYT Suggests, Without Evidence, Justice Samuel Alito Sent βStop the Stealβ Message Outside His Home appeared first on Breitbart.
Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) said Friday on MSNBC's "Deadline" that Democrats need to make the Supreme Court an election issue.
The post Blumenthal: Dems Need to βPut the Supreme Court on the Ballot,β Blame GOP for Justices with No Decency appeared first on Breitbart.
President Joe Biden, who wears bespoke sneakers to prevent embarrassing collapses and whose command of the English language rivals that of most kindergartners, is in bad political shape.Β
It is unsurprising that Democrats have resorted to some of the slimiest tactics imaginable to derail President Donald Trumpβs comeback bid and push their senile octogenarian across the November finish line. Properly skeptical of their chances to topple Trump in a fair mano-a-mano, the Democrat-lawfare complex in 2023 conjured up four separate criminal prosecutionsβtwo federal probes and two state probesβtargeting the 45th president. After all, if you canβt beat him, then β¦ prosecute and incarcerate him! All in the name of βour democracy,β naturally.
Suffice it to say that the Democrat-lawfare complexβs brazen, cynical attempt to subvert our constitutional order in the name of saving it has not gone according to plan.
In Washington, D.C., Special Counsel Jack Smithβs crown-jewel case against Trump, pertaining to the 2020 presidential election and the Jan. 6 jamboree at the U.S. Capitol, has been interrupted by the U.S. Supreme Court. The justices stepped in to assess the thorny constitutional question of the scope of immunity from criminal prosecution for former presidents, and a decision is not expected until late June.
The most likely result is a mixed opinion that holds some βcoreβ Article II presidential functions are immune from post-presidency prosecution, but other acts are not. This would require a remand to the trial court for fact-finding to determine which legal category the acts in Smithβs indictment fall into. That trial court finding could then be appealed, too. There is virtually no chance Smith can wrap this all up before November.
In Florida, Smithβs other federal case has not been more successful. The Florida prosecution, pertaining to Trumpβs post-presidency handling of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate, had at least some potential on the legal merits. But Smith wildly overplayed his hand by charging Trump with violating the controversial World War I-era Espionage Act, and the proceedings have frequently been set back due to the strenuous demands of the Classified Information Procedures Actβa 1980 statute first introduced in the Senate, ironically, by then-Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.
Recently, Judge Aileen Cannon indefinitely postponed the trial start date, which had initially been scheduled for May 20. There is again little to no chance Smith can reach a jury before November.
The case in Fulton County, Georgia, which once seemed the most perilous of them all due to Georgiaβs sprawling Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, the far-left Atlanta jury pool, and the potential for high-profile prosecution witnesses, has gone totally off the rails. Ever since January, the only questions in the case have not been substantive legal issues such as whether Trump oversaw a grand conspiracy to βoverturn an election,β but tabloid fodder such as whether Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and her illicit extramarital lover and appointed special prosecutor, Nathan Wade, are too compromised to bring the case.
The trial courtβs finding that only one of them must recuse is now pending before a Georgia appellate court, and it is likely the Supreme Court of Georgia will weigh in, too. This case isnβt reaching a jury before November, either.
That leaves the ongoing drama in New York City, where a literal porn βstarβ (Stormy Daniels) and a convicted felon (Michael Cohen) are aiding the George Soros-funded prosecutorβs case of β¦ well, he hasnβt exactly told us what it is. We surmise the case entails alleged New York State fraudulent bookkeeping charges in furtherance of a federal campaign finance law violationβwhich doesnβt even fall into the local district attorneyβs jurisdiction.
The prosecution is about to rest its case, and we donβt even know for sure what the actual black-letter legal case is. On Thursday, the βstar witnessβ convicted felonβs testimony was so bad that far-left CNN anchor Anderson Cooper remarked: βI think if I was a juror in this case watching that, I would think this guy is making it up as heβs going along.β
Brutal.
The Democratsβ strategy is failing. But it is up to the American people to make them pay for it.
COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM
The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.Β
The post Will Democrats Pay a Price for Their Crumbling Lawfare Strategy Against Trump? appeared first on The Daily Signal.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been granted the right to appeal his extradition to the United States by London's High Court on Monday
The post WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange Granted Right to Appeal Extradition to United States appeared first on Breitbart.
Prosecutor Karim Khan of the International Criminal Court (ICC) formally requested arrest warrants on Monday for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu,Β Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and several leaders of the genocidal Hamas terrorist organization.
The post International Court Seeks Arrest Warrants for Netanyahu, Hamas Leaders appeared first on Breitbart.
Trump slapped sanctions on the ICC for attempting to investigate the U.S. or Israel for fighting terrorists. Biden revoked Trump's order shortly after taking office.
The post Biden Reversed Trump Policy Against ICC, Leaving the U.S. and Israel Vulnerable appeared first on Breitbart.
Israel's opposition leaders attacked the International Criminal Court (ICC) on Monday for its decision to issue arrest warrants for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant over the war against Hamas.
The post Israeli Opposition Calls ICC Warrants βa Crime of Historic Proportionsβ appeared first on Breitbart.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) that sought an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Monday is the former workplace of Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is prosecuting former President Donald Trump.
The post ICC, Where Trump Prosecutor Jack Smith Worked, Now Targets Netanyahu appeared first on Breitbart.
Amal Clooney, the human rights lawyer married to Hollywood star George Clooney, was involved in helping to prepare the request for arrest warrants of Israeli leaders Monday by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
The post George Clooneyβs Wife, Amal, Involved in ICC Warrant Against Netanyahu appeared first on Breitbart.
President Joe Biden claimed Monday to be outraged at the International Criminal Court (ICC) warrants against Israeli officials for the war in Gaza -- after Biden revoked President Donald Trump's executive order against the ICC.
The post Biden, After Revoking Trumpβs Order Against ICC, Claims Outrage at ICC Warrants Against Israel appeared first on Breitbart.
Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Monday that President Joe Biden should restore President Donald Trump's 2020 sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC), which Biden reversed soon after taking office in 2021.
The post Mike Pompeo: Biden Should Restore Trumpβs Sanctions on the ICC appeared first on Breitbart.
A law signed by President George W. Bush in 2002 theΒ American Servicemembersβ Protection Act (ASPA), bars the United States from cooperating with the International Criminal Court (ICC) in pursuing warrants against Israel.
The post Bush-era Law Authorizes U.S. to Free Netanyahu if Detained by ICC appeared first on Breitbart.
Congress is pushing forward with a data regulation bill that would trap Americans in a hidden tangle of quotas inside private software, says Stewart Baker, an influential lawyer in Washington, DC.
The post Bipartisan Bill Injects Progressive Quotas into Everyday Software appeared first on Breitbart.
George Clooney, and his wife, Amal Clooney are seemingly at odds with President Joe Biden after the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) revealed he was seeking arrest warrants for Israeli leaders and Hamas terrorist leaders.
The post Biden at Odds with Hollywood Fundraisers George and Amal Clooney over ICC Warrant of Arrest for Israeli Leaders appeared first on Breitbart.