In the ridiculous federal election interference case in D.C., President Trump’s attorneys argued to the DC Circuit appellate court that President Trump holds inherent constitutional immunity. In essence, because President Trump was acquitted by the Senate of claims he incited or instigated the January 6, 2021, events, lawyers arguing under the constitution that only impeached and removed presidents can be criminally prosecuted.

The initial 3-judge panel of the court has taken up the appeal, and all subsequent lower court activity was suspended until the constitutional issue is resolved. Again, if President Trump does not have immunity, then all preceding and future presidents can be criminally prosecuted for any/all events and decisions while holding office. This is a core issue, and the DC Circuit Court of Appeals has to tread very carefully with these ramifications at the forefront.

The decision of the 3-judge panel could also be followed by a full en-banc review by all judges in the circuit. Then, depending on their decision, it could -likely will- go even higher to the U.S. Supreme Court. All of this takes time, and the initial 3-judge appeals court have not provided any hints on their timeline.

Apparently, as a consequence, the entire trial of the case has been removed from the lower DC court docket. The removal took place within the last few days, and the Washington Post noticed the removal. This removal means the timing of the case, if at all, is completely unknown now.

WASHINGTON – Former president Donald Trump’s March 4 trial date on charges of plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election has been dropped from the public calendar of the federal court in Washington, a sign of what has long been anticipated — that his claim of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution would delay his trial while it remains on appeal.

(more…)

The only reason this story gained traction was because CCTV video was involved.  With tens of millions of violent illegal aliens throughout the country, just imagine how much crime is occurring without detection or without widespread public knowledge.

In New York City, five illegal aliens acting as a pack of wild dogs were caught-on-camera attacking two NYPD cops in Times Square.  They were tracked down and arrested.  However, after appearing in court, they immediately received bail.

As noted by the NY Post, “Footage of the incident on West 42nd Street shows an NYPD officer and lieutenant telling a group of migrants to move along before a scuffle breaks out. The officers sustained kicks and punches as they attempted to wrestle some of the individuals to the ground.”

In an update, after receiving bail the five assault criminals have now hopped a charity bus heading to California to avoid prosecution.

NEW YORK – Four of the migrants cut loose without bail after allegedly ganging up on two NYPD cops near Times Square may be on the run, The Post has learned.

Cops believe the group hopped on a bus bound for California on Wednesday after giving phony names to a church-affiliated nonprofit group that helps migrants get rides out of the city, according to law enforcement sources.

(more…)

Because of course he did….  Both the prosecutor Nathan Wade and District Attorney Fani Willis were on the cusp of losing control of their fabricated case against Donald Trump, because a hearing was scheduled for tomorrow where uncomfortable questions would have been asked during under oath testimony of Nathan Wade.

The duo will still have to face questions from the trial judge in the criminal case, where the evidence of their relationship first surfaced, but they both avoided devastating questioning in the civil case by settling the Wade divorce and getting the divorce attorney to back down.   Their demanded testimony in the divorce case held massive ramifications for the criminal case in Fulton County.

We can only imagine the scope of the successful divorce terms for Wade’s soon to be ex-wife, Joycelyn Mayfield Wade, as the financial leverage created by this civil case against Nathan, and ultimately DA Willis, was enormous.

(Washington Post) – The lead prosecutor in the Georgia election interference case against former president Donald Trump and his allies settled a contentious divorce dispute on Tuesday, canceling a hearing scheduled for Wednesday morning that could have included testimony about allegations of an improper relationship between him and Fulton County District Attorney Fani T. Willis.

Nathan Wade had been expected to be questioned under oath Wednesday morning about his finances — including his income as a special prosecutor in the Trump case and his spending, including his purchase of airline tickets for himself and Willis in October 2022 and April 2023.

(more…)

President Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, delivered furious remarks to the assembled media pool following the Trump -vs- Carroll defamation trial and jury verdict.  Habba outlines the lawfare effort of the New York court system.  WATCH:

.

(more…)

E. Jean Carroll is 50 shades of crazy. This New York civil jury is just as nutty. Carroll was awarded a ridiculous $83.3 million in damages for her civil defamation lawsuit against President Trump.

The goofball advice columnist and her lawfare team convinced a prior New York jury that President Trump sexually assaulted her inside a department store fitting room.

President Trump had already left court today when the verdict was read.  The jurors – five men and four women – delivered their decision after three hours of deliberations. Carroll’s Lawfare crew had originally been seeking at least $24 million in damages.

NEW YORK – A jury ordered Donald Trump on Friday to pay $83.3 million to the writer E. Jean Carroll over defamatory remarks he made about her while he was president in response to her rape accusation.

U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled last fall that Trump defamed Carroll by saying in 2019 that he had never met her and that her book, in which she accused him of having raped her in the dressing room of a luxury department store in the mid-1990s, “should be sold in the fiction section.” (read more)

(more…)

In a 5-4 ruling today [pdf Available Here], Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined with the radical leftists on the court, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, to say that Texas is not permitted to protect itself from illegal border crossers.  None of the justices provided any explanation for their vote.

The court majority sided with the Biden administration policy of removing razor wire to permit illegal alien entry without impediment.  Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas voted with Texas, in favor of national border integrity.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Supreme Court on Monday allowed Border Patrol agents to cut razor wire that Texas installed on the U.S.-Mexico border, while a lawsuit over the wire continues.

The justices, by a 5-4 vote, granted an emergency appeal from the Biden administration, which has been in an escalating standoff at the border with Texas and had objected to an appellate ruling in favor of the state.

The concertina wire along roughly 30 miles (48 kilometers) of the Rio Grande near the border city of Eagle Pass is part of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s broader fight with the administration over immigration enforcement. (read more)

God, I pray for stability right now, because this is infuriating.

(more…)

In a court filing two weeks ago [SEE pdf HERE], one of the co-defendants in the Fulton County election case against President Trump presented very specific details of an intimate relationship between District Attorney Fani Willis and Special Prosecutor Nathan Wade.  Among the allegations are claims Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade had extravagant vacations together as a result of payments made for legal services.

Nathan Wade was a lawyer specializing in family matters prior to being appointed by Willis.  Mr. Wade never prosecuted a single felony case in his legal career.  Additionally, Mr. Wade is currently in divorce proceedings and making matters more complicated for DA Willis, Mr Wade’s wife is seeking to unseal the details of their current divorce battle and force a deposition from Ms Willis.

Judge Scott McAfee ordered District Attorney Fani Willis to file a written response by Feb. 2. He said he will hold a hearing on the allegations on Feb. 15.

[Source Link]

Additionally, according to White House visitor logs, Mr Wade visited White House lawyers prior to indictment of President Trump.  Also, DA Willis met with staff (Mary McCord) from the January 6 Committee prior to the indictment.

The Georgia prosecutor meeting with Biden lawyers prior to the indictment against Biden’s political opposition is a big issue that has yet to surface in front of Judge McAfee.

Things are getting very interesting.

(more…)

In a 14-page opinion and ruling today [SEE pdf HERE] four judges from the DC Circuit Court of Appeals deconstruct the previous ruling from their own court as well as the DC judge beneath them that gave Special Counsel Jack Smith access to President Trump Twitter account data and then enforced a non-disclosure order.

There are multiple layers to this story, but the substantive part is the scheme and the construct of how the Lawfare took place.  There’s no way this was coincidental; I’ll explain why.

First, there are only 7 members on the full DC Circuit Court of Appeals.  When the Twitter case to gain access to President Trump communication came to the appellate level, somehow all three of the most left-wing judges were assigned to hear the appeal.

An “en banc” review would have included the full 7 members.  However, that review was made moot by the release of the information (a result of the appellate decision).  The release itself was done with the use of a non-disclosure order, hiding the ruling in secrecy and keeping President Trump from knowing about it.  Once the other four members of the DC CCA eventually found out about the case and the ramifications for ‘executive privilege’ their opinion lambasting their own court is released.

As noted from the panel, “the court here permitted a special prosecutor to avoid even the assertion of executive privilege by allowing a warrant for presidential communications from a third party and then imposing a nondisclosure order.”

The Circuit Court justices note that Jack Smith could have gone to the National Archives for the information as they held the same set of documents and information.  However, Smith didn’t want to go that route because the National Archives would inform President Trump as customary and provide him the ability to assert executive privilege over any of the 32 Direct Messages requested.

(more…)

Everything about the case in New York City against the Trump Organization business operations is ridiculous.  There are no victims.  There was no fraud.  All of the lenders did their own due diligence.  All of the loans were paid back without issue, and the statement of financial condition was factual and accurate.  There were no defaults or banking interests adversely impacted. There are no victims of what the State calls “fraud.”

New York Attorney General Latisha James campaigned for office with promises to target the Trump Organization and Donald Trump himself.  This is malicious Lawfare in the extreme.  Additionally, the statute being used as the predicate for the case is a consumer fraud statute, intended to protect borrowers from predatory lenders. In the four corners of this case, Trump is the borrower, and the banks were the lenders.  New York is flipping the statute to claim the borrower defrauded the lenders, despite the lenders denying there was any fraud and there was no harm.   The entire case is ridiculous.

Appearing on CNN, O’Leary Ventures Chairman Kevin O’Leary outlines, to a perplexed Laura Coates, why Donald Trump’s civil fraud trial in New York is political nonsense. WATCH (prompted):

TRANSCRIPT – O’LEARY: Well, let’s leave out Trump for a minute, and let’s leave out politics, and just talk about what happens in real estate development anywhere. So, if you’re a developer and you’ve got a building on the block, anywhere in America, and it’s worth, let’s say, $500 million, and you want to build a building right beside it, you go to the bank and say, “This building is worth $500 million. I’d like to borrow a construction finance loan against this asset, and I want you to tell me it’s worth $500 million too.”

(more…)

President Donald Trump’s lawyer was asked about presidential immunity on Tuesday, by Federal Judge Florence Pan.  The specifics of the question surrounded if President Trump could order SEAL Team Six to assassinate an American citizen (or presidential candidate) and if Absolute Immunity would apply.

President Trump’s attorney was prepared to answer the hypothetical question with a “qualified yes“; however, unfortunately the lawyer was not prepared to give Judge Pan a real-world example of this action that recently took place.   It’s not a hypothetical; it was done recently.  President Obama did exactly this.

CITATION – “Anwar al-‘Awlaqī; (April 1971 – 30 September 2011) was an American Islamic scholar and lecturer who was killed in 2011 in Yemen by a U.S. government drone strike ordered by President Barack Obama. Al-Awlaki became the first U.S. citizen to be targeted and killed by a drone strike from the U.S government.

President Barack Obama had absolute immunity for ordering the intentional killing of American citizen, Anwar al-Awlaqi.  The issue of him being a presidential candidate is a non sequitur.

If Presidents did not have absolute immunity, or if the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals removes absolute immunity from President Trump, then Barack Obama can immediately be charged and arrested for killing al-Awlaqi. There is no statute of limitations for murder.  Yes, this is the cold truth of the matter.

Additionally, 16-year-old American Citizen, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, was killed in the same military assassination.  Abdulrahman, a child, was standing next to his father; he was never accused of any wrongdoing; he was never charged with any unlawful conduct; he was an innocent bystander.

In 2011 when the Obama administration was questioned about killing the teenager, White House Spokesperson Robert Gibbs said, “I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well-being of their children. I don’t think becoming an al-Qaeda jihadist terrorist is the best way to go about doing your business.”

(more…)