More of this is needed.   Today, Illinois Senator Dick Durbin (D) and Ohio Senator JD Vance (R) confronted each other in the upper chamber over DOJ nominees that Senator Vance refuses to advance with unanimous consent.

Durbin was furious at the blocks JD Vance was putting in front of the Joe Biden nominees for U.S. Attorney and criticized Vance for campaigning on “law and order” while blocking those DOJ nominees advanced by Durbin.  In response, Senator Vance delivered remarks promising to block every DOJ nomination as long as Joe Biden continues weaponizing Main Justice and the USAO nominations to target his political opposition.  WATCH [prompted to the Vance response]:

.

JD Vance has some tenuous network affiliations in his background that give me a little pause; however, on the substance of this issue, he is righteous in this approach.

There has been little, if any, Republican push-back to the radical nature of the onslaught brought forth by Biden, DAG Lisa Monaco and AG Merrick Garland.  Factually the Lawfare tactics have increased in weaponized intensity throughout the Biden term in office.

The Republican House has the ability to block the funding mechanism, and the Republican minority in the Senate have the ability to block the nominees. Until now, we have seen little, if any, effort by either chamber to bring the Biden rogue elements to heel.  Perhaps this is the start.  Regardless, it is at least a step in the right direction.

(more…)

During yesterday’s Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee hearing, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul took the opportunity to confront the Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) and FBI with the recent history of their activity.

As noted by Senator Paul, the past several years exhibits clear and irrefutable evidence of the DHS and FBI working collaboratively to conduct surveillance on American citizens, while simultaneously violating the first amendment by coordinating with big tech social media companies on censorship.  WATCH:

Everything Rand Paul says in that statement is factually correct.  However, highlighting just how the game of pretending is conducted in DC, at the end of hearing Senator Rand Paul -joined by Senator Lindsey Graham- voted to approve Jack Lew as Joe Biden’s ambassador to Israel.   Quite a shift in ideological priority considering that Jack Lew was the primary cover-up official responsible for protecting Obama from exposure to the IRS targeting operation against conservatives.

Additionally, prior to his job as Treasury Secretary, and prior to his position as President Obama’s Chief of Staff, and prior to him being Obama’s Budget Director (comical considering Obama never had a budget) Jack Lew served as State Department Director under Hillary Clinton.    It was Lew’s influence that shaped and positioned the failed Obama/Clinton foreign policy toward the Middle East.   Specifically, toward Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya during their upheaval, the Arab Spring.   How did that work out for our interests?

(more…)

Of course he does. Because even the most entrenched ideological Attorney General can see the absurdity of pushing the “new democratic norms” to the scale of jailing the leading presidential candidate in the United States.

During the opening segment of an interview with Obama “wingman” Eric Holder, the former attorney general admitted there is no likely scenario where DC Judge Tanya Chutkan would jail President Trump for violating a transparently motivated gag order.

Then again, this is Lawfare not necessarily any constitutional application of law.  The entire case is a manipulated interpretation of arcane law, twisted and manipulated to give the appearance of a law being broken simply by protesting the results of a transparently fraudulent election.  [First Two Minutes]

.

(more…)

For the sake of this argument, if you wanted to align with Judge Chutkan on the need for a gag order, you would first need to clarify if Mark Meadows was a witness for the Jack Smith prosecution.  Absent an actual witness list, the remarks by President Trump have to be stretched to encompass potential witnesses or foreseeable witnesses.  That’s what Judge Chutkan decided.  Anyone who might be a witness is protected by the gag order forbidding President Trump from talking about them.

Jack Smith baited President Trump by leaking a story to ABC News saying Mark Meadows warned President Trump that Biden’s 2020 election win was legitimate.  It never happened, but the leak and story were bait to get President Trump to respond – thereby creating the dynamic that would lead to the gag order.   The Lawfare worked.

[Page 7, pdf link]

I do not fault President Trump for responding to the ABC News article, he should have every right to speak about false assertions against him.  In reality, Jack Smith knew Judge Chutkan wanted to reaffirm the gag order, so he just provided her the legal tool to do it.  When dealing with corruption, that’s how Lawfare operates.

(more…)

Justice Arthur Engoron is truly one of the most ridiculous judges on the bench.

During a break in the courtroom theatrics, following testimony by Michael Cohen, President Trump told the media, “This judge is a very partisan judge with a person who’s very partisan sitting alongside of him, perhaps even much more partisan than he is.”  President Trump was clearly remarking about Michael Cohen who was on the witness stand.

However, Moonbat Judge Engoron then demanded President Trump take the witness stand so he could ask him who those comments were directed toward.  With Trump on the witness stand, the judge asked: “To whom were you referring?”  “You and Cohen,” Trump replied.

The judge then said he did not believe Trump, “as the trier of fact, I find the witness is not credible“, he decreed from his perch; preferring to believe that President Trump was talking about Judge Engoron’s clerk.    The idiot in a robe then levied another $10,000 sanction based on his wrongful assumption of President Trump’s thinking.

This is all far too ridiculous at this point.

(more…)

In the New York case against President Trump’s business operations, far left Judge Arthur Engoron previously issued a gag order forbidding President Trump from criticism of any court employee.  Today, Judge Engoron levied a $5,000 fine against President Trump because a Truth Social media post made prior to the order was visible on the Trump campaign website.

This judge is nuts.  Literally, nuts.

(Reuters) – Donald Trump was hit on Friday with a $5,000 fine by a New York judge for violating a gag order barring the former U.S. president from disparaging court staff during a civil fraud trial in which he is accusing of unlawfully inflating his net worth to dupe lenders.

Future violations by Trump could be punished by steeper fines and possible imprisonment, Justice Arthur Engoron said in an order. The judge noted that the violation appeared inadvertent, but added, “Make no mistake: future violations, whether intentional or unintentional, will subject the violator to far more severe sanctions.”

(more…)

President Trump and Alina Habba speak to the media following another day of nonsense testimony in the New York civil case against Donald Trump.

President Trump again reiterates the construct of the case against him as a political effort with no foundational premise in legal statute.  The lending institutions did their own due diligence; there are no victims, all the banks and finance offices were repaid with interest and ahead of schedule; there were no defaults and all lenders were satisfied with the terms, conditions and results.   WATCH:

BELOW: President Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, then reads the first page of the lending agreement to the media so they can better understand the nature of the fraudulent case being attempted by the State of New York.

(more…)

In one of the most disingenuously undefined judicial rulings in recent memory, U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan says President Trump may not “target” a member of the court or prosecution in his rebuke of their official offices against him. [3-page pdf HERE]

[SOURCE]

Obviously, Judge Chutkan intends to give herself the most latitude possible when defining what terms of speech may end up being considered “targeting.” However, criticism is not a possible definition in ordinary parlance. So, we’ll see.

Additionally, Chutkan did not outline what -if any- punishment would be levied in the event she considers any statement to be considered “targeting.” The lawfare games continue…

(more…)

Good luck with this effort!  That’s my thoughts.

Yes, DC Judge Tanya Chutkan can decree from her perch that President Donald Trump is not permitted to criticize his persecution, the court, the witnesses who will testify against him or the political prosecution that is targeting the leading 2024 presidential candidate, but executing that decree is another kettle of fish entirely.

It is one thing to decree your control over independent speech, it is another thing entirely to try and enforce that decree.  Thankfully, and standing firm in his position, President Trump said in response he is “willing to go to jail, if that’s what it takes for our country to win and become a democracy again.”

(Washington DC) – […] Trump, who opted to campaign in Iowa rather than attend the hearing Monday, has also in recent weeks pointedly attacked several known witnesses in the case. He suggested that one of them, retired Gen. Mark Milley, would have warranted the death penalty in another era, and he repeatedly blasted another, former Attorney General Bill Barr.

Acknowledging Trump’s broad right to weigh in on public policy issues as he pursues a second term in the White House, Chutkan said nevertheless that Trump could not launch a “pretrial smear campaign” against those who might testify against him. She said she would consider “sanctions” if she observes any violations. She did not elaborate on those sanctions, although she said she planned to issue a written order with further details.

The pronouncement raises the prospect that Trump could face punishment — ranging from restrictions on his use of social media all the way up to potential pretrial incarceration — if he continues to mount public attacks on Smith and his team or witnesses likely to testify in his March trial. (read more)

Any restrictions against President Trump’s ability to defend himself from political prosecution can be appealed and let the Supreme Court of the United States go on record for or against the rights of the accused.

(more…)

The New York appeals court refused to stop or delay the ongoing civil action against President Trump; however, they did put a stay on the forced dissolution of the businesses.

Activist Judge Arthur Engoron had previously given President Trump’s team 10 days to outline a receivership process that would dissolve his business interests in New York. The appeals court ruling stops that from happening as the civil trial continues.

[Source]

CNN — A New York appeals court judge on Friday rejected Donald Trump’s attempt to stop the ongoing $250 million civil fraud trial, but temporarily halted the process of breaking up his businesses.  Associate Justice Peter Moulton issued the ruling after a brief hearing Friday afternoon. (link)

This civil trial is a farce manufactured by radical Lawfare ideologues.

(more…)