Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions


By: Jonathan Turley | June 7, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/06/07/laptop-deniers-in-delaware-the-media-shrugs-as-the-biden-laptop-is-authenticated-in-federal-court/

Below is my column in Fox.com on the authentication of Hunter Biden’s laptop in the Delaware trial. The government has denounced the Russian disinformation claims as a “conspiracy theory” and put on evidence that there is no evidence of tampering with the laptop. The FBI declared the laptop to be “real” and “authentic” and the court agreed. It was introduced as evidence before many reporters who previously embraced the debunked “conspiracy theory.” As discussed below, Houdini’s elephant was just revealed on stage and most of the audience looked away.

Here is the column:

Watching the coverage this week out of Delaware was like finding oneself in a parallel universe. There were ABC, NBC, CBS, the Washington Post and other news outlets reporting matter-of-factly that the Hunter Biden laptop showed no evidence of tampering and was both real and authentic.

These are the same outlets, and some of the same reporters, who eagerly spread the false claims that the laptop was “Russian disinformation.”

Yet, what followed the testimony of FBI agent Erika Jensen was absolute crickets. There was no effort to track down the signatories of the now-debunked letter from former intelligence officials just before the election. In the letter, figures such as Leon Panetta, former CIA director in the Obama administration, claimed that the laptop had all the markings of a Russian disinformation effort by intelligence services. (Panetta continued to make the assertion even in late 2023 in pushing what the federal government is now calling a “conspiracy theory.”)

  • There was no attempt by the media to confront associates of the Biden campaign (including now Secretary of State Antony Blinken) who pushed a long effort to get former intelligence officials to sign a letter.
  • There was no attempt to question President Joe Biden, who made this false claim in the presidential election to deflect any questions about the evidence of corrupt influence peddling on the laptop.

Years ago, I wrote that the Biden campaign had pulled off the single greatest political trick in history. As I wrote back then, the key to this Houdini-esque trick was to get the media to invest in the deception like audience members called to the stage.

Houdini used to make his elephant Jennifer disappear on stage every night because he knew that the audience wanted her to disappear. They were part of the act. The Bidens made the media part of the act, and these reporters have to back the illusion or admit that they were part of the deception. They are all laptop deniers, but they know that there are few who will call them to account for their conspiracy theory. Rather, it is social media where readers can see videos of leading media claiming that the laptop is the work of Russian intelligence.

In 2020, CBS News’ Lesley Stahl literally laughed mockingly at then-President Donald Trump when he raised the Hunter Biden laptop and what it revealed about the Bidens.

Figures like former Chief of Staff at the CIA and Department of Defense Jeremy Bash, who told MSNBC that the laptop “looked like Russian intelligence” and “walked like Russian intelligence.” He dismissed the relevance of the laptop before the election by declaring that “this effort by Rudy Giuliani and the New York Post and Steve Bannon to cook up supposed dirt on Joe Biden looks like a classic, Russian playbook disinformation campaign.”

Bash added that it made Trump an effective agent of Russian intelligence since he kept referencing the laptop: “[when] Rudy Giuliani suddenly comes forward with these mysteriously created emails, probably hacked through a Russian intelligence operation, we have to acknowledge the fact that the President of the United States is supporting, is condoning, is welcoming a Russian intelligence operation in 2020. … This is collusion in plain sight.”

Bash, like others behind the conspiracy theory, was later given an intelligence position by Biden.

The New York Times and The Washington Post both eventually verified Hunter Biden’s laptop after big tech dismissed the New York Post’s bombshell reporting during the 2020 presidential election. The Post reporting was famously censored by Twitter ahead of the 2020 election.

CNN’s Alex Marquardt told viewers, “We do know it is a very active Russian campaign.”

Indeed, the Washington Post has continued to suggest that this reporting was accurate. One of the leading purveyors of this false story was the Post’s Philip Bump, who slammed the New York Post for its now proven Hunter Biden laptop story.

In 2021, when media organizations were finally admitting that the laptop was authentic, Bump was still declaring that it was a “conspiracy theory.” Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, Bump continued to suggest that “the laptop was seeded by Russian intelligence.”

After Bump had a meltdown in an interview when confronted over past false claims, I wrote a column about the litany of such false claims. The Post surprised many of us by issuing a statement that they stood by all of Bump’s reporting, including the laptop conspiracy theory. That was in August 2023.

Of course, this trick would not have been possible without the assistance of 50 former intelligence officials who were reportedly organized through Clinton campaign associates to issue the infamous letter. These figures then continued to spread the false claim.

  • Former CIA Director John Brennan, one of the 50 who signed the letter, also claimed that the laptop bore “the hallmarks of Russian disinformation.”
  • James Clapper, a former director of National Intelligence and CNN analyst, said the laptop was “classic, textbook Soviet, Russian tradecraft at work.”
  • Members of Congress also repeated the false claims, including Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., who told the media not to join Giuliani as a “vehicle for Russian disinformation.” 
  • Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., former chair of the House Intelligence Committee, insisted that the laptop was clearly “Kremlin propaganda.”
  • This long-debunked claim was even recently repeated in Congress by Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., who claimed that the laptop could not be authenticated even though it was just authenticated and introduced in a federal prosecution.

All of those who pushed what the U.S. government is now calling a false “conspiracy theory” have flourished in the wake of Biden’s victory. Intelligence officials like Bash received plum positions while others like Clapper were given media contracts. Schiff is expected to be elected to the Senate and is running, ironically enough, on his record with intelligence investigations of Trump.

Conversely, the New York Post and reporters like Miranda Devine have received no recognition for their work in disclosing the contents and defying attacks from politicians and media alike. While reporters were given a Pulitzer for reporting the now debunked Russian collusion story, Devine and others will never receive a Pulitzer for uncovering the true story behind the laptop.

Devine, the New York Post, and others simply refused to get in on the trick. As is often said, there are some facts simply “too good to check” in the media. The Hunter Biden laptop disappeared from the stage like Houdini’s elephant because the media wanted it to disappear.

The reappearance of the laptop in a Delaware courtroom might be awkward for most people, but not the media or intelligence officials or politicians who pushed the conspiracy theory. After all, they were all in on the trick. It was the voters who were played for chumps.


A.F. Branco – 80th Anniversary of D-Day

A.F. BRANCO | on June 6, 2024 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-80th-anniversary-of-d-day/

02 D-Day 80 CI 1080
A Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco 2024

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Flipboard

A.F. Branco Cartoon – June 6th 2024 is the 80th Anniversary of D-Day. Where American soldiers died and fought against the very thing Biden and the Democrats represent and advocate today.

HUMILIATION: Biden Awkwardly Hunches Over at D-Day Celebrations… “Is He Downloading in His Diaper?” (VIDEO)

By Ben Kew – June 6, 2024

Joe Biden once again reminded the world how mentally and physically unfit he is for office by randomly crouching down during war celebrations in France.
Appearing at D-Day 80th anniversary celebrations with French President Emmanuel Macron, Biden started leaning forward and appeared on the brink of collapse before eventually restoring balance.
Both Jill Biden and Brigitte Macron looked on in confusion as the 81-year-old continued to embarrass himself. READ MORE… 

DONATE to A.F. Branco Cartoons – Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump. READ MORE…


Thursday, June 6, 2024

Top Stories
Biden Ignores Hundreds of Cases of Violence Against Pro-Life Christians
Trump Glad Roe Overturned so States Can Pass Their Own Abortion Laws: “It’s a Beautiful Thing
Democrats’ Attempt to Pass Trojan Horse Bill Pushing Abortion is Defeated
Biden Puts Pro-Life Americans in Prison, Hasn’t Arrested Anyone for Firebombing a Pregnancy Center

More Pro-Life News
Teens Who Beat a Couple and Killed Their Unborn Baby Released After Arrest
Couple Banned From Adopting Because They’re Conservative Christians Win First Battle in Court
Abortions Drop to Near 0 in Pro-Life States as Abortion Bans Save Babies
Canadian Court Will Hear Case of Woman Who Might be Euthanized Because She Has Autism
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories

Biden Ignores Hundreds of Cases of Violence Against Pro-Life Christians

Trump Glad Roe Overturned so States Can Pass Their Own Abortion Laws: “It’s a Beautiful Thing

Democrats’ Attempt to Pass Trojan Horse Bill Pushing Abortion is Defeated

Teens Who Beat a Couple and Killed Their Unborn Baby Released After Arrest

Couple Banned From Adopting Because They’re Conservative Christians Win First Battle in Court

Abortions Drop to Near 0 in Pro-Life States as Abortion Bans Save Babies

Democrats “Right to Contraception” Bill Pushes “Trans Surgeries” on Children

Canadian Court Will Hear Case of Woman Who Might be Euthanized Because She Has Autism

MORE PRO-LIFE NEWS FROM TODAY

Indiana Fights in Court to Keep Abortion Ban, Which is Saving Babies From Abortions

Soros Funneled $19M Into Leftist Groups Attacking Justice Alito

Senator Challenges Democrats to Support Moms and Babies Instead of Pushing Abortion

Premature Triplets Reunite With Their NICU Nursing Team 18 Years Later

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Liberals Can’t Say They Support Women When They Defend Sex-Selection Abortions

Republicans Block “Right to Contraception” Bill That Promotes Abortion, Trans Surgeries on Kids

Kamala Harris Compares Pro-Life Americans to Child Molesters, Slave Owners

Biden Judicial Nominee Can’t Say if Chromosomes Determine Sex: “I Haven’t Studied Biology”

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.
For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.


By Jon Brown, Christian Post Reporter Wednesday | June 05, 2024

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/tucker-carlson-asserts-demonic-forces-at-work-in-world-affairs.html/

Journalist Tucker Carlson explained during a recent podcast with Shawn Ryan that he believes humanity is engulfed in a spiritual war. | Screenshot: YouTube/Shawn Ryan Show

Journalist Tucker Carlson explained during a recent podcast with former U.S. Navy SEAL Shawn Ryan that he believes humanity is engulfed in a spiritual war and that World War III could be on the horizon as the final spiritual dividing lines are being drawn.

During a wide-ranging discussion that spanned more than three hours, Carlson spoke to Ryan at length about the spiritual warfare he discerns is taking place in the world, which he believes includes UFOs or so-called “Unidentified Aerial Phenomena,” also known as UAPs.

When Ryan asked him if he believes the world is approaching World War III, Carlson said, “We’re really close to it, as you know. Really, really, really close.”

“The fact that anyone would even consider getting within a thousand miles of f—ing around with a nuclear exchange just shows you that the core impulse here is suicide,” he said. “That’s what all of this is. And that’s why I personally think it’s spiritual. The word ‘demonic’ is suddenly being overused, it’s everywhere, because it’s real.”

“If you see a human movement that’s anti-human — the push toward nuclear war for its own sake is, by definition, anti-human. I would say AI is anti-human, by definition. Transgenderism is anti-human, by definition. Transhumanism is anti-human. Do people act against their own long-term interest? Probably not, actually, so it’s probably not human.”

“Did dogs act against their own collective interest? Do caribou? Do porcupines? Do single-cell amoeba? Do sea cucumbers? No, none of them do. No animal does that, because it’s not natural. Animals are part of nature, they do natural things. People are subject to the supernatural, so they do things that are not natural, like kill themselves.”

“That’s why we’re the only species that kills itself, right?” Carlson continued. “So when you kill yourself, whether slowly or all at once, you’re being acted on by forces outside of you — spiritual forces, obviously.”

The two went on to discuss UAPs, which Carlson has previously suggested are demonic entities that have a relationship with the U.S. government.

Carlson cited Genesis 6, which some biblical commentators have suggested teaches that fallen angels and humans procreated before the Flood, according to the Encyclopedia Britannica.

Conceding that he is a devout Christian who believes other religions are false, Carlson noted that most belief systems teach that supernatural beings can take physical form, a doctrine he said would include the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

“If every culture in the world that we know about has left any kind of written or physical record is reaching the same conclusions about something, maybe there’s something there,” he said. “And maybe it’s not so crazy to think what everyone else has always thought since the beginning of time, which is that there is this combination in cases of human beings and the spiritual realm, whatever that is.”

“I don’t understand the specifics of it, but I know that it has been written about since people have been writing,” Carlson added, noting that modern man seemingly stopped believing in the supernatural largely after 1945, when they proved they were capable of destroying the world.

After Ryan observed that there is seemingly a deepening cultural divide between Christians and overt satanists that might suggest the end of the world is approaching, Carlson predicted religious revival.

“I don’t have too many great insights into things or prophetic feelings,” he said. “I’m very conventional, but the one thing that I really felt strongly a couple of years ago — really strongly, I felt it overwhelmingly like from outside me — was that there’s some form of religious revival coming. I felt that really strongly.”

Carlson said he receives reams of information about the End Times from friends. While he is reticent to formulate a firm opinion on the topic, he said he believes mankind is unmistakably moving toward a crisis point.

“I think history ends, I think we all sort of sense history ends,” he said. “But it’s also really clear that we don’t know when it ends, so I kind of resent that a little bit, because it’s like, ‘What are you? God? You know the future?'”

Acknowledging that humans are incapable of knowing the future, he also said, “We are clearly moving towards something big.”

“Who doesn’t feel that? Everybody feels it, and the divide is spiritual,” he added.

Since his ouster from Fox News in 2023, Carlson has become more open about his beliefs regarding the spiritual nature of the battles afflicting the world. During a speech to members of the Tarrant County GOP in Texas in March, he exhorted his audience to keep the country’s increasingly evident spiritual war in mind amid the approaching election.

“This is not flesh and blood at all. If you’re offended by prayer, you’re taking orders, OK? I don’t see another rational explanation for it,” he said.

“You can reduce all these debates about climate, crime, all the weird sex stuff — I’m not going to dignify it with a name, I’m just gonna call it that ‘weird sex stuff’ — but, if they’re promising you the opportunity to castrate your children, what are they really promising? No grandchildren. The end of your line,” he continued.

“And Solomon [and] David would like instantly recognize that as an act of total war against you and your people, period,” he added. “Because that’s what that is.”

Jon Brown is a reporter for The Christian Post. Send news tips to jon.brown@christianpost.com


BY: TIM GOEGLEIN | JUNE 06, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/06/80-years-later-remember-the-d-day-invasion-that-liberated-the-world/

Soldiers coming ashore at Normandy on D-Day.

Author Tim Goeglein profile

TIM GOEGLEIN

MORE ARTICLES

June 6 marks the 80th anniversary of American, British, and Canadian troops landing on the coast of Normandy, France, in the greatest military mobilization in history, also known as D-Day. The New York Times reports that “fewer than 200 veterans of the allied invasion of Normandy, which marked a turning point in World War II, are still alive and sound enough to attend this year’s D-Day reunion in France.”

In the words of Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, whose team had been planning the mobilization for over a year, “These men came … to storm these beaches for one purpose only, not to gain anything for ourselves, not to fulfill any ambitions America had for conquest, but to preserve freedom.”

Eisenhower knew the importance and difficulty of the task ahead. If the mission failed, it would set back Allied efforts to defeat Nazi Germany for at least a year, resulting in the inhumane extermination of millions of more Jews and the deaths of countless thousands of soldiers.

As Winston Churchill and President Franklin Roosevelt believed, the D-Day invasion was essential if freedom were to flourish and Christian civilization — rooted in the inherent respect for and dignity of all humankind — were to be saved.

That is why in the wee hours before the launch of the invasion, Eisenhower told the courageous soldiers they were about to “embark upon the Great Crusade” and the “eyes of the world are upon you.”

He then concluded, “Let us all beseech blessing of Almighty God upon this great and noble undertaking.”

The fighting was fierce indeed. More than 4,400 Allied soldiers of the 156,000 deployed from the United States, Great Britain, and Canada would lose their lives. Another 10,200 were injured, including 6,600 Americans. Those who fought later said the waters of Normandy turned red from all the blood spilled.

Forty years later, at the 40th anniversary of D-Day, President Ronald Reagan gave a touching tribute to those men who stormed the Normandy beaches, in particular the most treacherous, Pointe du Hoc, saying:

The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity, faith that a just God would grant them mercy on this beachhead or on the next. It was the deep knowledge — and pray God, we have not lost it — that there is a profound, moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest. You were here to liberate, not to conquer, and so you and those others did not doubt your cause. And you were right not to doubt.

He continued:

You all knew that some things are worth dying for. One’s country is worth dying for, and democracy is worth dying for, because it’s the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man. All of you loved liberty. All of you were willing to fight tyranny, and you knew the people of your countries were behind you.

Yet, despite the importance of this mission, its memory fades with each passing generation.

President Reagan warned us about this in his 1989 farewell address to the nation: “You know, four years ago, on the 40th anniversary of D-Day, I read a letter from a young woman writing to her late father, who’d fought on Omaha Beach. Her name was Lisa Zanatta Hehn, and she said, ‘We will always remember, we will never forget, what the boys at Normandy did.’”

He added, “Well, let’s help her keep her word. If we forget what we did, we won’t know who we are.”

But unfortunately, we are not keeping our word. For instance, one poll found that 12 percent of Americans thought Dwight Eisenhower fought in the Civil War (which ended 25 years before he was born), instead of leading the D-Day invasion! Perhaps even worse, another survey found that only 43 percent of Americans know the real reason we celebrate Memorial Day. These sad statistics are just another example of how neglecting to teach American history in our schools has taken a toll on our national memory.

This is tragic. Perhaps it is our time for us, as parents, to do what else President Reagan encouraged us to do in his farewell address: “An informed patriotism is what we want. And are we doing a good enough job teaching our children what America is and what she represents in the long history of the world? All great change happens in America at the dinner table. So, tomorrow night in the kitchen I hope the talking begins.”

That is why I wrote my bookToward a Perfect Union: The Moral and Cultural Case for Teaching the Great American Story, to equip parents to do this, so our children and their children will never forget the bravery of the men who stormed the beaches and climbed the cliffs of Pointe-du-Hoc to preserve freedom. If we do not teach this, the freedom they fought so valiantly for will become a forgotten memory. So, 80 years later, let’s never forget the history of D-Day.


Timothy S Goeglein is vice president of Focus on the Family in Washington, and author of the book Toward a More Perfect Union: The Cultural and Moral Case for Teaching the Great American Story (Fidelis, 2023).


By: Deroy Murdock | June 06, 2024

Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/06/06/just-one-justice-system-why-not-two/

Ever since Donald Trump came down the escalator of Trump Tower in 2015 to launch his first campaign for president, there has been a widespread perception on the Right that the scales of justice have been tipped against them and in favor of the Left and that Lady Justice is anything but blind. (Photo: Vladimir Cetinski/ iStock/Getty Images)

Many things human come in pairs. Eyes, ears, hands, feet, and lungs appear in twos. Even a single nose features two nostrils.

In this context, America’s new, two-track justice system might be perfectly natural: One for the Left—in which they suffer few consequences, if any, for their misdeeds—and one for the Right, in which arrests, trials, and prison sentences are routine.

After the Supreme Court’s current term ends later this month, masons should spend this summer re-chiseling the marble above its columns. Out with “Equal Justice Under Law.” In with “Bipolar Justice for All!”

Black Lives Matter and Antifa thugs on the Left spent the summer of 2020 yanking statues from pedestals, torching police precincts, and otherwise unleashing total mayhem. Then-Sen. Kamala Harris promoted a legal-defense fund to free arrestees. Few paid any price for the “fiery but mostly peaceful” George Floyd riots.

A peaceful demonstrator shares his opinion at a Black Lives Matter march on June 14, 2020, in Los Angeles. Few, if any, of his more violent BLM compatriots suffered any legal consequences for their anything but “mostly peaceful” actions after the killing of George Floyd less than three weeks earlier. (Photo: Rodin Eckenroth/Getty Images)

The Jan. 6 hoodlums on the Right who shattered windows and smashed doors to breach the U.S. Capitol deserve serious prison time. But other protesters naively entered after Capitol Police waved them in.

“Hey, look. It’s open house!” some might have thought.

Many of these accidental tourists are in huge trouble. Arkansas’ Daniel Hatcher entered the Capitol, snapped some photos for two minutes, and walked out. The FBI arrested Hatcher in Little Rock last Feb. 13. He now faces federal charges.

Left-wing Deep State functionaries John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, Peter Strzok, and Andrew Weissmann advanced the Russia Hoax, which bedeviled the Trump administration and divided America for three years. Each of these men scored a book contract and a TV deal. Literally.

On the Right, Russiagate ensnared Trump aides Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, George Papadopoulos, Gen. Michael Flynn, and Roger Stone. All were sentenced to prison. Trump pardoned Flynn and Stone. Gates served house arrest. Manafort and Papadopoulos went to the slammer.

The quintessence of these two systems involves 2016’s presidential nominees and how they separately tried to influence that election.

On the Left, Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign paid $175,000 to Democratic law firm Perkins Coie, which engaged opposition-research shop Fusion GPS. It hired former British spy Christopher Steele. He wrote a baseless “Dirty Dossier” that hallucinated ties between Trump and the Kremlin. Team Clinton leaked this fraudulent report, which BuzzFeed published. And the Russia Hoax was off to the races.

On the Right, Trump was accused of reimbursing his then-attorney, Michael Cohen, for paying porn star Stormy Daniels $130,000 to clam up about an alleged affair with Trump that both of them have denied.

As former Justice Department official John B. Daukas wrote in the American Spectator: “So, Hillary Clinton is found to be liable for mislabeling payments for the Steele Dossier as legal fees and gets an $8,000 civil fine; Trump has been found guilty of mislabeling nondisclosure payments as legal fees and is a convicted felon.”

As Yogi Berra might have said: “Only in America.”

Clinton went on to write books, deliver lectures, and whine loudly about why she lost to a real-estate magnate and TV personality on his first political campaign. Notwithstanding emotional scars, she is out a whopping eight grand.

Trump, meanwhile, endured a six-week trial that kept him off the campaign trail for four days each week, cost him undisclosed millions in—not to coin a phrase—legal expenses, and added abundant stress to his already high-pressure life. He awaits sentencing on July 11 and could receive four years for each of the 34 counts on which he was convicted. Total: 136 years in the big house.

But is this really so wrong?

If good things come in pairs, perhaps this applies to justice.

Rather than complain about two paths to justice, one Left and one Right, maybe conservatives should celebrate this development. After all, the truth about pectoral muscles also might apply to justice systems: “One is not enough, and three are too many.”


By: Jonathan Turley | June 6, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/06/06/just-ask-mookie-hunter-biden-has-no-defense-other-than-nullification/

Below is my column in the New York Post on the first day of testimony in the trial of Hunter Biden. Every claim of the defense seemed to collapse in the first two days of the trial. The defense argued that Hunter did not check the box on the gun form, so the prosecutors called the employee who watched him fill out the form. It claimed he was not using drugs at the time, so the prosecutors read texts from the next day in which Hunter sought to buy crack and called a series of witnesses on his continual use of crack during the period. The defense previously claimed the laptop showed evidence of tampering, so the prosecutor called a FBI agent establishing that there is no evidence of tampering and that the laptop is authentic. The defense claimed that Hunter just wandered into the store and was pressured to buy a gun, so prosecutors called an employee who testified that Hunter came in specifically wanting to buy a gun. As previously discussed, the lack of a defense is becoming glaringly obvious as is the nullification strategy.

Here is the column:

On the first day of his trial, Hunter Biden spoke to the jury . . . against himself. The prosecutors in his Wilmington gun trial read long excerpts from Hunter’s book on his long addiction to drugs and his self-proclaimed “superpower — finding crack anytime, anywhere.”

Listening to himself was the President’s son, whose counsel had just suggested that Hunter may have had a brief moment where he was drinking as opposed to snorting or smoking.

Accordingly, defense counsel Abby Lowell suggested, Hunter did not “knowingly” deny that he was using drugs when he purchased a .38-caliber Colt Cobra revolver from the StarQuest Shooters and Survival Supply in Wilmington, Del. Somehow the argument is that — for a brief moment on October 12, 2018 — Hunter forgot that he was a superpowered junkie. The problem is that the next prosecution witness is likely to be, again, Hunter Biden.

The day after he bought the gun, Hunter was texting a guy named “Mookie” to score drugs behind a minor league baseball stadium. Mookie appears to have come through for Hunter since the next day (two days after denying that he used drugs), Hunter allegedly texted Hallie Biden that he was “waiting for a dealer named Mookie.”

Then, two days after the gun purchase, Hunter texted, “I was sleeping on a car smoking crack on 4th street and Rodney.” That corner appears less than a mile and half from the federal courthouse where Hunter is sitting. It is roughly five miles from the gun shop where he denied using drugs.

Hallie will also testify. She was the widow of Hunter’s deceased brother and started an intimate relationship with Hunter after Beau’s death. She was also allegedly doing crack. Yet, when Hallie saw the gun in the console of Hunter’s car, she had the presence of mind to realize he was an unstable addict. She took the gun and threw it into a dumpster behind a restaurant.

The brutal start of the hearing raises the question — again — of why Hunter decided to go to trial. There is no viable defense. The most that the defense can come up with is a claim that someone else may have completed the form, or that he had a moment of sobriety before heading off to meet Mookie.

In his book, Hunter describes an addiction that led him to smoke crack almost every 15 minutes. That would seem likely to come to mind when you are given a form asking, “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?”

Certainly his need for drugs was much on Hunter’s mind when he was texting Mookie.

Indeed, not long after the purchase, the Biden family held an intervention at their Delaware home to deal with Hunter’s raging addiction.

These defenses are about as convincing as saying that your client got locked into the bank vault after losing his way to the restroom . . . hours after the bank closed.

So why present unbelievable defenses in Wilmington? Because it is Wilmington. This is Biden’s hometown. The President maintains his residence in the city and remains the town’s favorite son.

As if the jury needed any reminder, First Lady Jill Biden sitting behind Hunter brings home that this is a Biden trial in Bidentown. The combination of sympathy for a reformed addict and identification with the Bidens could be enough for a jury nullification strategy. The defense is not asking the jury to consider the evidence. It is asking the jury to ignore it.

Every juror appeared to confirm knowing someone with a drug addiction, including siblings or other relatives. Given that panel, Hunter could well take the stand to describe his addiction and lack of clarity of thought.

Hunter’s book offers moving descriptions of his struggle with addiction and could sway some jurors, especially given the relatively minor criminal charges. Wilmington for Biden is the opposite of Manhattan for Trump. This is a town that overwhelmingly voted for Biden in 2016 and 2020. It is a great jury pool for the defense. Viewed through a nullification defense, it does not matter how absurd the actual defense is in the case.

It is merely a pretense. Whether it is sympathy for a drug addict or a Biden, the defense clearly hopes that the jury will look beyond the evidence and the crime in this case.

Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.


By: Jonathan Turley | June 6, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/06/06/garlands-moment-of-truth-with-the-perjury-referral-the-attorney-general-faces-a-clear-choice-between-principle-and-politics/

“Conscience doth make cowards of us all.” Those words from Hamlet captured the moral dilemma for many of us as we face the costs of conscience.

For each of us, there often comes a moment when our principles are put to an undeniable and unavoidable test. It may be as simple as cheating on a test, shoplifting a product, or admitting to a wrong. It is natural to want to avoid such moments, particularly when we cannot even admit to ourselves that we may not be the person we have long claimed.

For Attorney General Merrick Garland, that moment of truth has finally arrived. Garland has long maintained that he is an apolitical attorney general who does not even consider the political consequences of his actions. Over the last three years, some of us have questioned that commitment in a series of actions or, more importantly, non-actions. Yet, Garland has always been able to evade responsibility by shifting decision-making to others or claiming a lack of knowledge.

Yesterday, Garland ran out of room to maneuver when three House committees (Oversight, Judiciary, and Ways and Means) sent him formal referrals for the perjury prosecution of Hunter Biden and his uncle, James Biden. The evidence of false answers to Congress is overwhelming and Garland’s department has prosecuted Trump associates and others with far less in past cases, including the prosecution of former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

Here is the Committee’s summary of the allegations, which I also previously discussed in a column:

During his deposition, Hunter Biden made false statements about holding a position at Rosemont Seneca Bohai (RSB), a corporate entity that received millions of dollars from foreign individuals and entities who met with then-Vice President Biden before and after transmitting money to the RSB account that then transferred funds to Hunter Biden. After deposing Hunter Biden, the Committees obtained documents showing Hunter Biden represented that he was the corporate secretary of RSB.

Additionally, Hunter Biden during his testimony relayed an entirely fictitious account about threatening text messages he sent to his Chinese business partner while invoking his father’s presence with him as he wrote the messages.  Hunter Biden testified he had transmitted this threat to an unrelated individual with the same surname. However, documents released by the Committee on Ways and Means demonstrate conclusively that Hunter Biden made this threat to the intended individual, and bank records prove Hunter Biden’s Chinese business partners wired millions of dollars to his company after his threat.  A portion of the proceeds has been traced to Joe Biden’s bank account.

During James Biden’s transcribed interview, he stated that Joe Biden did not meet with Tony Bobulinski, a business associate of James and Hunter Biden, in 2017 while pursuing a deal with a Chinese entity, CEFC China Energy. His statements were contradicted not only by Mr. Bobulinski, but Hunter Biden.  Mr. Bobulinski also produced text messages that establish the events leading up to and immediately following his meeting with Joe Biden on May 2, 2017.

These are straight-forward questions and answers. More importantly, both men knew and prepared for these questions. They were widely discussed before their testimony. They appear to have knowingly lied. The question is what Garland is now prepared to do about it.

For Garland, a bill has come due. I supported his appointment as Attorney General because I respected his integrity and intellect as a federal judge. I believed his claim that he would not allow political considerations to cloud his judgment. I grew more critical as I saw Garland struggling to avoid decisions that would work against President Biden or his family.

Now, Garland has what appears flagrant perjurious statements made by the President’s son and brother. Given the fact that these were anticipated questions, the false answers appear premeditated and egregious. Hunter and Jim Biden displayed a sense of impunity in denying facts that the committees (and many commentators) believe are well established on the available evidence. Those facts were highly embarrassing to the Biden family and they allegedly chose to lie rather than admit to them.

The fact that such alleged false statements occurred in the midst of an impeachment investigation only magnifies the concerns. This was an effort to establish the President’s knowledge of a massive corrupt influence peddling operation maintained by his family.

The gun charge in Delaware is a relatively minor criminal allegation. This is far more serious and could impose far greater punishment for the President’s son.

In the Trump cases, the Justice Department moved with impressive speed in going to grand juries against figures for false statements or contempt of Congress. There was little handwringing, no hem and hawing.

So, Garland’s moment of truth has arrived. He will either have to meet it or shrink from it. Either way, the Attorney General is about to give the full measure of himself and his office.


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Guard on Duty

A.F. BRANCO | on June 6, 2024 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-on-guard/

The GOP Has No Teeth
A Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco 2024

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Flipboard

A.F. Branco Cartoon – The reason the Democrats keep exercising Lawfare against Trump and conservatives is that the GOP guards on watch have no teeth or spine to fight back. Oh yes, but they have a loud bark and some sternly worded letters.

Attorney Mike Davis: “Republicans are Weak and Stupid and Democrats Know This – Biggest Wimps on Planet” (VIDEO)

By Jim Hoft – Aug 15, 2023

Mike Davis, the former Chief Counsel for Nominations to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, is the founder and president of the Article III Project (A3P). Mike joined Steve Bannon today on The War Room and was in rare form after the Democrats indicted President Trump on speech charges and 18 of his top officials and supporters.
Mike Davis says Democrats get away with this because Republicans are so weak and stupid. We could not agree more. READ MORE…

DONATE to A.F. Branco Cartoons – Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump. READ MORE…


Wednesday, June 5, 2024

Top Stories
Republicans Block “Right to Contraception” Bill That Promotes Abortion, Trans Surgeries on Kids
Kamala Harris Compares Pro-Life Americans to Child Molesters, Slave Owners
Biden Judicial Nominee Can’t Say if Chromosomes Determine Sex: “I Haven’t Studied Biology”
Melinda Gates is Spending $1 Billion Promoting Abortion, But She Claims to be a Faithful Catholic

More Pro-Life News
Pro-Life Doctor: I Oppose Abortion Because Both Mother and Baby are Important
Mom Earns Her Graduate Degree, Takes Her 3-Year-Old Son to the Ceremony
Democrats “Right to Contraception” Bill Pushes “Trans Surgeries” on Children
Biden is Abusing FACE Act To Silence His Pro-Life Critics
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories

Republicans Block “Right to Contraception” Bill That Promotes Abortion, Trans Surgeries on Kids

Kamala Harris Compares Pro-Life Americans to Child Molesters, Slave Owners

Biden Judicial Nominee Can’t Say if Chromosomes Determine Sex: “I Haven’t Studied Biology”

Melinda Gates is Spending $1 Billion Promoting Abortion, But She Claims to be a Faithful Catholic

Pro-Life Doctor: I Oppose Abortion Because Both Mother and Baby are Important

Mom Earns Her Graduate Degree, Takes Her 3-Year-Old Son to the Ceremony

Democrats “Right to Contraception” Bill Pushes “Trans Surgeries” on Children

Biden is Abusing FACE Act To Silence His Pro-Life Critics

MORE PRO-LIFE NEWS FROM TODAY

Abortion Is Not Health Care. Health Care Helps Patients, It Doesn’t Take Innocent Lives

A Grieving Father Holds His Aborted Son After a Late-Term Abortion

Bogus “Right to Contraception” Bill Funds Planned Parenthood, Creates “Right” to Abortion Drugs

Autistic Woman is Refusing to Eat So She Can be Euthanized

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Christian Employers Should Beware of Democrat Bill Forcing Them to Fund IVF

New York Bill Would Legalize Killing People in Assisted Suicide

Indiana Abortions Drop 98% as Abortion Ban Saves Hundreds of Babies

West Virginia Abortions Drop 98% as Abortion Ban Saves Babies

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.
For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.


Wednesday, 05 June 2024 03:49 PM EDT

Read more at https://www.newsmax.com/world/globaltalk/war-gaza-hamas/2024/06/05/id/1167594/

The leader of Hamas said on Wednesday the group would demand a permanent end to the war in Gaza and Israeli withdrawal as part of a ceasefire plan, dealing an apparent blow to a truce proposal touted last week by U.S. President Joe Biden. Israel, meanwhile, said there would be no halt to fighting during ceasefire talks, and launched a new assault on a central section of the Gaza Strip near the last city yet to be stormed by its tanks.

The remarks by Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh appeared to deliver the Palestinian militant group’s reply to the proposal that Biden unveiled last week. Washington had said it was waiting to hear an answer from Hamas to what Biden described as an Israeli initiative.

“The movement and factions of the resistance will deal seriously and positively with any agreement that is based on a comprehensive ending of the aggression and the complete withdrawal and prisoners swap,” Haniyeh said.

Asked whether Haniyeh’s remarks amounted to the group’s reply to Biden, a senior Hamas official replied to a text message from Reuters with a “thumbs up” emoji.

Washington is still pressing hard to reach an agreement. CIA director William Burns met senior officials from mediators Qatar and Egypt on Wednesday in Doha to discuss the ceasefire proposal.

Since a brief week-long truce in November, all attempts to arrange a ceasefire have failed, with Hamas insisting on its demand for a permanent end to the conflict, while Israel says it is prepared to discuss only temporary pauses until the militant group is defeated.

Biden has repeatedly declared that ceasefires were close over the past several months, only for no truce to materialize. Notably, in February Biden said Israel had agreed to a ceasefire by the start of the Ramadan Muslim holy month on March 10, a deadline which passed with military operations in full swing. But last week’s announcement came with far greater fanfare from the White House, and at a time when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is under mounting domestic political pressure to chart a path to end the eight-month-old war and negotiate the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas.

Three U.S. officials told Reuters Biden, having obtained Israel’s agreement for the proposal, had deliberately announced it without warning the Israelis he would do so, to narrow the room for Netanyahu to back away.

“We didn’t ask permission to announce the proposal,” said a senior U.S. official granted anonymity to speak freely about the negotiations. “We informed the Israelis we were going to give a speech on the situation in Gaza. We did not go into great detail about what it was.”

Hamas, who rule Gaza, precipitated the war by attacking Israeli territory on Oct. 7, killing around 1,200 people and capturing more than 250 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. Around half of the hostages were freed in the war’s only truce so far, which lasted a week in November.

Israel’s military assault on Gaza has killed more than 36,000 people, according to health officials in the territory, who say thousands more dead are feared buried under the rubble.

ISRAEL LUKEWARM

Although Biden described the ceasefire proposal as an Israeli offer, Israel’s government has been lukewarm in public. A top Netanyahu aide confirmed on Sunday Israel had made the proposal even though it was “not a good deal.” The full details have not been published, but Israel insists that it would not sign up to any proposal that requires it to halt the war before Hamas is completely destroyed. The militants, meanwhile, have shown no sign of surrender and their main leaders are still at large.

“The outline allows Israel to realize all of the objectives: to destroy Hamas militarily and its governing capabilities, to bring home our hostages, and ensure that Gaza can never form a threat to us again,” Israeli government spokesman David Mencer said on Wednesday of the ceasefire proposal.

Far-right members of Netanyahu’s government have pledged to quit if he agrees to a peace deal that leaves Hamas in place, a move that could force a new election and end the political career of Israel’s longest-serving leader. Centrist opponents who joined Netanyahu’s war cabinet in a show of unity at the outset of the conflict have also threatened to quit, saying his government has no plan.

NEW ASSAULT IN CENTRAL GAZA

Meanwhile, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said there would be no let-up in Israel’s offensive while negotiations over the ceasefire proposal were under way.

“Any negotiations with Hamas would be conducted only under fire,” Gallant said in remarks carried by Israeli media after he flew aboard a warplane to inspect the Gaza front. Israel announced a new operation against Hamas in central Gaza on Wednesday, where Palestinian medics said airstrikes had killed dozens of people.

The armed wings of Hamas and Islamic Jihad said they had fought gun battles with Israeli forces in areas throughout the enclave and fired anti-tank rockets and shells.

“The sounds of bombardment didn’t stop all night,” said Aya, 30, a displaced woman in Deir Al-Balah, a small city in the central Gaza Strip, now the only major population center in the enclave yet to be stormed by Israeli tanks.

Two children were among the dead laid out on Wednesday in the city’s Al Aqsa Martyrs Hospital, one of the last hospitals functioning in Gaza. Mourners said the children had been killed along with their mother, who had been unable to leave when others in the neighborhood did.

“This is not war, it is destruction that words are unable to express,” said their father Abu Mohammed Abu Saif. 

© 2024 Thomson/Reuters. All rights reserved.

Read more: In Blow to Biden Plan, Hamas Leader Demands Full End to Gaza War | Newsmax.com


By: Terence Jeffrey | June 05, 2024

Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/06/05/can-russian-and-chinese-agents-legally-vote-in-washington-dc/

“Starting in 2024, qualified non-citizen District of Columbia residents may vote in local elections,” say instructions posted online by the D.C. Board of Elections. Pictured: A “vote” sign is seen on East Capitol Street in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Washington, D.C., on Nov. 8, 2022. (Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Suppose Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping made an agreement: All their personnel stationed in Washington, D.C., would vote for the same candidates running in Washington’s local elections.

How many votes would this hypothetical alliance deliver? Perhaps not many—but more than a few.

The New York Times reported last July that the number of Russians working at their D.C. embassy had dropped significantly.

“In recent years, as many as 1,200 Russian personnel worked in the embassy compound,” said the Times. “The State Department will not say how many remain—staffing levels here and at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow are now a sensitive topic—but in January 2022, Mr. [Anatoly] Antonov [the Russian ambassador] put the number at 184 diplomats and support staff members.”

The website of the Chinese Embassy in Washington does not appear to mention how many Chinese nationals are deployed there. But it does talk about the massive size of the embassy building. “It covers an area of 10,796 square meters with a floor area of 39,900 square meters,” it says.

So, how can the Chinese nationals who work there—for a communist government—get away with voting in an American election?

How can Russians, working at the direction of Putin, do the same?

The D.C. government enacted a law that allows it.

On Oct. 18, 2022, the D.C. Council voted 12 to 0—with one member absent and not voting—to approve the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act. Despite this one-sided vote, Mayor Muriel Bowser did not support it.

“Mayor Bowser expressed opposition by withholding her signature on the Act—something she has done only a handful of times over the course of her tenure,” said a report on the act published by the House Oversight and Accountability Committee.

The Washington Post also opposed it—in an editorial published a day before the council vote.

“Voting is a foundational right of citizenship,” said the Post. “That’s why we oppose a bill, poised to pass the D.C. Council this week, that would allow an estimated 50,000 noncitizen residents to cast ballots in local elections.”

The Post also pointed out that this bill would allow both illegal aliens and foreign nationals working at foreign embassies to vote in D.C. elections.

“The proposal has been expanded to give voting rights in local elections to all noncitizen adults, regardless of whether they are in the country legally, so long as they’ve resided in the District for 30 days,” said the Post.

“There’s nothing in the measure,” the Post said, “to prevent employees at embassies of governments that are openly hostile to the United States from casting ballots.”

The House committee report repeated these points.

“On November 21, 2022, the District government enacted the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act … which allows noncitizens, including illegal immigrants, to vote in D.C. local elections,” said the report. “The Act makes no exception for foreign diplomats or agents voting in the District. These individuals often have interests separate from, or opposed to, the interests of Americans. This D.C. Act dilutes the votes of American citizens and could have a ripple effect across other large U.S. cities.”

The D.C. Board of Elections has posted online instructions for how foreign nationals can vote in D.C. elections.

“Starting in 2024, qualified non-citizen District of Columbia residents may vote in local elections,” say the instructions.

“Specifically, under District of Columbia law, non-citizen residents may vote in District of Columbia elections held for the offices of Mayor, Attorney General, member(s) of the DC Council, member(s) of the State Board of Education, or Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner(s), or to vote on initiative, referendum, recall, or charter amendment measures that appear on District of Columbia ballots,” say the instructions.

“Non-citizens cannot vote for federal offices,” they warn.

In its editorial opposing the bill, The Washington Post had made a key point about this last provision. “The U.S. Constitution does not explicitly prohibit what the D.C. bill seeks to do, but a law signed in 1996 by President Bill Clinton bans noncitizens from voting in federal contests,” said the Post. “The proposed law presents logistical nightmares that will require the Board of Elections to print separate ballots so that noncitizens don’t vote in federal races.”

Republican Rep. James Comer of Kentucky introduced a resolution in January 2023 to nullify this D.C. voting law. When it came up for a vote on Feb. 9, 2023, then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy spoke in support of it.

“Last year, Washington, D.C., passed a law that would give the vote to illegal immigrants,” McCarthy said on the House floor. “The law makes no exceptions for foreign diplomats or agents who have interests that are the opposite of ours. Under this bill, Russian diplomats would get a vote and Chinese diplomats could get a vote.”

“The [Chinese Communist Party] is already infiltrating our culture, our farmland, and our skies,” said McCarthy, “but the D.C. Council would let them infiltrate our ballot boxes.”

The resolution to nullify this D.C. law passed the House 260-162—with 42 Democrats joining 218 Republicans. But it went nowhere in the Senate.

On May 23, the House again approved a bill to stop noncitizens from voting in D.C. elections. This time the vote was 262 to 143—with 52 Democrats voting for it.

Yet, this week, our nation’s capital had its first local primary election where Russian and Chinese agents could legally vote.

COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM


By: Jonathan Turley | June 5, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/06/05/is-hunter-biden-pursuing-a-jury-nullification-strategy/

Below is my column in The Hill on the start of the Hunter Biden trial and the elements of a classic jury nullification strategy by the defense. It is not clear that it will work in an otherwise open-and-shut case, but it might. What is clear is that it may be all that Biden has short of the Rapture.

Here is the column:

There was an interesting development this week in the Hunter Biden gun trial: the fact that there will indeed be a Hunter Biden gun trial. That development is surprising only because there do not appear to be any facts in dispute in this case. And the primary witness against Hunter Biden will be Hunter Biden himself.

The sole issue in this case is whether Biden filed a false gun form (ATF Form 4473) in which, as a condition for his purchase of a .38-caliber Colt Cobra revolver from the StarQuest Shooters and Survival Supply in Wilmington, Del., he stated that he was not a user of drugs.

Biden’s counsel, Abbe Lowell, previously suggested that his client may have had a window of sobriety when he signed the form, but then returned to his addiction afterward. But then Hunter himself blew that theory away with his public comments and books. Lowell then suggested in court that someone else may have checked the box on the form.

In the interim, Lowell has brought a litany of challenges. At one point, he claimed that the government must fulfill a prior dead plea agreement. At another, he adopted an argument of the National Rifle Association challenging the underlying statute.

The defense also failed this week to call a last-minute witness who would testify that Hunter may not have known that he was an addict. The defense was accused of essentially hiding the ball with the expert’s expected testimony so Judge Maryellen Noreika barred the appearance of the Columbia professor.

Yet, again, Hunter Biden himself would have destroyed the defense. The form asks if Hunter was a user of drugs, not just an addict: “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?”

Hunter wrote how he was a user of a wide array of drugs for years. It is hard to imagine he thought himself as clean as a clergyman in Wilmington in 2018.

So why wouldn’t Hunter just plead guilty? Even without his earlier plea deal, a guilty plea could significantly reinforce a request to avoid jail time in the case. It would also avoid an embarrassing trial for himself and his father during a presidential election.

While Hunter could always throw in the towel before the start of testimony, there is currently no discernible strategy beyond hoping that a pending case in the Supreme Court might undermine the indictment.

There may also be another possible strategy in play: jury nullification.

Unlike Donald Trump in Manhattan, Delaware is Biden country. The chance that he will get strong supporters of his father on the jury is an almost statistical certainty. In 2020, Joe Biden received roughly 60 percent of the vote over Donald Trump in the state. Having first lady Jill Biden, who is extremely popular, at the trial will only reinforce the connection.

In addition to a favorable jury pool, Biden may be hoping that testimony on his travails with drugs will prompt one or more jurors to ignore the law and vote to acquit. Notably, virtually all of the selected jurors have said that they know of someone who has struggled with drugs.

Indeed, Judge Noreika already appears to suspect such a strategy. Noreika rejected the effort of the defense to introduce an altered version of the federal firearms form created by the gun store employees. They argue that the alteration showed a political bias on the part of the prosecutors. The court found the document “irrelevant” and chastised the defense team for pursuing “conspiratorial” theories and an effort to confuse or mislead the jury.

She noted that the use of the altered form would be “unduly prejudicial and invites (jury) nullification.”

Jury nullification arguments have long been banned or discouraged in many courtrooms. Nevertheless, jury nullification has its advocates. For example, Georgetown Law Professor Paul Butler has called for Black jurors to refuse to convict Black defendants of drug crimes. Butler has said that “my goal is the subversion of the present criminal justice system.”

Hunter Biden is obviously not the primary concern of Professor Butler in the impact of drug prosecutions on the Black community. However, he has also argued that “jury nullification is just part of an arsenal of tools to end the failed “war on drugs.”

Biden’s case has all of the characteristics of a nullification defense. Even if he cannot secure acquittal, the combination of political and social elements at play in Delaware could produce a hung jury.

Trying a Biden in Delaware is a challenge for any prosecutor, even without the potential sympathies for a reformed drug addict. With the first lady sitting behind him, the family ties will be on full display. There is an understandable parental desire to show emotional support for Hunter, but prosecutors cannot be thrilled by the potential effect on jurors in the pro-Biden state.

Wilmington is President Biden’s hometown, where he still maintains a family residence. In Wilmington itself in 2020, Biden received 26,698 votes to Trump’s 3,580.

The hope is that, as President Biden once said, “Delaware is about getting everyone in the room, no matter how tough the problem, no matter how big the disagreement, and staying in the room until we figure it out.” Most everyone is in the courtroom and the hope is that at least some of these jurors will “figure it out” in their favor.

Perhaps Hunter put it best: “The single best thing is, family comes first. Over everything. I can’t think of anything that has been more pervasive and played a larger part in my life than that simple lesson.”

The defense may be hoping that, for some jurors, “family [will] come first … over everything,” particularly over the evidence.

Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.


By: Jonathan Turley | June 5, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/06/05/report-j6-committee-delayed-secret-service-driver-from-refuting-false-limo-story-of-cassidy-hutchinson/

Just the News is reporting that the January 6th Committee rebuffed repeated efforts from a Secret Service agent to refute the false story related by Cassidy Hutchinson alleging a violent episode with Trump in the presidential limousine during the Capitol riots. The J6 Committee staff repeatedly delayed the testimony of the agent to disprove the widely reported allegation.

Rep. Barry Loudermilk, the chairman of the House subcommittee that is investigating the Jan. 6 riot, has obtained a transcript of the driver’s interview that was conducted months after he first offered to testify.  However, it turns out that committee staff were asked repeatedly by counsel for the agent to let him present evidence debunking the claim. Despite being reported by virtually every news outlet, the Committee slow walked his appearance as the story went viral.

The transcript of the driver’s testimony contains express objections by the lawyer that his client had offered to testify in July, August and September of 2022, but was “rebuffed” by the committee.

The account reaffirms a major criticism of the committee. After Democrats refused to allow the GOP to pick its members (as a long-accepted practice in the House), the Democrats selected two anti-Trump Republicans who did little to push for a full and fair display of witnesses and facts. The Committee was chaired by Rep. Benny Thompson, a Democrat, with Rep. Liz Cheney, as Vice Chairwoman.

Cheney and the committee members clearly knew that Hutchinson’s account was debunked by the very driver who allegedly struggled with Trump. Yet, they allowed the media to report the incident for months while rebuffing the requests of the driver. Loudermilk is quoted as saying “We’re talking about the driver of the limousine, and the head of the entire protective detail. They were brought in by the select committee to testify, but they weren’t brought in until November.”

The false account was given by Hutchinson in June of that year.

The Secret Service driver testified Trump never tried to reach for or grab the wheel of the SUV.

Notably, the transcript shows Cheney trying to explain the delay as due to the need for the Secret Service to produce all documents in the January 6 investigation.

Yet, she had no problem with making the false story public through Hutchinson before such supporting material was supplied. She also did not suggest any countervailing testimony or witnesses on the issue as the media ran with the account. Instead, Cheney publicly teased the claim that they had much more evidence of crimes against Trump, which never materialized.  Cheney ended one hearing by calling for more officials to come forward and noting that Trump family members and former officials have now come forward with their own public “confessions.”

Many of us support the effort to bring greater transparency to what occurred on Jan. 6th and these hearings have offered a great deal of important new information. Indeed, it has proven gut-wrenching in the accounts of lawyers and staff trying to combat baseless theories and to protect the constitutional process.

Yet, the heavy-handed approach to framing the evidence by the Committee was both unnecessary and at times counterproductive. The strength of some of this evidence would not have been diminished by a more balanced committee or investigation.

We previously discussed the highly scripted and entirely one-sided presentation of evidence in the Committee. Indeed, witnesses were primarily used to present what Speaker Nancy Pelosi referred to as “the narrative” where their prior videotaped testimony was shown, and they were given narrow follow-up questions. They at times seemed more like props than witnesses — called effectively to recite prior statements between well-crafted, impactful video clips. It had the feel of a news package, which may be the result of the decision to bring in a former ABC executive to produce the hearings.

That framing led to glaring omissions. The Committee routinely edited videotapes and crafted presentations to eliminate alternative explanations or opposing viewpoints like repeatedly editing out Trump telling his supporters to go to the Capitol peacefully.

What is striking was that offering a more balanced account, including allowing the Republicans to appoint their own members (in accordance with long-standing tradition), would not have lessened much of this stunning testimony. Yet, allowing Republicans to pick their members (yes, including Rep. Jim Jordan) would have prevented allegations of a highly choreographed show trial. It would have added credibility to the process.

If the Committee had a single member with a dissenting or even skeptical viewpoint, testimony on issues like the fight in the presidential limo could have been challenged before it was thrown before the world.

That was clearly not in the interests of the J6 Committee or the media, which eagerly spread this false account.


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Smoke Signal

A.F. BRANCO | on June 5, 2024 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-smoke-signal/

Lawfare Raises Trump Poll Numbers and Donations
A Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco 2024

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Flipboard

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Biden’s lawfare scheme appears to have backfired. They had hoped to use it to destroy Trump’s path to the White House (election interference), but it seems to have had the opposite effect. Trump’s poll numbers continue to rise along with millions in campaign donations.

WAYNE ROOT: Democrats Just Woke the Sleeping Giant, Proved Who the Real Dictator is, and Turned Trump into “America’s Nelson Mandela”

By Wayne Allen Root – By Assistant Editor – May 31, 2024

Remember what the Japanese Admiral Yamamoto said after his airmen had destroyed Pearl Harbor and sent over 3,000 young Americans to their death in a sneak attack. His men cheered their resounding victory. But he solemnly stated, “I fear we have awakened the sleeping giant.”
Like Pearl Harbor, yesterday was a day that will live in infamy. And Democrats have awakened the sleeping giant.

First, there is no question Democrats will regret this day. They’ve crossed a line that has never been crossed in the history of America. They’ve touched “the third rail.” They’ve destroyed the justice system and “the rule of law.” They’ve turned America into a combination of a Banana Republic, the Soviet Gulag and 1930s Nazi Germany. READ MORE…

DONATE to A.F. Branco Cartoons – Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump. READ MORE…


Tuesday, June 4, 2024

Top Stories
Indiana Abortions Drop 98% as Abortion Ban Saves Hundreds of Babies
West Virginia Abortions Drop 98% as Abortion Ban Saves Babies
Elderly Pro-Life Woman Going to Prison for Two Years Just for Protesting Abortion
Comparison Between Trump and Biden is Clear: Biden Wants Abortions Up to Birth, Trump Does Not

More Pro-Life News
Professors Sue Biden Admin: We Won’t Give Students Excused Absences for Killing Babies in Abortions
Judge Mocks Elderly Woman’s Christian Faith Before Putting Her in Prison for Protesting Abortion
Vermont Revokes Couple’s Foster Care License Because of Their Christian Beliefs
America’s Foundation is Crumbling But Not Lost, We Must Fight for It
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories

Indiana Abortions Drop 98% as Abortion Ban Saves Hundreds of Babies

West Virginia Abortions Drop 98% as Abortion Ban Saves Babies

Elderly Pro-Life Woman Going to Prison for Two Years Just for Protesting Abortion

Comparison Between Trump and Biden is Clear: Biden Wants Abortions Up to Birth, Trump Does Not

Professors Sue Biden Admin: We Won’t Give Students Excused Absences for Killing Babies in Abortions

Judge Mocks Elderly Woman’s Christian Faith Before Putting Her in Prison for Protesting Abortion

Vermont Revokes Couple’s Foster Care License Because of Their Christian Beliefs

America’s Foundation is Crumbling But Not Lost, We Must Fight for It

MORE PRO-LIFE NEWS FROM TODAY

Christians Should Not Support the Pro-Abortion Pride Movement

Congress Will Hear Stories of Babies Saved From Abortion

Some Women “Communicate” With Their Babies to Justify Aborting Them

North Carolina Judge Strikes Down Abortion Pill Protections, Women Could Die From Botched Abortions

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Arkansas Reports 0 Abortions as Abortion Ban Saves Babies

Catholic Bishops Sue Biden Rule Promoting Abortion: “Promoting Human Dignity Includes the Unborn”

Poll Shows Majority of Americans Supported Harrison Butker’s Pro-Life, Pro-Family Message

Southwest Airlines Defends Firing Stewardess for Her Pro-Life Beliefs

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.
For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.


BY: BRIANNA LYMAN | JUNE 04, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/04/lawsuit-up-to-4-arizona-counties-have-more-registered-voters-than-eligible-citizens/

Sign reading 'Vote Here'

As many as four Arizona counties have more registered voters on their rolls than eligible citizens as the state fails to conduct voter list maintenance in compliance with federal law, a lawsuit filed by the Arizona Free Enterprise Club alleges.

The Arizona Free Enterprise Club, along with Arizona GOP Chair Gina Swoboda and Steven Gaynor, a registered voter, allege in a suit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona that Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes has failed to comply with Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). The NVRA requires that states conduct list maintenance to remove ineligible voters.

Fontes told the state legislature that a federally required list maintenance program is “in development,” according to the suit. Fontes’ comment, plaintiffs allege, indicates “that the general maintenance program required of states by the NVRA does not currently exist in Arizona.”

[READ NEXT: Court Affirms Arizona’s Need To Keep Noncitizens Off Voter Rolls, But Makes It Harder To Do So]

Because of the state’s failure, according to the suit, as many as four counties — Apache, La Paz, Navajo, and Santa Cruz — have more registered voters than eligible citizens. The plaintiffs compared the total number of registrants on each county’s voter rolls to the Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) reported by the U.S. Census Bureau and concluded that Apache County had a 117 percent registration rate, while Santa Cruz County had a registration rate of more than 111 percent. La Paz and Navajo Counties both exceeded the 100 percent mark when comparing the number of registrants with the Census Bureau’s 5-year American Community Survey from 2017-2021.

The suit also alleges that all counties in the state but one have “implausibly high …registration rates that far exceed the national and statewide voter-registration rates in recent years.”

In total, the suit alleges that the state has at least 500,000 registered voters on their rolls who are ineligible due to a change of residence or death.

“In looking at Arizona deaths compared to voter file removals, from December 2020 to the end of November 2022, there were approximately 20,000 to 35,000 registered voters who died and were not removed from Arizona’s voter rolls,” the suit alleges.

The suit asks the federal court to find that Fontes violated the NVRA and compel him to remove ineligible voters in accordance with the NVRA.

“Election integrity is a serious issue in our nation,” President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club Scot Mussi said in a statement. “Ensuring that Arizonans can have faith in the integrity of our election system and representative government starts with clean voter rolls that leave no doubts about who is able to cast a ballot.”

“Unfortunately, most Arizona counties continue to have voter registration rates far exceeding the national average,” Mussi continued. “We hope that the court compels Secretary Fontes to comply with his obligations under the NVRA to clean up Arizona’s voter rolls.”


Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist.

Author Brianna Lyman profile

BRIANNA LYMAN

VISIT ON TWITTER@BRIANNALYMAN2

MORE ARTICLES


BY: STEVE ROBERTS, JONATHAN FAHEY, AND ANDREW PARDUE | JUNE 04, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/04/heres-everything-you-need-to-know-about-hunter-bidens-criminal-gun-trial/

Hunter Biden

Author Steve Roberts, Jonathan Fahey, and Andrew Pardue profile

STEVE ROBERTS, JONATHAN FAHEY, AND ANDREW PARDUE

MORE ARTICLES

Jury selection for Hunter Biden’s first federal criminal trial began Monday in Delaware. The Biden son is facing trial on three charges: two counts of false statements and one count of unlawful firearm possession, all related to a Colt Cobra 38SPL revolver he allegedly purchased and possessed in Delaware in October 2018. Biden faces up to 25 years imprisonment if convicted of these offenses. 

The case the prosecution intends to prove is relatively straightforward. Biden has struggled with addiction to various narcotics for years and was even discharged from the U.S. Navy Reserve after failing a mandatory drug test in June 2013. In his 2021 book, Beautiful Things, he openly discussed the fact that during the period that is relevant in this case, “[a]ll my energy revolved around smoking drugs and making arrangements to buy drugs — feeding the beast.” Then, amid this addiction, Hunter Biden purchased a handgun.

Every gun owner will be familiar with ATF Form 4473, a document that asks all prospective firearms purchasers a series of questions to ensure they are legally authorized to own a firearm before completing a sale. One of these questions asks whether the purchaser is “an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?”

The prosecution will attempt to prove that Biden answered “no” to this question on his Form 4473 when the truthful answer should have been “yes,” and he therefore obtained a gun that he was not legally authorized to possess. In other words, Hunter Biden is not being prosecuted for being an addict; he is being prosecuted for lying about his addiction to unlawfully obtain a firearm and then possessing that firearm as an unlawful user of illegal drugs.

For years, it appeared as if Hunter Biden would avoid accountability for his conduct entirely. After significant public pressure, however, a plea agreement was reached between Biden and the government that would allow him to plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax offenses — despite allegedly failing to pay over $1.4 million in taxes by understating his income and inflating his expenses, offenses that themselves carry a maximum of 17 years in prison — and avoid responsibility almost entirely for his gun offenses by entering into a deferred prosecution agreement. Such agreements are almost entirely unheard of for firearms offenses.

To make the deal even sweeter for Biden, the agreement did not even require him to cooperate with the government, which is often a requirement with plea agreements, particularly in cases where extreme leniency is being offered.

But then something happened in the spring of 2023 that threw a wrench into the deal being worked out between Biden and the government and changed the landscape. Two IRS whistleblowers came forward alleging political interference in their investigation of Hunter Biden’s taxes by officials in the Department of Justice who repeatedly limited the scope of the investigation. A New York Times investigation revealed that the U.S. attorney’s posture on whether to require Hunter Biden to plead guilty to misdemeanor tax offenses as a condition of any deal changed shortly after the IRS whistleblowers came forward.

Then Biden’s team demanded that the plea deal include immunity for “any other federal crimes” he may have committed, even beyond the gun and tax-related matters that were the subject of this investigation. Because this broad immunity request went farther than the prosecution was willing to go, the plea deal fell apart and was ultimately rejected by the federal judge.

The case has also raised interesting questions about the scope of the Second Amendment after Hunter Biden’s lawyers argued that the federal law under which he was charged infringes upon his constitutional right to own a firearm. Relying on the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, Biden’s attorneys argued that the charges should be dismissed because there is no “historical tradition” in the United States of prohibiting users of illicit substances from obtaining firearms simply upon the basis of their addiction (as opposed to a prior criminal conviction for drug charges, for example).

Federal courts are divided on the constitutionality of this law, and while the argument was not successful in preventing Biden’s case from moving forward to trial, it could still be relevant in an appeal. If Biden’s argument succeeds, that would effectively expand Second Amendment rights to a class of people whose right to own a firearm is not currently protected under federal law.

Hunter Biden’s legal troubles will not end with the conclusion of his Delaware trial. His indictment for failure to pay taxes from 2016 through 2019 is pending. And a congressional investigation into Hunter Biden’s foreign business deals and lobbying is also ongoing. Of course, his legal troubles may all go away after the November election, when, if reelected, President Biden would have the ability to pardon him, likely without serious political ramifications. 


Steve Roberts and Jonathan Fahey are partners at Holtzman Vogel, and Andrew Pardue is a Holtzman Vogel associate.


BY: DAVID HARSANYI | JUNE 04, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/04/merrick-garland-shouldnt-be-praised-he-should-be-impeached/

Merrick Garland

Author David Harsanyi profile

DAVID HARSANYI

VISIT ON TWITTER@DAVIDHARSANYI

MORE ARTICLES

It’s no accident that The Wall Street Journal ran an “exclusive” hagiographic piece on Merrick Garland’s “by-the-book, play-no-favorites approach” the day the attorney general is set to be grilled by Congress. The administration wants to paint the AG as a fair-minded dispenser of justice.

In truth, while Garland might occasionally — only when faced with no real options — put the Biden administration in an uncomfortable political position, he has regularly weaponized the agency to target the president’s political enemies, from pro-life protesters to concerned parents to presidential candidates.

Even as I write this, Garland is refusing to hand over audio recordings of Joe Biden’s interviews with former Special Counsel Robert Hur, despite a congressional subpoena. Even as the DOJ stonewalls Congress, it is prosecuting the Republican Party’s presidential candidate for crimes for which the Hur tape supposedly “exonerates” Biden.

Garland’s claims of executive privilege are risible. If Biden’s audio can be withheld from the public simply because someone somewhere might manipulate the tape using AI, then any audio of any president can be denied the public.

Also, why is this DOJ’s concern? Considering the Hur transcript has already been released — and we know that Biden lied about it — there is even less justification for withholding the audio. And considering the DOJ has apparently cleaned up all the “uhs” and “ohs” and garbled words in the transcript, the tape would likely further cement the president as an “elderly man with a poor memory.”

So, the real problem here isn’t the deep fake; it’s the unedited tape. Withholding the audio is obviously politically motivated. Which is unsurprising, since Garland has been one of the most partisan AGs in memory.

While Garland was raiding the home of the former president over a classified document dispute, he was letting the statute of limitations on the foreign influence-peddling by the president’s family run out.

While left-wing pro-Hamas protesters were rioting and targeting Jews, Garland was still fearmongering over the coming MAGA extremist revolution, inflating the threat with bogus statistics.

While Garland did nothing about those (likely) illegally picketing the homes of federal judges and attempting to intimidate them and influence cases — even after an assassin tried to kill Brett Kavanaugh — the DOJ was deploying armed teams to raid the homes of pro-life families and prosecuting elderly anti-abortion protesters for praying in front of “clinics.”

Even as Democrats are yammering about saving democracy, the DOJ has been working to undermine the electoral choices of voters in red states like Texas. Abortion is not a (pretend) constitutional right anymore. The DOJ does not care.

The DOJ is restarting censorship efforts under the guise of stopping foreign interference, and also targeting X owner Elon Musk, who has opened his platform to more neutral speech. It’s quite the happenstance, right?

Not only did Garland form a “task force” to investigate local parents who were protesting authoritarian Covid restrictions and racist curriculums, but he refused to dissolve the effort even after the National School Boards Association apologized for the letter that sparked it.

Of course, it was the Biden administration that prompted the organization to use the term “domestic terrorism” to give the DOJ justification to get involved in the first place. Even The New York Times acknowledged that “Garland did not detail any specific threats of violence or offer reasons for the increase in harassment and threats.” The only reason to get involved was to chill speech and intimidate parents.

No matter.

Even the case against Hunter Biden, used most often by the left to brandish Garland’s alleged Solomonic credentials, is a farce.

Let’s not forget if the Justice Department had its way, the case would have disappeared. To begin with, Garland ignored the law and appointed a counsel from within the government. David Weiss, whose office was filled with Biden allies, was prepared to give Hunter an astonishing immunity deal, not only on felony gun and tax charges, but for a slew of unrelated serious potential offenses, including failure to register as a foreign agent, bribery, and corruption.

It was only because of the whistleblower testimony of Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler that Weiss was forced to ask Hunter to plead guilty to two piddling misdemeanor counts. And the immunity deal was only quashed because Judge Maryellen Noreika, who pointed out there was not a single precedent in which immunity was offered for “crimes in a different case,” rejected it.

In his remarks to Congress today, Garland promised that he “will not back down from defending our democracy,” despite the “repeated attacks” and “conspiracy theor[ies]” regarding the DOJ. Some conspiracy theories exist, no doubt, but most criticisms of Garland’s work are legitimate. Treating criticism of his corrupt tenure as an attack on the “judicial process itself” has it backward.  Demanding no one question the actions of state institutions is authoritarian. If the system were working properly, Garland would be impeached.

But in their efforts to save “democracy” — a concept that’s been stripped of any meaning — Democrats have justified deploying the state to punish and destroy political enemies. For many progressives, the legal system isn’t merely a tool for criminal justice but a way to exact political justice.

Garland is one of the leaders in this fight. Whether it’s because he is a weak man willing to do what’s expected of him or because he is corrupt makes little difference. 


David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist, a nationally syndicated columnist, a Happy Warrior columnist at National Review, and author of five books—the most recent, Eurotrash: Why America Must Reject the Failed Ideas of a Dying Continent. Follow him on Twitter, @davidharsanyi.


By: Virginia Allen | June 04, 2024

Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/06/04/biden-issues-controversial-executive-order-southern-border/

President Joe Biden, seen here May 31 at the White House, signed an executive order on Tuesday, giving himself the authority to close the border after the seven-day average of daily border crossings between ports of entry exceeds 2,500. (Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

President Joe Biden signed an executive order Tuesday giving himself the authority to close the border when the seven-day average of daily border crossings between ports of entry exceeds 2,500. 

The order is set to take effect immediately, since the daily threshold has already been met. The border will only reopen if crossings between ports fall to a seven-day daily average of 1,500 or less. 

Biden is drawing on the authority in Title 8 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to temporarily close the border. 

The executive action specifically makes three changes to Biden’s own border policy: 

  1. Illegal aliens who cross the border between a port of entry will “generally be ineligible for asylum.”
  2. Illegal aliens who are being processed for “expedited removal while the limitation is in effect will only be referred for a credible-fear screening” if they express that they are afraid to return to their country of origin. 
  3. The qualification for a “credible-fear” interview is being raised to “reasonable probability of persecution or torture standard.”

Even before Biden issued the order Tuesday, Republican lawmakers criticized the then-anticipated action, saying the order was too little, too late to solve a crisis they say Biden himself caused. 

“On Day One, this president signed dozens of executive orders that caused this border crisis,” Rep. Juan Ciscomani, R-Ariz., said during a press conference on Capitol Hill on Tuesday morning. 

Ciscomani said that since Biden took office in January 2021, he has refused to “take any kind of responsibility or ownership over this crisis. Also since then, [Biden] refused that he had any authority to actually solve or address this crisis that we’re seeing now.”

On Biden’s first day in office, he signed an executive order stopping border wall construction, and rolled back a number of Trump administration border and immigration policies that the Biden administration called “harsh and extreme.” Biden suspended President Donald Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy when he took office, and formally ended the program in the spring of 2021. 

Biden has repeatedly said “Congress must act” to secure the border, but Republicans and Democrats have failed to agree on a border bill. In May 2023, the GOP-led House passed HR 2, a border-security bill that would restart border wall construction, end catch-and-release, and reinstate the “Remain in Mexico” policy. The Senate has yet to take up the bill. 

Senate border bill, which was touted as “bipartisan” and backed by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., failed in February and again in May as Republicans said the bill would do more harm than good at the southern border by still allowing 4,000 illegal aliens to enter the country daily. 

Republicans have criticized the failed Senate bill and Biden’s new executive action as an election year stunt. After economic issues, immigration is a top concern for American voters ahead of the November presidential election, according to Gallup

“Like the Schumer Senate border bill, the exceptions swallow the rule,” Lora Ries, director of The Heritage Foundation’s Border Security and Immigration Center, told The Daily Signal. “Biden simply wants credit for ‘doing something’ five months out from Election Day and to bash congressional Republicans, even though the House did its job,” said Ries, noting the passage of HR 2, “a real border security bill,” last year.

“Joe Biden has had 3 years to secure the border,” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on Monday. “Why is he just now signing an executive order to fix it? It’s a political play before the election to get the corporate media to gush and say, ‘Things aren’t so bad.’”

During a press conference Tuesday, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., called Biden’s executive order on the border “window dressing,” adding that if Biden “was concerned about the border, he would have done this a long time ago.”

On the other side of the political aisle, opponents of stronger border enforcement also criticized the president for his executive action, arguing it would harm illegal aliens seeking asylum. 

“A few days into Immigrant Heritage Month … and [Biden] is planning to shut down legal pathway for people fleeing persecution,” the Welcome With Dignity Campaign wrote on X on Monday. 

Laura St. John, legal director of the Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project, said in a statement that her pro-immigration organization is “deeply dismayed to see the Biden administration enacting further restrictions on asylum.” 

The Border Patrol’s apprehension of illegal aliens has remained high this spring. In April, the Border Patrol apprehended an average of 4,296 illegal aliens between ports of entry daily. Since Biden took office, Customs and Border Protection has encountered 9.5 million illegal aliens at or between U.S. ports of entry. An additional nearly 1.8 million known “gotaways” have crossed America’s borders since Biden took office. 

Related Posts:

  1. DHS Chief Mayorkas’ Budget Request Is an Unserious Response to Threats to Homeland
  2. Where Are the Executive Actions to Secure the Border? A Look Back at 9/11
  3. RIP: The Death Toll of Biden’s Illegal Alien Bloodbath

By: Jonathan Turley | June 4, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/06/04/lets-not-sugarcoat-it-people-are-not-reading-your-stuff-post-reporters-outraged-after-publisher-drops-truth-bomb/

Washington Post publisher and CEO William Lewis is being denounced this week after the end of the short-lived tenure of Executive Editor Sally Buzbee and delivering a truth bomb to the staff. Lewis told them that they have lost their audience and “people are not reading your stuff.” It was a shot of reality in the echo chambered news outlet and the response was predictable. However, Lewis just might save this venerable newspaper if he follows his frank talk with meaningful reforms to bring balance back to the Post.

As someone who once wrote for the Washington Post regularly, I have long lamented the decline of the paper following a pronounced shift toward partisan and advocacy journalism. There was a time when the Post valued diversity of thought and steadfastly demanded staff write not as advocates but reporters. That began to change rapidly in the first Trump term.

Suddenly, I found editors would slow walk copy, contest every line of your column, and make unfounded claims. In the meantime, they were increasingly running unsupported legal columns and even false statements from authors on the left. When confronted about columnists with demonstrably false statements, the Post simply shrugged.

One of the most striking examples was after its columnist Philip Bump had a meltdown in an interview when confronted over past false claims. After I wrote a column about the litany of such false claims, the Post surprised many of us by issuing a statement that they stood by all of Bump’s reporting, including false columns on the Lafayette Park protests, Hunter Biden laptop and other stories.  That was long after other media debunked the claims, but the Post stood by the false reporting.

The decline of the Post has followed a familiar pattern. The editors and reporters simply wrote off half of their audience and became a publication for largely liberal and Democratic readers. In these difficult economic times with limited revenue sources, it is a lethal decision. Yet, for editors and reporters, it is still professionally beneficial to embrace advocacy journalism even if it is reducing the readership of your own newspaper.

Lewis, a British media executive who joined the Post earlier this year, reportedly got into a “heated exchange” with a staffer. Lewis explained that, while reporters were protesting measures to expand readership, the very survival of the paper was now at stake:

“We are going to turn this thing around, but let’s not sugarcoat it. It needs turning around,” Lewis said. “We are losing large amounts of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People are not reading your stuff. Right. I can’t sugarcoat it anymore.”

Other staffers could not get beyond the gender and race of those who would be overseeing them. One staffer complained “we now have four White men running three newsrooms.”

The Post has been buying out staff to avoid mass layoffs, but reporters are up in arms over the effort to turn the newspaper around.

The question is whether, after years of creating a culture of advocacy journalism and woke reporting, the Post is still capable of reaching a larger audience. If you want to read about certain stories, you are not likely to go to the Post, NPR or other outlets.

Likewise, with reporters referring to the January 6th riot as an “insurrection,” there is little doubt for the reader that the coverage is a form of advocacy. Again, such stories can affirm the bona fides for reporters, but they also affirm the bias for readers.

I truly do hope that the Washington Post can recover. The newspaper has played a critical role in our history and a towering example of journalism at its very best from the Pentagon Papers to Watergate. If you want people to “read your stuff,” you need to return to being reporters and not advocates; you need to start reaching an audience larger than yourself and your friends.

As I previously wrote, the mantra “Let’s Go Brandon!” was embraced by millions as a criticism as much of the media as President Biden.  It derives from an Oct. 2 interview with race-car driver Brandon Brown after he won his first NASCAR Xfinity Series race. During the interview, NBC reporter Kelli Stavast’s questions were drowned out by loud-and-clear chants of “F*** Joe Biden.” Stavast quickly and inexplicably declared, “You can hear the chants from the crowd, ‘Let’s go, Brandon!’”

Stavast’s denial or misinterpretation of the obvious instantly became a symbol of what many Americans perceive as media bias in favor of the Biden administration. Indeed, some in the media immediately praised Stavast for her “smooth save” and being a “quick-thinking reporter.” The media’s reaction has fulfilled the underlying narrative, too, with commentators growing increasingly shrill in denouncing its use. NPR denounced the chant as “vulgar,” while writers at the Washington Post and other newspapers condemned it as offensive; CNN’s John Avalon called it “not patriotic,” while CNN political analyst Joe Lockhart compared it to coded rhetoric from Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan and ISIS.

The more the media has cried foul, however, the more people picked up the chant.

It was the public response to how many in the media have embraced advocacy journalism and rejected objectivity in reporting; in their view, readers and viewers are now to be educated rather than merely informed. That included the rejection of “both-sidesism,” the need to offer a balanced account of the news.

Many of us hope that Lewis will rescue the Post from itself in the coming months. It will not be easy after years of orthodoxy and advocacy in the ranks. Yet, the Washington Post is a national treasure worth fighting for. People are still longing for old-fashioned, reliable news. As with the Field of Dreams, if you re-build it, “they will come” back to the Post.


By: Jonathan Turley | June 4, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/06/04/a-blatant-lie-the-biden-campaign-falsely-accuses-foxs-john-roberts-of-lying-about-the-insulin-caps/

Winston Churchill once said that “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.” It often seems like the Biden White House and campaign has embraced that warning as an operating principle. The most recent target was the veteran Fox news anchor John Roberts, who was accused of airing “a blatant lie” in questioning Biden’s claim that he was the first president to push through a cap of $35 on insulin treatments. Roberts was entirely correct, but the campaign has still not removed the false attack on his integrity and accuracy.

In the interests of full disclosure, I am a legal analyst for Fox News and I have known Roberts for decades. There is no one who I hold in higher regard for his integrity or his intellect than John Roberts. We have known and worked with each other at different networks through the years. Roberts is an old-school journalist with impeccable credentials.

Yesterday, the Biden campaign launched the attack on Roberts for his questioning of the claim of President Joe Biden that he solely secured the insulin cap. Roberts remarked that he had a recollection that it was former President Donald Trump who pushed the cap.

“I seem to remember that back in May of 2020, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid said that President Trump had signed an executive order to cap the price of insulin for Medicare recipients at 35 bucks. Now, maybe I’m misremembering that, but I think it kind of already happened.”

The Biden campaign then called it “a blatant lie” in a posting on X that has reached over a million people.

Contrary to the Biden campaign’s claims, Roberts’s recollection was entirely correct. Under the Trump Administration, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services announced in May 2020 that the Part D Senior Savings Model participating plans would cap insulin copays to $35 per month’s supply, and over 1,750 Medicare Advantage and Medicare Part D plans applied to offer lower insulin costs.

Trump praised the new policy, which was widely covered by the press.

There was a Rose Garden event where Trump was praised for his actions:

Trump later, in July 2020, signed four executive orders aimed at lowering the cost of insulin. That included Executive Order 13937, which required Federally Qualified Health Centers to pass 340B discounts on to patients. Notably, Biden later reversed Executive Order 13937 before those cost-saving measures could take effect.

This is obviously not the first false statement from the President. However, it is notable that his campaign spread obvious disinformation that was picked up by over a million people but then declined to take down the false claim. The campaign is now in a worse position. To take down the posting is to acknowledge not just that it has lied about Roberts, but that the President lied in taking sole credit for this cap.

This is the same administration supporting the banning, blacklisting, and throttling of those responsible for disinformation. I would not support such censorship of the campaign. This and other columns refuting the false account is sufficient to combat a “blatant lie” by the Biden campaign. Whether it is his uncle being eaten by cannibals or insulin caps, free speech can correct false claims without government regulation. However, President Biden and his administration continue to push for censorship of others accused for false or misleading statements.

The fact that John Roberts was right is hardly surprising. However, there remains a “blatant lie” on the Biden campaign’s social media that must still be corrected.


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Brace for Impact

A.F. BRANCO | on June 4, 2024 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-brace-for-impact-2/

01 Lettters CI 1080
A Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco 2024

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Flipboard

A.F. Branco Cartoon – After the Democrats have implemented a steady barrage of weaponized lawfare at Trump and the Conservatives, the only thing the GOP can muster is some feckless, strongly worded letters.

Maria Bartiromo GOES OFF on Spineless and Silent GOP Lawmakers: ‘Let Me be Clear Viewers are Sick and Tired of Hearings, Letters… They Want Action’ While Trump Sits in Trial All Day Long (VIDEO)

By Jim Hoft – May 11, 2024

FOX News anchor Maria Bartiromo held nothing back as she confronted Congressman Russell Fry (R-SC) during an interview, expressing her frustration—and that of the public—at the inaction of the GOP lawmakers and lack of accountability amid the ongoing witch hunts against former President Donald Trump.

As Trump faces these politically motivated witch hunts—with nearly 100 felony counts across four jurisdictions—Bartiromo voiced the exasperation of a public weary of what they see as political theater without substantial outcomes. The counts against Trump carry a potential for roughly 700 years of combined incarceration. READ MORE…

DONATE to A.F. Branco Cartoons – Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump. READ MORE…


Monday, May 3, 2024

Top Stories
Arkansas Reports 0 Abortions as Abortion Ban Saves Babies
Catholic Bishops Sue Biden Rule Promoting Abortion: “Promoting Human Dignity Includes the Unborn”
Poll Shows Majority of Americans Supported Harrison Butker’s Pro-Life, Pro-Family Message
Southwest Airlines Defends Firing Stewardess for Her Pro-Life Beliefs

More Pro-Life News
Republicans Should Go After Democrats for Wanting Abortions Up to Birth
Biden Supports Abortions Up to Birth at Taxpayer Expense, He Must be Exposed
Supreme Court May Ban Mail Order Abortions, Protecting Women and Babies
Notre Dame Alumni Demand University Rescind Award Given to Joe Biden
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories

Arkansas Reports 0 Abortions as Abortion Ban Saves Babies

Catholic Bishops Sue Biden Rule Promoting Abortion: “Promoting Human Dignity Includes the Unborn”

Poll Shows Majority of Americans Supported Harrison Butker’s Pro-Life, Pro-Family Message

Southwest Airlines Defends Firing Stewardess for Her Pro-Life Beliefs

Republicans Should Go After Democrats for Wanting Abortions Up to Birth

Biden Supports Abortions Up to Birth at Taxpayer Expense, He Must be Exposed

Supreme Court May Ban Mail Order Abortions, Protecting Women and Babies

Notre Dame Alumni Demand University Rescind Award Given to Joe Biden

MORE PRO-LIFE NEWS FROM TODAY

Former Trump Spokeswoman Kayleigh McEnany Will Headline Pro-Life Conference

WHO Promotes Teen Abortion as It Meets to Settle Pandemic Agreement

Faithful Christians Continue Fighting to Protect Babies From Abortion

Research Confirms 95.9% of Abortions are Killing Babies as Birth Control, Just .4% for Rape

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Texas Supreme Court Protects Babies With Disabilities From Abortions

UK is Killing More Babies With Down Syndrome in Abortions

Joe Biden is the Least Popular President in 70 Years, Time for Him to Go

Joe Biden Puts Elderly Woman in Prison for 25 Months for Protesting Abortion

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.
For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.


BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | JUNE 03, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/03/joe-bidens-fingerprints-are-all-over-the-criminal-prosecutions-of-trump/

Joe Biden

Author Margot Cleveland profile

MARGOT CLEVELAND

VISIT ON TWITTER@PROFMJCLEVELAND

MORE ARTICLES

In response to Americans’ outcry over the political prosecutions of Donald Trump and a Manhattan jury convicting the former president on 34 felony counts, President Joe Biden declared, “It’s irresponsible for anyone to say this was rigged, just because they don’t like the verdict.” Coming from the Commander-in-Rigging, this proclamation means nothing.

Biden and those seeking to ensure his re-election have their hands all over Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s prosecution of the former president. A lead prosecutor for Bragg during the trial was Matthew Colangelo. In December 2022, Colangelo left the Biden Department of Justice to “jump start” the criminal case against Trump. Biden had previously named Colangelo his acting associate attorney general—the third highest-ranking official in the DOJ.

There’s Plenty More Where That Came From

Colangelo’s role in prosecuting his former boss’s political opponent provides the most obvious evidence of the Biden administration’s involvement in the Manhattan D.A.’s criminal targeting of Trump, but the rigging started much earlier. As I previously reported, the incestuous relationship between the Manhattan D.A.’s office and Team Biden began as early as mid-February 2021. Then, “Bragg’s predecessor, District Attorney Cyrus Vance, arranged for private criminal defense attorney and former federal prosecutor Mark Pomerantz to be a special assistant district attorney for the Manhattan D.A.’s office.”

As The New York Times reported at the time, Pomerantz was to work “solely on the Trump investigation” during a temporary leave of absence from his law firm, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton, and Garrison. “But even before being sworn in as a special assistant to the Manhattan D.A., Pomerantz had reportedly ‘been helping with the case informally for months.’” Even Democrats’ most reliable Old Grey Lady (of the evening) acknowledged, “the hiring of an outsider is a highly unusual move for a prosecutor’s office.”

Soon after the Manhattan D.A. hired Pomerantz, two of his colleagues, Elyssa Abuhoff and Caroline Williamson, also took leaves of absence from Paul, Weiss to serve as special assistant district attorneys on the Trump investigation. “For a law firm to lend not one but three lawyers to the Manhattan D.A.’s office seems rather magnanimous, until you consider Paul, Weiss’s previous generosity to Joe Biden.”

As I previously reported, during Biden’s first run for the White House, “the law firm hosted a $2,800-per-plate fundraiser for about 100 guests.” Brad Karp, the chair of Paul, Weiss, also topped the list of Biden fundraisers, bundling at least $100,000 for the then-candidate. At the time, Karp wrote in an email: “As someone who cares passionately about preserving the rule of law, safeguarding our democracy and protecting fundamental liberties, I’ve been delighted to do everything I possibly can to support the Joe Biden/Kamala Harris ticket.”

Biden’s relationship with Karp continued after his election, with the president including Karp and his wife at a state dinner with the Australian prime minister. Karp and his fellow Paul, Weiss lawyers continue to fund Biden’s re-election campaign. In fact, Biden’s connection to the firm is so strong Bloomberg branded Paul, Weiss the “Biden-Era N.Y. Power Center.”

But for Paul, Weiss lending Pomerantz to the Manhattan D.A.’s office to control the Trump investigation, the former president likely never would have been charged. According to Pomerantz, Bragg had decided “not to go forward with the grand jury presentation and not to seek criminal charges,” indefinitely suspending the investigation.

Pomerantz made those claims in the resignation letter he tendered to Bragg in early 2022, which was deliberately leaked to The New York Times. “Pomerantz’s letter and his claims that Bragg had suspended the Trump probe triggered a political firestorm, which the Manhattan D.A. sought to quell by telling the public the investigation was ongoing.” Soon after, Bragg capitulated, hiring Biden’s high-ranking DOJ lawyer, Colangelo, who proceeded to indict and convict Trump.

In contrast to the Biden-connected attorneys who secured Trump’s indictment and conviction, in late 2021, at least three career prosecutors in the Manhattan D.A.’s office asked to be removed from the investigation of Trump, reportedly “concerned that the investigation was moving too quickly, without clear evidence to support possible charges.”

Not Just Manhattan

The Biden connection to the political targeting of Trump is not limited to the Manhattan D.A.’s office. In August 2023, Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney Fani Willis charged Trump and 18 other Republicans in a sprawling 98-page criminal indictment.

Earlier this year, court filings and testimony in the case related to motions to disqualify Willis and her former lover, Nathan Wade, revealed the Fulton County D.A.’s office had met with White House counsel in May 2022. Then, just three days after Trump announced his 2024 candidacy for president, Wade traveled to D.C. for an interview with the “White House,” according to Fulton County records. The Biden administration’s White House counsel’s office also dispatched two letters to Willis, according to one of her prosecutors.

Biden and his Democrat-run administration also have their fingers all over the remaining two criminal cases targeting Trump, both brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith. President Biden, according to an April 2, 2022, New York Times report, “As recently as late last year… confided to his inner circle that he believed former President Donald J. Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted.”

The Times claimed Biden had expressed frustration with Garland’s “deliberative approach” and that the president believed Trump should be prosecuted. The president “has said privately that he wanted Mr. Garland to act less like a ponderous judge and more like a prosecutor who is willing to take decisive action over the events of Jan. 6.,” the legacy outlet reported.

Biden’s attorney general would eventually appoint Smith special counsel. Smith would later charge Trump in two separate indictments—one in Florida concerning documents the former president retained, and one in D.C. with various conspiracy to defraud and obstruction charges related to Trump’s challenging the outcome of the 2020 election.

Stretching the Law Past Its Breaking Point

With the D.C. indictment, the special counsel delivered to Biden just what he wanted—a prosecution of Trump “for his role in the events of Jan. 6.” To deliver for Biden, though, required Smith to stretch the federal criminal code to the point of breaking. In the case of two of the crimes charged, in the context of Jan. 6, 2021, defendants, the Supreme Court seems poised to limit the reach of the relevant statutes—a holding that could mean that Smith charged Trump with two non-crimes.

The final criminal case pending against Trump, Smith’s documents case, also connects back to the Biden administration. That case began when the DOJ launched an investigation prompted by a referral from the national archivist related to a dispute over presidential records—even though the same archivist declined to refer Hillary Clinton to the DOJ for mishandling classified documents. Later, a top aide to Smith, Jay Bratt, would meet with “White House officials multiple times, just weeks before Mr. Smith indicted former President Donald Trump.”

That case has been delayed after it was revealed the FBI agents who executed a search warrant obtained by the Biden administration had failed to keep the documents seized from Mar-a-Lago in the same condition they were found, with the order of the materials mixed up. At the same time, it was revealed that the “classified cover sheets” depicted in the photographs of the evidence seized during the August 2022 search of Trump had been placed there by federal agents. The leak of those photographs falsely portrayed the former president as in possession of documents bearing classified cover sheets.

Biden can continue to deny his responsibility for the criminal targeting of his political opponent all he wants, but the facts tell a different story. So did the president’s malevolent smile on Friday when he was asked to respond to Trump calling himself a political prisoner and blaming the president directly.


Margot Cleveland is an investigative journalist and legal analyst and serves as The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. Margot’s work has been published at The Wall Street Journal, The American Spectator, the New Criterion, National Review Online, Townhall.com, the Daily Signal, USA Today, and the Detroit Free Press. She is also a regular guest on nationally syndicated radio programs and on Fox News, Fox Business, and Newsmax. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. Cleveland is also of counsel for the New Civil Liberties Alliance. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland where you can read more about her greatest accomplishments—her dear husband and dear son. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.


By: Jonathan Turley | June 3, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/06/03/buzz-kill-the-trump-conviction-presents-a-target-rich-environment-for-appeal/

Below is my column in the Hill on the most compelling grounds for an appeal in the Trump case after his conviction on 34 counts in Manhattan. There has been considerable criticism of the defense team and its strategy in the case, including some moves that may undermine appellate issues. However, after the instructions became public, I wrote a column that I thought the case was nearly un-winnable, even for those of us who previously saw a chance for a hung jury. Clarence Darrow would likely have lost with those instructions after the errors in the case by Judge Juan Merchan. At that point, it became a legal canned hunt. So the attention will now shift to the appellate courts. While it may be tough going initially in the New York court system for the former president, this case could well end up in the federal system and the United States Supreme Court. The thrill kill environment of last week may then dissipate as these glaring errors are presented in higher courts.

Here is the column:

The conviction of former President Donald Trump in Manhattan of 34 felonies produced citywide celebrations. This thrill-kill environment extended to the media, where former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman told MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace that it was “majestic day” and “a day to celebrate.” When I left the courthouse after watching the verdict come in, I was floored by the celebrations outside by both the public and some of the media.

The celebrants would be wise to think twice before mounting this trophy kill on the political wall. The Trump trial is a target-rich environment for an appeal, with multiple layers of reversible error, in my view.

I am less convinced by suggestions that the case could be challenged on the inability of Trump receiving a fair trial in a district that voted roughly 90 percent against him. The problem was not the jury, but the prosecutors and the judge.

Some of the most compelling problems can be divided into four groups.

The Judge

Acting Supreme Court justice Juan Merchan was handpicked for this case rather than randomly selected. This is only the latest in a litany of Trump cases where Merchan has meted out tough rulings against Trump and his organization. With any other defendant, there would likely be outrage over his selection. Merchan donated to President Biden. Even though the state bar cleared that violation based on the small size of the contribution, it later stressed that no such contributions were appropriate for a judge. We learned later that Merchan has contributed to a group to stop the GOP and Trump. Merchan’s daughter is also a Democratic organizer who has helped raise millions against Trump and the GOP and for the Democrats.

To his credit, CNN legal analyst Elie Honig has previously said that this case was legally dubious, uniquely targeted Trump and could not succeed outside of an anti-Trump district.  On the judge, he recently challenged critics on the fairness of assigning a Biden donor who has earmarked donations for “resisting the Republican Party and Donald Trump’s radical right-wing legacy.” He asked, “Would folks have been just fine with the judge staying on the case if he had donated a couple bucks to “Re-elect Donald Trump, MAGA forever!”? “Absolutely not.”

What is equally disturbing is the failure of Merchan to protect the rights of the defendant and what even critics admit were distinctly pro-prosecution rulings in the trial. It is not just the appearance of a conflict with Judge Merchan but a record of highly biased decisions. In watching Merchan in the courtroom, I was shocked by his rulings as at times incomprehensible and conflicted.

The Charges

A leading threshold issue will be the decision to allow Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to effectively try Trump for violations of federal law. The Justice Department declined any criminal charges against Trump under federal election law over the alleged “hush money” payments. The Federal Election Commission likewise found no basis for a civil fine. With no federal prosecution, Bragg decided to use an unprecedented criminal theory not only to zap a dead misdemeanor into life (after the expiration of the statute of limitation) but to allow him to try violations of not only federal election law but also federal taxation violations. In other words, the Justice Department would not prosecute federal violations, so Bragg effectively did it in state court.

Even when closing arguments were given, analysts on various networks admitted that they were unclear about what Bragg was alleging. The indictment claimed a violation under New York’s election law 17-152 that the falsification of business records were committed to further another crime as an unlawful means to influence the election. However, in a maddeningly circular theory, that other crime could be the falsification of business records. It could also be violations of federal election and taxation laws, which Trump was never charged with, let alone convicted of.

The Evidence

Judge Merchan allowed a torrent of immaterial and prejudicial evidence to be introduced into the trial by the prosecution. That included testimony from porn actress Stormy Daniels that went into details about having sex with Trump. She included a clear suggestion that Trump raped her. After this utterly disgraceful testimony, Merchan expressed regret but actually blamed the defense counsel, despite their prior objections to the testimony. He had previously chastised counsel for making continued objections, but now he criticized them for not continuing to make objections.

Merchan was equally conflicted in his other orders. For example, he allowed the prosecutors to introduce the plea agreement of Michael Cohen to federal election violations as well as the non-prosecution agreement of David Pecker on such violations. However, it was allowed only for the purposes of credibility and context. He issued an instruction that the jury could not consider the plea or the agreement to establish or impute the guilt of Trump.

The prosecutors then proceeded to expressly state that it was “a fact” that federal election violations occurred in this case and that Trump ordered those violations. They also solicited such statements from witnesses like Cohen. Merchan overruled the objections that the prosecutors were eviscerating his instruction. Merchan also barred the use of a legal expert, former FEC Chair Brad Smith, who was prepared to testify that such payments cannot be viewed as federal election violations and would not affect the election even if they were considered contributions, since they would not even have had to be reported until after the election.

Merchan is likely to be upheld in denying the expert, since the court retains the authority to state what the law is to the jury. The problem is that Merchan failed to do so. Worse still, he allowed the jury to hear the opposite in the repeated false claim that these payments were campaign contributions.

The Instructions

Even with all of the reversible errors, some of us held out hope that there might be a hung jury. That hope was largely smashed by Merchan in his instructions to the jury. The court largely used standard instructions in a case that was anything but standard. However, the instruction also allowed for doubt as to what the jury would ultimately find. When the verdict came in, we were still unsure what Trump was convicted of.

Merchan allowed the jury to find that the secondary offense was any of the three vaguely defined options. Even on the jury form, they did not have to specify which of the crimes were found. Under Merchan’s instruction, the jury could have split 4-4-4 on what occurred in the case. They could have seen a conspiracy to conceal a federal election violation, falsification of business records or taxation violations. We will never know. Worse yet, Trump will never know.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that the requirement of unanimity in criminal convictions is sacrosanct in our system. While there was unanimity that the business records were falsified to hide or further a second crime, there was no express finding of what that crime may have been. In some ways, Trump may have been fortunate by Merchan’s cavalier approach. Given that the jury convicted Trump across the board, they might have found all of three secondary crimes. The verdict form never asked for such specificity.

These are just a few of the appellate issues. There are other challenges, including but not limited to due process violations on the lack of specificity in the indictment, vagueness of the underlying state law and the lack of evidentiary foundation for key defenses like “the legitimate press function.” They are the reason why many of us view this case is likely to be reversed in either the state or federal systems. None of that is likely to dampen the thrill in this kill in Manhattan.

But if Biden wins the election before this conviction is overturned, history’s judgment will be deafening.

Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.


By: Jonathan Turley | June 3, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/06/02/the-deepfake-privilege-the-justice-department-makes-startling-claim-to-withhold-the-biden-hur-audiotape/

We have been discussing the dubious constitutional basis for President Joe Biden withholding the audio tapes of his interview with special counsel Robert Hur. I have previously written that the claim of privilege makes little sense when the transcript of the interview has already been released. It seems curious that Biden is claiming to be the president “who cannot be heard” in withholding the audio version. It just got wackier as the Justice Department seeks to create a new type of “Deepfake privilege” that would effectively blow away all existing limits on the use of the privilege when it comes to audio or visual records of a president.

Multiple committees are investigating Biden for possible impeachment and conducting oversight on the handling of the investigation into his retention and mishandling of classified material over decades. Classified documents were found in various locations where Biden lived or worked, including his garage. The mishandling of classified material is uncontestable. Broken boxes, unprotected areas and lack of tracking are all obvious from the photos.

Biden made the situation even worse with a disastrous press conference in which he attacked Hur and misrepresented his findings.

Hur’s ultimate conclusion that Biden’s diminished cognitive abilities would undermine any prosecution left many dumbfounded. After all, the man who is too feeble to prosecute is not only running a superpower with a massive nuclear arsenal but running for reelection to add four more years in office.

From impeachment to oversight to the 25th Amendment (allowing the removal of a president for incapacities), there are ample reasons for Congress to demand information and evidence from the government on these questions. Congress is also interested in looking at repeated omissions for “inaudible” statements. Under this sweeping theory that Biden can legitimately withhold these recordings under executive privilege, any president could withhold any evidence of incapacity or criminality.

As previously explained, the claim that the audiotape but not the transcript remains privileged is hard to square with precedent or logic. However, now the Justice Department appears to be pivoting with a new claim with a late Friday filing.  The filing obtained by Politico states that the audiotape must be withheld due to the risk that it could be altered by artificial intelligence and passed off as authentic in a deepfake release: “The passage of time and advancements in audio, artificial intelligence, and ‘deep fake’ technologies only amplify concerns about malicious manipulation of audio files.”

Consider the implications of that argument for a second. It would mean that any visual or audio recording of the President could be withheld due to the danger of digital or other manipulation. It would eviscerate any existing limits on privilege assertions.

It is also absurd since you could create such fake recordings using the transcript and Biden’s voice from countless interviews through AI programs. The Justice Department acknowledges that obvious logical disconnect by noting that the release would make any fake version more credible.

“To be sure, other raw material to create a deepfake of President Biden’s voice is already available, but release of the audio recording presents unique risks: if it were public knowledge that the audio recording has been released, it becomes easier for malicious actors to pass off an altered file as the true recording.”

The filing is logically and legally absurd. It is also dangerous.

For a president who is already carefully insulated from questions and controlled in public appearances, the argument would allow staff to completely control any public or, more importantly, congressional review of his actual speech and discourse.

In seeking to prevent “malicious actors” from altering reality, the government is claiming the right to frame reality as an inherent constitutional prerogative.

The argument ignores that, if an audiotape is released, it is harder to pass off a fake as genuine. As it stands, actors can claim tapes as leaked or derived from other sources. In the absence of an official tape, such arguments can be difficult to refute.

The fact that this spurious argument is being made by Merrick Garland’s Justice Department is another disappointing sign that he has abandoned his pledge to remain apolitical in office. This litigation is clearly designed for one overriding purpose: to delay any release until after the election when it cannot harm the President.

It is the legal version of a deepfake — misrepresenting the law to mislead citizens into believing that they are better off with less information on the credibility and competence of their president.


A.F. Branco Cartoon – The Difference

A.F. BRANCO

 on June 2, 2024 at 5:00 am

Hero Officer Jamal Mitchell
A Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco 2024

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Flipboard

A.F. Branco Drawing – A Minneapolis police officer is dead, and another was injured when they were fired upon while responding to a report of a shooting in the Whittier neighborhood on Thursday evening.

MPD officer dead, another injured along with several civilians shot in Minneapolis

By Crime Watch MN – May 31/2021

The fallen officer has been identified as Jamal Mitchell, who had only been with the department for about a year-and-a-half.
A Minneapolis police officer is dead, and another was injured when they were fired upon while responding to a report of a shooting in the Whittier neighborhood on Thursday evening.
Four civilians were also reportedly shot in the incident that played out about 5:20 p.m. on the 2200 block of Blaisdell Avenue South.
The fallen officer has been identified as Jamal Mitchell, who had only been with the department for about a year-and-a-half. Mitchell made headlines in February of last year after he and another officer rescued an elderly couple from their burning residence on his third day on the job. READ MORE…

DONATE to A.F. Branco Cartoons – Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump. READ MORE…


June 1, 2024


Friday, May 31, 2024

Top Stories
Joe Biden Puts Elderly Woman in Prison for 25 Months for Protesting Abortion
Texas Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Challenge to Abortion Ban, Babies Can Continue Being Saved
Leading Pro-Life Group: “We are More Committed to Helping Trump Win”
Pro-Life Leader: We Must Support Donald Trump After What Happened Yesterday

More Pro-Life News
Ben Carson: We Have to Protect Our Children From the Leftist Sexual Agenda
Texas Supreme Court Protects Babies, Confirms Abortion Ban Allows Emergency Medical Care
We Need Leaders Who Value the Family Like Harrison Butker
Hundreds of Lawmakers Worldwide Oppose Radical WHO Pandemic Agreement
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories

Joe Biden Puts Elderly Woman in Prison for 25 Months for Protesting Abortion

Texas Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Challenge to Abortion Ban, Babies Can Continue Being Saved

Leading Pro-Life Group: “We are More Committed to Helping Trump Win”

Pro-Life Leader: We Must Support Donald Trump After What Happened Yesterday

Ben Carson: We Have to Protect Our Children From the Leftist Sexual Agenda

Texas Supreme Court Protects Babies, Confirms Abortion Ban Allows Emergency Medical Care

We Need Leaders Who Value the Family Like Harrison Butker

Hundreds of Lawmakers Worldwide Oppose Radical WHO Pandemic Agreement

MORE PRO-LIFE NEWS FROM TODAY

Pro-Life Leader Mark Houck Going After Joe Biden After Biden Tried to Put Him in Prison

Court Lets Anti-Euthanasia Group Fight for 27-Year-Old Autistic Woman Who May be Euthanized

Liberal World Health Assembly Delegates Push for Killing More Babies in Abortions

We Have to Show the World Human Life is Gift From God to be Protected

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Montana Residents Should Reject CI-128, Legalizing Abortions Up to Birth

Catholic Bishops Sue to Stop Joe Biden’s Radical Abortion Agenda

Joe Biden is the Least Popular President in 70 Years, Time for Him to Go

Democrats Bracing Themselves for Potential Biden Loss in November

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.
For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.



By: Robert Schmad | May 31, 2024

Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/05/31/biden-admin-spending-millions-foreign-lgbtq-events-pride-month-approaches/

The annual Sofia LGBTQ Pride parade in Sofia, Bulgaria—seen here June 12, 2021—is being subsidized in part this year by the Biden State Department. (Photo: Georgi Paleykov/NurPhoto/Getty Images)

Robert Schmad

Robert Schmad is a reporter at the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The State Department is funding an array of LGBT pride events across the globe ahead of June, some of which include events focused on children, federal grant records show.

President Joe Biden’s State Department is bankrolling a gay film festival, an LGBT community conference, and other pride events in Australia, the Czech Republic, and Bulgaria in the lead-up to June, according to grant records.

Some observe June as “Pride Month” to commemorate the Stonewall riots, a series of clashes between LGBT people and the police after law enforcement raided a gay bar in 1969.

“The Department of State’s Pride theme for 2024 is ‘Pride and Protection: Human Rights for LGBTQI+ Persons around the World,’” a spokesperson for the department told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “The theme is a stark reminder not only of the constant danger faced by LGBTQI+ persons for living their lives authentically, but also of the importance of our continued efforts at the Department internationally.”

“Even as we continue to be heartened by indications of progress toward LGBTQI+ equality, we are also alarmed by anti-LGBTQI+ and anti-democratic sentiments that seek to disenfranchise LGBTQI+ persons,” it continued.

American taxpayers are footing the bill for LBGT pride week in the Czech city of Brno, records show. Events at the taxpayer-funded pride week included reading “queer children’s literature” to young children, a “picnic for queer youth,” and an LGBT-affirming worship service performed by a female priest of the Czechoslovak Hussite Church, according to the event’s website.

The pride week spanned from May 18 to May 25 and received about $5,500 worth of public funding, records show.

American taxpayers are also paying for Sofia Pride, an LGBT pride event in Bulgaria’s capital, according to grant records. The State Department has allocated roughly $15,000 for the event, which will take place on June 22.

Sofia Pride claims to be the “largest human rights event in Bulgaria” and says it is “key to LGBTQI+ visibility,” according to its website. In 2023, Sofia Pride focused on families and children. This year, Sofia Pride will cap off with an 18+ dance party, according to the event’s website.

In addition to Sofia Pride, the State Department is also paying Deystvie, a pro-LGBT nongovernmental organization, roughly $7,500 to hold a film festival in Bulgaria “to promote inclusion and acceptance of the LGBTQI+ community,” per federal records.

A 2022 LGBT film festival the State Department funded in Portugal included films depicting incest and pedophilia.

Moving outside of Europe, the State Department also allocated $5,250 to Better Together, a “LGBTQI+ community conference” in Australia that will take place June 13 to 15, records show. The conference will include events on how LGBT activists can more effectively engage with government to achieve policy changes, according to its website. One such event focuses on the “trans culture wars” and will cover” strategies to win the battle for public and legislative opinion” in the realm of transgender and nonbinary rights.

Other events touch on topics such as the changing landscape of queer India” and “queering menopause,” among others, according to the event’s website.

Funding pro-LGBT events and organizations abroad has become commonplace in Biden’s State Department.

Under Biden, the department has paid to support queer Muslim writers in India, funded ballroom dancing to “uplift” transgender youth in Peru, shelled out hundreds of thousands of dollars on programs for LGBT refugees in Latin America, and spent taxpayer dollars on theatrical productions in an attempt to teach Africans about LGBT rights.

Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation


By: Nick Pope | May 31, 2024

Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/05/31/biden-admin-pumps-900-million-into-green-school-buses-as-americas-students-struggle/

The Biden administration allocates $900 million to buy “green” school buses in 47 states as the nation’s students struggle academically. Pictured: A banner suggesting school buses don’t need gasoline or other fossil fuels stretches across West 53rd Street as climate activists march Sept. 17 in New York City. (Photo: John B Senter III/UCG/Universal Images Group/ Getty Images)

The Biden administration will hand out $900 million to pay for “green” school buses, as the nation’s public-school students continue to perform poorly in the aggregate.

The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday announced the recipients of the funding for school buses designed to fight climate change, with schools in 47 states receiving money for the vehicles

dailycallerlogo

The spending comes as American public-school students continue to struggle to make up for learning disruptions caused by COVID-19 lockdown policies. A 2022 review by the National Assessment of Educational Progress found that only 31% of eighth grade students met or exceeded grade-level proficiency in reading, a decrease from 2019.

“President Biden believes every child deserves the opportunity to lead a healthy life and breathe clean air, and his Investing in America agenda is designed to deliver just that,” EPA Administrator Michael Regan said of the funding for climate-friendly buses. “With today’s latest round of funding, we are transforming the nation’s school bus fleet to better protect our most precious cargo—our kids—saving school districts money, improving air quality, and bolstering American manufacturing all at the same time.”

The push for green school buses is part of the Biden administration’s broader, $1 trillion-plus climate agenda, which seeks to slash emissions in nearly every facet of American life. Educational outcomes for American students have generally tanked since the pandemic, when some Democrats and teachers unions pushed for prolonged school closures and remote learning. Some of the nation’s struggling school districts were among the awardees announced Wednesday by the EPA.

Just outside the nation’s capital in Maryland, Prince George’s County Public Schools received over $5 million to acquire over 15 green buses, according to the EPA. Only 21% of third graders in the Prince George’s County school system were proficient in math in 2023; less than 10% of sixth, seventh, and eighth grade students were proficient in math last year, according to The Washington Post.

In Pennsylvania, the Philadelphia City School District is set to receive more than $8.5 million to buy green school buses, according to the EPA. Philadelphia’s public-school students are also struggling academically, with only 15% of middle school students and 43% of high school students scoring as proficient in math while 24% of middle schoolers and 41% of high school students scoring as proficient in reading, according to U.S. News & World Report.

The Environmental Protection Agency also awarded over $8.5 million to the public school system in Bridgeport, Connecticut, to purchase at least 25 green buses for students. At Bridgeport’s schools, less than 16% of students met the state’s standards in reading and less than 7% in math during the 2022-2023 school year, according to CTPost.

The EPA and the White House did not respond immediately to requests for comment.

Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation

Related Posts:

  1. Pittsburgh Provides Example of How Biden Energy Policies Help China
  2. House Votes to Stop Biden’s Green ‘Slush Fund’
  3. Researchers Fault EPA for Resisting Efforts to Verify Accuracy of Computer Models on Methane


By: Jonathan Turley | May 31, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/05/31/trump-is-convicted-what-comes-next/

This morning, many of us are emerging from the late coverage last night after the conviction of former President Donald Trump on 34 felonies. I was in the courtroom for the verdict, which hit like a thunderclap (particularly after a strange snafu with the judge).  The question that everyone is asking: what happens next?

The scene in the court was a madhouse. Judge Juan Merchan told the court that the jury had not reached a verdict and would be dismissed for the day.  Many reporters in the overflow courtroom were leaving when Merchan suddenly said that there was a verdict. People came running back into the courtroom. That was followed by 34 guilty verdicts.

I am obviously saddened by the verdict, but not surprised. Until the very end, I was hopeful that there would be a hung jury, a result that could restore some integrity to the New York criminal justice system. However, I previously noted that the jury instructions made conviction much more likely. I referred to the deliberations as a legal “canned hunt” due to instructions that made conviction a near certainty.

You could feel the weight of history in the courtroom, though we still have to see what history was made. For some, it was the conviction of the first president of a felony. For others, it was the key moment where the weaponization of the criminal system became clear and inescapable. It was both, obviously. Yet, the trial fulfilled narratives on both sides.

I ran outside to join the coverage. (One humorous moment was an officer screaming at reporters piling out of the courtroom to “walk not run.” It did not work.) It looked like the final judgment with everyone panicking to find an exit.

The scene outside the courtroom was surreal. The Trump supporters were outraged. The anti-Trump protesters were ecstatic, dancing and celebrating in the street.

While I have written a book about what I have called “the age of rage,” I am always shocked by such scenes. There is a dehumanizing element of these moments as people celebrate not just the first conviction of a president but a person. Rage is addictive and contagious. That was vividly evident outside the courtroom.

So, what happens next?

Obviously, appeals will be taken. As I said last night, we must keep the faith. Indeed, moments like this require us to take a leap of faith in a nation that remains committed to the rule of law.  Manhattan is neither the entirety of the country nor the legal system. I believe that these convictions will be overturned, but it will take time. Judge Merchan committed, in my view, layers of reversible error. Eventually, this case may reach the United States Supreme Court.

It has been suggested that an appeal could be taken directly to the Supreme Court. I find that doubtful after the Supreme Court rejected an expedited process for Special Counsel Jack Smith in his federal prosecutions. It will work first through the New York appellate system.

As for the criminal process, Trump will have to meet with a probation officer for an interview. That officer will make recommendations to the court.

There is a possibility of a jail sentence for felonies that come with up to four years for each offense. Any jail sentences would almost certainly run concurrently. However, any jail sentence would be ridiculous in Manhattan for an elderly first-offender in a non-violent offense.

Consistent with his past commentary, MSNBC legal analyst and former Mueller aide Andrew Weissmann predicted that Merchan will give Trump jail time. He is not alone as legal analysts seemed to get caught up in a thrill-kill conviction.

It is much more likely that Merchan will impose a sentence without a jail sentence, though with fines. The most appropriate, in my view, would be a conditional discharge that requires Trump not to commit a new crime or face potential imprisonment.

Merchan could also tailor a sentence to require home confinement or even weekend jailing. Those options would raise serious conflicts with his campaigning and obviously, if elected, serving as president. Even the probation process will be awkward since a convicted defendant ordinarily has to get approval for any travel outside of the state from his probation officer.

Sentences can also include community service, counseling and other requirements.

After his ruling in this trial, it is impossible to rule anything out. However, any jail sentence would add even more outrage to an abuse of the criminal law system.


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Devil’s Advocate

A.F. BRANCO | on May 31, 2024 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-devils-advocate-2/

Merchan Slaughters the Justice System
A Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco 2024

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Flipboard

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Judge Merchan has managed to slaughter the rule of law and the Justice system all in one highly politicized lawfare campaign against Trump. Everyone knows it’s a sham and will only help Trump’s poll numbers.

Republican Lawmakers Release Statement Following Verdict in President Trump’s Manhattan Sham Trial

By Jim Hoft – May 30, 2024

The political temperature in America has reached a boiling point following the controversial guilty verdict in the sham trial of President Donald Trump.

President Trump has been found guilty on all 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection to a hush-money payment made to adult porn star Stormy Daniels.
This verdict makes Trump the first former U.S. president to be convicted of a crime. The jury reached their decision after a five-week trial and two days of deliberation.
Donald Trump denounced the trial as a “disgrace” and “rigged,” claiming that a “conflicted” and “corrupt” judge presided over the proceedings. He has consistently maintained his innocence, declaring himself a “very innocent man,” and has announced plans to appeal the verdict. READ MORE…

DONATE to A.F. Branco Cartoons – Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump. READ MORE…


Thursday, May 30, 2024

Top Stories
Abortion Pills are Releasing Dangerous Chemicals, Remains of Aborted Babies in Our Water
Catholic Bishops Sue to Stop Joe Biden’s Radical Abortion Agenda
Joe Biden is the Least Popular President in 70 Years, Time for Him to Go
Pro-Life Republicans Must Defend Republican Party’s Pro-Life Platform

More Pro-Life News
Thank You Harrison Butker for Defending Pro-Life, Pro-Family Values
This Democrat State Bought 15,000 Abortion Pills, Fortunately Most of Them Have Never Been Used
Woman Whose Husband Forced Her to Have Two Abortions Has Profound Regret Now
Disabled Babies Should Not be Killed in Abortions, Perinatal Hospice is a Better Option
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories

Abortion Pills are Releasing Dangerous Chemicals, Remains of Aborted Babies in Our Water

Catholic Bishops Sue to Stop Joe Biden’s Radical Abortion Agenda

Joe Biden is the Least Popular President in 70 Years, Time for Him to Go

Pro-Life Republicans Must Defend Republican Party’s Pro-Life Platform

Thank You Harrison Butker for Defending Pro-Life, Pro-Family Values

This Democrat State Bought 15,000 Abortion Pills, Fortunately Most of Them Have Never Been Used

Woman Whose Husband Forced Her to Have Two Abortions Has Profound Regret Now

Disabled Babies Should Not be Killed in Abortions, Perinatal Hospice is a Better Option

MORE PRO-LIFE NEWS FROM TODAY

Texas Appoints Top Pro-Life OBGYN to Maternal Mortality Committee

Planned Parenthood Promotes Abortion at World Health Assembly, Claims Killing Babies is Health Care

Pro-Life Pregnancy Centers Take NY AG Letitia James to Court to Stop Her From Shutting Them Down

Trump Will Get Rid of WHO Pandemic Agreement That Promotes Abortion

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Hillary Clinton Freaks Out: “We May Never Have Another Election” if Trump Wins in November

Justice Sonia Sotomayor Cried Over Rulings Like Dobbs That Saved Babies From Abortions

Abortion Lost Big in Georgia and More People Need to Talk About It

Democrats Bracing Themselves for Potential Biden Loss in November

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.
For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Seeking Guidance

A.F. BRANCO

 on May 30, 2024 at 5:00 am

Jake Tapper Advice Merchan – Cartoon
A Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco 2024

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Flipboard

A.F. Branco Cartoon – I can almost envision Fake News Jake Tapper asking Judge Merchan for advice on ways to silence Trump from exposing the truth when he hosts the 2024 Biden-Trump debates since they’re so politically aligned.

BREAKING: Stalinist Judge Merchan Directs Jury to Choose Among These Three Crimes to Convict Trump – Jurors Don’t Have to Unanimously Agree!

By Cristina Laila – May 29, 2024

President Trump was back in court on Wednesday morning in Alvin Bragg’s ‘hush money’ show trial in New York City.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg indicted Trump in April 2023 on 34 felony counts related to ‘hush payments’ he made to Stormy Daniels.
Trump was accused of paying porn star Stormy Daniels, AKA, Stephanie Clifford, ‘hush payments’ through his then-attorney Michael Cohen in a scheme to silence her and stop the story about their alleged affair from being published in the National Enquirer.

The jury deliberations began on Wednesday after Judge Merchan instructed them to choose among the three predicate crimes Trump supposedly committed. READ MORE…

DONATE to A.F. Branco Cartoons – Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump. READ MORE…


Wednesday, May 29, 2024

Top Stories
Trump Will Get Rid of WHO Pandemic Agreement That Promotes Abortion
Hillary Clinton Freaks Out: “We May Never Have Another Election” if Trump Wins in November
Justice Sonia Sotomayor Cried Over Rulings Like Dobbs That Saved Babies From Abortions
Abortion Lost Big in Georgia and More People Need to Talk About It

More Pro-Life News
Democrats Bracing Themselves for Potential Biden Loss in November
Louisiana Governor Signs Law Blocking WHO and UN From Having Jurisdiction There
Planned Parenthood Loses Bid to Silence Pro-Life Protestors
Planned Parenthood Wants Indiana Judge to Water Down Abortion Ban so It Can Kill Babies
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories

Trump Will Get Rid of WHO Pandemic Agreement That Promotes Abortion

Hillary Clinton Freaks Out: “We May Never Have Another Election” if Trump Wins in November

Justice Sonia Sotomayor Cried Over Rulings Like Dobbs That Saved Babies From Abortions

Abortion Lost Big in Georgia and More People Need to Talk About It

Democrats Bracing Themselves for Potential Biden Loss in November

Louisiana Governor Signs Law Blocking WHO and UN From Having Jurisdiction There

Planned Parenthood Loses Bid to Silence Pro-Life Protestors

Planned Parenthood Wants Indiana Judge to Water Down Abortion Ban so It Can Kill Babies

MORE PRO-LIFE NEWS FROM TODAY

Democrats Must Stop Their War on Pro-Life Pregnancy Centers

Record Number of Twin Babies Saved From Abortions During Recent Pro-Life Campaign

Scotland Records Highest Number of Abortions Ever as More Babies Killed

More Babies With Down Syndrome are Being Killed in Abortions

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Baby Born Weighing Only 600 Grams at Birth Leaves Hospital, Doing Great Now

Assisted Suicide is Not Health Care

Police Arrest Man Who Assaulted Christians During Church Service

Harrison Butker Defends His Pro-Life, Pro-Family Commencement Speech: “I Do Not Regret At All”

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.
For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.


May 30, 2024

Donald Trump was just found guilty of 34 counts in the socialist hush money lynching.

Is America over?

Is he Clift we just fell over too deep to recover?

Has the Socialist Left successfully taken over our country?

Remember, what they just did to Trump, they can do to anyone. Communist/Socialist countries do this every day, especially with their political opponents. All political office holders need to be very afraid. Anyone one of them could be next.

If you haven’t been praying for America, please start today.


BY: JOSEPH LOBUE | MAY 29, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/05/29/democrats-not-trump-are-the-real-crooked-record-keepers/

Donald Trump speaking about manhattan trial

Author Joseph LoBue profile

JOSEPH LOBUE

MORE ARTICLES

President Trump is on trial in New York for allegedly falsifying business records because the bookkeepers in his organization recorded certain legal expenses — specifically, a legal settlement — as “legal expenses.” According to Democrat prosecutors, the bookkeepers should have recorded these payments as campaign contributions and expenditures because, they say, the payments were “intended” to “influence” the 2016 election “unlawfully” by concealing a purported sexual encounter with a pornographer.

Convoluted and bizarre enough for you yet? It should be. Because there is absolutely nothing “unlawful” about concealing a purported sexual encounter with a pornographer.

There is, nevertheless, a good deal of crooked record-keeping going on these days. But Democrats are the ones doing it.  

False Characterization of Record-Keeping Requirements

Federal campaign finance law actually prohibits candidates from characterizing the payments at issue in the Trump case as campaign contributions and expenditures.

Brad Smith, a leading expert on campaign finance law and former member of the Federal Election Commission, was set to testify to that very thing in open court in the Trump case. Except Juan Merchan, the partisan Democrat Biden-donor judge presiding over the case, barred him from doing so. 

To accept the prosecution’s case, one must conclude that New York law requires candidates to make business records that violate federal law. The supremacy clause of the Constitution does not allow that. So, it is Democrat prosecutors, not the Trump organization, that conspired to falsely characterize the record-keeping issues in the case.

Judge Merchan’s Manipulation of the Trial Record

Judge Merchan’s rationale for excluding Smith’s testimony is that judges traditionally instruct the jury on the law. The problem is that Merchan already allowed prosecution witnesses, and prosecutors themselves, to opine on their understanding of campaign finance laws. Once he allowed that, Merchan was constitutionally required to allow Trump to mount a defense on the same point.

Merchan also overlooked the fact that how people align their behavior with the law is based as much on the policies of the administrators who enforce the law as on the words of the statute itself. Smith, a former member of the regulatory body that enforces federal campaign law, was prepared to testify that the agency’s policy precludes candidates from treating payments like these as campaign contributions and expenditures.

This leads to the obvious conclusion that the Trump organization booked the payments in the manner that they did, not to “unlawfully” influence the 2016 election, but because they were (or at least thought they were) required to do so in that manner by federal law, completely negating the factual element of unlawful intent.

In fact, had Trump “intended” to “influence” the 2016 election by covering up the Stormy Daniels’ NDA payments, the easiest way to do so would have been to characterize the late October 2016 payments as campaign contributions and expenditures. This is because, under federal campaign finance law, contributions and expenditures made in late October of an election year do not need to be reported until after the election.

Unfortunately (and unjustly), the jurors in the New York case will not hear any of this exculpatory information because the partisan Democrat judge has excluded it from the record. Like I said, it’s the Democrats who have the record-keeping problem. 

Talk About Falsifying Business Records to Influence an Election

Joe Biden is old. As Bill Maher puts it, Joe Biden is “cadaver-like” old. Polls show that nearly two-thirds of Americans believe Biden does not possess the mental fitness to serve another term as president. Do you think that might incentivize the White House to alter records to mitigate the political effects of Biden’s mental deterioration?

The White House is doing just that. It recently released the official transcript of Biden’s May 19 speech to the NAACP in Detroit. It was official. Except it wasn’t a transcript. It was a political circular designed to clean up the incoherent mess left by a mentally diminished man selfishly trying to hold onto the most difficult, demanding, and consequential job in the world.

The so-called “transcript” substantively corrected numerous significant instances of mental lapses or gibberish uttered by Biden, including the claim that he was vice president during the Covid “pandemic,” and that President Obama told him to go to Detroit and “fix it.”

Records? We Don’t Have to Show You Any Stinking Records!

There’s no need to falsify records if you improperly refuse to let the public see them at all. That’s what the White House did last week by claiming “executive privilege” over the audio recordings of Biden’s interviews with the special counsel investigating Biden’s mishandling of classified documents.

That’s the case where Biden took highly classified documents from the government while he was a senator and vice president, “willfully” retained them openly in dilapidated boxes in his garage, and then “willfully” disclosed the classified information to his ghostwriter as part of a lucrative $8 million book deal. Biden’s Justice Department declined to prosecute Biden, concluding that he would present himself to a jury like he did in his interviews — “as a sympathetic elderly man with a poor memory” — making it difficult to prove a felony “that requires a mental state of willfulness.”

In an effort to control the damage from the special counsel’s report, the White House and its allies released redacted transcripts of Biden’s interviews with investigators, apparently hoping that presenting the cold, written version of Biden’s testimony might minimize public fears about his declining mental state. It did not. Yet, it did open the door for Congress to subpoena the audio tapes of the interviews.

Last week, the White House barred the Justice Department from releasing those audio tapes to Congress on the grounds of “executive privilege.” However, the White House has already voluntarily released the transcripts of the interviews, so any privilege that may have existed has been waived. It is a basic principle of law that a party waives confidentiality privileges once the party voluntarily discloses any significant portion of the information. In fact, in these circumstances, the White House’s claim of executive privilege is not merely wrong, it is ludicrous.    

The White House’s assertion of “executive privilege” is not really a legal one — it knows it has no chance of prevailing in court. Rather, the assertion of privilege is purely political. The White House believes it can conceal the audio tapes until after the election while the issue is litigated.

The audio tapes must be really, really bad for Biden. How do we know this?  Because not releasing the tapes is really bad for Biden. The special counsel essentially reported that Biden appeared mentally diminished in his interviews. By refusing to release the audio tapes, Biden just confirms that perception.

There were no good options for the White House on the audio tape issue. Because the White House chose a bad option (withholding the tapes), one can only assume that the other option (releasing the tapes) was substantially worse. 

Why Withhold Records if You Can Just Hide or Destroy Them Instead?

That, apparently, was the credo of one of Dr. Anthony Fauci’s top advisers — and possibly Fauci as well — during the Covid panic in relation to their dealings with EcoHealth Alliance and the now-admitted use of federal funding to perform gain-of-function research at the infamous Wuhan Institute of Virology.

This month, the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic released shocking emails sent from the private Gmail account of David Morens, an adviser to Fauci, detailing an apparent effort by administrators to evade public open records laws — commonly referred to as “FOIA” — by improperly performing government work through private Gmail accounts or by deleting records altogether.

In one such email, Morens tells Peter Daszak, president of EchoHealth Alliance, that “there is no worry about FOIAs. I can either send stuff to Tony on his private gmail, or hand it to him at work or at his home. He is too smart to let colleagues send him stuff that could cause trouble.”

In another email, Morens confesses, “I learned from our foia lady here how to make emails disappear after I am foia’d, but before the search starts, so i think we’re all safe. Plus, i deleted most of those earlier emails after sending them to gmail.”  

Wow, that’s bad. But you have to understand, to Democrats, booking legal expenses as “legal expenses” is the real threat to democracy.


Joseph LoBue is a retired Naval officer and attorney.


By Sam Barron    |   Wednesday, 29 May 2024 11:04 AM EDT

Read more at https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/alan-dershowitz-donald-trump-michael-cohen/2024/05/29/id/1166625/

Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law professor emeritus, told Newsmax Wednesday that the prosecutors in former President Donald Trump’s criminal trial in Manhattan misled the jury in closing arguments.

Trump is charged with falsifying business records on a $130,000 payment to Michael Cohen. Trump’s former attorney to reimburse him for paying adult film star Stormy Daniels to stop saying she had a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006. Trump has denied all charges and said the encounter never occurred.

The prosecutors told the jury they could find all the elements of a crime committed without believing Michael Cohen, their star witness.

“That’s just not true,” Dershowitz told “The National Report.” “The only evidence that Donald Trump knew of this at all comes from an uncorroborated conversation with Michael Cohen that could have been corroborated by Alan Weisselberg.”

But prosecutors never called Weisselberg, Dershowitz said.

“There is a lack of corroboration for a crucial conversation that might criminalize what was otherwise innocent behavior,” Dershowitz said.

Dershowitz also attacked a New York State law that allows the prosecution to go last when presenting closing arguments, calling it unconstitutional.

“How does a defense go first when it doesn’t even know what the crimes are that turned a misdemeanor into a felony?” Dershowitz said. “They had to wait until they heard it from the prosecutor’s closing argument and then had no chance to rebut.”

Dershowitz said if he was on the defense team, he would’ve said he had nothing to say and that he would wait for the prosecutors to present their case and then respond to it.

“You can’t make me respond to a case I haven’t heard yet,” Dershowitz said. “The defense was forced to go first, which imposed a burden on them which the jury will take into the room.”

In closing arguments, Dershowitz said the defense should’ve focused on prosecutors not calling Weisselberg as a witness.

“I would’ve put up a life-size blown-up picture of Allen Weisselberg on the witness stand,” Dershowitz said. “What did the prosecution hide from you?”

About NEWSMAX TV:

NEWSMAX is the fastest-growing cable news channel in America!

  • Find Newsmax channel in your home via cable and satellite systems – More Info Here
  • Watch Newsmax+ on your home TV app or smartphone and watch it anywhere! Try it for FREE — See More Here: NewsmaxPlus.com

Sam Barron 

Sam Barron has almost two decades of experience covering a wide range of topics including politics, crime and business.


By: Jonathan Turley | May 29, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/05/29/democracy-is-on-the-ballot-california-democrats-seek-to-prevent-voters-from-approving-new-taxes/

“Democracy is on the ballot.” That mantra of President Joe Biden and other Democrats has suggested that “this may be our last election” if the Republicans win in 2024. A few of us have noted that the Democrats seem keener on claiming the mantle of the defenders of democracy than actually practicing it. Democrats have sought to disqualify Donald Trump and dozens of Republicans from ballots; block third party candidates, censor and blacklist of those with opposing views; and weaponize the legal system against their opponents. Most recently, in California, democracy is truly on the ballot and the Democrats are on the wrong side.

California has always prided itself on the ability of citizens to vote on changes in the law directly through referenda and ballot measures. That is precisely what citizens are attempting to do with a measure that would require voter approval of any tax increase, including a two-thirds vote for some local taxes. It is called the Taxpayer Protection Act and it is a duly qualified statewide ballot measure slated for the November 2024 ballot.

The state Democrats are apoplectic over the prospect of citizen control over revenue and taxes.  What was a quaint element of democratic empowerment is now challenging a core vehicle of Democratic power. So, Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democratic leaders have taken the issue to the state Supreme Court to demand that citizens be denied the right to decide the issue.

In oral arguments, the attorney supporting the challenge explained to the justices that citizens are simply not equipped to deal with the complexities of taxation and should not be allowed to render such a decision.

In a prior decision, Associate Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar wrote that “Whether the context involves taxation or not, all of these cases underscore how courts preserve and liberally construe the public’s statewide and local initiative power. Indeed, we resolve doubts about the scope of the initiative power in its favor whenever possible and we narrowly construe provisions that would burden or limit the exercise of that power.”

Half of the Court seemed to be inclined to deny the public the right to decide the question.

The Court, however, may wait until after the election to render a decision on the limits of democracy in California.


By: Jonathan Turley | May 29, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/05/29/de-niro-goes-full-travis-bickle-the-biden-campaigns-courthouse-presser-turns-into-a-sad-spectacle/

Fox News screenshot

In the movie A Bronx Tale, the character played by Robert De Niro tells his son that “the saddest thing in life is wasted talent.”  Yesterday, the actor appeared to have forgotten his own cinematic advice in a bizarre press conference organized by the Biden campaign in front of the Manhattan courthouse during the trial of former President Donald Trump. In a raving, disconnected press conference, De Niro predicted the end of democracy and then the world if Trump is not stopped in New York. De Niro offered a rambling monologue and exposed the danger of an actor speaking without a script:

It’s a good time to reflect on how Americans fought and died so that we may enjoy the freedoms guaranteed to us by a democratic government, a government that as President Lincoln said of the people by the people for the people shall not perish from the earth.

Under Trump this kind of government will perish from the earth.

I don’t mean to scare you.

No, no, wait, maybe I do mean to scare you.

If Trump returns to the White House, you can kiss these freedoms goodbye that we all take for granted.

And elections, forget about it.

That’s over. That’s done if he gets in, I can tell you right now, he will never leave, he will never leave. You know that he will never leave.

De Niro has gone full Travis Bickle. However, now 80, it came across as De Niro screaming at the courthouse for Trump to get off his lawn.

The diatribe is consistent with the messaging of Democrats, including President Biden, that “democracy is on the ballot” and that this may be our last election. De Niro was not satisfied with that alarmist message and decided to take it to an apocalyptic level in predicting a global meltdown.

As I have previously written, it is a narrative that ignores our history and our values. To suggest that this may be our last democratic election is to suggest that both branches (and the population at large) would stand idly by as a president assumed tyrannical powers. That did not occur, even when this country was united by wars and national emergencies. With the nation now divided right down the middle, it is even less likely.

That is why the “democracy is on the ballot” claims border on defamation against our Constitution. We have the most successful and stable democratic system in history. The success of that system is not measured by those who would riot or challenge our values. It is measured by how the system responds. Our system works because it was not only written for times of relative unity and calm, it also was written for times like these.

What was particularly weird is that the Biden campaign succeeded in reinforcing the view of this case as lawfare, an effort to stop Trump at any cost. That message was also reaffirmed by President Biden stating that he will hold a press conference on the verdict.  After the third highest ranking official in the Biden Justice Department joined the prosecution to bring the case, the announcement only magnified the view of a case that is being used for political purposes.

De Niro walked away pursued by hecklers and proceeded to exchange profanities.

The question for the Biden campaign lingered as to what was achieved by the chaotic scene outside of the courthouse. I am a great fan of De Niro’s artistic work, a legacy of great movies that are now an indelible part of our culture. That is precisely why, as I watched from the Fox camera location near his presser, I was more sad than surprised by the spectacle. As another De Niro character said in the movie Stardust, “reputations, you know, a lifetime to build, seconds to destroy.”


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Safe Space

A.F. BRANCO | on May 29, 2024 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-safe-space/

08 BubbleJoe CI 1080
A Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco 2024

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Flipboard

A.F. Branco Cartoon—It appears it’s Deja vu all over again for the 2024 election, with some Lawfare thrown in for good measure. Biden will be well protected in his basement with bubble wrap.

Trump Says What We are All Thinking About Joe Biden’s 2024 Campaign Strategy

By Cristina Laila – Aug 19, 2023

President Trump on Saturday said what we are all thinking about Joe Biden’s 2024 campaign strategy.

“Just think of it! They (Crooked Joe Biden and his Thugs!) Indict me, and their whole campaign is that “Trump is Indicted.” Does that sound fair to anyone? Am I allowed to do such a horrible and unconstitutional thing if, and when, I win the Presidency? We are entering really dangerous territory!!!” Trump said Saturday afternoon. READ MORE…

DONATE to A.F. Branco Cartoons – Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump. READ MORE…


Tuesday, May 28, 2024

Top Stories
Harrison Butker Defends His Pro-Life, Pro-Family Commencement Speech: “I Do Not Regret At All”
Tennessee Governor Signs Bill to Stop Trafficking Teens to Other States for Secret Abortions
Melinda Gates Spending $1 Billion to Push Abortion Worldwide
Catholic Cardinal Condemns “Killing Unborn Children” in Abortions: “History Will Judge Us”

More Pro-Life News
Louisiana Governor Signs Bill to Stop Predators From Forcing Women to Have Abortions
Pro-Life Group Sues Joe Biden for Targeting Pro-Life Advocate Mark Houck
Hillary Clinton is Still Mad About Dobbs Saving Babies From Abortion
Letitia James Loses First Legal Battle After She Tries to Shut Down Pro-Life Pregnancy Centers
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories

Harrison Butker Defends His Pro-Life, Pro-Family Commencement Speech: “I Do Not Regret At All”

Tennessee Governor Signs Bill to Stop Trafficking Teens to Other States for Secret Abortions

Melinda Gates Spending $1 Billion to Push Abortion Worldwide

Catholic Cardinal Condemns “Killing Unborn Children” in Abortions: “History Will Judge Us”

Louisiana Governor Signs Bill to Stop Predators From Forcing Women to Have Abortions

Pro-Life Group Sues Joe Biden for Targeting Pro-Life Advocate Mark Houck

Hillary Clinton is Still Mad About Dobbs Saving Babies From Abortion

Letitia James Loses First Legal Battle After She Tries to Shut Down Pro-Life Pregnancy Centers

MORE PRO-LIFE NEWS FROM TODAY

Travis Kelce Defends Harrison Butker’s Pro-Family Commencement Speech

Incredible Study Shows Brain-Injured Patients Can Recover

Pro-Life Pregnancy Centers Sue New York AG Letitia James For Trying to Shut Them Down

Washington Democrat AG Withdraws Complain Against Pro-Life Pregnancy Centers

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Former Abortionist Shocks Everyone By Describing How Abortions “Tear Out” the Body Parts of Babies

Ireland’s ProLife Campaign Takes Pro-Life Message to Millions of Voters

Abortion is Not Health Care Because Abortions Don’t Help Women’s Health

Woman Goes Viral With Video Claiming “My Fetus Dancing Right Before It Was Aborted”

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.
For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.


By Corey Brooks Fox News Published May 28, 2024 9:54am EDT | Updated May 28, 2024 10:00am EDT

Read more at https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/illinois-democrats-think-magically-cure-crime-devastating-chicago-few-words

Once again, our Illinois politicians believe they have the magic that will cure the crime that riddles our city of Chicago. I recently learned that our state’s Democratic lawmakers plan to introduce House Bill 4409 to amend the Illinois Crime Reduction Act of 2009 in order to rename “offenders” as “justice-impacted individuals.” That is right — with the magic of rewording, we will no longer have “offenders” or “criminals.” Instead, we will have “justice-impacted individuals” and the implication could not be clearer: rather than being seen as criminals who victimized society they will be seen as victims of the system.

I wish it were that simple. 

If it were, I could stop my work as a pastor who has tried to reform criminals in the Woodlawn neighborhood on the South Side for the last 20 years. I could stop construction on my massive Project H.O.O.D. community center designed to take back the neighborhood from criminals. But you and I know that this latest move by our state politicians is just more leftist foolishness.

ILLINOIS POLITICIANS AIM TO CHANGE WORD ‘OFFENDER’ TO ‘JUSTICE-IMPACTED INDIVIDUAL’

It makes me tired. I’m of watching how these liberals have sprinkled this magic dust in my neighborhood over and over — for the last seven decades. In the beginning, long before I arrived on the South Side to begin my ministry, they introduced welfare policies that took the father out of the home in exchange for government dependency. 

Year after year, they failed to provide us with sufficient schools and teachers — today, the nearby elementary school produces kids who can barely read or do math. And only several months ago, less than a year ago, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson announced that he would magically achieve equity by shuttering some of the city’s best public high schools because it wouldn’t be fair to the Black kids in poor performing schools.

CHICAGO MAYOR TOUTS HIS ACHIEVEMENTS LEADING ‘GREATEST FREAKING CITY IN THE WORLD’

I wish I could laugh at this foolishness, but I can’t. I’m so tired of politicians claiming to care about us and then running away from the failures that their policies have caused. Instead, they prefer to sprinkle the magic dust of empty words, hoping to distract us. Sadly, it works too often.

Every single offender that I have encountered on the streets or in my church broke the law. They knew what the law was, and they crossed the line anyway. They hurt people, even killed people. You can’t erase these consequences with a turn of a phrase.

But what bothers me profoundly about the left is their consistent refusal to see people in my neighborhood as fully human. That is why calling criminals in my neighborhood “justice-impacted individuals” is just more of not seeing them as fully human.

By contrast, I see these fallen men and women for who they are: criminals. We have to focus on the reality of that. It may not be fair that many of them were born into great poverty and burdened with disadvantages, but that is no excuse to embark on the criminal path.

Every single offender that I have encountered on the streets or in my church broke the law. They knew what the law was, and they crossed the line anyway. They hurt people, even killed people. You can’t erase these consequences with a turn of a phrase.

But what I believe in my heart is that you can reform a criminal into a law-abiding citizen. The first step begins with finding the individual hiding under that criminal armor. When you do that, you reconnect that individual to all the good things in life, especially to who they are as a person. 

Then you begin to show that individual the possible new pathways in life. I tell them over and over that it is possible for them to change their lives for the better — to become good employees, to become good parents, and to become good citizens. 

This work is not easy or for the faint of heart. Not everyone succeeds, but I have seen many who have.  It is a beautiful thing to witness them spread their wings. 

No amount of liberal magic can ever replace the true and human work that desperately needs to be done in my community.

Follow along as Fox News checks in with Pastor Corey Brooks with a new Rooftop Revelation

For more information, please visit Project H.O.O.D.

Pastor Corey Brooks, known as the “Rooftop Pastor,” is the founder and Senior Pastor of New Beginnings Church of Chicago and the CEO of Project H.O.O.D. (Helping Others Obtain Destiny), the church’s local mission. He gained national attention for his 94-day and 343-day rooftop vigils to transform the notorious “O-Block,” once known as Chicago’s most dangerous block, into #OpportunityBlock. Learn more at ProjectHOOD.org.


Tuesday, 28 May 2024 03:10 PM EDT

Read more at https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/ohio-ballot-biden-access/2024/05/28/id/1166492/

President Joe Biden will be formally nominated as the Democratic presidential nominee through a virtual roll call ahead of the party’s official convention in Chicago in August — a maneuver that will allow Biden to appear on the November ballot in Ohio and also reduce opportunities for disruptions from protesters. The Democratic National Convention, where the president would otherwise be formally nominated, comes after Ohio’s ballot deadline of Aug. 7. The party’s convention is scheduled for Aug. 19-22.

Ohio lawmakers have moved the deadline in the past for candidates of both parties, although they had not done so yet for Biden this year and were called to a rare special session by Gov. Mike DeWine to address the issue. The virtual proceedings will allow Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris to get the party’s formal nod and will be very similar to the process used in 2020, when the convention went virtual because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The move also reduces the chances for an unscripted moment during the party’s highly produced Chicago convention that could embarrass Biden — who has faced discontent from some activist members of his party over his support for Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza — on live television.

The Democratic National Committee on Tuesday did not say when the virtual roll call will take place, but it is expected in the weeks after the committee’s rules and bylaws committee votes to propose changes to the roll call process. That committee vote is scheduled for June 4.

“Joe Biden will be on the ballot in Ohio and all 50 states, and Ohio Republicans agree. But when the time has come for action, they have failed to act every time, so Democrats will land this plane on our own,” Jaime Harrison, the Democratic National Committee chairman, said in a statement. “Through a virtual roll call, we will ensure that Republicans can’t chip away at our democracy through incompetence, or partisan tricks and that Ohioans can exercise their right to vote for the presidential candidate of their choice.”

Ohio lawmakers, meanwhile, were gathering Tuesday for the special session.

Negotiations between the House and Senate on a solution to Biden’s ballot conundrum began Friday. State Rep. Bill Seitz told reporters during a conference call that he and state Sen. Rob McColley, both Republicans, are leading the talks, with no resolution announced as of Tuesday.

Since Ohio changed its certification deadline from 60 to 90 days ahead of its general election, state lawmakers have had to adjust the requirement twice, in 2012 and 2020, to accommodate candidates of both leading parties. Each change was only temporary.

And the ability of voters to speak directly through the ballot initiative process on questions such as abortion has made reaching a solution more difficult in both chambers, where the GOP has lopsided majorities.

The Senate sent its version of the ballot fix to the House after attaching a prohibition on foreign nationals donating to Ohio ballot campaigns, stopping it in its tracks.

DeWine urged legislators to pass the combination measure during the special session, but Democrats have balked, saying the proposal goes beyond the foreign nationals ban to add requirements intended to make it more difficult to mount future ballot campaigns in the state.

That’s after Ohio voters overwhelmingly approved three ballot measures last year, including a constitutional amendment protecting access to abortions that Republicans opposed and an initiated statute legalizing adult-use marijuana.

A “clean” House bill containing only the adjustment to Ohio’s ballot deadline may also be considered.

Due to differing interpretations of the proclamation DeWine issued Thursday, the Ohio Senate scheduled a single day of activity for Tuesday, while the Ohio House plans to begin with two days of committee hearings before taking its vote Thursday.

A Senate spokesman has said it’s possible the upper chamber can convene Tuesday and then recess to wait for the House.

Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.


By: Elizabeth Troutman @ElizTroutman / May 28, 2024

Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/05/28/missouri-high-schoolers-asked-if-they-understand-difference-between-gender-sex-assigned-at-birth/

A Missouri high school asks students in a health class whether they understand that “gender” is different than “sex assigned at birth.” (Photo illustration: Fat Camera/Getty Images)

A Missouri high school instructed students in a health class to complete a survey asking if they understood “the difference between sex assigned at birth and gender.”

Webster Groves High School hosted a workshop in late April called “Understanding Gender and Relationships” presented by a speaker with a program run by the St. Louis-based domestic abuse treatment center Safe Connections. Before and after the guest speaker’s lecture, the health teacher instructed students to take the survey. 

Webster Groves High School is part of Webster Groves School District, which enrolls 4,407 students across 10 schools. The survey asked students in the high school health class to respond with “yes,” “not sure,” or “no” to four statements, including “I can explain the difference between sex assigned at birth and gender.”

Two other statements on the survey are “I can create relationships in which others can express themselves and I can be myself” and “I understand how some gender stereotypes contribute to violence and abuse.”

The guest speaker for the health class represented Project HART, which its website describes as a “relationship violence prevention program offered at St. Louis-area schools, community centers and other places teens gather.” (HART is an acronym for Healthy Alternatives for Relationships Among Teens.)

In a fourth statement, the survey asks students whether they “can show people respect regardless of gender and how it is expressed.”

The high school gave the survey to students after Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, a Republican, ordered the Webster Groves School District to “cease and desist” teaching students about human sexuality, including gender ideology, without parental consent ahead of time, The Daily Signal reported in February.  

Missouri state law requires every public school district and public charter school to notify each student’s parent or guardian before providing any human sexuality materials or instruction to students. When asked if the survey taken by students in the health class violated this mandate, Webster Groves School District’s communications director, Derek Duncan, told The Daily Signal that the school system notifies families before lessons about human growth and development.

“Families are given the choice to opt out of such lessons,” Duncan said. 

Duncan did not respond directly to The Daily Signal’s question asking whether parents of the involved students got the opportunity to opt their children out of the health class lesson on gender ideology. 

The Missouri Attorney General’s Office told The Daily Signal it would look into the matter. 

The session on “Understanding Gender and Relationships” allows students to “explore harmful gender stereotypes and to understand the differences between biological sex, gender identity, gender expression, and attraction/sexual orientation,” Cynthia Danley, chief executive officer for Safe Connections, told The Daily Signal in an email. 

“Key learning objectives include helping youth recognize that everyone deserves respect regardless of their gender and expression, understanding the negative impact of failing to respect gender-expansive individuals, and equipping youth with the tools to build relationships where peers can safely express themselves and be authentic,” Danley said. 

Webster Groves School District, in the suburbs of St. Louis, approved a memorandum of understanding with Safe Connections at an April 11 school board meeting. On Feb. 20, Webster Groves issued a $220 check to the organization, according to the website BoardDocs.


By: Tyler O’Neil @Tyler2ONeil / May 28, 2024

Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/05/28/new-day-visibility-counters-lgbtq-narrative-start-pride-month/

The sun shines behind a rainbow flag meant to symbolize the LGBTQ movement
While so much of American culture gears up to celebrate LGBTQ “Pride” during June, The Ruth Institute is dedicating the first Sunday in June to those who rejected a homosexual lifestyle. “Ex-Gay Visibility Day” is unlikely to receive President Joe Biden’s endorsement, but arguably it’s more necessary than the Transgender Day of Visibility, which the White House commemorated on Easter. (Photo illustration: Getty Images)

Next month, companies will add rainbow flags to their icons and logos, the White House will hold events celebrating LGBTQ individuals, and Target and other stores will likely promote rainbow-themed merchandise. Amid all this “Pride,” the men and women who rejected a homosexual lifestyle will be forgotten.

Why should “Pride” have the entire month of June? That’s a question Jennifer Roback Morse, president of the Ruth Institute, asked herself. She came to the conclusion that if so, much of America’s culture is going to celebrate people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender, she might as well highlight the Americans who rejected those identities.

Morse has christened the first Sunday in June (which is June 2 this year) “Ex-Gay Visibility Day,” in a fitting response to the White House’s commemoration of “Transgender Day of Visibility.”

“It’s not politically correct to talk about ex-LGBT people,” Morse says in a press release provided early to The Daily Signal. “To the gay lobby, they don’t exist, or they’re just lying to themselves or were never really gay in the first place. But I have met many people who have journeyed away from an LGBT identity and are living happy, fulfilled lives with opposite-sex partners.”

Morse mentions research from Father Paul Sullins, a Roman Catholic priest, senior research associate at The Ruth Institute, and former sociology professor at Catholic University, who found that sexual orientation is more malleable than LGBTQ activists claim. The “born this way” narrative doesn’t match up with the results of Sullins’ research.

Sullins previously told The Daily Signal that he doesn’t encourage lesbians, gays, or bisexuals to try to change their sexual orientation unless they feel uncomfortable about it. He emphasized that efforts to change sexual orientation don’t always work, but—contrary to the LGBTQ narrative—they do occasionally succeed.

“When people attempt to change sexual orientation, it is fully successful in my studies about 17 to 20% of the time,” Sullins said. “Most persons who undergo it, meaning about 60 to 65%, report that they are less caught up in homosexual attractions and behaviors and activity.”

Sullins noted that about 30% of the 1,500 lesbians, gays, and bisexuals in a 2020 study on sexual orientation said that they have tried to change their sexual orientation and about 10% said they agreed with this statement: “If I could be completely heterosexual, I would want to do that.”

“So there is a minority of the gay population who wants to change, is not happy with living the way that they’re living,” Sullins said.

As Roman Catholics, both Morse and Sullins consider homosexual activity to be a sin, but they’re not supporting Ex-Gay Visibility Day to shame those who identify as LGBTQ. They say they merely intend to highlight the fact that there are options for people who experience same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria (the painful and persistent feeling of identifying with the gender opposite one’s biological sex), even if they are uncomfortable with their feelings.

The White House is so dedicated to the LGBTQ movement that it chose Good Friday (the day Western Christians commemorate Jesus’ Crucifixion) as the day to release a statement commemorating Transgender Day of Visibility, which coincided this year with Easter Sunday, the holiest day on the Western Christian calendar. The White House played off this timing as a coincidence, but it shocked many Americans, especially Roman Catholics. (The Catechism of the Catholic Church condemns the ideology behind the transgender movement.)

President Joe Biden is unlikely to celebrate Ex-Gay Visibility Day, however, even though it doesn’t coincide with a more popular holiday. Biden touted “transgender leaders” whom he appointed to serve in the federal government, but he is unlikely to mention any ex-gays or detransitioners.

These heretics give the lie to the LGBTQ movement’s claim that it offers the only solution for those who experience same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria. They are living proof that it is possible to reject the movement and they’re often dismissed as irrelevant, so a day of visibility arguably makes far more sense for them than it does for transgender individuals, who enjoy a chorus of support from companies, stores, and government bodies.

The Ruth Institute will release videos about ex-gays and detransitioners over the coming month, but especially June 2, to present hope for anyone who wants another answer. Sadly, it seems Biden, Target, and their allies would prefer that these people remain invisible.


By: Jonathan Turley | May 28, 2024

Rerad more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/05/28/the-closing-trumps-final-argument-must-be-clarity-to-chaos-in-merchans-courtroom/

Below is my column in the New York Post on the closing arguments scheduled for today in the trial of former President Donald Trump.  The column explores the key elements for a closing to bring clarity to the chaos of Judge Juan Merchan’s courtroom.

Here is the column:

With the closing arguments set for Tuesday in the trial of former president Donald Trump, defense counsel is in a rather curious position. There is still debate among legal experts as to the specific crime that District Attorney Alvin Bragg is alleging.

Trump’s lawyers are defending a former president who is charged under a state misdemeanor which died years ago under the statute of limitations. It was then zapped back into life in the form of roughly three dozen felonies by claiming that bookkeeping violations — allegedly hiding payments to Stormy Daniels to ensure her silence about a supposed affair with Trump — were committed to hide another crime. But what is that second crime? Even liberal legal analysts admitted that they could not figure out what was being alleged in Bragg’s indictment. Now, after weeks of trial, the situation has changed little.

Originally, Bragg referenced four possible crimes, though he is now claiming three: a tax violation or either a state or federal campaign financing violation. The last crime is particularly controversial because Bragg has no authority to enforce federal law and the Justice Department declined any criminal charge. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) did not even find grounds for a civil fine.

Judge Merchan has ruled that the jury does not have to agree on what that crime is. The jury could split into three groups of four on which of the three crimes were being concealed and Merchan will still treat it as a unanimous verdict.

The jury has been given little substantive information on these crimes, and Merchan has denied a legal expert who could have shown that there was no federal election violation.

This case should have been dismissed for lack of evidence or a cognizable crime. The jury will be reminded that the burden is on the government, not the defense. However, the presumption of innocence is often hard to discern in criminal cases. Most jurors believe that clients are sitting behind the defense table for a reason. That is why many prosecution offices have conviction rates in the 80%-90% range. That presumption is even more difficult to discern when the defendant is named Trump, and the jury sits in Manhattan.

Three-legged Stool

A classic closing pitch by lawyers is to use a physical object like a three-legged stool. If any leg is missing, the stool collapses.

In this case, the government needs to show that there was a falsification of business records, that the records were falsified to conceal another crime and that Donald Trump had the specific intent to use such “unlawful means” to influence the election.

Even a cursory review of the evidence shows this case does not have a leg to stand on.

The First Leg: Falsification of Records

The dead misdemeanor that is the foundation for this entire prosecution requires the falsification of business records. It is not clear that there was such falsification or that Trump has any knowledge or role in any falsification.

Witnesses testified that Trump would sign checks prepared by others and that the specific checks in this case were signed while Trump was serving as president. Some of these checks, labeled “legal expenses,” were allegedly for attorney Michael Cohen to pay off Stormy Daniels.

Most importantly, Jeffrey McConney, the Trump Organization’s retired controller and senior vice-president, testified that it was not Trump who designated these payments as “legal expenses.” Rather, the corporation used an “antiquated” drop-down menu where any payments to lawyers were designated “legal expenses.” There is a plausible reason why payments to an attorney were listed as legal expenses.

The government also cites the designation of payments to Cohen as part of his “retainer,” which included reimbursement for the payment of the Daniels non-disclosure agreement. However, that designation was the result of discussions between Cohen and former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg, who is sitting in a jail cell in New York City. The government could have called Weisselberg, but did not.

The government has made a big deal over the fact that retainer agreements are supposed to have written contracts. However, that was the failure of Cohen, who was later disbarred as an attorney.

For a businessman like Weisselberg, monthly payments to an attorney could have seemed perfectly logical. Once again, there was no evidence that Trump knew of how the payments were denoted.

The Second Leg: The Secondary Crime

The government must also show that any falsification was done to further or conceal another crime. This is where the defense needs to bring greater clarity to its own narrative. Trump’s team needs to drive home that a non-disclosure agreement is common in political, business and entertainment circles. The payment of money to quash a story before an election is neither unlawful nor unusual.

Indeed, Keith Davidson, Stormy Daniels’ attorney, described the NDA as routine and said that it was not hush money but a simple contractual transaction: “It wasn’t a payoff. It wasn’t hush money. It was consideration.”

This is where the testimony of David Pecker, the former publisher of the National Inquirer, was particularly damaging to the government.

Pecker detailed how killing such stories was a common practice at the National Inquirer and that he had done so for Trump for over a decade before he ran for president. He also killed stories for an impressive list of other celebrities, including Tiger Woods, Mark Wahlberg, Rahm Emanuel and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Merchan has allowed the jury to repeatedly hear of “election violations,” while blocking a legal expert to explain that there is no federal election law violation. The payment of hush money is not a campaign contribution and, again, the federal government not only declined to bring any criminal charge but found no basis for even a civil fine.

Had he been allowed to testify, Bradley Smith, the former Federal Election Commission (FEC) chairman, would have explained that, even if it were a campaign contribution, it would not have been needed to be filed until after the election — demolishing the notion that this was an effort to influence an election that would have run before any filing had to be made.

The defense has to hammer away on the fact that no one has testified that it was a federal campaign violation.

Various witnesses, including former Trump aide Hope Hicks, testified that Trump was motivated to protect his family from embarrassment. She recounted how Trump even “wanted me to make sure the newspapers weren’t delivered to their residence that morning.”

Pecker testified that he previously killed stories about Trump going back over a decade. That included stories that were demonstrably untrue, such as a claim of a doorman that he fathered a child out of wedlock.

In addition to being a married man, Trump was the host of a major television program subject to a scandal clause. He was also an international businessman. Given all of those interests, it is impossible to claim absolutely that the campaign was the reason for the NDA, which was chump change for a billionaire.

The Third Leg: Criminal intent

The government spent considerable time proving facts not in dispute. There is no dispute that there was a NDA or that Trump signed checks on these payments. It is like repeatedly telling a court that a driver drove 55 miles an hour down a highway and elected to change lanes with a signal. The intent is to convince the jury that somehow proving that an NDA was paid and that an affair occurred is proof of an offense. It is not.

The supervisor in charge of processing payments said that permission to cut Cohen’s checks came not from Trump, but from Weisselberg and McConney. Trump’s White House secretary, Madeleine Westerhout, testified that it was common for Trump to sign checks in the White House without reviewing them.

The entire basis for the alleged criminal intent is Michael Cohen, a disbarred lawyer and serial perjurer. Yet even Cohen did not offer a clear basis for showing a criminal intent to use unlawful means to influence the election. Everything Cohen described could be true and only show a desire to kill an embarrassing story before an election — again, not a crime.

Cohen described the mechanics on the payments, but the only person who discussed these payments in detail with Cohen was Weisselberg.

Even liberal experts on CNN admitted that Cohen was trashed on the stand. The only crime that was clearly established in this trial was the grand larceny that Cohen admitted to under oath (after the statute of limitations had run out). Cohen said that he stole tens of thousands from the Trump corporation, a crime far more serious than the dead misdemeanor or even the felonies alleged against Trump.

However, the most significant testimony by Cohen may be his latest alleged perjury in front of the jury.

Many of us guffawed when Cohen claimed that he secretly taped Trump to protect him and keep Pecker honest. No one can explain how that could possibly be true. If it were, he would have told Trump. There is nothing in the call that would have any impact on Pecker, and Cohen admitted to regularly taping others without telling them.

Another alleged perjury came with the key telephone call in which Cohen claimed Trump was informed that the Daniels deal was concluded. The defense showed that that 96-second-long call was to Trump’s bodyguard, Keith Schiller, in late October 2016. It was preceded and followed by text messages that clearly shows that the conversation was about a teenager harassing Cohen, not the NDA.

Other witnesses trashed Cohen as unprofessional, prone to exaggeration, bitter against Trump, at times suicidal over being denied positions like attorney general and simply “a jerk.” Hope Hicks, a former aide to Trump, said that Cohen “used to like to call himself Mister Fix It, but it was only because he first broke it.”

Those were the government’s witnesses.

Cohen’s lack of credibility and his admitted financial interest in attacking Trump only highlight again the absence of Weisselberg, whom Cohen references repeatedly as the key person making decisions on how these payments were made and described.

If what Cohen said was true, corroboration was sitting a car ride away in Rikers Island. Traffic may be bad but it is not that bad. The only reason not to call Weisselberg was that he would contradict Cohen.

The prosecution preferred to use a serial perjurer who roughly half of the country views as dishonest as almost the entirety of their case. Even beyond Weisselberg, there is no corroboration for Cohen’s vague allegations on the record.

In the end, this three-legged stool is the very thing that all of us must stand on when accused. Who on the jury would want to stand on this stool with their own liberty at stake?

In the end, the defense needs to be honest with these jurors. The question is whether hatred for this man is enough to ignore the obvious injustice in this case. They may have come to this case with little doubt about Donald Trump, but the question is whether there is not any reasonable doubt about the crimes alleged against him.

In the end, we are all standing on that wobbly stool when the government seeks to convict people without evidence or even a clear crime. If we allow a conviction, it is more than a stool that will collapse in this Manhattan courtroom.

Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.

Tag Cloud