Featured

Home Featured
Featured posts

Pelosi Predicts Trump Skips Upcoming Kamala Debate

5
Nancy Pelosi via Gage Skidmore flickr

Pelosi is peddling desperate lies…

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) predicted that former president Donald Trump will back out of his next debate.

Pelosi appeared at the Texas Tribune Festival over the weekend where she spoke to journalist Kara Swisher about a variety of topics before signing copies of her latest book. Pelosi spent much of the time ripping Trump and turned up the vitriol when Tuesday’s highly anticipated ABC News Presidential Debate came up. 

Swisher asked Pelosi what advice she would give former President Trump ahead of the matchup with Harris. The 84-year-old Pelosi quipped, “You think he’s gonna show up?”

The largely liberal audience burst into laughter, followed by applause, as Pelosi slightly smiled. 

Swisher asked, “Do you know something I don’t know?”

“I know cowardice when I see it,” Pelosi responded. 

Watch:

The Trump campaign dismissed Pelosi’s suggestion of the former president skipping the debate as “fake news.”

“Nancy Pelosi has no idea what she is talking about and has been proven to be a liar and fraud. If she isn’t busy giving herself fake titles to make herself feel better, she’s peddling fake news because it’s the only thing she’s ever done,” Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung told Fox News Digital.

Pelosi and Trump have a long history of animosity toward each other, regularly trading barbs over the years. In 2020, Pelosi famously tore her printed copy of Trump’s State of the Union address immediately after he finished addressing a Joint Session of Congress.

Trump and Harris are scheduled to debate on Tuesday night in Philadelphia. 

Despite Pelosi’s best attempts to stir up trouble, the Trump campaign also released details of Trump’s scheduled arrival in the City of Brotherly Love. Air Force Trump is scheduled to land in Philadelphia at 6:30 pm on Tuesday.

Giuliani Says What He Did After Mugshot

    0
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani is not keeping silent after he was processed by Arizona authorities on Monday.

    Giuliani, who also served as Donald Trump’s personal attorney, was indicted in Arizona in connection with a fake electors scheme in which pro-Trump electors attested to the former president’s victory in the state.

    See the mugshot below:

    “You are now looking at the latest mugshot of former Mayor Rudy Giuliani,” Kaitlan Collins said on Monday’s edition of The Source on CNN as his mugshot appeared on screen. “He wasn’t processed by Arizona authorities until today. That’s why you’re seeing this photo now. And here’s what he said after he posted the $10,000 and bond.”

    Collins then aired a clip of a KPNX Phoenix reporter catching up with Giuliani emerging from the police station where he had just been processed. However, instead of keeping his head down Giuliani directly addressed reporters.

    REPORTER: Do you have any regrets about what you did in Arizona after the election?

    GIULIANI: Oh my goodness, no.

    REPORTER: Why not?

    GIULIANI: I’m very, very proud of it. There was a substantial amount of vote fraud that went on here that was covered up. Probably one of the biggest conspiracies in American history.

    In a statement to Mediaite, a representative for Giuliani alleged the justice system is being “weaponized” against the former mayor and other Trump allies to influence the 2024 presidential election.

    “This is yet another example of partisan actors weaponizing the criminal justice system to interfere with the 2024 presidential election through outlandish charges against President Trump and anyone willing to take on the permanent Washington political class,” Ted Goodman said. “Joe Biden and his allies continue to eviscerate the trust and integrity of our criminal justice system in their quest to take down President Trump and hold on to power. Mayor Rudy Giuliani—the most effective federal prosecutor in U.S. history—will be fully vindicated.”

    Giuliani has pleaded not guilty to conspiracy, fraud, and forgery charges. 

    Notorious Criminal Speaks Out Ahead Of Trump Hush Money Trial

      1

      On Tuesday, MSNBC’s Ari Melber interviewed incarcerated convicted felon Michael Avenatti to get his thoughts on former President Donald Trump’s fast-approaching New York criminal hush money trial.

      Avenatti, a disbarred attorney, is currently serving 19 years for extortion, fraud, obstruction, and identity theft. Some of those charges stem from his theft of proceeds from a book by his former client, Stormy Daniels. 

      The former president faces 34 charges linked to hush money payments made by his ex-fixer to porn actress Stormy Daniels to cover up an alleged affair ahead of the 2016 election. He has pleaded not guilty.

      Trump is scheduled to head to trial in his New York criminal case on April 15.

      Mediaite has more:

      “Michael, have you been in touch with D.A. Bragg’s office?” Melber asked. “And what specifically in evidence or logic do you think is wrong with this case?”

      “I’m going to decline to answer as to whether I’ve been in touch with either the defense or the D.A.s office,” Avenatti replied. “But let me say this in response to the second part of your question. You know, I think the case has a lot of problems. Now that– I don’t mean to suggest that means that Trump will not be convicted because I think he will be convicted because number one, he’s a criminal defendant in our society. I don’t believe criminal defendants generally get a fair shake.”

      Avenatti then echoed attorneys for Trump, who have unsuccessfully attempted to secure a change of venue. He said:

      I don’t think that he can get a fair trial in New York. And to the people who claim that in fact, he can get a fair trial in New York with a New York jury, I would ask them, if they were to go to sleep tonight and wake up tomorrow and find out that the case had been moved to Mississippi or Alabama, would they still think the trial was going to be fair?

      And I think if they were being honest, they would answer no. So, I don’t think he can get a fair trial in New York.

      On Monday, a judge in New York denied a request for a delay in his hush money trial. Trump’s attorneys argued for the trial to be relocated from Manhattan and postponed as they pursue the matter. 

      Trump’s attorneys argued for the trial to be relocated from Manhattan and postponed as they pursue the matter. His attorneys argued that Manhattan, a well-known liberal bastion, was not an appropriate location for the Republican president’s case. They requested a change of venue to Staten Island, the only borough in New York City that Trump won in both 2016 and 2020.

      Wyoming Official Intervenes On Court Labeling Trump ‘Insurrectionist’

        9
        Missvain, CC BY 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons

        Wyoming Secretary of State Chuck Gray is working to change a Colorado judge’s ruling which labeled former President Donald Trump an “insurrectionist”.”

        “As chief election officials of our states, [Secretaries of State] have to stand up for the electoral process in our republic, and this is pivotal to ensuring the integrity of our elections,” Gray told Fox News Digital in a phone interview. 

        “I ran on election integrity, and that’s why the people of Wyoming voted me into office. And I’m following through on that, and defending the truth here, and making sure that these outrageous, frivolous lawsuits that the radical left is bringing and trying to remove President Trump from the ballot, that they don’t succeed.” 

        Gray filed an amicus curiae brief, otherwise known as a friend of the court brief, with the Colorado Supreme Court last week that argues a Colorado District Court made a mistake when labeling Trump an “insurrectionist” in a legal case that worked to remove Trump’s name from the state’s primary ballot. 

        The amicus brief calls on the Colorado Supreme Court to vacate the district court’s order and “direct the District Court to dismiss the petition for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” 

        “It really should have been dismissed immediately, the case is frivolous. And instead we got this 95-page finding from this local judge there in Colorado and with the principle of issue preclusion, this could be really used against President Trump,” Gray said. “So it’s very important that this is just dismissed in its entirety. And that’s what we really try to delve into with this amicus brief … and we’re really proud that Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft and Ohio Secretary of State LaRose signed on.” 

        Gray’s move comes after a liberal group attempted to have Trump removed from the state’s 2024 primary ballot under the 14th Amendment..

        Gray told Fox News the case should have been dismissed from the start.

        “The frivolous lawsuits, they’re happening around the country, and it’s imperative that voters in one state not be affected by judgments in other states. And if you think about it, preventing an eligible candidate in one state for being able to attain electoral votes affects every other state. And preventing a candidate from being on the ballot, primary or caucus, artificially will alter momentum,” Gray said. 

        Republicans Pour Cold Water on Trump Ahead of 2024 Announcement

        7

        As buzz continues to build around Trump’s looming 2024 announcement some Republicans are already trying to burst his bubble.

        Despite the obvious excitement surrounding Trump’s long-awaited presidential campaign announcement the Republican is already facing hurdles on the path to 2024.

        Trump, who is already facing various legal challenges, will be effectively cut off from the Republican National Committee if he declares his candidacy committee chairwoman Ronna McDaniel told The Hill.

        Last year, the RNC admitted it was paying for legal fees “that relate to politically motivated legal proceedings waged against President Trump” and in recent months the committee has funded Trump’s defense against probes launched by Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance Jr. (D) and New York Attorney General Letitia James (D).

        “We cannot pay legal bills for any candidate that’s announced. So these are bills that came from the Letitia James lawsuit that started while he was president,” McDaniel said. “It was voted on by our executive committee for our former president, that this was a politically motivated investigation and that’s what it’s been.”

        “But we cannot do in kind contributions to any candidate right now. He’s the former president being attacked from every which way with lawsuits, and he’s certainly raised more under the RNC than we’ve spent on these bills,” she added.

        Advisers in Trump’s inner circle have indicated the announcement could come as soon as November 14th but some conservatives say it shouldn’t come as any shock.

        Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) said on Sunday that Trump’s upcoming announcement doesn’t surprise him, according to The Hill.

        “Like, why should anybody be surprised,” Christie said, adding, “When something happens that you anticipated happening, it doesn’t make any difference.”

        “He’s going to run. Everyone always knew he was going to run. He can’t miss the attention any more than he does, and he’s going to run,” the former governor added. “Now we’ll see what happens.”

        However, reports began to swirl on Monday that Trump couls make his annoucenment during tonight’s rally in Ohio. Axios reporter Jonathan Swan was the first to report that Trump could move up the announcement date.

        “Based calls/texts all morning, Trump/Vance rally in Ohio will be v closely watched by Rs. Speculation has reached a point of absurdity at this point but many Rs of varying degrees of closeness to Trump are anticipating accelerated announcement based on his recent private comments,” Swan tweeted.

        A source close to the matter told The Washington Examiner that ultimately the decsion is up to Trump and nobody knows exactly when he will share the news.

        “There’s a lot of back-and-forth right now, no one really knows if it’s going to happen tonight or if it’s going to happen in a week or so. Trump himself is the one who wants to do it ASAP. No one knows right now whether it’s happening tonight or not,” the source explained.

        Trump Calls on CNN to Form New Conservative Network

          2
          CNN Headquarters via Wikimedia Commons

          Former President Donald Trump wants CNN to start a new business venture aimed to conquer right-of-aisle viewers.

          In an email statement from his Save America PAC, Trump wrote that CNN should open a “conservative network” with himself as the host.

          “If CNN were smart, they’d open up a Conservative network, only have me on, and it would be the most successful network in History. Fox only made it because of me, Twitter only made it because of me, and even Facebook is now in the tubes, having lost almost $90 billion in value since I was taken off, which was considered one of the biggest mistakes in business over the last two years,” the statement read.

          This story is developing. Stay with Great America News Desk for more updates.

          Secret Service Suspends 6 Agents Over Trump Assassination Attempt

          By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54581054338/, Public Domain,

          Without Pay or Benefits…

          The U.S. Secret Service has acknowledged disciplinary action against six agents, citing operational lapses during the July 13, 2024, assassination attempt on President Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania.

          The agency confirmed to Fox News that the disciplinary action occurred in February. A Senate report on the near-assassination is scheduled for imminent release.

          The attack occurred when 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks opened fire from a rooftop roughly 400 feet from the rally stage. One bullet grazed Trump’s ear. Another fatally struck firefighter Corey Comperatore, who had shielded his family. Increasingly erratic gunfire from Crooks wounded two others before Secret Service counter-snipers neutralized him.

          Leadership Fallout and Push for Reform

          In the wake of the incident, then–Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle resigned, acknowledging it as the agency’s most serious operational failure in decades.

          Acknowledging the desire for institutional reform, Deputy Director Matt Quinn stated, “We aren’t going to fire our way out of this.” Among the measures already underway: deploying military-grade drones, upgrading communication systems, and enhancing cooperation with local law enforcement.

          Heated Congressional Oversight

          Yet tensions boiled over in December 2024 during a public hearing held by the Task Force on the Attempted Assassination of Donald J. Trump. Then–Acting Director Ronald Rowe Jr. and Rep. Pat Fallon (R-Texas) engaged in a heated, nearly unintelligible shouting match over the agency’s preparedness.

          Lawmakers across party lines expressed deep frustration. Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) criticized the agency’s outdated communications and a culture that discouraged agents from voicing security concerns.

          Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) described the Secret Service’s posture during the Butler rally as “almost lackadaisical,” citing “really basic” lapses that hinted at complacency.

          The bipartisan panel released a scathing report, outlining multiple preventable failures and calling for sweeping structural reforms.

          Restoring Trust Under New Leadership

          In January 2025, President Trump appointed Sean Curran — the agent who shielded him that day in Butler — as the new director of the Secret Service, signaling a commitment to restoring trust and accountability within the agency.

          READ NEXT: DeSantis Suggests Musk Pursue Constitutional Amendments Instead Of Establishing New Political Party

          Report: Trump Legal Team Files To Dismiss Special Counsel’s Election Interference Case

          2
          Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

          Lawyers for former President Trump filed a motion on Thursday to dismiss charges related to the 2020 election brought against him by Special Counsel Jack Smith.

          In their legal filing, the Trump team claims Smith was unlawfully appointed.

          Fox News reports:

          “President Donald J. Trump respectfully requests leave to file this proposed motion to dismiss the Superseding Indictment and for injunctive relief—which is timely and, alternatively, supported by good cause—based on violations of the Constitution’s Appointments and Appropriations Clauses,” the filing states. 

          The Appointments Clause says, “Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States be appointed by the President subject to the advice and consent of the Senate, although Congress may vest the appointment of inferior officers in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.” Smith, however, was never confirmed by the Senate.

          “The proposed motion establishes that this unjust case was dead on arrival— unconstitutional even before its inception,” the Trump filing states.

          Trump lawyers argued that in November 2022, Attorney General Merick Garland “violated the Appointments Clause by naming private-citizen Smith to target President Trump, while President Trump was campaigning to take back the Oval Office from the Attorney General’s boss, without a statutory basis for doing so.” 

          Trump attorneys argue that Smith “was not appointed ‘by Law,'” and argue that he “has operated with a blank check by relying on an inapplicable permanent indefinite appropriation that was enacted in connection with a reauthorization of the Independent Counsel Act in 1987.” 

          “Smith was not appointed pursuant to that Act, which expired in 1999. The appropriation contemplates the possibility of appointment by some ‘other law,’ but no ‘other law’ authorized Smith’s appointment,” the attorneys continue. “The appropriation also requires that the prosecutor be “independent,” in the very particular, rigorous sense that attorneys appointed pursuant to the defunct Independent Counsel Act were meant to be independent.” 

          They added: “That is not true of Smith’s appointment, either.” 

          “For these reasons, Smith should have never been permitted to access these huge sums of money, and his use of this funding violated the Appropriations Clause,” the filing states. “Based on these violations of the Appointments and Appropriations Clauses, the Superseding Indictment should be dismissed with prejudice. In addition, an injunction against additional spending by Smith is necessary to prevent ongoing irreparable harm and to ensure complete relief for the Appropriations Clause violation.” 

          Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges. 

          Smith has until Halloween, Oct. 31, to file his response.

          Trump, Murdoch Agree To Delay Deposition In WSJ Libel Lawsuit

            0
            David Shankbone, CC BY 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

            Attorneys for President Trump and Rupert Murdoch have agreed to delay a deposition Trump’s team wants the media mogul to sit for as part of the president’s lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal.

            Trump’s legal team last month asked for Murdoch, whose News Corp acquired the Journal in 2007, to sit for a speedy deposition in the case, citing his age and health concerns.

            But in a filing with the court on Monday, the two parties agreed not to move forward with discovery and evidence gathering, putting any chance of the 94-year-old conservative media tycoon giving sworn testimony on hold for now.

            This lawsuit arose from The Wall Street Journal’s article that described an album allegedly compiled by Epstein’s former girlfriend and accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell for his 50th birthday in 2003.

            According to the report, Trump contributed a letter for the birthday collection that included a lewd drawing and referenced the two men sharing a “wonderful secret.” President Trump has dismissed the letter as fake.

            The letter bearing Trump’s name, which was reviewed by the Journal, is crude—like others in the album. It contains several lines of typewritten text framed by the outline of a naked woman, which appears to be hand-drawn with a heavy marker. A pair of small arcs denotes the woman’s breasts, and the future president’s signature is a squiggly “Donald” below her waist, mimicking pubic hair.

            Trump filed the complaint in federal court in Miami last month against the Journal, the Journal’s publishing firm Dow Jones, parent company News Corp, owner Rupert Murdoch, News Corp CEO Robert Thomson, and the two Journal reporters, Safdar and Palazzolo. He alleges two claims, defamation per se and defamation per quod, and demands $10 billion in damages.

            Democrats Attempt To Label Trump’s Venezuela Operation ‘Impeachable Offense’

            5

            Democrats and Republicans have split sharply over President Donald Trump’s decision to carry out strikes in Venezuela that resulted in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, with a growing number of Democratic lawmakers calling the operation unconstitutional and some openly urging impeachment.

            Progressive Democrats have led the backlash, accusing the administration of launching an illegal military action without congressional authorization. Several lawmakers argue that the operation amounts to an invasion of a sovereign nation and violates both the Constitution and the War Powers Act.

            “Many Americans woke up to a sick sense of déjà vu,” Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) a member of the House’s progressive “Squad,” wrote on X over the weekend. “Under the guise of liberty, an administration of warmongers has lied to justify an invasion and is dragging us into an illegal, endless war so they can extract resources and expand their wealth.”

            Ramirez called for Congress to pass a War Powers Resolution introduced by Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., aimed at blocking further military action against Venezuela, and said Trump “must be impeached.”

            Omar’s resolution seeks to reassert Congress’ constitutional authority over war-making and would require the administration to halt hostilities unless lawmakers explicitly approve them.

            Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) echoed those concerns, criticizing Trump for bypassing Congress to launch what he described as a war with Venezuela. Goldman said the administration failed to provide lawmakers with “any satisfactory explanation” for the strikes.

            “This violation of the United States Constitution is an impeachable offense,” Goldman said in a statement. “I urge my Republican colleagues in the House of Representatives to finally join Democrats in reasserting congressional authority by holding this president accountable.”

            Other Democrats struck a more cautious tone. Rep. April McClain Delaney (D-Md.) stopped short of naming Trump but wrote on X that “invading and running another country without a congressional declaration of war is an impeachable offense,” while also questioning whether impeachment is the most effective strategy. “Whether it makes sense to pursue impeachment as the best strategy to end this lawlessness is a tactical judgment that our Caucus needs to seriously deliberate,” she wrote.

            In California, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) a gubernatorial hopeful, said he would not rule out supporting impeachment when asked by reporters, according to the Pleasanton Weekly.

            Progressive candidates running for office also weighed in. Kat Abughazaleh, a Democrat seeking an open House seat in Illinois, called Trump a “war criminal” in a post on Bluesky and demanded Congress “halt this conflict and impeach” the president.

            Still, Democrats are not unified in their opposition. A number of more centrist lawmakers have either defended the administration’s actions or argued that the removal of Maduro serves U.S. national security interests. Some Democrats have described the operation as a targeted effort to remove a destabilizing authoritarian leader rather than the start of a broader war, while others have said the administration should now work with Congress to define limits and next steps.

            Republicans, for their part, have largely rallied behind Trump. GOP leaders characterized the operation as a decisive blow against a longtime adversary of the United States and a win for regional stability.

            Senior Republicans have also pushed back on claims that the administration violated the Constitution, arguing that the action was a limited law enforcement or counterterrorism operation rather than a traditional military engagement requiring prior congressional approval.

            While impeachment calls are growing among progressives, Democratic leadership has so far stopped short of endorsing that approach