Random

    Featured

    Home Featured
    Featured posts

    Biden Breaks Silence On Trump In First Interview Since Leaving Office

      By
      Madeleine Jackson
      -
      5
      Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

      Is Biden back?

      In his first interview since leaving the White House, former President Joe Biden took the opportunity to attack President Donald Trump’s foreign policy efforts.

      Speaking to BBC journalist Nick Robinson in an exclusive and sweeping sit-down that aired Wednesday, the former president abandoned the tradition of ex-presidents holding their tongue — and instead ripped into Trump’s first 100 days back in office.

      “He’s not behaving like a Republican president,” Biden said of Trump.

      The former president focused on a now-notorious Oval Office exchange from February, where Trump and Vice President JD Vance berated Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky for questioning Russian President Vladimir Putin’s motives.

      “I found it beneath America, the way that took place,” Biden said.

      The former president slammed Trump’s approach to Ukraine as capitulation, saying: “It is modern-day appeasement.”

      Trump has pushed Ukraine to consider ceding territory to Russia — an approach Biden argues signals weakness and invites further aggression.

      “Anybody who thinks Putin’s going to stop is foolish,” he said.

      In an attack on Trump’s suggestions that the U.S. “take back Panama,” or annex Greenland, Biden painted Trump’s approach as dangerously unserious — and deeply damaging to the U.S. image abroad.

      “And the way we talk about now that, ‘it’s the Gulf of America,’ ‘maybe we’re going to have to take back Panama,’ ‘maybe we need to acquire Greenland,’ ‘maybe Canada should be a [51st state].’ What the hell’s going on here?” Biden said.

      He added: “What President ever talks like that? That’s not who we are. We’re about freedom, democracy, opportunity — not about confiscation.”

      New Details Emerge About Supposed NYC Trump Trial Juror

      By
      admin
      -
      3
      Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

      Nine days ago, a New York City jury convicted former President Donald Trump on 34 felony counts in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s so-called hush money case. The jury convicted Trump on all counts related to falsifying business records stemming from a scheme to cover up hush money payments made to Stormy Daniels, an adult film actress, ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

      The jury deliberated for two days before reaching a verdict. The falsified records were assumed to violate federal campaign finance laws, which served as the predicate crime for the charges.

      Although it is not uncommon for state prosecutors to base charges on violations of federal law, it is unusual in high-profile cases such as this. The jury had to find that Trump intended to commit, aid or conceal a second crime, supposedly federal campaign violations, to convict him on the falsification charge. (RELATED: ‘Mob Justice!’ Fox’s Constitutional Expert Shreds Letitia James’ Threat To Seize Don’s Assets)

      Trump sentencing is scheduled for July 11. However, a new development has emerged that could potentially impact the case. In a letter to all parties, Judge Juan Merchan disclosed that the day before the conviction was announced, a Facebook user named “Michael Anderson” posted that Trump would be convicted, citing his cousin, who he claimed was a juror, as the source of this information.

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

      Fox News continues:

      Fox News obtained the letter Judge Juan Merchan shared with Trump defense attorneys and Manhattan prosecutors.

      “‘Today, the Court became aware of a comment that was posted on the Unified Court System’s public Facebook page and which I now bring to your attention. In the comment, the user, ‘Michael Anderson,’ states:

      “’My cousin is a juror and says Trump is getting convicted! Thank you folks for all your hard work!!!!’”

      People-v-DJT-6-7-24-Letter-to-PartiesDownload

      The comment was posted on May 29 “regarding oral arguments in the Fourth Department of the Appellate Division unrelated to this proceeding.”

      Little public information is available about Michael Anderson’s profile. However, he describes himself as “Transabled & professional sh– poster.”

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

      A Trump campaign official said they are “investigating the matter.” (RELATED: Trump Reveals What He Will Do To Biden If He Wins In November)

      Despite his conviction, Trump can still run for president in the 2024 election. The U.S. Constitution does not prohibit a convicted felon from running for or holding the office of the president. Trump has already secured the necessary delegates for the Republican nomination and plans to appeal the conviction, a process that could extend beyond Election Day.

      Recent polls have shown mixed impacts on the standings of Trump and President Biden following the trial. A Morning Consult poll indicated that Biden leads Trump by a single percentage point nationally, 45% to 44%. However, in key swing states, Trump maintains an edge.

      Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News.

      READ NEXT: Citizens Sue City Over Scheme To Pay Race Reparations

      Judge Rules Against Attempt to Try All Trump Georgia Defendants Together

        By
        Madeleine Jackson
        -
        2
        Gavel via Wikimedia Commons Image

        On Thursday, a Georgia state judge rejected District Attorney Fani Willis’ request to try all 19 defendants in the Georgia election interference case next month, dealing a significant blow to the infamous anti-Trump prosecutor.

        The Georgia judge’s ruling means former President Donald Trump will not be tried in October alongside at least two of his co-defendants who invoked their right to a speedy trial, according to The Hill.

        “The Court joins the skepticism expressed by several federal courts that denying severance always ensures efficiency, especially in ‘mega trials’ such as this,” Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee wrote in an order. 

        “[T]he Court finds sua sponte, without the need for any particularized showing from each defendant, that severance is an absolute necessity,” McAfee wrote. “Additional divisions of the  defendants may well be required. That is a decision for another day once the many anticipated pretrial motions have been resolved and a realistic trial date approaches.”

        Trump and his 18 co-defendants have all pleaded not guilty to the combined 41 charges they face. The former president has also made numerous attempts to have the trial delayed, arguing his team would not be ready for trial by October.

        Though Judge McAfee did not set a trial date for Trump, his ruling sets a motions deadline of Dec. 1

        Judge McAfee also ruled that defendants Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell – the two defendants who invoked their right to a speedy trial last month – will be tried together.

        Chesebro had argued in court filings that he never met Powell, rendering it “impossible” to try their cases together.  

        This is a breaking news story. Click refresh for the latest updates.

        READ NEXT: Governor’s Anti-Gun Emergency Public Health Order Rejected By Judge

        Supreme Court Permits Trump To Remove FTC Member

          By
          Madeleine Jackson
          -
          1
          Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

          The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday gave President Donald Trump an important win in his effort to hold unelected regulators accountable, temporarily blocking a lower court order that had reinstated Democratic commissioner Rebecca Slaughter to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

          Chief Justice John Roberts issued an administrative stay, granting the justices more time to consider the administration’s formal request to remove Slaughter before her term expires. Roberts also directed Slaughter to file a response by next week.

          Lower Courts Tried to Shield FTC Bureaucrat

          The dispute stems from a July ruling by a D.C. district judge who said Trump could not remove Slaughter, citing outdated removal protections. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling in September in a 2-1 decision, relying on the 1935 Humphrey’s Executor v. United States precedent. That case limited President Franklin Roosevelt’s ability to fire an FTC commissioner purely over policy disagreements.

          Supporters of Trump’s position argue that this nearly 90-year-old ruling no longer reflects the modern FTC, which today wields sweeping power over antitrust enforcement and consumer protection—authority that directly impacts the American economy.

          White House Argues for Executive Authority

          In its Supreme Court filing, the administration emphasized that “the modern FTC exercises far more substantial powers than the 1935 FTC,” and therefore its members should be subject to presidential removal, just like other executive branch officials.

          The Supreme Court has already recognized in recent cases that presidents must have the authority to fire those who exercise executive power on their behalf. Trump’s legal team says this case is no different.

          A Pattern of Wins at the High Court

          Since Trump’s return to the White House in January, his administration has repeatedly pushed back against lower courts that tried to block his policies. The Supreme Court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, has largely sided with the administration, reaffirming the president’s constitutional authority to carry out his agenda without interference from unelected bureaucrats or activist judges.

          The 1776 Project is building an army of parents and school board leaders to CRUSH the Soros agenda — join the fight! [DONATE NOW]

          Amanda Head: OUTRAGEOUS! Steve Bannon Will Serve Time In Prison

          By
          Amanda Head
          -
          0
          Gavel via Wikimedia Commons Image

          On Friday, Judge Carl Nichols sentenced former Trump strategist Steve Bannon to pay a $6,500 fine and serve four months in prison.

          Watch Amanda break down the shocking news below:

          Report: Judge Agrees To Unseal Additional Filings From Jan. 6 Trump Case

          By
          Madeleine Jackson
          -
          6

          U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan agreed to unseal additional filings from special counsel Jack Smith laying out his election interference case against former President Trump

          Chutkan agreed to a request from Smith to unseal exhibits that accompany his 180-page brief asserting that prosecutors can still bring much of their Jan. 6 case against Trump in the wake of a Supreme Court decision granting former presidents broad criminal immunity. 

          Chutkan granted Smith’s motion to post redacted versions of the exhibits, which could include grand jury transcripts, texts and other evidence assembled by prosecutors.

          The Hill reports:

          “The court determines that the Government’s proposed redactions to the Appendix are appropriate, and that Defendant’s blanket objections to further unsealing are without merit. As the court has stated previously, ‘Defendant’s concern with the political consequences of these proceedings’ is not a cognizable legal prejudice,’” she wrote.

          Trump opposed both the unsealing of Smith’s motion as well as the accompanying evidence.

          But Chutkan also agreed to stay her ruling for seven days after an earlier motion from Trump’s legal team asked for additional time “so that President Trump can evaluate litigation options relating to the decision.”

          “There should be no further disclosures at this time of the so-called ‘evidence’ that the Special Counsel’s Office has unlawfully cherry-picked and mischaracterized — during early voting in the 2024 Presidential election,” Trump’s team wrote in an earlier filing Thursday.

          I Am Donald J. Trump. FEAR NOT! There are those who will do whatever it takes to stop us, but I will never stop fighting for you. I will never surrender! Your support means everything to me. Together, through our UNITY, we will Make America Great Again!

          Woman Who Admitted Trump Death Threats To Secret Service Released By Judge

          By
          Madeleine Jackson
          -
          4

          A woman arrested last month for allegedly making death threats against President Donald Trump has been released by a federal judge who has clashed with the Trump administration several times this year.

          Federal Chief Judge James Boasberg ordered the release of 50-year-old Nathalie Rose Jones under electronic monitoring and instructed her to visit a psychiatrist in New York City once she obtains her personal belongings from a local police station.

          Her release comes after U.S. Magistrate Judge Moxila Upadhyaya had ordered her held without bond, citing alarming conduct, including online posts proclaiming willingness to “disembowel” Trump and stage his arrest, and statements admitting she would kill him with a bladed weapon at “the compound.”

          Jones took part in a “dignified arrest ceremony” for Trump at a protest in Washington, D.C., which circumnavigated the White House complex and was arrested following an investigation into her series of concerning Instagram and Facebook posts. 

          In early August, Jones labeled Trump a terrorist, referred to his administration as a dictatorship, and stated that Trump had caused extreme and unnecessary loss of life in relation to the coronavirus. 

          “I am willing to sacrificially kill this POTUS by disemboweling him and cutting out his trachea with Liz Cheney and all The Affirmation present,” an Aug. 6 post directed at the FBI states.

          The next day, Jones voluntarily agreed to an interview with the Secret Service, during which she called Trump a “terrorist” and a “nazi,” authorities said. 

          She said that if she had the opportunity, she would kill Trump at “the compound” if she had to and that she had a “bladed object,” which she said was the weapon she would use to “carry out her mission of killing” the president.

          Following the protest in Washington, D.C on Aug. 16, Jones was interviewed again by the Secret Service, during which she admitted that she had made threats towards Trump during her interview the previous day. 

          She was charged with threatening to kill, kidnap, or seriously hurt the president and sending messages across state lines that contained threats to kidnap or harm someone.

          However, Jones’s lawyers argued their client was unarmed and had no real desire to follow through with the threats, appealed Upadhyaya’s detention decision, and Boasberg overturned Upadhyaya’s detention order.

          U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., Jeanine Pirro, whose office pushed for the indictment, blasted the jury’s refusal on Tuesday.

          “A Washington D.C. grand jury refused to indict someone who threatened to kill the President of the United States. Her intent was clear, traveling through five states to do so,” Pirro told Fox News in an exclusive statement. 

          “She even confirmed the same to the U.S. Secret Service. This is the essence of a politicized jury. The system here is broken on many levels. Instead of the outrage that should be engendered by a specific threat to kill the president, the grand jury in D.C. refuses to even let the judicial process begin. Justice should not depend on politics,” Pirro added.

          Judge Boasberg’s Background
          Judge Boasberg, a Barack Obama appointee, has repeatedly clashed with the Trump administration. In March, he issued a restraining order halting deportations of Venezuelans under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act, ordering planes to return to U.S. soil and demanding an investigation into compliance. He later threatened contempt proceedings, prompting appellate review and momentum that led to Supreme Court rulings affirming due‑process requirements. Trump publicly labeled Boasberg a “Radical Left Lunatic” and sought his impeachment. Additionally, Trump‑aligned officials, including AG Pam Bondi, filed a complaint over Boasberg’s remarks warning of a constitutional crisis and criticizing the administration—remarks Bondi argued had no factual basis and undermined judicial impartiality. (RELATED: DOJ Files Complaint Against Judge Boasberg Over Anti-Trump Comments, Deportation Case Actions)

          Recent Assassination Attempts Targeting Donald Trump

          1. Butler, Pennsylvania Rally — July 13, 2024

          • What happened: Former President Trump was addressed at a campaign rally near Butler, PA, when 20‑year‑old Thomas Matthew Crooks opened fire from a nearby rooftop with an AR‑15‑style rifle. Trump was grazed in the upper right ear; one attendee, firefighter Corey Comperatore, was killed, and two others critically injured. Secret Service counter‑snipers neutralized Crooks seconds after he began firing.

          Aftermath & investigations: A House task force released a report by December 2024. A Government Accountability Office audit (July 2025) found that the Secret Service failed to share vital threat intelligence internally, and suffered planning and communication breakdowns. Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley criticized entrenched mismanagement and cited funding under a recent bill to help rebuild the agency. Meanwhile, six Secret Service agents received suspensions—the longest up to 42 days—for their roles in the security failure. The agency has since overhauled protocols, including deploying drones and increasing law enforcement coordination.

          2. West Palm Beach, Florida Golf Course — September 15, 2024

          • What happened: While golfing at his Trump International Golf Club, Trump was threatened by 59-year‑old Ryan Wesley Routh. The suspect was seen aiming a rifle from shrubbery. A Secret Service agent intervened, no shots were fired at Trump, and Routh fled but was later detained.
          • Legal proceedings: Routh faces federal charges including attempting to assassinate a major presidential candidate. He remains in custody, and a federal trial is scheduled to begin September 8, 2025.

          READ NEXT: Trump Calls for RICO as the Answer to Sanctuary City Chaos

          I SURVIVED an assassin’s bullet — now I fight for YOU. Chip in $15 and STAND WITH TRUMP!

          Senate Panel Blocks Trump’s FBI HQ Plan

          By
          Patrick Houck
          -
          4
          I, Aude, CC BY-SA 3.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

          A Senate committee voted Thursday afternoon to block President Donald Trump’s plan to keep the FBI headquarters in downtown Washington, D.C., escalating a simmering power struggle over the agency’s future location.

          The dispute pits the White House against a bipartisan coalition in Congress that had long backed moving the agency’s headquarters out of the decaying J. Edgar Hoover Building and into suburban Maryland.

          Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) introduced an amendment to the fiscal 2026 Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations bill that would restrict funding exclusively to the original relocation site in Greenbelt, Maryland.

          The measure gained unexpected bipartisan traction, with Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) siding with Democrats. The decision to cross party lines prompted a backlash from several Republican senators, who argued the decision was outside the committee’s authority.

          Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) pushed back, saying the panel does not “get to choose sites.”

          The dispute led Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) to call for a “very long recess,” delaying further consideration of the bill. Collins said she hopes the standoff can be resolved before the next markup session.

          “I think it’s better we withdraw the bill for now than watch this bill go down,” she said.

          The panel is not expected to reconvene before next week.

          Trump’s plan would relocate the FBI to the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center — a federal property just blocks from the White House. The administration argues the move keeps the FBI close to other national security agencies while avoiding the massive cost of building a new complex from scratch.

          But Maryland officials aren’t backing down, determined to secure the economic and strategic benefits of hosting the new FBI campus.

          Politico has more on the reaction and outlook from lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

          The blowup exasperated some Democrats on the panel, who questioned why the Republican majority could not accept Van Hollen’s provision. “Because there was a bipartisan amendment adopted we’re going to tank this bill?” asked Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz.

          Others expressed confidence the issue would ultimately get settled.

          “I honestly think we’ll be able to resolve it,” said Washington Sen. Patty Murray, the panel’s top Democrat. “We’ve always been able to work out issues.”

          Murkowski, who was spotted chatting on the floor on Thursday afternoon with Murray, said she had “volunteered” a path for members to hit pause on the bill and “get a little more information about what it is the administration is seeking to do with the [new headquarters plan], because it seems to me that is kind of the blank spot right now.”

          Despite cautious optimism, Thursday’s vote throws another wrench into the increasingly politicized debate over the FBI’s future headquarters — and highlights the broader friction between Congress and the Trump administration.

          READ NEXT: Trump Mulling Federal Takeover Of DC To Tackle Crime

          Help us slam the brakes on the Left’s 2026 plan to take down Trump!

          Amanda Head: Hillary Clinton is an Election Denier

            By
            Amanda Head
            -
            1
            Hillary Clinton via Gage Skidmore Flickr

            While the left has lambasted Donald Trump for questioning the 2020 election results Hillary Clinton has been given a free pass. As speculation surrounding Clinton’s potential 2024 bid still looms her recent spike in chatter regarding elections has Americans on edge for a reason.

            Watch Amanda break it down below.

            Poll: Americans Oppose US Involvement In Iran, Believe US Should Stay Out Of Other Countries’ Business

            By
            Donny Ferguson
            -
            3

            A new poll finds overwhelming majorities of Americans oppose the U.S. government’s military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities and believe the federal government should stay out of other countries’ disputes.

            Reuters/Ipsos reports their new poll finds “most Americans support immediately ending U.S. involvement in the conflict with Iran. The poll also finds that Americans oppose U.S. military involvement in the Middle East unless the U.S. is directly threatened and that most Americans do not feel that U.S. airstrikes against Iran make America safer.”

            Only 36 percent of Americans support the strikes, with 45 percent opposing.  

            A whopping 69 percent of Americans, including 57 percent of Republicans, oppose “any military action in the Middle East unless America is directly threatened”.

            58 percent of Americans say “it is better for the nation if the U.S. stays out of the affairs of other nations”

            Republicans generally opposed U.S. strikes on Iran when Democrats Barack Obama and Joe Biden were president, warning it would lead to “World War 3.”  They now report supporting the policy under Republican President Donald Trump.

            Reuters summarized the findings, noting:

            * Seven in ten say they have been following the U.S. airstrikes against Iran (70%) or the war between Israel and Iran (67%) very or somewhat closely. Republicans are slightly more likely to say they are following the U.S. airstrikes very closely (39%) compared to Democrats (32%), independents (31%), and the general population (33%).

            * Four in five Americans say they are concerned with the conflict growing between the U.S. and Iran (84%) and U.S. military personnel stationed in the Middle East (79%). In comparison, similar numbers of Americans are concerned about rising inflation (81%) and growing U.S. debt (78%).

            * Republicans (69% support, 17% oppose) are significantly more likely to support the strikes compared to Democrats (13% support, 74% oppose) and independents (29% support, 48% oppose).

            * Just over one in three Americans (36%) say they agree that U.S. airstrikes against Iran make America safer, while 60% disagree and 4% refused or skipped. This is heavily divided along partisan lines, with 12% of Democrats, 29% of independents, and 67% of Republicans agreeing with this statement.

            * Most Americans say the U.S. should not become involved in any military action in the Middle East unless America is directly threatened (69%). Majorities across partisanship feel this way, with 57% of Republicans, 73% of independents, and 80% of Democrats agreeing with this statement. 

            “This Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted June 21-23, 2025. The poll began fielding immediately after the June 21 U.S. strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities. The poll closed before the June 23 Iranian strikes on a U.S. military base in Qatar, which has reportedly caused no fatalities,” Reuters notes.

            123...96Page 1 of 96
            © Great America News Desk 2022