Featured posts

    Government

    Home Government

    Democrat Presidential Challenger Signals He Would Accept Trump Cabinet Bid

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    4

    Rep. Dean Phillips (D-Minn.) signaled Thursday that he’d be willing to serve under President-elect Trump when he returns to the White House.

    “If there is a job that could help the country and that my skillset would be useful for. Anybody should consider that,” Phillips told NewsNation’s “On Balance.” 

    “And if we come to a point where no Democrat will want to serve in a Republican administration, and conversely, we are limiting 50 percent of the universe of potential appointees and that’s what I am trying to overcome,” he added. 

    Phillips, mounted a long shot bid against President Biden before dropping out in March.

    The Minnesota Democrat consistently warned his party about not having a competitive primary process and urged both parties to try to better understand the needs of the American people. 

    Phillips said last week that Trump has “become a significant historical figure in American politics” and that he built a movement “that, frankly, snuck up on most Democrats.” 

    “I am not a big fan of the President himself, but I understand the MAGA movement,” Phillips said Thursday. “I understand why people are angry. I understand why this federal government needs to be reformed. But then do it with people with competency and integrity to do it.” 

    Trump has announced a a number of candidates for his Cabinet and other administration posts since being declared the winner of the presidential race, including picking two ex-Democrats, former Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and environmental lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr., to be his director of national intelligence and head the Department of Health and Human Services

    SCOTUS Responds To Mark Meadows’ Bid To Move Election Subversion Case To Federal Court

    By
    Patrick Houck
    -
    5
    Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    In a significant setback for former Trump administration Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, the Supreme Court has denied his request to transfer his election subversion case from Georgia state court to federal court. Tuesday’s ruling means Meadows will face charges in Fulton County, where the case was brought by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. Since presidential pardons apply only to federal offenses, Meadows is now ineligible for a potential pardon, should one ever be considered.

    As The Hill reports:

    Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis (D) charged Meadows, President-elect Trump and more than a dozen others over accusations they unlawfully attempted to overturn President Biden’s 2020 victory in Georgia.

    Refusing to hear Meadows’s bid to move courts marks a win for Willis, who has attempted to keep the defendants together for a singular trial in state court.

    Trump’s election as president Tuesday has complicated that goal, however. His attorneys are expected to argue the Constitution prohibits Trump’s charges from moving forward while he is in the White House.

    It remains unclear how any pause would impact the Trump allies charged alongside him. The trial proceedings already are on indefinite pause amid an appeal by some defendants seeking to remove Willis over her once-romantic relationship with a top prosecutor on the case who has since stepped aside.

    What Does This Mean for Meadows?

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

    With this decision, Meadows has exhausted his options for moving the case to federal court. The implications are significant:

    -Ineligibility for Presidential Pardon: Since his case remains in state court, a federal pardon would not apply.

    – Advertisement –

    -Focus on State Jurisdiction: The case will proceed under Georgia’s judicial system, potentially influencing how other co-defendants approach their defense strategies.

    What’s Next in the Georgia Election Case?

    Meadows isn’t alone in seeking relief from the legal proceedings. Other co-defendants, also charged with alleged election interference, are challenging District Attorney Willis’ authority in the case. A critical hearing is scheduled for Dec. 5 in the Georgia Court of Appeals, where arguments will be heard regarding the removal of Willis as the lead prosecutor.

    Trump’s victory will likely put the Georgia election interference case against him on hold, at least until he leaves office. However, attorneys for his co-defendants told Law360 that this is unlikely to apply to their clients.

    Key Points to Watch:

    -Outcome of Dec. 5 Hearing: If Willis is removed, it could reshape the prosecutorial strategy and impact case proceedings for Meadows and others.

    -Potential Legal Precedents: The rulings in this case could set important precedents for how state-level cases involving federal officials are handled in the future.

    Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News.

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Weighs In On Mail-In Voter Debate

    By
    Patrick Houck
    -
    1

    In a pivotal decision on Wednesday, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that voters whose mail-in ballots were rejected due to errors—including missing signatures, incorrect dates or absence of a required secrecy envelope—can still cast their vote on Election Day. The 4-3 decision ensures that these individuals are allowed to submit provisional ballots at their local polling places, provided no additional disqualifying issues arise.

    The ruling originated from a case in Butler County, where two voters were denied the opportunity to vote provisionally after their mail-in ballots were rejected during the April primary for missing secrecy envelopes. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Pennsylvania and the Public Interest Law Center represented the voters, arguing that the county had misinterpreted the state’s Election Code.

    Per Spotlight PA:

    Justice Christine Donohue, writing for the majority, noted that the Republican litigants argued that in order to maintain election integrity, provisional ballots should not be counted, but said the majority was “at a loss to identify what honest voting principle is violated by recognizing the validity of one ballot cast by one voter.”

    “If appellants presume that the general assembly intended to disqualify the provisional ballot of a voter who failed to effectively vote by mail in order to punish that voter, we caution that such a construction is not reconcilable with the right of franchise,” she wrote.

    The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania and the Public Interest Law Center, which brought the case on behalf of two voters, celebrated the ruling as a victory.

    “Today’s decision affirms that if you make a paperwork mistake that will keep your mail ballot from counting, you have the right to vote by provisional ballot at your polling place on Election Day,” said Ben Geffen, senior attorney at the Public Interest Law Center. “This reinforces the right to vote in Pennsylvania.”

    This decision holds broad implications for voters across Pennsylvania, offering a contentious solution for those facing similar issues in future elections. However, there was notable dissent, including from Justice P. Kevin Brobson, who contended that the state’s Election Code explicitly prohibits counting such provisional ballots.

    The ruling comes as Pennsylvania takes center stage in the 2024 election. Polls suggest a highly competitive race, with the latest RealClearPolitics average showing former President Donald Trump holding a slight 0.6-point lead over Vice President Kamala Harris.

    READ NEXT: Fmr. Democrat Congressman Caught Campaigning For Trump In PIVOTAL Swing State

    It’s Time To DRAIN THE SWAMP! Stop Supporting Career Politicians – Elect Dave McCormick! WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT! Help us win back the Senate.
    © Great America News Desk 2022