Latest

    News

    Home News Page 54

    Report: Trump Voter Challenge Dismissed

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    Gavel via Wikimedia Commons Image

    North Carolina’s election board has dismissed a voter’s challenge to Donald Trump’s candidacy on the state’s primary ballot.

    On Tuesday, the State Board of Elections voted 4-1 to dismiss the candidacy challenge brought by Brian Martin who argued Trump should be booted from the ballot under the 14th Amendment.

    Before the vote, general counsel to the elections board, Paul Cox, made the case against hearing the voter’s candidacy challenge and said he was “quite uncertain” as to whether the board had the authority.

    The Hill has more:

    “I do think it’s uncertain. And I think that the board has to consider whether it has the jurisdiction and authority to act,” Cox told members of the board during Tuesday’s meeting. “Obviously the board is an administrative agency that derives its authority from the law, and it must consider whether the statutes that give it authority, give it this authority.”

    “And, in reading the language of the challenge statutes, I’m quite uncertain as to whether the challenge statutes in North Carolina law contemplate a challenge to a presidential preference primary candidate,” he added.

    Siobhan Millen, the sole vote against the motion, pushed back on Cox’s arguments, asking him when a voter could bring a candidacy challenge. She argued the board was hiding behind technicalities.

    “It seems like there is an unknown as to whether the presidential primary statute controls the field or whether the challenge statute controls the field, and it’s never been litigated before. You’re uncertain, if I’m hearing you,” Millen said.

    “It’s troubling to me,” she continued. “We have a voter who’s gone to the trouble to fill out a facially very impressive challenge form and we are, to me, hiding behind a technicality by saying it doesn’t apply, that we won’t even hear it. That’s — it’s troubling.”

    The dismissal came the same day the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Trump should be removed from the state’s primary ballot under the 14th Amendment.

    This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

    Colorado Republican Party Threatens To Cancel Primary If Trump Is Not Included On Ballot

    By
    admin
    -
    3
    Missvain, CC BY 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    Last night, the Colorado Supreme Court disqualified former President Donald Trump from appearing on the Colorado Republican presidential primary ballot. The ruling has the Colorado Republican Party threatening to call off the primary election in the state if Trump is kept off the ballot.

    The Daily Wire’s Ryan Saavedra reported on the Colorado GOP’s response following the state supreme court’s finding that Trump is ineligible for the presidency:

    “We will withdraw from the Primary as a Party and convert to a pure caucus system if this is allowed to stand,” the party said in responding to the Court’s ruling.

    “A majority of the court holds that President Trump is disqualified from holding the office of President under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution,” the opening lines of the court’s opinion read. “Because he is disqualified, it would be a wrongful act under the Election Code for the Colorado Secretary of State to list him as a candidate on the presidential primary ballot.”

    The opinion said that the majority had “little difficulty concluding that substantial evidence” showed Trump’s subversion of the democratic process by “a concerted and public use of force or threat of force by a group of people to hinder or prevent the U.S. government from taking the actions necessary to accomplish the peaceful transfer of power in this country.”

    The majority concluded “the events of January 6 constituted an insurrection.”

    Saavedra continued, noting the legal reaction to the bombshell ruling:

    Heritage Foundation election law expert and former FEC commissioner Hans von Spakovsky responded to the ruling by calling it “nakedly partisan” and “anti-democratic.”

    “First, Section 3 of the 14 Amendment applies only to individuals who were previously a ‘member of Congress,’ an ‘officer of the United States,’ or a state official. Individuals who are elected—such as the president and vice president—are not officers within the meaning of Section 3,” he said. “Second, no federal court has convicted Trump of engaging in ‘insurrection or rebellion.’ In fact, the Senate acquitted Trump of that charge in his second impeachment.”

    “Third, some scholars assert Section 3 doesn’t even exist anymore as a constitutional matter after the Amnesty Acts of 1872 and 1898–a matter completely ignored by the court today,” he continued. “Fourth, prior court rulings have held that Section 3 is not self-executing and Congress has never passed any federal law providing for enforcement, meaning that courts such as the Colorado Supreme Court have no legal authority to enforce Section 3.”

    The Colorado Supreme Court temporarily stayed its ruling until Jan. 4, 2024, pending further appellate proceedings.

    The Trump campaign has vowed to swiftly appeal the “completely flawed decision” to the U.S. Supreme Court.

    “We have full confidence that the U.S. Supreme Court will quickly rule in our favor and finally put an end to these unAmerican lawsuits,” campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement.

    This article was republished with permission from American Liberty News.

    Colorado Supreme Court Rules On Trump Ballot Ban

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    5
    Gavel via Wikimedia Commons Image

    The Trump campaign announced it will swiftly appeal the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling removing the former president from the state’s 2024 ballot to the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Trump’s leading allies have responded to the decision with fire and fury on social media:

    The Colorado Supreme Court has ruled to remove Donald Trump from the 2024 state ballot, citing the 14th Amendment’s so-called insurrection clause.

    The ruling has been temporarily stayed by the state’s highest court. It is subject to further appellate proceedings.

    An appeal is all but certain, as CNBC reports:

    The ruling is the first time a state court has agreed that Trump, who is the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination, should be barred from ballots in a state because of a U.S. constitutional provision barring people who have engaged in “insurrection” from federal office.

    Courts in Minnesota and Michigan have rejected similar suits challenging Trump’s placement on the presidential ballot, but the issue is continuing to be litigated in a number of states.

    A group of six Colorado voters in September sued to block Trump from state ballots in 2024 because of a claim he was barred due to a provision in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

    That provision, Section 3, says that “no person” can serve as an officer of the United States who, having previously taken an oath of federal office, “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the U.S.

    A Colorado judge ruled last month that Trump must be allowed on next year’s Republican primary ballot. District Judge Sarah Wallace said in her ruling that that language in the 14th Amendment means it can’t be used to prevent Trump from appearing on the ballot.

    Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which filed the lawsuit on behalf of six Colorado voters, appealed Wallace’s decision to the Colorado Supreme Court.

    The disqualification trial focused on Trump’s actions before and during the U.S. Capitol riot and whether they violated Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Section 3 states:

    No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability

    This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

    Trump Scores Another House Republican Endorsement

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0

    Donald Trump just scored another endorsement from the House of Representatives.

    Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) told Fox News Digital on Monday about his endorsement.

    “I can not sit idly by while Joe Biden and his disastrous policies continue to erode what makes America the greatest country in the world,” Barr said. “Since Biden took office, we have seen record-high illegal immigration at the Southern Border, 40-year high inflation, and threateningly weak foreign policy that has invited aggression from our adversaries.”

    However, Barr said, “despite all of this, Democrats and the ‘mainstream media’ are doing everything they can to ensure Joe Biden remains president.”

    “Donald Trump is the only candidate who can defeat Joe Biden and reinstate an America First agenda,” he said.

    “American families’ incomes rose, and their small businesses flourished,” he said, adding that none of those developments were “coincidences.”

    “They were a direct product of Trump’s low-tax, pro-economic growth policies,” he told Fox News Digital, saying Biden’s policies have “resulted in the opposite.” 

    Watch: Drunk Driver Crashes Into Biden’s Secret Service Motorcade

    By
    admin
    -
    1
    Police image via Pixabay free images

    On Sunday night, a car crashed into part of President Joe Biden‘s motorcade near his Delaware campaign headquarters.

    President Biden looked stunned as a sedan hit a U.S. Secret Service vehicle being used to close off intersections as Biden was walking from the campaign office to his waiting armored SUV. 

    The sedan then tried to continue into a closed-off intersection, before Secret Service personnel surrounded the vehicle with weapons drawn and instructed the driver to put his hands up.

    On Monday morning, authorities said the 46-year-old driver had been charged with driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol and inattentive driving. 

    This article was republished with permission from American Liberty News.

    Michigan Appeals Court Rules On Trump Ballot Challenge

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    On Thursday, the Michigan Court of Appeals sided with former President Donald Trump, ruling the Republican candidate can appear on the state’s primary ballot.

    While the appeals court upheld two lower court decisions the Court declined to decide whether Trump should be disqualified under the 14th Amendment, which bars those who previously took an oath to uphold the Constitution but later “engaged in insurrection” from holding office again.

    The Hill has more:

    The court determined that the former president’s spot on the general election ballot was not ripe for consideration. 

    “It would be improper to decide whether to grant a declaration that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of President of the United States at this time,” the 3-0 opinion reads. “At the moment, the only event about to occur is the presidential primary election.”

    Regarding his spot on Michigan’s primary ballot, the secretary of state has “no discretion” to decide not to place him — or any other candidate identified as a primary candidate by a state political party — on the ballot.

    This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

    House Greenlights Biden Impeachment Inquiry

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    The U.S. House of Representatives voted on Wednesday evening to formalize an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.

    The Republican resolution passed on a party line vote of 221-212. Earlier in the day, Hunter Biden defied the House Oversight Committee’s subpoena to testify behind closed doors, pushing lawmakers to initiate contempt of Congress proceedings.

    The Hill continues:

    The resolution makes official an inquiry into Biden that has been underway for months, after former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) in September said that various GOP probes into the president would be under the umbrella of impeachment — but did not hold an official vote. 

    Republicans have said they moved to formalize the inquiry in part because the White House responded to document requests last month with a letter that argued their inquiry was unconstitutional due to the lack of a vote, citing a Trump-era legal opinion.

    “We’re very pleased with the vote today. I think that’s it a message loud and clear to the White House. We expect you to comply,” House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.), who is leading one of the arms of the probe, said after the vote.

    President Biden ripped House Republicans for what he called a “baseless political stunt.”

    After the vote, the president released a statement, saying in part: “I wake up every day focused on the issues facing the American people – real issues that impact their lives, and the strength and security of our country and the world. Unfortunately, House Republicans are not joining me.”

    On the Senate side, some Republicans remain skeptical of the investigation’s most salacious allegations. If the House votes to approve articles of impeachment against Biden, it will be imperative to win over the following holdouts:

    • Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who stated that no evidence had been found of wrongdoing by President Biden himself. However, he added that if such evidence is uncovered, it would be critical and important. “But we haven’t seen that yet,” he added.
    • Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), a member of the chamber’s GOP leadership, said,”I don’t see any evidence there” before conceding that “The House is going to do what the House is going to do. I don’t have any influence.”
    • Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) argued that Republicans have not learned from the Democrats’ strategic mistakes in their first impeachment of former President Trump. According to Rounds, the Senate did not have sufficient evidence to convict Trump during the impeachment trial. Democrats “were trying to develop it in the trial.” Rounds emphasized that House Republicans must provide clear and incontrovertible evidence of impeachable offenses before bringing it to trial before the Senate. If they fail to do so, their actions will be deemed as “crying wolf.”

    The inquiry is investigating the finances of the Biden family, treatment of Hunter Biden by the Justice Department and Hunter’s alleged influence-peddling scheme.

    This article was republished with permission from American Liberty News.

    Report: Special Counsel To Use Trump White House Cell Data In Election Interference Case

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    3
    Elvert Barnes, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    New filings show special counsel Jack Smith plans to call witnesses who have analyzed data extracted from former President Trump’s cell phone in the federal election interference case.

    Smith reportedly plans to bring in experts for testimony, including one who can weigh in on Trump’s Twitter habits and another who has analyzed the movement of the crowd following the President’s speech on Jan. 6th, 2021.

    Prosecutors on the election interference case also extracted data from Trump’s White House cell phone, and that of an aide, described in the filing only as “Individual 1.”

    The expert, who is unnamed in the court filing, reviewed how Trump and the aid used their phone throughout the post-election period, and has “specifically identified the periods of time during which the defendant’s phone was unlocked and the Twitter application was open on Jan. 6.” 

    It’s unclear the extent of the information prosecutors have from Trump’s phone, though the filing says the expert analyzed “images found on the phones and websites visited.”

    A separate expert prosecutors plan to bring in will analyze how a crowd of Trump supporters moved in response to his speech which included calls to “march towards the Capitol.”

    The expert “plotted the location history data for Google accounts and devices associated with individuals who moved, on January 6, 2021, from an area at or near the Ellipse to an area encompassing the United States Capitol building.”

    Their review “will aid the jury in understanding the movements of individuals toward the Capitol area during and after the defendant’s speech at the Ellipse.”

    Hunter Biden Lawyers Seek To Dismiss Delaware Gun Charges

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    President Joe Biden hugs his family during the 59th Presidential Inauguration ceremony in Washington, Jan. 20, 2021. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took the oath of office on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol. (DOD Photo by Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Carlos M. Vazquez II)

    Hunter Biden’s legal team has filed a motion to dismiss the indictment against him over gun charges in Delaware.

    Earlier this year, special counsel David Weiss charged Hunter Biden with making a false statement in the purchase of a firearm; making a false statement related to information required to be kept by a federal firearms licensed dealer; and one count of possession of a firearm by a person who is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance. 

    The president’s son pleaded not guilty to all counts in October before a sweetheart plea deal fell through.

    Biden’s lawyers are attempting to have the indictment dismissed by saying it “violates” the collapsed plea agreement and maintain it is “still in effect” between the president’s son and federal prosecutors. 

    Fox News has more:

    “The Indictment against Mr. Biden must be dismissed because it violates a Diversion Agreement that is in effect between Mr. Biden and the prosecution,” Lowell argued in the filing. “In exchange for Mr. Biden giving up various rights—including his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent by agreeing to the Statement of Facts drafted by the prosecution and numerous restrictions on his liberty—the prosecution agreed to provide him immunity for any offense concerning his purchase of a firearm (among other offenses).” 

    Citing the initial agreement, which Republicans have billed as a “sweetheart plea deal,” Lowell said prosecutors, in July, said they could not bring firearms charges “based on the firearm identified in the factual statement to the Diversion Agreement.” 

    “Nevertheless, the prosecution did just that, by subsequently bringing this Indictment charging Mr. Biden with three felony firearm offenses, which all relate to the firearm identified in the Diversion Agreement’s factual statement,” Lowell continued Monday. “Because Mr. Biden gave up valuable rights as part of this contract, in exchange for the prosecution’s promise not to prosecute him, such promise must be fulfilled.”

    Last week, Biden was also indicted on tax charges in California.

    CNN reported that Hunter was hit with nine counts on charges that include failure to file and pay taxes; evasion of assessment and false or fraudulent tax return.

    Biden is facing up to 17 years in prison for his crimes.

    Special Counsel Asks Supreme Court To Weigh In On Trump Federal Election Interference Case

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    4
    Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    Special Counsel Jack Smith asked the Supreme Court to immediately take up former President Trump’s federal 2020 election criminal case, urging the justices to weigh in on Trump’s immunity defense as the former president seeks to have the case tossed entirely.

    Citing Trump’s fast-approaching March 4 trial date, Smith asked the Supreme Court to immediately take up the issue.

    The Hill has more:

    “It is of imperative public importance that respondent’s claims of immunity be resolved by this Court and that respondent’s trial proceed as promptly as possible if his claim of immunity is rejected,” Smith wrote in the filing.

    Smith also requested the Supreme Court expedite its consideration of whether to take up the issue. If they do agree to hear it, Smith further asked that the justices expedite their consideration of the case.

    “This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office or is constitutionally protected from federal prosecution when he has been impeached but not convicted before the criminal proceedings begin,” Smith wrote in the filing.

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

    1...535455...101Page 54 of 101
    © Great America News Desk 2022