Random

    Politics

    Home Politics

    Did Fauci Lie To Congress? New Investigation May Reveal The Truth.

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    1
    National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony S. Fauci. Photo Credit: Fogarty International Center from Bethesda, MD, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

    In the wake of revelations that the former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Dr. Anthony Fauci may have knowingly lied to Congress in sworn testimony, U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is asking the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation.

    Paul has asked U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., Matthew Graves to open an investigation into testimony Fauci made to the United States Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) on May 11, 2021, in which Fauci denied funding research at viral laboratory in China where the COVID-19 virus reportedly originated.

    “The NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Fauci said under oath in May.

    But a month later a June 14, 2023,  Government Accountability Office report concluded the Wuhan Institute of Virology did receieve NIH funding.

    There are concerns the COVID-19 virus “may have been genetically engineered because gain-of-function research was taking place in Wuhan before the pandemic,” Paul reports.

    Now Paul wants to determine if Fauci’s statements were illegal.

    “I warned Dr. Fauci of the criminal implications of lying to Congress and offered him an opportunity to recant his previous statement,” Paul wrote in a letter to Graves. “Dr. Fauci’s testimony is inconsistent with facts that have since come to light.”

    “Before Congress, Dr. Fauci denied funding gain-of-function research, to the press he claims to have a dispassionate view on the lab leak hypothesis, and in private he acknowledges gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology to his colleagues. His own colleagues have acknowledged Dr. Fauci’s inconsistency. A congressional hearing, however, is not the place for a public servant to play political games – especially when the health and well-being of American citizens is on the line,” Paul writes.

    Under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 it is a federal crime to make “any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation” as part of “any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.”

    The penalty for an offense includes criminal fines and imprisonment of up to five years.

    The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It was first published in American Liberty News.

    READ NEXT: Ukrainian Special Forces Reportedly ‘Pinned Down’ During Night Raid In Crimea By Security Guard In Underwear

    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!

    Tim Scott Enters 2024 White House Race

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    Michael Vadon, CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    The 2024 Republican primary field is growing.

    Popular South Carolina Senator Tim Scott has officially declared himself a candidate for the GOP nomination for president.

    Scott filed paperwork with the Federal Election Commission on Friday, ahead of an expected formal campaign launch on Monday.

    Scott joins a growing primary field for the Republican presidential nomination against Trump, former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley, former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, among the party’s most high-profile contenders.

    Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is widely expected to announce his presidential campaign next week.

    Other Republicans who have widely been speculated to be running but have not yet officially entered include former Vice President Mike Pence, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, and New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu.

    Trump Assassination Attempt Suspect Seeks Judge’s Recusal From Case

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    3

    The man accused of attempting to assassinate former President Donald Trump at his Florida golf course in September filed a motion requesting the judge recuse herself from the case.

    Ryan Routh’s legal team raised concerns about Judge Aileen Cannon’s impartiality due to her appointment by Trump and the former president’s public praise of her judicial decisions regarding his classified documents case, according to the motion.

    Routh’s attorneys argued that the unique nature of the case could lead the public to question the fairness of the proceedings.

    “Mr. Trump is the current Republican candidate for President in next month’s election. On the campaign trail, he has repeatedly praised Your Honor for her rulings in his case,” the motion stated. “By repeatedly and publicly praising this Court by name for its rulings in his case, Mr. Trump has arguably bolstered the perception that the Court is partial in his favor. Moreover, were Mr. Trump to become President again in the future, he would be in a position to nominate Your Honor to a vacancy on a higher appellate court, including the U.S. Supreme Court.”

    The defense highlighted the potential conflict of interest, given Trump’s role as the alleged victim in this case.

    “As the alleged victim here, he has a significant stake in the outcome of this case too. Were he to become President in the future, he would have authority to nominate Your Honor to a federal judgeship on a higher court were a vacancy to arise.”

    Cannon previously granted former Trump’s motion to dismiss the classified documents case in July, siding with his argument that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s appointment was unconstitutional.

    President Trump is the only one who stood up for working families, and the DC elite want him destroyed. Kamala is raising over $1 Billion to crush his campaign. Will you chip in $3 before the day ends? — JD Vance

    Trump Targets New York AG In Thanksgiving Day Message

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    5
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    Former President Donald Trump targeted key figures in his ongoing civil business fraud trial in a series of late-night Thanksgiving Day posts.

    In a post to his Truth Social platform at 2:03 a.m., the former president railed against some of the key figures in his New York fraud civil trial — including state Attorney General Letitia James, presiding Judge Arthur Engoron and his Chief Clerk Alison Greenfield.

    “Happy Thanksgiving to ALL, including the Racist & Incompetent Attorney General of New York State, Letitia “Peekaboo” James, who has let Murder & Violent Crime FLOURISH, & Businesses FLEE; the Radical Left Trump Hating Judge, a “Psycho,” Arthur Engoron, who Criminally Defrauded the State of New York, & ME, by purposely Valuing my Assets at a “tiny” Fraction of what they are really worth in order to convict me of Fraud before even a Trial, or seeing any PROOF, & used his Politically Biased & Corrupt Campaign Finance Violator, Chief Clerk Alison Greenfield, to sit by his side on the “Bench” & tell him what to do,” Trump wrote.

    The gag order against Trump which prohibited him from going after the judge’s staff, including Greenfield, was recently paused. However, prosecutors are arguing the order should be reimposed.

    While the fraud case seems to have much of Trump’s attention these days, he also included his chief political rival in his middle-of-the-night Thanksgiving greeting.

    “[Happy Thanksgiving to] Crooked Joe Biden, who has WEAPONIZED his Department of Injustice against his Political Opponent, & allowed our Country to go to HELL; & all of the other Radical Left Lunatics, Communists, Fascists, Marxists, Democrats, & RINOS, who are seriously looking to DESTROY OUR COUNTRY,” the former president stated.

    New York Attorney General Letitia James’ case accuses Trump, his two adult sons, the Trump Organization, and top executives of falsely inflating the values of Trump’s real estate properties and other assets in order to get tax benefits and better loan terms.

    James seeks around $250 million in damages, and she wants to bar Trump and his co-defendants from running another business in New York.

    ‘QAnon Shaman’ Eyes Run For Arizona Congressional Seat

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    4
    Elvert Barnes, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    Jacob Chansley, the Capitol rioter who came to be known as the “QAnon Shaman,” has reportedly filed paperwork signaling his interest in running for the Arizona congressional seat being vacated by Debbie Lesko (R).

    The Arizona Republic reported that a candidate statement of interest was signed by Jacob Angeli-Chansley and filed with the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office on Thursday, indicating he would seek to run as a Libertarian. He has also been known to go by Jacob Angeli.

    The Hill has more:

    Chansley, 35, gained notoriety for his horned fur hat, bare chest and face paint that made him one of the more recognizable Jan. 6 rioters. He pleaded guilty to a charge of obstructing an official proceeding and sentenced to 41 months in prison. Chansley, who grew up in Phoenix, served 27 of those months before being released to a halfway house this past March.

    The Associated Press reported that while the Constitution does not bar felons from running for Congress, Arizona law prevents them from voting in elections until they complete their sentence and have the right restored.

    Former Republican Arizona Senate candidate Blake Masters has also jumped into the race for Lesko’s seat.

    “I’m running for Congress, to fight for Arizona’s 8th,” Masters said on X, formerly Twitter. “Biden has failed. We need Trump back. We need to stop inflation, Build the Wall, avoid WW3, and secure Arizona’s water future. We need to fight for our families.”

    CIA Sued Over Role In Hunter Biden Laptop Election Cover-Up

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    3
    The New Headquarters Building (NHB) of the CIA. The Central Intelligence Agency, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    A nonprofit legal watchdog has filed a federal lawsuit against the Central Intelligence Agency, seeking documents and records over an election-year government effort to cover up reporting seen as damaging to Joe Biden’s presidential campaign.

    In particular, the group seeks information on the agency’s role in a letter signed by 51 intelligence officials that falsely claimed the Russian government “planted” evidence of criminal activity on a laptop owned by Biden’s middle-aged son Hunter.

    Judicial Watch filed the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the CIA for all “communications of the spy agency’s Prepublication Classification Review Board (PCRB) regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and ‘clear’ a letter signed by 51 former intelligence community officials characterizing the Hunter Biden laptop story as having ‘all the earmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign,’” the group announced.

    “The Deep State CIA, it seems, engaged in election interference and a political operation against the American people to help Joe Biden and hurt Trump,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And now the CIA is ignoring FOIA law to cover up its role in the scandal, censoring and suppressing the Hunter Biden/Joe Biden laptop story just before the presidential election.”

    In October 2020, the New York Post broke a bombshell story revealing that Hunter Biden’s laptop, which he abandoned at a Delaware computer shop, contained photographs of Hunter Biden engaged in drug use and using prostitutes, as well as emails describing what appear to be shady foreign business deals.

    Fearing the story could damage Biden’s presidential campaign, social media companies attempted to suppress the sharing of the Post’s reporting.

    The Biden campaign also reached out to intelligence officials, including the CIA and FBI, seeking their help in falsely discrediting the story.

    “In a May 10, 2023, report the House Judiciary Committee revealed that on October 19, 2020, three days before the second presidential debate between President Donald Trump and Democrat candidate Joe Biden, then-Acting CIA Director Michael Morell sent the PCRB the finalized letter for review, calling it a ‘rush job,’ and quickly secured its approval,” Judicial Watch reports.

    Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the CIA failed to respond to a May 11, 2023, FOIA request for:

    Records and communications of the Prepublication Classification Review Board, Central Intelligence Agency, including emails, email chains, email attachments, text messages, cables, voice recordings, correspondence, statements, letters, memoranda, reports, presentations, notes, or other form of record, regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and “clear” a letter involving the Hunter Biden laptop story potentially having Russian involvement or being a Russian disinformation plot.

    An investigation by the House Judiciary Committee and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence found that the CIA, or a CIA employee, may have helped the Biden campaign find signers for the false letter.

    One former CIA employee, David Cariens, reveals that while speaking with the PCRB in October 2020 to review materials for his memoir, a CIA employee “asked” him to sign the false letter.

    “When the person in charge of reviewing the book called to say it was approved with no changes, I was told about the draft letter,” said Cariens.

    “The person asked me if I would be willing to sign. . . . After hearing the letter’s contents, and the qualifiers in it such as, “We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement . . .’ I agreed to sign,” Cariens said.

    “If accurate, this information raises fundamental concerns about the role of the CIA in helping to falsely discredit allegations about the Biden family in the weeks before the 2020 presidential election,” Judicial Watch notes.

    Another former CIA officer, Marc Polymeropoulos, criticized the CIA’s involvement in his testimony to the House Judiciary Committee in the following exchange:

    Q. Does what [Former CIA official David Cariens] described there, that interaction with the [Prepublication Classification Review Board], sound like a quid pro quo to you?

    A. I can’t comment on this. This is—to me, this is something that the [Prepublication Classification Review Board] in my experience would never engage in something like that. They are just straightforward back and forth in terms of approval. The idea they would have a comment on any other thing that they were working on, that to me is not even close to what I’ve experienced with them.

    Q. Does that concern you?

    A. If it’s true, it would concern me, for sure. But I just—I have a hard time believing that occurred. If it did, that’s incredibly unprofessional.

    The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It first appeared in American Liberty News.

    READ NEXT: Longtime ACU/CPAC Leader David Keene Speaks Out After Vice Chair’s Resignation

    Indicted Congressman Eyes Party Switch After Potential Presidential Pardon

    By
    Patrick Houck
    -
    2

    Speculation on Capitol Hill is building that Congressman Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), who is currently facing federal corruption charges, might consider switching parties if granted a presidential pardon. The potential shift has set political tongues wagging, fueled by Cuellar’s complicated legal battle and reactions from both sides of the aisle.

    The rumor is as follows:

    It’s alleged someone is going to receive a pardon and flip from blue to red in the House of Representatives.

    Now I fully believe that this person has only gotten indicted because of his wide open criticism of the current admin and his opposition to… https://t.co/WjCOGNNbca— George Santos (@MrSantosNY) December 26, 2024

    Cuellar, a conservative Democrat, was indicted in May following a two-year investigation by the Department of Justice. The probe, linked to an ongoing corruption case, began after FBI agents raided his South Texas home and campaign office. While initial details were sparse, reports alleged that Cuellar cultivated relationships with Azerbaijani and Mexican business leaders, leveraging his congressional position to advance their interests in U.S. policy.

    The indictment, if accurate, presents a damning picture. Between 2014 and 2021, Cuellar and his wife, Imelda, allegedly accepted $600,000 in bribes from two foreign entities: an Azerbaijani state-owned oil and gas company and a Mexico City-based bank. Federal prosecutors claim these payments were funneled through bogus consulting contracts to shell companies under Imelda Cuellar’s name, with little to no actual work performed.

    In exchange, Cuellar allegedly influenced U.S. foreign policy to benefit Azerbaijan and supported legislative activities favorable to the Mexican bank. The charges against the Cuellars are sweeping, with potential penalties stacking up as follows:

    Two counts of conspiracy to commit bribery and acting as an unregistered foreign agent (up to 5 years each).

    Two counts of bribery of a federal official (up to 15 years each).

    Two counts of conspiracy to commit honest services wire fraud (up to 20 years each).

    Two counts of violating laws against unregistered foreign agents (up to two years each).

    One count of conspiracy to commit money laundering (up to 20 years).

    Five counts of money laundering (up to 20 years each).

    Both Henry and Imelda Cuellar have pleaded not guilty, with the congressman insisting his actions were focused on serving South Texans. Despite the charges, Cuellar secured an 11th term in November, showcasing his political resilience among his constituents.

    President-elect Donald Trump has eagerly weighed in on the case. Writing on Truth Social shortly after the indictment, Trump accused the Biden administration of targeting Cuellar and his wife for his conservative stance on border policy.

    “Biden just indicted Henry Cuellar because the respected Democrat Congressman wouldn’t play Crooked Joe’s open border game. He was for Border Control, so they said, ‘Let’s use the FBI and DOJ to take him out!’” Trump wrote, calling the administration “D.C. Thugs” and labeling President Biden a “threat to democracy.”

    The drama surrounding Cuellar’s case, coupled with rumors of a potential party switch, has heightened tensions in Washington. Inside the Beltway, all eyes are on the congressman to see whether he will stay the course or make a stunning shift in a historically narrowly divided Congress.

    Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News

    Trump’s Voter Citizenship Requirement Blocked By Federal Judge

    By
    Seijah Drake
    -
    5

    In a controversial decision that critics say undermines basic electoral integrity, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a preliminary injunction Thursday blocking the Trump administration from implementing key provisions of its election reform order — including a requirement that individuals provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections.

    The Trump administration’s order, signed in March, sought to address the widespread public concern over election security by aligning U.S. registration standards with those used by many developed nations — where proof of citizenship is a basic requirement to cast a vote. Yet, in her ruling, Judge Kollar-Kotelly sided with Democratic operatives and partisan groups, granting their request to halt implementation of what should be a commonsense safeguard.

    It’s already a felony for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. So why oppose a mechanism to verify that voters are, in fact, eligible citizens? The administration’s proposed policy simply sought to enforce existing law, not change it. But for activists and partisan lawyers, that’s apparently too much.

    Critics of the ruling argue that it demonstrates a disturbing disconnect between legal theory and electoral reality. While the plaintiffs claimed the executive order infringes on the “Elections Clause” of the Constitution — which delegates much of the authority over elections to the states — the Trump order targeted the federal voter registration form, which is a product of federal law and administered by a federal agency.

    Among the more absurd arguments presented during the case was the suggestion that requiring proof of citizenship would complicate voter registration drives at grocery stores and public venues. In other words, ensuring that only citizens vote is too inconvenient for activists looking to register voters en masse.

    But this framing reveals the central issue: voter registration is being treated like a political campaign tactic, not a civic responsibility. If accuracy and integrity are seen as barriers to convenience, something is deeply wrong with the system.

    If the courts won’t even allow the federal form to be updated to reflect current law, critics argue, how can Americans have confidence that elections are fair and secure?

    Ironically, while liberal groups celebrate the decision as a “victory for voters,” many Americans see it as a victory for loopholes and ambiguity. The same people who insist elections are sacred and democracy is under threat are now openly opposing the most basic eligibility checks used around the world.

    Meanwhile, Trump’s other proposed reforms — including tighter mail ballot deadlines and review of voter rolls against immigration databases — were allowed to stand. But with the citizenship requirement blocked, many worry that the core vulnerability in the system remains unaddressed.

    When noncitizens can easily register to vote — intentionally or accidentally — and the federal government is barred from checking, who exactly benefits?

    This article originally appeared on American Liberty News. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It is republished with permission.

    READ NEXT: President Trump Signs Executive Order Requiring Proof Of Citizenship To Vote In Federal Elections

    Yes, a Trump-DeSantis Ticket Could Actually Happen

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    10
    Former President of the United States Donald Trump speaking with attendees at the 2022 Student Action Summit at the Tampa Convention Center in Tampa, Florida. [Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons]

    Despite this year’s midterms only being weeks away plenty of Americans are already looking forward to the next presidential election and the idea of a potential Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis ticket has most Republicans thrilled.

    It’s no secret that the 45th President is seriously considering running in 2024, he’s all but confirmed the fact. However, another rising star has captured the hearts of many conservatives in recent years that could derail Trump’s plans. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is widely regarded as the favorite to receive the Republican nomination if Trump doesn’t run, and some analysts say he stands a solid chance of beating out Trump for the nomination if the two became competitors.

    Some Republicans have begun to wonder if Trump ultimately does run for president who his choice for vice president would be, but one fact is for certain it won’t be Mike Pence. Conservatives have pointed to DeSantis as being a potential VP pick, a move that could avoid a divisive primary that could cost the GOP the White House.

    Some experts have cautioned against a Trump-DeSantis ticket over concerns that the 12th Amendment might stand in the way since it seems to suggest that two candidates from the same state cannot run on the presidential ticket. Trump and DeSantis are each currently Florida residents.

    The language of the amendment reads: “[t]he Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves.”

    However, based on historic precedent, there’s nothing standing in Trump’s way to selecting DeSantis as his running mate. During the 2000 election concerns arose when Governor George W. Bush of Texas selected former congressman Dick Cheney as his running mate because he maintained residency in Texas during his business career.

    RealClearFlorida reports:

    Cheney moved to Wyoming four days before Bush selected him as his running mate, and Bush/Cheney went on to victory. Liberals attempted a legal challenge on the residency issue, but courts and the legal community soundly rejected it. Cheney’s move to Wyoming put an end to the issue. The courts reasoned that Cheney had fulfilled the residency requirements by doing so.

    The Bush/Cheney ticket is arguably a reverse version of a Trump/DeSantis ticket: Bush and DeSantis were both sitting governors, and thus ineligible to move. Cheney and Trump are businessmen with deep ties to other states. Some would say that Cheney had a major advantage that Trump does not. Cheney’s previous state of residence, Wyoming, loved him. Trump’s previous state, New York, is vigorously pursuing legal charges against him.

    But there is no reason Trump would need to move to New York. He could move to Tennessee, Nebraska, Wyoming, or any other state that would react favorably to his residency. It does not matter that Trump has no previous affiliation with those states.

    It’s worth noting that U.S. case law has opposed extraneous residency requirements for people running for Congress. This flexibility has allowed people like Alan Keyes and Hillary Clinton to move to new states to run for office. True, this case law has concerned states creating extra laws, as opposed to interpreting the 12th Amendment; but given that the judiciary has used the Constitution to strike down these laws, it is unlikely that the same judiciary would hold for extensive residency requirements to prevent someone from getting elected president or vice president.

    Does this mean Trump will ultimately pick DeSantis as his running mate? Not by any means but it does mean he has the opportunity to build a ticket the conservative base is already energized to vote for. But first, Trump has to reveal if he plans to run for president…and now we wait.

    123...47Page 1 of 47
    © Great America News Desk 2022