Home Blog Page 107

DeSantis Defends Trump After Latest Criminal Indictment News

0

Republicans have rushed to defend former president Donald Trump after news of his latest indictment.

Presidential candidate and Trump rival Ron DeSantis said during an interview on Tuesday that if elected President of the United States, he will clear the ranks at the FBI and Department of Justice.

DeSantis made the remarks during an interview on CNN with host Jake Tapper when asked about the former president saying that he has received a letter informing him that he is the target in an investigation into his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

“If Jack Smith has evidence of criminality, should Donald Trump be held accountable?” Tapper asked.

“So, here’s the problem. This country is going down the road of criminalizing political differences,” DeSantis responded. “I think that’s wrong. Alvin Bragg stretched the statute in Manhattan to be able to try to target Donald Trump. Most people, even people on the Left, acknowledge if that wasn’t Trump, that case would not have likely been brought against a normal civilian.”

“And so you have a situation where the Department of Justice, FBI had been weaponized against people they don’t like, and the number one example that happened to be against Donald Trump with the Russia collusion,” he said. “That was not a legitimate investigation; that was being done to try to drive Trump out of office. And so what I’ve said, as president, my job is to restore a single standard of justice to end weaponization of these agencies.”

“We’re going to have a new FBI director on day one; we’re going to have big changes at the Department of Justice,” he added. “Americans across the political spectrum need to have confidence that what is going on is based on the rule of law, not based on what political tribe you’re in.”

Georgia Governor To Meet With Senate Leaders Amid 2024 Talks

2
Georgia National Guard from United States, CC BY 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

A prominent Republican governor is preparing to meet with top Senate leaders this week.

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp is meeting with two top Republican leaders in the Senate in Washington, D.C. over the next two days, a spokesperson for the governor confirmed to The Hill

Kemp will meet with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday and National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) Chair Steve Daines (R-Mont.) on Wednesday. 

The pair of meetings come after the Peach State governor told CNN’s Kaitlin Collins that he is “certainly” not running for president in 2024.

“In politics, there’s always doors opening and closing. I got a great job right now. I personally feel like having more people in the race does not help us win and beat Joe Biden,” Kemp told Kaitlan Collins on “The Source.” “So, you know, I’m certainly not running for president. But there’s always doors opening in politics depending on how things play out, and we’ll see what happens.”

The Georgia Governor reiterated that Trump should stop constantly referencing the 2020 election if he hopes to re-win the state.

“If he continues to do that, he’s going to lose Georgia in November,” Kemp said, later adding, “There is no path for us to win the White House if we can’t win Georgia.”

Amanda Head: Another Indictment- Why Are They So Scared Of Him?

0

Trump is facing a third indictment…

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Georgia Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Effort To Halt Election Probe

2
Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

The Georgia Supreme Court unanimously shut down former President Trump’s attempt to stop a potential indictment for tampering with the results of the 2020 presidential election in that state.

In a five-page decision issued Monday afternoon, all nine justices of the Georgia Supreme Court said Trump’s lawyers had failed to make a persuasive case for shutting down the inquiry led by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. She has signaled that indictments are possible in the election-related probe in the next few weeks as a grand jury convenes to consider possible charges.

The Georgia court said there was no reason to permit that in these circumstances.

“He makes no showing that he has been prevented fair access to the ordinary channels,” the high court wrote in an opinion not attributed to any specific justice. “He is asking this Court to step in and itself decide the motions currently pending in the superior court. This is not the sort of relief that this Court affords, at least absent extraordinary circumstances that Petitioner has not shown are present here.”

Willis’ probe reportedly focuses on pressure Trump and his allies put on Georgia officials the weeks after the 2020 election to try to reverse Trump’s loss to Joe Biden in the Peach State. A key piece of evidence in the probe is an audio recording of a call Trump made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger urging him to “find 11,780 votes,” which would have pushed Trump across the threshold to claim victory.

Various election officials and national GOP figures have testified during the special grand jury probe.

Trump’s attorneys also filed a petition in March with Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney, asking that Willis’ probe be halted. However, McBurney has yet to rule on that motion. 

Trump Notified He Is Target In Justice Department’s J6 Investigation

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

On Tuesday former President Trump confirmed that he is a target of the Justice Department’s Jan. 6 investigation focusing on his efforts to stay in power after losing the 2020 election. 

Trump said in a post on Truth Social he received the “target letter” Sunday evening.

“Deranged Jack Smith, the prosecutor with Joe Biden’s DOJ, sent a letter (again it was Sunday night!) stating that I am a TARGET of the January 6th Grand Jury investigation, and giving me a very short 4 days to report to the Grand Jury, which almost always means an arrest and indictment.”

Attorney Merrick Garland previously said he planned to pursue anyone who “unlawfully interfered with the transfer of power” but had yet to bring any formal charges against the former president.

Recently, Prosecutors have called a number of Trump allies before the grand jury, including Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and former aide Hope Hicks. Prosecutors reportedly asked questions about whether the former president was aware he had lost the election, as demonstrating intent is key for some charges. 

It’s unclear what specific charges Trump could face if prosecutors decide to move ahead.

An indictment would mark the third time this year Trump has been charged.

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

Amanda Head: Sam Brinton Luggage Thieving Paid For By YOU

0
Amanda Head

The Sam Brinton luggage saga seems to be never-ending…New details about the crime are coming to light and are sure to upset taxpayers…

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Supreme Court Could Overturn Hundreds of Capitol Riot ‘Obstruction’ Cases

    7
    Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – One of the most common federal felony charges brought against January 6 Capitol ‘rioters’ is ‘obstruction of an official proceeding.’ I put ‘rioters’ in quotes, because many of those charged by the Biden Department of Justice (DoJ) never rioted.

    While there were violent rioters who viciously attacked police, and I have repeatedly stated that they should absolutely go to jail (just like similar violent BLM rioters), some on Jan. 6 simply entered the Capitol, or otherwise just wandered the halls.

    That’s where the ‘obstruction’ charge comes in. And it carries a maximum 20-year sentence.

    And DoJ might yet even charge former president Donald Trump with obstruction for his purported role in allegedly inciting the riot. Trump has already been indicted on a different ‘obstruction of justice’ charge related to his classified documents case.

    The Epoch Times (TET) reported:

    federal prosecutors have charged more than 300 Jan. 6 defendants with obstructing congressional proceedings. The obstruction charge has been frequently used by the Justice Department during plea negotiations and as a means to coerce some Jan. 6 protesters into providing information to incriminate fellow protesters.

    Until recently, barring a general pardon by the next president of all non-violent Jan. 6 offenders – which I would strongly support – there was little hope for those hundreds of non-violent Americans caught up in the FBI’s draconian Jan. 6 dragnet.

    But now, one Jan. 6 defendant, Edward Jacob Lang, is asking the Supreme Court to hear his challenge of the ‘obstruction of an official proceeding’ charge levelled against him. He still has 10 other charges pending, including assaulting a police officer, but that’s a separate issue.

    Obstruction is one of the charges most abused by the DoJ.

    As Just the News (JTN) reported on what was stated in Lang’s court filing:

    The obstruction charge could be levied against “anyone who attends at a public demonstration gone awry,” attorneys for Lang wrote in an appeal to the Supreme Court last week. The proceeding for which the charge was brought refers to the event where Congress certifies the Electoral College votes to confirm the president.

    The charge “is nothing less than the weaponization of the penal code to stifle dissent; it sets a terrifying precedent unworthy of this nation’s history,” Lang’s attorneys also wrote.

    Meanwhile, Lang has been in jail for over two and a half years (900 days) without a trial. I doubt any violent BLM rioters who assaulted police have been locked up as long, if at all.

    Where is the ACLU when real government abuse is taking place and violating Americans’ civil liberties?

    Not here.

    But who needs the ACLU when you have real legal warriors fighting for our civil rights. Lang’s attorney Norman Pattis told Newsweek that if they are successful in this case, the Supreme Court could overrule the cases of “hundreds of defendants.”

    “The government misuse and abuse of the federal penal code in the [January 6] cases is shocking,” Pattis added.

    As Newsweek reported: 

    The statute that Lang’s legal team is arguing has been too broadly applied in his case comes from a federal law that states an individual who “corruptly alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document” or “otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so” can be imprisoned for up to 20 years.

    Newsweek added:

    In the petition to the Supreme Court, Lang’s team argues that the defendant did not satisfy the “corrupt” element and that various interpretations in lower courts have led to a “cacophonous result that leaves unsettled significant issues…”

    It went on: “Our political life for centuries has been fractious, with violence all too frequent. Seeking to punish and silence dissent in the name of democracy is the twisted dream of a slumbering tyrant.”

    The petition urged the justices to hear the case “as the nation’s attention turns to the 2024 election.” It argued that there is “good reason” to suspect the Justice Department’s use of the statute will “serve to chill political speech and expression on the eve of one of the most consequential events in American life – the election of the next President of the United States.”

    Meanwhile, as ET reported, on June 7, 2022, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols granted Lang’s motion to dismiss (pdf) the obstruction charge.

    The judge said that the statute “must be interpreted” in such a way that “requires that the defendant have taken some action with respect to a document, record, or other object in order to corruptly obstruct, impede or influence an official proceeding.”

    In other words, if someone hasn’t been accused of taking such an action, they cannot be charged with this violation.

    Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

    White House Contender Releases Short List of SCOTUS Candidates

    0
    Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    On Monday, White House candidate Vivek Ramaswamy announced a list of candidates he would nominate to the Supreme Court if he were elected.

    President Biden’s focus on judicial appointments appeared to be on diversity of race & gender. While I drew from diverse experiences — current and former federal judges, a former Solicitor General, two U.S. Senators — my sole criterion was to select candidates with an unwavering commitment to an originalist understanding of the U.S. Constitution, who also understand the unique threats to liberty in the 21st century (including lurking state action),” Ramaswamy said in a statement. 

    The list, first reported by Axios, includes multiple federal appeals court judges, like Judge James Ho, a member of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals who Trump suggested as a potential nominee to the Supreme Court prior to the 2020 presidential election.

    Ramaswamy’s list also includes three other federal appeals court judges: Judge Lawrence VanDyke, Judge Lisa Branch, and Judge Thomas Hardiman.

    The list is rounded out with three non-judges, including Senators Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), both of whom also appeared at times on Trump’s Supreme Court shortlists.

    Ramaswamy also included Paul Clement, a veteran Supreme Court advocate who served as U.S. solicitor general under the second Bush administration. 

    DeSantis Reveals A Republican Under Consideration to Become His Running Mate

    8

    Republican White House contender Ron DeSantis says he is eyeing Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds as his potential pick for vice president.

    DeSantis made the remarks after he touted the popular Iowa governor on Friday at a forum with Tucker Carlson. (RELATED: Tucker Carlson to Host GOP Presidential Forum – Without Trump)

    “Governor, you have spent a lot of time with Governor Reynolds, you defended her after President Trump’s recent statements,” a reporter said to DeSantis at an event on Saturday. “Would you consider her as a potential vice presidential pick in this campaign?”

    “Of course,” DeSantis responded. “I mean, she’s one of the top public servants in America, I thought the attacks on her were totally, totally out of hand, and totally unnecessary.”

    “We should be thanking good Republican office holders,” he continued. “You know, we kind of joke about the Iowa-Florida [competition], sometimes they do things before us, sometimes we do. But honestly, I want them to do better than us because it’s healthy. When Republicans are doing well, I like that, I don’t get jealous of that, I want to see them do well.”

    “And so they’ve done a great job and I think she’s been a model public servant and anybody who’s a Republican that’s trying to denigrate her I think is way off base on that,” he concluded.

    Radical Army Secretary Doesn’t Want White Men from ‘Patriot’ Families

    6
    The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – In one of my earlier PDBs I asked if the Pentagon’s ‘Wokeness’ was a deliberate effort to keep straight, white Christian males from joining the military. Of course, I knew the answer was ‘yes.’ 

    I even said, “this may be the left’s goal – to deliberately alienate [straight] white Christian men from joining, so they can expand efforts to recruit non-religious, non-white, woke LGBT lefties instead.”

    But now Joe Biden’s Army Secretary, Christine Wormuth, a lefty civilian bureaucrat who never served a day in uniform, is saying the quiet part out loud. And she is going even farther. Much farther.

    Wormuth doesn’t just want to alienate white Christian men, so they won’t join, she specifically wants to keep out recruits from what I call ‘patriot families’ – those who have a history of serving our country going back up to seven generations. 

    Most of these patriot family recruits would be white Christian men. Many of them are from the South.

    Since the end of the draft in 1973 at the close of the Vietnam War, notes the Wall Street Journal, the Army has relied “heavily on veterans and military families to develop the next generation of recruits, especially in the region known in the military as the ‘Southern Smile,’ a curving region from the mid-Atlantic and down across the southern U.S.”

    But we now also have multi-generational Hispanic service members and a few others. The children of all these military families make up most new recruits in the U.S. military. 

    The Journal added:

    Today, nearly 80% of all new Army recruits have a family member who has served in uniform, according to the service. That can be a good thing, said Col. Mark Crow, director of the Office of Economic and Manpower Analysis at West Point, because “people who know the most about it stick around.” 

    But to the far-left Democrats, including Wormuth, all these patriots are dangerous and must be purged from our fighting forces. That’s what the Pentagon’s wokeness is really about.

    As the Wall Street Journal reported:

    Depending too much on military families could create a “warrior caste,” Wormuth said. Her plans seek to draw in people who have no real connection to the military and to broaden the appeal of service.

    What does that nonsense mean in real terms?

    Well, Daniel Greenfield says it very well in Frontpage Magazine:

    There is a ‘warrior caste’ insofar as you have families who have fought for this country since the War of Independence. They showed up, they bled, and now they’re to be replaced by drag queens and identity politics quotas.

    And Wormuth’s radical plan to replace our ‘warrior caste’ is being finalized. 

    According to the WSJ, “Wormuth said she expects within weeks to begin drafting a proposal for a recruiting overhaul so sweeping that Congress might need to pass legislation to enact all of it.”

    While not going into details, Wormuth has stated that: “The Army is strategically deploying recruiters to communities across the country based on demographics, ethnicity, race, and gender.” 

    How does this translate into policy? 

    Greenfield writes in another Frontpage piece that: “Rather than getting the best people or even adequately qualified people, the goal is to match the force to the census data in a completely senseless exercise so that the people they do get are 20% black, 7.2% Asian, and 0.6% American Indian, or develop a plan to get those Asians.”

    He adds:

    That’s what deciding that the military should “look like America” really means in the ranks. You can’t have too many white men, but too many black men could also become a problem. If the goal is to match the census, then you can’t have too few minorities or too many. Come on in Jiang, we haven’t met our Chinese quota yet, sorry Jose, we have too many Hispanics already.

    But as the Pentagon’s annual June ‘Pride’ festivities highlight, it’s not just about racial quotas, it’s also about sexual identity politics. Greenfield concludes:

    Who needs a few good men when you can have a few good trans-men of color? And who cares if they speak English? No Habla Ingles? No problemo! Having HIV  is not a problem. Being from an enemy nation is not a problem. Being a man who believes he’s a woman is not a problem.

    Being white, especially a heterosexual male, is a very big problem. We need a military that looks like America and white heterosexual men look nothing like America.

    Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.