Republican Senator Bill Cassidy (La.) predicted former President Donald Trump would lose the 2024 general election against Joe Biden if he’s ultimately the GOP’s presidential nominee.
Cassidy made the comments during a Sunday appearance on CNN and added that he thinks any other candidate in the Republican primary field is better suited to defeat Biden, a scathing rebuke of the former president he’s often supported.
“Do you think that Donald Trump should drop out of the race?” host Kasie Hunt asked.
“I think so. But, obviously, that’s up to him. I mean, you’re just asking me my opinion,” Cassidy responded.
“But he will lose to Joe Biden, if you look at the current polls. I’m a Republican. I think any Republican on that stage in Milwaukee will do a better job than Joe Biden,” he added. “And so I want one of them to win. If former President Trump ends up getting the nomination, but cannot win a general, that means we will have four more years of policies which have led to very high inflation, to a loss of purchasing power for the average American equivalent to $10,000, and to many other things which I think have been deleterious to our country’s future.”
However, Sen. Cassidy confirmed that he would vote for Trump if he becomes the Republican nominee.
ANALYSIS – The original interview Tucker Carlson did withformer Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund about the Capitol Riot never aired on Fox News because Tucker was fired just before. Still, a lot about that interview has leaked.
In that piece, I note that the Jan 6 riot was not a false flag operation, and most of the rioters were confirmed Trump supporters. However, in many ways, it was allowed to happen.
But to put the entire thing on the record, Carlson did the interview again – and posted it to X, formerly known as Twitter. And it is damning to those Democrats who benefited from the Capitol Riot.
Much of what Sund has said coincides with or dovetails with facts I have written about previously, especially how the Sergeant at Arms for both the House under Democrat Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and the Senate under Democrat Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, both declined National Guard support until it was too late.
The same occurred with the Democrat Mayor of Washington, DC, Muriel Bowser who specifically stated that troops not be deployed unless the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) approved.
She added that she believed her police department was “well trained and prepared to lead the way” to ensure Jan. 6 unfolded safely. They weren’t. And they didn’t.
This despite President Donald Trump offering the National Guard to them more than once.
*(Note that the graphic above is incorrect in one detail – Officer Brian Sicknick was NOT killed defending the Capitol. He died later of natural causes (a stroke) unrelated to the riot.)
In the case of Pelosi, Carlson is direct: “So this is an event that Pelosi herself has likened to Pearl Harbor and 9/11 — you know, the worst thing that’s ever happened on American soil — and she’s in charge of allowing the National Guard to come in and respond but she doesn’t for 71 minutes? What is that?”
Ep. 15 Former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund reveals what really happened on January 6th. Our Fox News interview with him never aired, so we invited him back. pic.twitter.com/opDlu4QGlp
In the interview, Sund indicated critical intelligence pertaining to possible threats ahead of the Jan. 6 protest was withheld from the Capitol Police and that the absence of such intelligence was cited by the congressional sergeants at arms — who were reporting to then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell at the time — as cause not to reinforce the Capitol in advance with the National Guard and federal assets.
However, the outlet added the former Chief now understands that the intelligence was there. It just wasn’t provided to his department:
According to the former chief, “We now know FBI [and] DHS was swimming in that intelligence. We also know now that the military seemed to have some very concerning intelligence as well,” adding that the FBI field office in Washington and other outfits “didn’t put out a single official document specific to January 6. That’s very unusual.”
During a conference call on Jan. 5, 2021, with the leaders of the Metropolitan Police Department and the FBI Washington field office along with National Guard, military officials, and others, “not one person on that call talked about any concerns from the intelligence … that was out there.”
“This was handled differently. … It’s almost like they wanted it to be watered down, the intelligence to be watered down for some reason,” said Sund. “It wasn’t right the way the intelligence was handled and the way we were set up on the Hill.”
The question is – did these federal security agencies make the decisions not to forward this intelligence on their own, or where they told not to send it?
In the interview, Sund noted that then-acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley had “both discussed locking down the city of Washington, D.C., because they were so worried about violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6.”
Sund added: “On Sunday and Monday, they had been discussing locking down the city, revoking permits on Capitol hill because of the concern for violence.”
He continued: “You know who issues the permits on Capitol Hill for demonstrations? I do. You know who wasn’t told? Me.”
This deserves much more investigation. The Jan 6 Committee was a partisan circus and designed only to blame Trump.
I have argued that the Pentagon leadership was extremely wary of bringing in the National Guard or any federal assets to DC due to the extreme overreaction by Democrats over Trump sending federal officers to quell riots in Portland a few months earlier.
Democrats also were apoplectic with rage at Trump’s actions to stop violent rioters outside the White House on June 1st.
There was also the incessant talk in the media about Trump using the military for a ‘coup,’ which Miller has stated as a constraint several times. These all remain valid explanations for the Pentagon’s preferred inaction.
And maybe for the Mayor’s decision to initially reject Guard troops.
But what about Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer? What did they know and when did they know it? And why did they veto reinforcing the Capitol till the chaos had already begun?
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Former President Donald Trump has reportedly finalized his plans to skip the first Republican presidential debate and instead participate in an event with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson.
The New York Times reported the news noting the former president has spent the last several days soliciting feedback from aides and allies on whether to participate in the debate.
When The Hill contacted for comment on the reported agreement between Trump and Carlson, an aide for the former president said his campaign “hadn’t confirmed anything on our end” and cautioned against “getting too far ahead” as it relates to the former president’s plans.
Trump, the front-runner for the GOP nomination, has for weeks signaled a hesitation to participate in the Aug. 23 debate, which is being hosted by the Republican National Committee and will be broadcast on Fox News.
The would-be assassin of former President Trump was sentenced to 262 months in prison.
On Thursday, Pascale Cecile Veronique Ferrier, a 56-year-old dual citizen of Canada and France, was selected to nearly 22 years in prison for mailing a letter containing the poison ricin in 2020 to then-President Trump and others. She pleaded guilty in January to violating biological weapons prohibitions.
In the letter, Ferrier referred to Trump as “The Ugly Tyrant Clown” and laced it with the potentially deadly ricin, saying, “If it doesn’t work, I’ll find better recipe for another poison, or I might use my gun when I’ll be able to come. Enjoy! FREE REBEL SPIRIT.”
Authorities arrested Ferrier while attempting to drive across the U.S.-Canada border while carrying a gun, a knife, and hundreds of rounds of ammunition, authorities said. The letter was intercepted at a mail sorting facility in September 2020, before it could reach the White House.
In September 2020, Ferrier posted on X, then called Twitter, that someone should “please shoot [T]rump in the face.”
Ferrier told the judge that she considers herself a “peaceful and genuinely kind person” but admitted she gets angry about problems like unfairness, abuses of power and “stupid rules.” She also said she considers herself to be an “activist” rather than a “terrorist.”
U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich handed down the 262-month sentence outlined in a plea agreement with prosecutors, which also would expel Ferrier from the U.S. once she is released from prison. She will be required to be under supervised release for life, if she ever returns.
Prosecutor Michael Friedman called the sentence an “appropriately harsh punishment” that sends a clear message.
“There is absolutely no place for politically motivated violence in the United States of America,” he said. “There is no excuse for threatening public officials or targeting our public servants.”
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)
The federal judge overseeing Hunter Biden’s case in Delaware dismissed two misdemeanor tax charges against him.
In a Thursday filing, U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika dismissed the charges after David Weiss, the federal prosecutor leading the case against Biden, moved to dismiss them last week in order to bring charges in Washington, D.C., or California according to The Hill. (RELATED:Attorney General Appoints Special Counsel in Hunter Biden Probe)
“On Tuesday of this week, Mr. Weiss advised me that in his judgment, his investigation had reached a stage at which he should continue his work as a special counsel, and he asked to be so appointed,” Garland said in a statement on the appointment.
Weiss’s appointment came amidst an unwinding plea deal in the case, which Biden’s legal team said the government went back on and the Department of Justice said was not standing due to a nonapproval by a probation official. Many Republicans heavily criticized Weiss’s appointment, with 2024 GOP presidential candidate and South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott claiming the newly-minted special counsel “cannot be trusted” in an interview on Fox News last week.
“Appointing David as a special counsel is like keeping the concept of a [Justice Department] protecting Democrats while hunting Republicans,” Scott said. “I can’t think of a more forceful sign that nothing has changed.”
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ popularity is waning…
The popular governor slipped to its lowest level this year, according to a new Quinnipiac University national poll released Wednesday.
Eighteen percent of Republican and Republican-leaning voters said they supported the Florida governor, which is his lowest level of support in Quinnipiac’s polling of the GOP primary this year. Former President Trump, on the other hand, clocked in at a whopping 57 percent support among Republican and Republican-leaning voters. Quinnipiac noted that DeSantis was only 6 points behind the former president in February, but now he finds himself trailing Trump by 39 points.
Meanwhile, entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy came in third place at 5 percent support, followed by former Vice President Mike Pence at 4 percent. Former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley, Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie each received 3 percent support.
The poll comes as DeSantis continues to struggle to gain traction in the polls. An Emerson College survey released earlier this week showed Christie surpassing DeSantis by 1 point in New Hampshire.
Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons
Popular conservative radio host Mark Levin argued this week that if elected to the White House Donald Trump would have the authority to pardon himself from state charges, according to exiting Justice Dept. policy.
Levin argues that unique circumstances allow a president to pardon himself.
President Trump can, in fact, pardon himself from the GA charges if he is elected president.
1. The Constitution's silent about whether a president can be indicted. 2. The DOJ has taken the position under both parties that you cannot indict a sitting president because it would…
The argument has several components. First, Levin notes that the existing Department of Justice policy against indicting a sitting president is partly explained by the idea that mounting a criminal defense would prevent a president from performing his or her duties.
Second, Levin argues that the same reasoning ought to apply to state indictments of a sitting president, because they could likewise distract the president — and because, in theory, they could be brought by any elected prosecutor in any jurisdiction. It cannot be, Levin argues, that the reasoning for the policy against indicting a sitting president in federal court would not also apply to a state court, where filing indictments is much easier in certain jurisdictions and is often driven by political considerations.
Finally, Levin argues that since a president can arguably pardon himself from federal crimes — a somewhat controversial, but accepted, view — the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause should override state law on pardons as well, for the reasons above.
Marjorie Taylor Greene -Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, via Wikimedia Commons
Georgia Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene is considering some big career changes.
The MAGA firebrand is openly considering a future run for Senate after being kicked off the conservative House Freedom Caucus after a heated disagreement with Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert.
While Green has yet to make any final decisions, former President Donald Trump has also openly pushed for Greene to run for Senate
“Marjorie Taylor Greene, you happen to be here. Would you like to run for the Senate? I will fight like hell for you, I tell you,” he said during a Texas rally in March.
Greene later said she hadn’t thought about it, but told NBC News that “it was so nice of him to say.”
However, the MAGA Congresswoman hinted that she has her eye on a higher office than the Senate.
“Am I going to be a part of President Trump’s Cabinet if he wins? Is it possible that I’ll be VP?” she said in the AJC interview. If Trump asked her to be his running mate, Greene said she’d consider it “very, very heavily.”
Newly uncovered documents show that a U.S. district judge berated Twitter when the social media company, now known as X, resisted complying with Special Counsel Jack Smith’s search warrant for Donald Trump’s Twitter account.
Politico’s Kyle Cheney reported on the unsealed filings describing the data Smith’s search warrant sought from the former president’s old account. This included Trump’s DMs, location information, draft tweets, and a list of all his liked, favorited, and retweeted tweets, including deleted ones.
NEW: Jack Smith obtained a stunning amount of Trump’s data from Twitter — DMs (yes, there were DMs), location info, draft tweets and more — newly unsealed court docs show. https://t.co/vdhI6YrskPpic.twitter.com/ZPNSswoF3W
This was a recurring subject throughout the dispute as Howell called out Twitter’s attempts to defend Trump’s First Amendment rights after his lengthy suspension from the platform. This coincided with Howell asking Twitter attorney George Varghese “Is this to make Donald Trump feel like he is a particularly welcomed new renewed user?”
The documents also show Howell and Twitter’s legal team deliberated on whether Trump’s DMs could fall under executive privilege. Howell also pressed Twitter’s lawyers on the concerns held by prosecutors that their investigation would be put at risk if Twitter disclosed the search warrant’s existence.
The Manhattan judge overseeing the hush money case against former President Donald Trump has refused to step away from the case despite his past contributions to Democrats
Merchan rejected the arguments and referenced findings from the New York State Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics, which he consulted prior to Trump’s recusal request.
Judge Juan Merchan affirmed his ability to be “fair and impartial” in an opinion rejecting arguments from Trump’s legal team stating that he should recuse himself, according to Fox News.
“We see nothing in the inquiry to suggest that the outcome of the case could have any effect on the judge’s relative, the relative’s business, or any of their interests,” the advisory committee wrote.
Regarding the allegations of personal bias, Merchan said Trump’s team had failed to make a substantive argument.
“Defendant has failed to demonstrate that there exists concrete, or even realistic reasons for recusal to be appropriate, much less required on these grounds,” Merchan wrote. “The speculative and hypothetical scenarios offered by Defendant fall well short of the legal standard.”
Merchan donated $15 to then-candidate Joe Biden’s campaign, $10 to the Progressive Turnout Project and $10 to Stop Republicans during the 2020 election cycle.
