A panel of judges in New York’s Appellate Division, First Department wrote that Giuliani “flagrantly misused” his position as an attorney for former President Trump and his campaign to make “intentionally” false statements to courts, lawmakers and the public.
“In so doing, respondent not only deliberately violated some of the most fundamental tenets of the legal profession, but he also actively contributed to the national strife that has followed the 2020 Presidential election, for which he is entirely unrepentant,” it says.
This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.
On Monday, former President Donald Trump moved to overturn his criminal conviction in the Manhattan hush-money case after the Supreme Court ruled presidents have immunity for “official acts” committed while in office.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged the former president in May with 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree. Trump pleaded not guilty to all counts in the Manhattan case.
Lawyers for Trump had filed a motion to dismiss the verdict hours after the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons
The motion came on the same day that the district attorney’s office sent sentencing recommendations to Judge Juan M. Merchan – who presided over the Manhattan trial – though it remains unclear whether that will be seen by the public, per reporting from The New York Times. Judge Merchan has received a letter from Trump’s lawyers, a person familiar with the matter confirmed to Fox News Digital.
The letter asks for permission to file a motion to vacate the jury’s Manhattan verdict, asks for a delay of the July 11 sentencing, and cites the high court’s decision in arguing that evidence was included at trial that should not have been admitted.
To file a motion in New York, defendants must first request permission from the judge in the case.
🚨 #BREAKING: President Trump’s July 11 sentencing likely to be DELAYED, as the Manhattan DA’s office declines to push back on Trump’s requests to throw the case out.
On Tuesday, Manhattan prosecutors agreed with Donald J. Trump’s request to postpone his criminal sentencing so that the judge overseeing the case could weigh whether a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling might impact his conviction, according to The New York Times.
On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that a former president has absolute immunity for his core constitutional powers.
Former presidents are also entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts. There is no immunity, the court holds, for unofficial acts.
The Supreme Court returned the case to the trial court to determine what is left of special counsel Jack Smith’s indictment against the former President.
Former President Trump touted the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity as a “big win for our Constitution and for democracy” during an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital.
“The President therefore may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled, at a minimum, to a presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts,” the majority opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts states. “That immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office, regardless of politics, policy, or party.”
Although the decision appears to be less than a total victory for Trump, the former president lauded the ruling.
“I have been harassed by the Democrat Party, Joe Biden, Obama and their thugs, fascists and communists for years,” Trump told Fox News Digital. “And now the courts have spoken.”
He added: “This is a big win for our Constitution and for democracy. Now I am free to campaign like anyone else. We are leading in every poll – by a lot – and we will make America great again.”
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons
The decision is in…
On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that a former president has absolute immunity for his core constitutional powers.
Former presidents are also entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts. There is no immunity, the court holds, for unofficial acts.
The case is the most high-profile of the court’s session, and it is being released on the final day before the Supreme Court justices go on summer recess. The case relates to Trump’s efforts to defend himself against a federal indictment for election interference.
Special Counsel Jack Smith’s indictment charged Trump with four felonies relating to his efforts to reverse President Biden’s 2020 victory. Trump’s legal team argues that the actions he took were all part of his official duties as president, and that presidents cannot be prosecuted for such acts.
The court directed trial judge Tanya Chutkan to determine which allegations in Trump’s indictment constitute official acts and must therefore be stricken from the case — and which do not.
“We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power requires that a former President have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office. At least with respect to the President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute. As for his remaining official actions, he is also entitled to immunity. At the current stage of proceedings in this case, however, we need not and do not decide whether that immunity must be absolute, or instead whether a presumptive immunity is sufficient,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.
In nearly three hours of debate in April, the high court wrestled with this question: “Whether and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office?”
“We’re writing a rule for the ages,” Justice Neil Gorsuch said during oral arguments for the case in April, according to Fox News.
Two lower courts sided staunchly against Trump. If the Supreme Court does the same, it could allow Trump’s election interference trial to occur before the November election.
Take a look at some reactions to the Supreme Court’s ruling:
BIG WIN FROM SCOTUS!!
President Trump said it best: if a president doesn’t have immunity, nothing can be accomplished in office.
The RADICAL LEFT can no longer continue with their KANGAROO courts, and their BLATANT bending of the law for an administration they disagree with and…
Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon reported to prison today to begin his four-month sentence for contempt of Congress charges.
The one-time Trump adviser is on his way to federal prison in Connecticut over his contempt charges for defying a subpoena from a congressional investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.
Steve Bannon goes SCORCHED EARTH on the eve of becoming a political prisoner 🔥
Bannon was convicted on two counts of contempt of Congress in 2022 for defying a subpoena from the House committee investigating the attack. He was allowed by a federal judge to delay his sentence for about two years as he appealed the case.
Steve Bannon told reporters that he was “proud” to report to federal prison.
“I am going to prison. I’m proud to go to prison. I am proud of going to prison today,” Bannon said at a press conference held with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) outside the Federal Correctional Institution Danbury. “I am proud to go to prison. If this is what it takes to stand up to tyranny. If this is what it takes to stand up to the Garland corrupt, criminal DOJ. If this is what it takes to stand up to Nancy Pelosi, if this is what it takes to stand up to Joe Biden, I’m proud to do it.”
Bannon also addressed a priest who came to the conference offering spiritual guidance.
“Father, don’t pray for me. Pray for our enemies. They’re the ones who are going to need the prayers,” Bannon said.
“It’s Nancy Pelosi and Merrick Garland that made me a martyr, but martyrs die, and I’m far from dead baby,” Bannon said earlier, reminding supporters that Trump will be sentenced in his Manhattan hush-money case on July 11, just four days before the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee.
“You can’t run a business from a federal prison. I have no intention to do anything with business, but I have a First Amendment right. I have a First Amendment right to have my voice heard, and my voice is going to be heard every day, and more importantly, their voices are going to be heard. You don’t need my voice, we’re a populous movement,” Bannon said.
Last week, the Supreme Court denied Bannon’s longshot appeal to delay his prison sentence.
Bannon will be the second former Trump White House aide to serve time in prison in connection with defying a subpoena from the House Jan. 6 committee.
Peter Navarro, a former trade adviser to Trump, began his four-month prison sentence in March after his emergency appeal at the Supreme Court also failed.
Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) is crafting a resolution urging Vice President Harris to convene the Cabinet and declare President Biden unable to carry out the duties of the Oval Office after the poor debate performance Thursday.
“I intend to put forth a resolution calling upon the @VP to immediately use her powers under section 4 of the 25th Amendment to convene & mobilize the principal officers of the Cabinet to declare the @POTUS is unable to successfully discharge the duties and powers of his office,” Roy wrote on X.
I intend to put forth a resolution calling upon the @VP to immediately use her powers under section 4 of the 25th Amendment to convene & mobilize the principal officers of the Cabinet to declare the @POTUS is unable to successfully discharge the duties and powers of his office.
Roy told reporters Friday morning that, ”I think anybody with eyes and anybody observing objectively last night saw an individual that is not capable of carrying out the duties the commander-in-chief in a world in which we’re, you know, facing increasing dangers.”
He added, “for those of us who follow this stuff internally, it has been very clear the declining status of the of the capacity of the president, but last night put it all out for all to see. Our colleagues on their side of the aisle can’t hide from it. And frankly, I don’t do this through a political lens, right. I mean, I don’t view it through the lens of well, is the timing good and bad for what happens in November or anything else? It’s just the simple fact of the matter is the president United States is not capable of doing the job.”
Section 4 of the 25th Amendment — which has never been used — says that if the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet or Congress deem the president as “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,” the vice president should “immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.”
“Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President,” the amendment reads.
Lisa Ferdinando via Wikimedia Commons
Harris defended Biden’s debate performance on CNN immediately after Thursday night’s event, conceding he had a “slow start” but arguing he had a “strong finish” and had laid out a strong contrast between himself and Trump.
Watch:
BREAKING: CNN grills Kamala Harris—should Joe Biden step aside?
"CNN's John King has described a panic in the Democratic Party right now because of Biden's performance. Some in your party are even asking if President Biden should step aside. What do you say to that?"
Several leading columnists for the New York Times are urging President Biden to drop out of the race, citing his poor performance during Thursday night’s debate.
“President Biden is a good man who capped a long career in public service with a successful presidential term. But I hope he reviews his debate performance Thursday evening and withdraws from the race, throwing the choice of a Democratic nominee to the convention in August,” Times columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote.
Thomas Friedman, another Times columnist, made a similar argument.
“I cannot remember a more heartbreaking moment in American presidential campaign politics in my lifetime,” he wrote, saying Biden “a good man and a good president, has no business running for re-election.”
Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons
In a pivotal 6-3 decision on Friday, the Supreme Court made it more challenging to charge Jan. 6 defendants with obstruction, a ruling that could impact scores of cases.
The ruling was notably not split along ideological lines, underscoring its significance.
Key Justices and Their Stances
Office of U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
The decision directly involves Joseph Fischer, a former police officer from Pennsylvania. Fischer, who participated in the U.S. Capitol riot, faces an obstruction charge among several other accusations, including assaulting a police officer and disorderly conduct.
Fischer’s appeal specifically targeted the obstruction charge under Section 1512(c)(2). His defense argued that this statute, originally crafted to tackle evidence tampering following the Enron scandal, was being misapplied to his actions on Jan. 6.
They asserted that the law’s intended scope was being overly stretched to cover protest activities. On the other hand, the government argued that the statute’s broad language was deliberate, designed to address various obstruction forms, including those that disrupt official proceedings like the certification of electoral votes.
Understanding Section 1512(c)(2)
Section 1512(c)(2) penalizes those who “corruptly” obstruct, impede or interfere with official congressional investigations, carrying a maximum sentence of 20 years. The Justice Department utilized this statute to prosecute individuals whose actions postponed the Electoral College vote count on Jan. 6. However, Fischer and many others contended that the Biden administration‘s DOJ had repurposed the law from its original focus on document tampering to now include those involved in the Capitol riot.
The Supreme Court’s decision could have profound implications on the Justice Department’s years-long prosecution of the Capitol attack.
More than 350 rioters were charged with obstructing an official proceeding after mobbing the Capitol on the day Congress was set to certify now-President Biden’s win against Trump. Several members of the extremist Proud Boys and Oath Keepers groups were convicted of the charge, including the leaders of each group, Enrique Tarrio and Stewart Rhodes.
Though most also faced other felony counts, 50 rioters were sentenced with the obstruction law as their only felony, according to Prelogar.
Jackson signaled in a separate opinion that she believed it is possible for Fischer and the other defendants to still be prosecuted under the charge.
“That issue remains available for the lower courts to determine on remand,” she wrote.
Broader Implications
The Supreme Court ruling may not only influence Fischer’s case but numerous other Jan. 6 defendants. It may even extend its impact to former President Trump, who faces related legal challenges.
Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) notably diverged from former President Donald Trump’s harsh rhetoric toward President Joe Biden on Tuesday, calling the incumbent commander-in-chief a “good guy.”
The Kentucky Republican’s remarks stand in contrast to Trump’s persistent portrayal of Biden as a corrupt figure intent on manipulating elections and targeting political adversaries.
“I know Joe Biden pretty well. He’s a good guy; I like him personally,” McConnell shared with an audience in Louisville on Tuesday.
Despite stylistic differences with Trump, McConnell maintains there are significant policy-driven arguments for opposing Biden. Other Republicans are encouraging Trump to focus on Biden’s job performance rather than personal attacks tonight.
Moreover, McConnell remains critical of Biden’s policies. “I never thought he was moderate in the Senate, but he ran as a moderate,” he stated. “But as soon as the president got elected, he pretty much signed up with the far left of the Democratic Party, which has created another set of problems for all of you who are in business. This has been a regulatory nightmare by this administration.”
A Tactical Endorsement
On March 6, 2024, McConnell endorsed Trump for the upcoming presidential race. This endorsement followed Trump’s decisive victories on Super Tuesday, which solidified his position as the GOP front-runner. McConnell acknowledged the substantial support Trump had garnered from Republican voters, expressing his backing for Trump’s nomination in a strategic move to unite the party.
The Path Forward?
As the debate rapidly approaches, McConnell’s tempered tone towards Biden could offer Trump a blueprint for a more policy-focused campaign. By addressing Biden’s track record and regulatory policies, Trump might find a path to appeal to undecided voters and moderate Republicans, who McConnell seemed to be addressing.
Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News.
Several leading columnists for the New York Times are urging President Biden to drop out of the race, citing his poor performance during Thursday night’s debate.
“President Biden is a good man who capped a long career in public service with a successful presidential term. But I hope he reviews his debate performance Thursday evening and withdraws from the race, throwing the choice of a Democratic nominee to the convention in August,” Times columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote.
Thomas Friedman, another Times columnist, made a similar argument.
“I cannot remember a more heartbreaking moment in American presidential campaign politics in my lifetime,” he wrote, saying Biden “a good man and a good president, has no business running for re-election.”
Despite the pleas for change the Biden campaign is committed to pushing forward.
President Biden is “not dropping out” of the 2024 race, a campaign official said following a shaky debate performance late Thursday that spurred talk among some Democrats of whether he should be replaced atop the ticket.
“Of course he’s not dropping out,” Biden campaign spokesperson Seth Schuster said in a text message.
The president himself brushed off talk over whether he should bow out during a stop at a Waffle House following the debate.
“No. It’s hard to debate a liar. The New York Times pointed out he lied 26 times,” he said, referring to former President Trump.
Georgia National Guard from United States, CC BY 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons
An unexpected response…
Georgia Republican Governor Brian Kemp recently disclosed he did not vote for Donald Trump in the state’s primary.
Kemp in an interview with CNN’s Kaitlin Collins on Wednesday, said he didn’t vote for anyone in the state’s primary because the GOP’s presidential race had already been decided.
“I voted, but I didn’t vote for anybody. I mean, the race was already over when the primary got here,” Kemp told Collins. “Well, it would be, for me, personally, politically, I mean it would be interesting if I had’ve voted for him, it would be interesting if I didn’t, it would be interesting if I didn’t vote at all.”
Watch:
The day before the debate, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp reveals he didn’t vote for Donald Trump in the Republican primary. “I didn’t vote for anybody. I voted. But I didn’t vote for anybody.” "You didn’t vote for Donald Trump?” Kemp: “I didn’t vote for anybody.” pic.twitter.com/CJ9mqdxlHq
During his interview with Collins, Kemp said Trump should not focus on the 2020 or 2022 election during the debate.
“I think that hurts him with swing voters. I mean from what I’m hearing from people, they are not focused on what happened in 2020 or 2022,” he said.
Kemp and Trump have had a rocky relationship since Trump’s last year in office. In 2018, Kemp won the governor’s mansion partly because of a Trump endorsement.
In the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election, where Biden defeated Trump in Georgia by 12,000 votes, Kemp pointedly pushed back against Trump’s election fraud claims, leading Trump to call him a “clown” and a “fool.”
Kemp endorsed Trump in March in a short statement, saying, “I think he’d be better than Joe Biden. It’s as simple as that.”
