Connect with us

Home

Democrat Scolds People Who Don’t Think Supreme Court Justices Want To Delay Trump Trials

Published

on

A House Democrat on Sunday chided anyone who does not believe the Supreme Court has justices who want to delay former President Donald Trump‘s trials in the lead-up to the 2024 election.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), a former constitutional law professor who led the January 6-focused impeachment inquiry against Trump, talked about the high court with former White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki on her MSNBC program.

The conversation followed the Supreme Court announcing on Wednesday that it was taking up the issue of whether Trump can invoke presidential immunity to shield himself from federal prosecution in a 2020 election case brought by special counsel Jack Smith.

“These justices know what their powers are, right? They know the court’s schedule. They have the same calendar. Do you look at this court and think some of these justices may want to delay these trials?” Psaki asked.

Raskin replied, “Well, yeah. If you don’t believe that, you’re too innocent to be let out of the house by yourself at this point.” He added, “This is a court driven by both Trump nominees and Bush nominees, and neither of those guys was elected with a popular vote majority.”

That leaves the United States, according to Raskin, with a Supreme Court “that is representing the choices of minority presidents.”

The Supreme Court scheduled an oral argument for the week of April 22, 2024, raising doubts among legal experts that a trial could be held before the election in November. Smith sought to have the high court fast-track consideration of the matter last year but was denied. Trump has pleaded not guilty in the case in which he is accused of unlawfully plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election. His lawyers filed to dismiss the case in October by arguing that Trump’s actions were “within the heartland” of his “official duties.” They also cited presidential immunity in a request to get a documents case also spearheaded by Smith dismissed.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule on a bid to remove Trump from the ballot in Colorado under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, an insurrection clause dating back to the Civil War, over his actions leading up to the U.S. Capitol breach on January 6, 2021.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Home

Alina Habba: They are prosecuting Trump because the can’t win the Elections

Published

on

Alina Habba, a lawyer and spokesperson for former President Donald Trump, alleged that Democrats are targeting the Republican presidential nominee in court because they are unable to defeat him through electoral means.

“The fact that we have two courts, not one — criminal and civil — being used against one man because they cannot beat him in the polls is a disgrace to the American judicial system,” she said in remarks at the New York State Supreme Court Building in Manhattan after opening arguments in the hush money case.

Habba mentioned that she had recently attended another court session where Trump faced accusations of inflating his asset values to obtain advantageous loans, which he has since repaid. Initially, he was instructed to post a $454 million bond before appealing, but an appellate court later reduced it to $175 million. On Monday, New York Judge Arthur Engoron approved this bond, effectively preventing New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, from seizing his assets while the case is under appeal.

Habba accused Engoron of not understanding “basic principles of financing” and said he and James “had no idea what they were talking about.”

“I am sick of coming in front of the press and saying this, but you have to because you people need to understand what is going on. God forbid you put an accounting thing in for ‘legal counsel.’ … Because they’re afraid of 2024. And you know what? They should be because the American people are not stupid. They see what’s going on,” she said.

Continue Reading

Home

The Charade of Donald’s Trump Hush Money Trial Begins with All Jurors Selected

Published

on

Opening statements in the Manhattan trial of ex-President Donald Trump’s hush money case are for Monday, following the selection of a full jury of 12 members and six alternates on Friday.

Trump took to social media the night before, posting on Truth Social:

“Four years ago I was a very successful and popular President of the United States and, in November, went into an Election where I received more votes, by far, than any sitting President in the history of our Country. Unfortunately, the Election were Rigged and Stolen, and our once great Country has quickly become a Nation In Serious Decline. Tomorrow morning I report to a New York Criminal Court for a Trial on, somewhat ironically, ELECTION INTERFERENCE, ruled over by Crooked Joe Biden’s DOJ, before a Corrupt and Highly Conflicted Judge, a failed Soros funded District Attorney who didn’t want to bring this case, which could have been brought eight years ago, but wasn’t, in an almost completely Democrat District. Virtually every Legal Scholar and Expert says that there is NO CASE, NO CRIME, NO NOTHING! IT IS A SHAM THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT, EXCEPT TO TRY AND DAMAGE BIDEN’S POLITICAL OPPONENT, ME. SEE YOU TOMORROW MORNING!”

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat, has brought forth 34 felony charges against Trump, accusing him of falsifying business records. These charges stem from an alleged attempt to conceal a $130,000 hush money payment, facilitated by his then-lawyer Michael Cohen, to adult actress Stormy Daniels prior to the 2016 election.

Bragg asserts that Trump’s classification of the payment as a legal fee was an effort to mask violations of campaign finance laws, elevating the offense to a felony rather than a mere regulatory infraction that might result in a fine. The jury, composed of seven men and five women, will ultimately determine the persuasiveness of this argument.


After a week-long selection process involving thorough questioning about potential biases and their ability to remain fair and impartial, the jurors and alternates were chosen. This process was crucial given the high-profile nature of the case, which also carries implications for the upcoming 2024 presidential election. With Trump currently leading in crucial swing states, the jury’s impartiality becomes all the more significant.

We are waiting to see where this charade goes

Continue Reading

Home

Republicans want to defend America and to ban the foreign aid help because Democrats wont do it

Published

on

A GOP lawmaker aims to limit the presence of foreign flags in the House chamber following Democrats’ waving of the Ukrainian flag in celebration of the $60.84 billion aid legislation passage. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) rebuked the display, calling it a breach of decorum. Now, Republicans are drafting legislation to ban the display of foreign flags on the floor entirely.

“Watching American representatives pass out & wave Ukrainian flags in the United States House of Representatives chamber infuriated me,” Rep. Kat Cammack (R-FL) said in a post on X. “If there is one room in our country that should only have the American flag present, it is this room.”

The timing for bringing the legislation to the floor remains uncertain, but Cammack’s team is currently drafting the text. Representatives won’t reconvene until April 29. Some lawmakers expressed dismay over the Ukrainian flag display, leading to a tense moment when Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) urged Democrats to “put those damn flags away” during votes.

Johnson also admonished members, later issuing a statement referring to a “disturbance on the House floor.”

“In these extraordinary times, both in the House and globally, it’s crucial to maintain decorum,” Johnson remarked. “We should only wave one flag on the House floor, and I believe we all know which flag that is.”

Democrats defended their celebration, with some even engaging with pro-Ukrainian protesters post-vote. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) expressed gratitude to many in the crowd for their support.

A list of possible co-sponsors for Cammack’s bill is not yet known, although a handful of House Republicans criticized Democrats for the move, indicating substantial support among rank-and-file GOP lawmakers.

“Shouldn’t have any other flag but the American flag on the House floor,” Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN) said. “That’s ridiculous. … It’s inappropriate. It’s just lack of order.”

Continue Reading

Latest Posts:

January 2025
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Trending

Copyright © 2017 Zox News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by WordPress.