reSee.it - Related Post Feed

@mrddmia - 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸

The angry responses from the "nonpartisan" (Democrat or Trump-deranged) "national-security experts" (hacks) is comical. The hacks desperately want to throw Trump in prison for the rest of his life. Because they hate him. And fear he will win back the White House in November 2024. The hacks are intentionally ignoring the plain language of the Presidential Records Act. Regardless of whether a President considers his records "personal" (which he owns; see Clinton sock drawer case) or "presidential records" (which the government owns), the President can have his presidential records. "[T]he Presidential records of a former President shall be available to such former President or the former President's designated representative." 44 U.S.C. § 2205(3). That statute trumps any press release from librarians or other bureaucrats--or any tweet from the hacks. It doesn't matter whether his presidential records are national-defense information or marked classified. That is why Congress funds the Office of the Former President, with secure office space, staff with clearances, and Secret Services protection. Former presidents don't get to access any classified or national-defense information they want. But they have an absolute statutory right to access their presidential records, even if the government owns them. And former presidents can share their presidential records with their designated representatives. The hacks pretend to believe a former President of the United States (somehow) commits "espionage"--and should die in prison--for simply retaining copies of his personal or presidential records. And fighting with librarians and other bureaucrats over them. (Gasp, "obstruction.") Even if they are declassified. Even if there is zero evidence the former President used them to harm America. This is an absurd legal argument. Presidents and Former Presidents are treated differently than everyone else as it relates to their presidential records (regardless of ownership). The hacks are ignoring the Presidential Records Act, which doesn't even have a criminal component. And peddling an unconstitutional reading of the Espionage Act. The remedy is negotiations and civil lawsuits, not raids and indictments. But Jack Smith is used to getting reversed by the Supreme Court, with his absurd legal arguments. Indeed, he managed the nearly impossible: Getting a unanimous Supreme Court to reverse his (bogus) conviction of Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell and likely 2016 Republican presidential candidate. But the damage was already done. Jack Smith took out a Republican presidential candidate in 2016. Mission accomplished, Jack. Biden and Garland have Jack Smith on his new mission in 2024: take out Trump. The hacks, of course, have been eerily quiet about President Biden's 5 sets of stolen classified records as the vice president and even senator, unguarded for years, moved several times, accessible by a foreign national, and potentially used to secure millions in foreign bribes and corruption. Biden and Garland sent a raid after Trump. They secretly colluded for 2 months on Biden's stolen classified records. When they got caught and Garland appointed a Special Counsel, the FBI found Biden's 5th set of stolen classified records. What did Biden and his attorneys misrepresent about their 4 prior searches? How did this miss this 5th set? How is this not obstruction of justice, like Garland and Smith are charging Trump? If the hacks cared about "national security," evidence that a sitting President is compromised by espionage, foreign bribery, and other foreign corruption would be a 5-alarm fire. But, of course, they are hacks. They know this is all about Trump's declassified (and damning) Crossfire Hurricane records. And deflection from evidence the FBI covered up then VP-Biden and his son Hunter taking a $10 million foreign bribe and change U.S. policy. Why are they so scared to let the American people decide in November 2024 whether they trust Trump or Biden more with our national security?

@charliekirk11 - Charlie Kirk

Senator JD Vance on Trump's indictment DESTROYS the DOJ's case: "The fundamental issue here is who controls the documents produced by our Government? Is it the permanent unelected bureaucracy or is it the people's elected President? If it's not the people's elected President, Article 2 of the Constitution is meaningless and we don't have a real republican form of government, we have an oligarchy controlled by the deep state."

@kylenabecker - Kyle Becker

Special Counsel Jack Smith just commited one of the greatest acts of election interference in U.S. history.  The special prosecutor just charged the 45th President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, with conspiring against the nation that he once led to peace and prosperity. The J6 indictment against Biden's chief 2024 adversary provides interference for a sitting president whom is undoubtedly one of the most corrupt presidents the nation has ever witnessed. The grand inquisitor is bringing forth Civil War era charges against Trump last seen during Reconstruction; namely, Section 241 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which makes it a crime for people to “conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person” in the “free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States.” This antedated statute invokes racial overtones to smear the former president through insinuation. Congress passed the law after the Civil War with the aim of giving federal agents the means to pursue Southern whites, including Ku Klux Klan members who perpetrated acts of terrorism to hinder the voting rights of freed slaves. It has recently been resurrected for the singular purpose of charging J6 defendants; by extension, of course, former President Donald J. Trump. Another charge, conspiracy to defraud the government, is risible given the U.S. government has done nothing but defraud the American people since Donald Trump appeared as a presidential candidate. Trump was accused of colluding with Russia to win the 2016 election, an implicit charge of treason for which he was later exonerated. Trump was impeached as president for seeking information on former Vice President Biden's actions in Ukraine, a request that has borne out to have significant merit. Indeed, then Speaker Pelosi undoubtedly impeached Donald Trump in search of a crime in order to stop any further investigation into the matter. Most pertinently, Trump was impeached for his alleged incitement of the January 6 riot. Never mind that he told the crowd before the Capitol Riots begin to 'peacefully and patriotically make their voices heard.' And that he told the rioters to stand down on social media platforms before he was banned in a transparent act of political collusion. And that the rioters themselves were penetrated by FBI agents months in advance, who subsequently did nothing to stop them. One agent even admitted by text message that there appeared to be no substantive plot to overthrow the government, as the dejected New York Times reported. Trump was also ultimately exonerated in a Senate trial. Thus, the constitutional process for adjudicating high crimes and misdemeanors that applies to U.S. presidents because they have sovereign immunity as head of state, namely, impeachment, is being completely undermined in a reckless DOJ effort to fling spaghetti against a judicial wall to see if anything sticks. But most interestingly, the U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to adjudicate a third potential charge that applies directly to Donald Trump: Obstruction of an official proceeding. A J6 defendant named Edward Lang recently filed a petition for a writ of certiorari, a type of appeal to the Supreme Court to review a lower court case. As the petition states, the SCOTUS’ decision “will influence scores, if not hundreds, of prosecutions arising from the riot at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.” The writ of certiorari suggested that Lang's appeal could impact the Justice Department’s potential January 6 case against Trump. Lang emphasized the timing of the filing, noting that Trump is currently a leading figure within the Republican Party. At the heart of the case is the alleged misapplication of 18 U.S. Code 1512 (c)(2), which regards to the obstruction of official proceedings, particularly with a “corrupt purpose.”

@kylenabecker - Kyle Becker

Prosecutors have argued that the “corrupt purpose” is rioting, purportedly at the behest of former President Donald Trump, with the aim of the president unlawfully retaining power by halting the Electoral College proceedings. As the legal writ points out, there has been no plausible explanation given by prosecutors about how rioters temporarily obstructing the Electoral College vote count would lead to Donald Trump retaining his office. This is, of course, exposes the illogical nature of charging a former Commander-in-Chief with participation in an "insurrection." As we are being asked to believe, then President Donald Trump apparently declined to issue any commands to the U.S. military to carry out a 'coup,' and instead directed an unarmed rabble to the capitol building to foment aimless chaos without any means to capture and hold the federal government. In the film "Knives Out," private detective Benoit Blanc sums up the problem with the deceptively straightforward narrative that millionaire benefactor Harlan Thrombey had been accidentally poisoned and had slit his own throat. “I spoke in the car about the hole at the center of this donut," Benoit says with a wry southern drawl. "And yes, what you and Harlan did that fateful night seems at first glance to fill that hole perfectly. A donut hole in the donut's hole. But we must look a little closer. And when we do, we see that the donut hole has a hole in its center -- it is not a donut hole at all but a smaller donut with its own hole, and our donut is not a hole at all!" If you examine the J6 matter closely, it is not what the federal government did on January 6 that raises the most serious questions, it is what it didn't do that defies belief. If Donald Trump was an existential threat to the country, the capitol would have been flooded with National Guard members, instead of crawling with armed undercover agents, as it was later revealed. The dire matter of charging a former president for the crime of “knowing deceit” based foundationally upon political speech was trenchantly summarized by the great French scholar Baron de Montesquieu in "Spirit of the Laws." “Nothing renders the crime of high treason more arbitrary than declaring people guilty of it for indiscreet speeches," Montesquieu wrote. "Speech is so subject to interpretation; there is so great a difference between indiscretion and malice; and frequently so little is there of the latter in the freedom of expression, that the law can hardly subject people to a capital punishment for words unless it expressly declares what words they are." “Words do not constitute an overt act; they remain only in idea," he continued. "When considered by themselves, they have generally no determinate signification; for this depends on the tone in which they are uttered. It often happens that in repeating the same words they have not the same meaning; this depends on their connection with other things, and sometimes more is signified by silence than by any expression whatever. Since there can be nothing so equivocal and ambiguous as all this, how is it possible to convert it into a crime of high treason?" “Wherever this law is established, there is an end not only of liberty, but even of its very shadow," he added. That is what America is now countenancing with the indictment of Donald Trump for January 6. If the former president can be indicted for contesting an election, then Americans can be indicted for anything.

@willscharf - Will Scharf

My Take on the New Trump Indictment Special Counsel Jack Smith’s new indictment against President Trump seeks to criminalize political speech and to criminalize taking incorrect legal advice. Americans of all political stripes should be furious and deeply concerned by the course Smith has set this country on. I have reviewed the new Trump indictment closely, and sadly, it is exactly what we have come to expect from Smith’s team—a highly political document, riddled with legal and factual infirmities. This indictment should have never been brought to a grand jury in the first place. Moreover, its timing, particularly in light of Smith’s statements and actions in the Trump documents case, is so highly suspect that it casts a political pall over the whole case. I’m going to run through the various issues I see with this indictment. Apologies in advance for the length of this post, and for some of the more technical aspects of it. Happy to answer any questions. The Indictment Smith’s indictment contains four counts against Trump. The first, brought under 18 U.S.C. § 371, alleges that Trump conspired to defraud the United States “by using knowingly false claims of election fraud to obstruct federal government function by which those results are collected, counted and certified.” The second and third allege conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding and the actual or attempted obstruction of an official proceeding, both in violation of subsections of 18 U.S.C. § 1512. The fourth alleges that Trump committed a “conspiracy against rights,” by knowingly conspiring to deprive Americans of their right to vote and have their votes counted, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 241. Having read the indictment, having followed January 6-related cases closely, having read extensive news coverage, and having spoken to others with experience in this area of the law, I do not believe that any of these charges can fairly be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in front of a fair judge and jury. Additionally, I expect that, were this case to reach the Supreme Court, the Court would reject Smith’s theories of liability on all or at least some of these counts, as it did unanimously with his prosecution of former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell. Smith and his team did a real disservice to the cause of justice by bringing this indictment. (1) Trump’s State of Mind In the Trump documents case, we’ve already seen how thorny issues of intent can be. There, many of us have argued that, in light of the President’s rights and responsibilities under the Presidential Records Act, it is essentially impossible for Jack Smith to prove that Trump knowingly violated the Espionage Act subsection charged. Here, we have a similar issue. For all four of these charges, Smith needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump knew that his claims about election integrity were false, and that he knew that the legal theories his team advanced were not viable. Not just that these claims were false, not just that Trump might have known that they were false, or that Trump should have known that they were false. If Trump did not actually know that his claims were false and the theories he was advancing were wrong, then I do not see how he can be found guilty of any of the four charges in the indictment. While Smith points to a few statements Trump allegedly made to others at various stages of his election challenges where he impliedly (if you squint hard enough) appears to concede defeat, the overwhelming gravamen of Trump’s statements and actions indicate that he believed that his claims—both factual about the conduct of the election and legal about potential remedies—were true. Considering the record as a whole, how does one go about proving that Trump didn’t believe his own arguments? Moreover, three of these counts charge conspiracy. For those counts, Smith likely has to prove that Trump’s alleged co-conspirators also knew that the claims they were advancing were false. And that Trump and his alleged co-conspirators all agreed, knowing that the claims were false, to press ahead anyway. Given the list of co-conspirators, their activities during the time period in question, and the interactions between them and Trump that have already been made public, I think the opposite is likely the case. In short, proving the requisite intent on the part of Trump and his alleged co-conspirators on all of these charges is likely impossible, at least in front of a fair jury in a fair courtroom. This indictment should never have been brought. (2) First Amendment Others have made this point publicly already, so I won’t belabor it. To put it simply, Jack Smith’s theory of the case necessarily requires criminalizing political speech. This is core, protected activity under the First Amendment, and the legal implications are truly scary for our democracy. Is any public challenge to a certified federal election a criminal act? In Jack Smith’s telling, the answer is probably yes. At what point do election challenges become criminal? Based of Jack Smith’s theory of the case, the answer to that is entirely unclear, meaning that the very fact that this indictment was brought may have a deeply chilling effect on protected speech in years to come. Hillary Clinton, Stacy Abrams, and many, many others have claimed for years that their elections were stolen from them. Stacy Abrams continued her efforts to challenge her defeat to Brian Kemp long after the results were clear. Andrew Jackson claimed that John Quincy Adams cheated him out of the Election of 1824. After the 2000, 2004, and 2016 elections, Democrats attempted to interfere with the electoral count process. Did those actions constitute a Conspiracy Against Rights under § 241? Under Jack Smith’s theory of the case, I think the answer is unclear, but possibly. Taking political speech and political acts of this sort and shoehorning them into criminal statutes that have never before been used in this way is terrifying. Political candidates should not live in fear of prosecution by their political opponents for stating their views about their elections. Jack Smith, in his rush to “get Trump,” has done serious violence to our Constitutional order and Bill of Rights. (3) Requisite Intent under § 241 Section 241 is a statute that was originally designed to deal with violence against black voters by the Ku Klux Klan, and other similar efforts to deprive people of their constitutional rights. Jack Smith’s use of it here is outrageous on its face, designed to inflame perhaps more than anything else. But there are also serious legal issues that Smith and his team seem to have been willing to ignore in terms of the statute’s applicability to the facts alleged. In United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Supreme Court grappled with the constitutionality of this statute, facing an argument that it was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. The Supreme Court ultimately held that the statute was constitutional, but only because of the heightened intent requirements that follow from it being a conspiracy statute. In the Supreme Court’s words, “[a] specific intent to interfere with the federal right [at issue] must be proved” on the part of the alleged conspirators. Only because of that specific intent requirement was the prosecution in that case allowable, and was the statute itself deemed to pass constitutional muster. In Anderson v. United States, 417 U.S. 211 (1974), the Supreme Court addressed the applicability of § 241 to a scheme to cast fake votes for federal, state, and local candidates in West Virginia. The Court cautioned that “[i]t is established that since the gravamen of the offense under § 241 is conspiracy, the prosecution must show that the offender acted with a specific intent to interfere with the federal rights in question.” Furthermore, the Court stated that “special care” was warranted in assessing this intent, because “charges of conspiracy are not to be made out by piling inference upon inference, thus fashioning . . . a dragnet to draw in all substantive crimes.” To prove his case, it’s not enough for Jack Smith to prove that Trump and his allege co-conspirators sought to overturn certified election results—he needs to prove that they acted with specific intent to deprive people of the rights to have their votes counted. This cannot be established by inference, under binding Supreme Court precedent. Smith needs evidence that Trump’s intent was specifically to deprive people of their right to have their votes counted. On the face of the indictment and public record, it doesn’t appear that he has anything close to meeting this high bar. (4) Issues with § 371 Section 371 is a statute that criminalizes defrauding the federal government or interfering in lawful functions of government. Its origins are in the tax fraud context, and it was originally cabined closely to property frauds against the federal government. Even after the statute was expanded, though, the Supreme Court has urged caution throughout the statute’s history that a conspiracy charge relating to the obstruction of governmental functions must be premised on the use of “deceit, craft or trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest.” Hammerschmidt v. United States, 265 U.S. 182 (1924). “Open defiance” of the law, for example, cannot give rise to a § 371 charge. Courts have consistently held that obtaining a conviction under this statute requires both the existence of an agreement to achieve an unlawful objective, as well as deliberate, knowing, and specific intent to participate in that agreement. Jack Smith’s theory is that Trump and his alleged co-conspirators conspired to “defeat the lawful federal government function by which the results of the presidential election are collected, counted, and certified by the federal government.” But in light of the requirements for proving fraud conspiracy under § 371, Smith needs to show that Trump and his team knew that their theories were groundless when they promoted them to state legislators and other decision makers in the electoral count process, and encouraged those officials to take various official actions. And that Trump and his team agreed that this was the plan—promoting theories they knew were groundless, based on facts that they knew were false, to these legislators and officials. The fact that Trump received advice to the contrary just doesn’t cut it, from a legal perspective, when it comes to proving a fraud conspiracy under § 371. This charge appears to be dead on arrival from a legal perspective. (5) Misapplication of § 1512 Section 1512 was originally enacted as part of the Sarbanes Oxley Act in 2002, intended to deal with the fallout from the Enron collapse and investigations. Subsection (c), under which Trump has been charged, deals primarily with destroying evidence in advance of judicial proceedings or legislative inquiries, but it also contains a catchall provision that criminalizes corruptly “obstructing” an official proceeding. The Biden DOJ has used this catchall provision, controversially, to prosecute January 6 defendants, and two of the counts in this new indictment track this theory—that Trump’s activities and statements constituted an obstruction of an official proceeding, namely the electoral count process. This is an issue that is expected to come before the Supreme Court sooner rather than later. In a sharply divided panel opinion this April, the D.C. Circuit allowed § 1512 charges to proceed against three January 6 defendants. But it did so only on the basis that, in the words of Judge Justin Walker’s decisive concurrence, the act’s requirement of a “corrupt” mental state on the part of the defendants sharply delimited its scope. In Walker’s view, to convict under this statute, a Defendant must have acted with the specific intent “to procure an unlawful benefit either for himself or for some other person.” (Judge Katsas dissented and would have dismissed the charges entirely). Under this reading of the statute, it is not enough that Trump (and in the case of the conspiracy charge his alleged co-conspirators) called for protests. It is not enough that Trump tried to prevent the certification of the election or the counting of electoral votes. Trump could have burned down the Capitol personally and that wouldn’t necessarily meet this high bar. He must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have done what he did to procure a benefit for himself that he knew to be unlawful. As with the other statutes discussed above, this is a very high bar to meet, and the facts as presented simply do not support this charge. (6) Timing As he did with his original indictment in the documents, Jack Smith accompanied his announcement of charges yesterday with a cynical call for a “speedy trial.” More than anything else, Smith’s insistence that these cases that he is bringing should be tried at the height of a presidential election adds fuel to the fire of President Trump’s expressed view that the Special Counsel is waging a political campaign against him, not a valid legal investigation. To put it simply, there is no reason why this case needs to be litigated now, as opposed to two years ago, or as opposed to after the presidential election in 2024. In the documents case, Smith followed his speedy trial call with a voluminous discovery production consisting of close to a million pages of documentary evidence, nine months of video recordings, and terrabytes of data to be analyzed by Trump’s defense team. He then proceeded to file a superseding indictment adding new charges and a new defendant. That case was either ready for trial at the time it was brought, or it wasn’t, but Smith can’t have it both ways—his public statements and court filings amount to a gaslighting of the federal court and indeed of the American people. In this case, the timing concerns are even more severe. The facts at issue date back to 2020 and the first few days of 2021. President Trump has already been impeached and acquitted for the same offense conduct he now faces these criminal charges for. Trump is now running to be president again (and winning in many polls). Inserting this case into the presidential election season has all the appearances of an attempt by Smith to substitute the judgment of his office, a single judge, and 12 D.C. jurors for the millions of Americans who would otherwise have had the opportunity to weigh these facts, alongside all the other political considerations that go into a presidential election. These millions of Americans will likely be faced with a choice to vote for Smith’s boss, Joe Biden, or his likely opponent, Donald Trump. Prosecuting a political opponent during a presidential election in this manner smacks of banana republic politics.

@wendyp4545 - Wendy Patterson

I'm going to start today from the beginning. It's important for everyone to understand why the courts refused to hear the cases brought before them concerning the 2020 election fraud. People who hate Trump like to say that he lost all of the cases that were brought before the courts when in reality, the courts refused to hear the cases and here's why: Standing is the legal right to initiate a lawsuit. To do so, a person must be sufficiently affected by the matter at hand, and there must be a case or controversy that can be resolved by legal action. The attorney's and those they represented didn't have "damage done to them" according to the court. Now many of us disagreed with the courts because everyone is damaged by a fraudulent election and to prove that fraud occurred, we needed to prove it in court but we were denied the ability to present evidence, leaving the results in place. President Trump didn't lose the cases brought to the courts, he was denied by the courts the right to present evidence to prove that fraud took place, until now. In Jack Smith's haste to stick to a pre planned timeline that would tie Trump up in court on major event dates during the presidential campaign season, he charged president Trump with imaginary free speech crimes that any first year novice wouldn't have charged using the stolen 2020 election as his target opening the door for president Trump to exercise his due process rights, with subpoena power to finally litigate the 2020 election fraud in a court of law. "Due process is a requirement that legal matters be resolved according to established rules and principles and that individuals be treated fairly. Due process applies to both civil and criminal matters."

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Fraud trial. Election interference. NYC. Cabal intel: #BREAKING Trump arrives at New York court for $250 million fraud trial KEY POINTS: The $250 million civil fraud trial that could see Donald Trump permanently banned from doing business in New York has begun. Trump is present in the courtroom in the Manhattan Supreme Court. New York Attorney General Letitia James accuses Trump, two of his adult children, the Trump Organization and its top officials of engaging in a yearslong pattern of financial fraud. James alleges the defendants misstated the values of real estate properties by billions of dollars in business records to obtain better loan and insurance terms and tax benefits. Source: https://www-cnbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2023/10/02/trump-fraud-trial-to-kick-off-in-new-york-court.html?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16962612835975&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnbc.com%2F2023%2F10%2F02%2Ftrump-fraud-trial-to-kick-off-in-new-york-court.html…

Trump New York fraud trial ends first day with tax accountant testimony New York Attorney General Letitia James accuses Donald Trump, the Trump Organization and others of engaging in business fraud for years. www-cnbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

COMMS. Election interference. Trump. Fraud trial. MI intel: #BREAKING Trump makes a powerful statement upon leaving the courtroom today. Goes in on corrupt deepstate operative Letitia James

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Gag. Judge. Cabal intel: #BREAKING Trump judge issues limited gag order after former president makes disparaging post about court clerk A New York judge placed a limited gag order on Donald J. Trump on Tuesday after the former president posted a message to social media targeting the judge’s law clerk. Mr. Trump attacked the clerk, Allison Greenfield, shortly before noon on his Truth Social site. His post was a picture of Ms. Greenfield with Senator Chuck Schumer, the Democratic majority leader. Mr. Trump mocked Ms. Greenfield as “Schumer’s girlfriend” and said that the case against him should be dismissed. The post was taken down during a lunch break, shortly after a closed-door meeting in the room where Mr. Trump is being tried. Justice Arthur F. Engoron explained what had happened after the break, though he did not name Ms. Greenfield or Mr. Trump, referring to him only as a defendant. “Personal attacks on my members of my court staff are unacceptable, inappropriate, and I will not tolerate them under any circumstances,” he said. Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/03/nyregion/trump-gag-order-fraud-trial.html

Trump Ordered Not to Comment on Judge’s Staff in Fraud Case The former president attacked Justice Arthur F. Engoron’s clerk in a social media post that soon disappeared. He was called to account behind closed doors, then chastised in court as the judge issued a limited “gag order.” nytimes.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE Trump returns to New York courtroom as civil fraud trial continues Former President Donald Trump is attending his civil fraud trial in New York on Tuesday, returning to a Manhattan courtroom for the fourth time since the trial began two weeks ago. Trump, two of his sons, and their company were already found liable for fraud in September in the civil suit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. The trial is proceeding on several other charges, including falsification of business records and conspiracy. Corrupt NY AG Letiticia James made a video yesterday of new developments in the case Trial Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-trial-new-york-court-civil-fraud-charges/

Instead of coming face-to-face with Michael Cohen, Trump confronts emails and spreadsheets at New York trial Former President Donald Trump attended his civil fraud trial in New York on Tuesday for the fourth time since the trial began two weeks ago. cbsnews.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Fraud trial. Testify. Cabal intel: #BREAKING Trump to take the stand momentarily I don't watch the fake news media. So this channel I've been subscribed to since day 1 is streaming the event live. He's a patriot. https://www.youtube.com/live/Yv-x1Y6rphU?si=Pz2aWm9ZwqoqGQ5C

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE Trump co-defendant in GA election case Harrison Floyd refusing plea deal. He wants to focus his case on proving Trump won the 2020 election in Georgia.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. TrIal. Alina. Fraud. NYC. MI intel: #BREAKING Trump attorney and spokesperson Alina Habba officially declares plan to file for MISTRIAL in the corrupt AG Octogon member Letitia James' SHAM trial against President Trump

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Georgia. Election interference. Plea deals. Cabal intel: #BREAKING 4 days ago, Reverend Stephen Cliffgard Lee, one of 18 Trump's co-defendants, declared that he is not ACCEPTING a plea deal in the case initiated by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. "I am not going to plead out to a lie." "I'm not going to cooperate with evil. This is bigger than me." Now, this is how you stand up to cabal! Not like the other deepstate cabal traitors! He faces 5yrs in prison if convicted. I hope he has a legal donation fund setup! Instead of donating to these deepstate cabal Republicans who don't do a damn thing but talk.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Election fraud. Ballots. Georgia. MI intel: #BREAKING 3600 duplicate Ballots of the 2020 election found in Fulton County #FultonCounty | #Georgia Trump delivered the news via Truth Social. Developing...

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Law-fare. Octogon. Alina. MI intel: #VIDEO Alina Habba goes on a truth diatribe stating that Trump has already sued and won members of the cabal, including Hillary, members of the FBI, etc.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. J6. Fraud. Courts. Appeal. SC. Cabal intel: #BREAKING Judge pauses Jan. 6 case against Trump amid his appeal to dismiss Judge Chutkan put a pause on Trump's case until the Supreme Court decides whether to weigh in The judge presiding over the case against former President Donald Trump and his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election acknowledged she does not have jurisdiction over the matter while it is pending before the Supreme Court, and put a pause on the case against the Republican 2024 frontrunner until the high court determines its involvement. Special Counsel Jack Smith on Monday asked the Supreme Court to rule on whether Trump can be prosecuted on charges relating to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. A federal judge ruled the case could go forward, but Trump said he would ask the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., to reverse that outcome. Smith is attempting to bypass the appeals court — the usual next step in the process — and have the Supreme Court take up the matter directly. Late Monday, the Supreme Court asked Trump’s lawyers to respond to the special counsel's motion by Wednesday, Dec. 20 — two days later than Smith had requested. Lawyers for Trump filed a motion Tuesday urging Judge Tanya Chutkan to pause proceedings against Trump in the Jan. 6 case while his appeal is pending. The trial was set to begin March 4, but now that start date could be delayed. Chutkan said that she would reconsider the trial date at the completion of the appeals process. Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judge-pauses-jan-6-case-against-trump-amid-former-presidents-appeal-dismiss

Judge pauses Jan. 6 case against Trump amid former president's appeal to dismiss The judge presiding over the case against former President Donald Trump and his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election acknowledged she does not have jurisdiction over the matter while it is pending before the Supreme Court. foxnews.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Election. Fraud. Rudy Giuliani. Lawsuit. Cabal intel: #BREAKING Rudy Giuliani to pay $148 million in Georgia election worker defamation case Ruby Freeman and her daughter, Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, asked for at least $24 million each for Giuliani’s defamatory statements about them following the 2020 election. What to know about Rudy Giuliani’s defamation trial: •The jury delivered its verdict Friday afternoon in Rudy Giuliani's civil defamation trial related to false claims he made about two former election workers in Georgia. •Jurors awarded the plaintiffs Ruby Freeman and her daughter Wandrea “Shaye” Moss $148.17 million total in damages. •Freeman and Moss asked for at least $24 million each for Giuliani's defamatory statements about them following the 2020 presidential contest when he baselessly accused them of election fraud. U.S. District Judge •Beryl Howell, who is overseeing the trial, ruled this year that Giuliani defamed the two women with his remarks. •Trial testimony this week lasted four days. Giuliani reversed course yesterday and said he would not take the stand in his defense, despite saying earlier that his testimony would make "definitively clear" that what he said about Freeman and Moss "was true." •The jury began deliberating yesterday afternoon following closing arguments in the case. Developing... Source: https://www-nbcnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/live-blog/rcna129882?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=17026806140030&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Fpolitics%2Fpolitics-news%2Flive-blog%2Frudy-giuliani-trial-verdict-defamation-live-updates-rcna129882

Rudy Giuliani to pay $148 million in Georgia election worker defamation case: Recap Latest news and updates as a jury deliberates on the damages Giuliani will face for defaming two Georgia election workers following the 2020 election. www-nbcnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#AMERICAUNDERATTACK Trump. Election interference. Colorado. President. Cabal intel: #BREAKING Colorado Supreme Court disqualifies Trump from 2024 ballot, pauses ruling to allow appeal The Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that former President Donald Trump can not appear on the state's ballots for the 2024 election due to his incitement of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, reversing a lower court ruling. But the state Supreme Court stayed its ruling from taking effect until Jan. 4, "subject to further appellate proceedings." The cabal is setting the stage for the steal. Source: https://www-cnbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2023/12/19/trump-ballot-challenge-decided-by-colorado-supreme-court.html?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=17030279636160&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnbc.com%2F2023%2F12%2F19%2Ftrump-ballot-challenge-decided-by-colorado-supreme-court.html

Colorado Supreme Court disqualifies Trump from 2024 ballot, pauses ruling to allow appeal The Colorado court ruling barring Donald Trump from ballots in the state is the first time a court has rule he is disqualified for engaging in insurrection. www-cnbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE Trump team issued a statement on the Colorado decision

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Election. Fraud. Rudy. Bankruptcy. Lawsuits. Cabal intel: #BREAKING Judge orders Rudy Giuliani to start paying Georgia election workers $146 million. Rudy files chapter 11 bankruptcy U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell lifted a 30-day pause on collecting the judgment because of the plaintiffs' concerns he'd try to hide his assets. Former Georgia election workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss can immediately seek enforcement of their $146 million financial judgment against Rudy Giuliani because there is good reason to assume he will not comply, a federal judge ruled Wednesday. “Giuliani’s failure to ‘satisfy even more modest monetary awards entered earlier in this case,’ provides good cause to believe that he will seek to dissipate or conceal his assets during the 30-day period,” U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell wrote in her order. Developing... Source: https://www-nbcnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna130719?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_ct=1703179669900&_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=17031796416523&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Fpolitics%2Fdonald-trump%2Fjudge-orders-rudy-giuliani-start-paying-georgia-election-workers-146-m-rcna130719

Judge orders Rudy Giuliani to start paying Georgia election workers $146 million U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell lifted a 30-day pause on collecting the judgment because of the plaintiffs' concerns he'd try to hide his assets. www-nbcnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE Rudy Giuliani files for bankruptcy in NY, lists $500M in debts after devastating $148M loss in election fraud case Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has filed for bankruptcy in the wake of a $148 million civil court ruling and a mountain of unpaid legal bills. Giuliani, who was once hailed as “America’s Mayor,” listed debts of up to $500 million with assets of only $10 million in the filing, Bloomberg News reported on Thursday. I've repeatedly stated that they're setting up the steal again. Look around. The Dominion systems will still be in use. They've convicted a good portion of the J6ers. They've indicted Trump with election fraud. They've indicted those supposedly who were close to him, and many of those pled guilty and will testify against him. They've taken Trump off the ballot in Colorado pending appeal, with more states to follow. Do you get it yet? Source: https://nypost.com/2023/12/21/news/rudy-giuliani-files-for-bankruptcy-in-ny/?utm_campaign=nypost&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

Rudy Giuliani files for bankruptcy in NY, owes up to $500M after devastating $148M loss in election fraud case Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has filed for bankruptcy in the wake of a $148 million civil court ruling and a mountain of unpaid legal bills. nypost.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Election interference. Michigan. SC. Patriot intel: #BREAKING Michigan Supreme Court keeps Trump on ballot; rejects insurrectionist argument The Michigan Supreme Court has declined to hear a case arguing that former President Donald Trump should be excluded from the state's primary ballot, meaning the frontrunner for the GOP nomination will remain a listed candidate. The order issued Wednesday is in line with lower court rulings in Michigan, though at odds with a recent ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court. Source: https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2023/12/27/michigan-supreme-court-trump-stays-primary-ballot/72037140007/

Michigan Supreme Court keeps Trump on ballot; rejects insurrectionist argument The argument over whether Trump is an eligible candidate center around whether his conduct around the 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol was insurrection. freep.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Escalation. Trump. Election interference. Ballots. Maine. Cabal intel: #BREAKING Donald Trump removed from Maine primary ballot by secretary of state Maine barred Donald Trump from the primary ballot Thursday, becoming the second state to block the former president from running again because of his actions before and during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. Resubscribe POLITICS Biden administration The Fix The 202s Polling Democracy in America Election 2024 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA Donald Trump removed from Maine primary ballot by secretary of state By Patrick Marley Updated December 29, 2023 at 1:29 a.m. EST|Published December 28, 2023 at 6:58 p.m. EST Maine on Dec. 28 became the second state to ban former president Donald Trump from its primary ballot due to his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. Maine barred Donald Trump from the primary ballot Thursday, becoming the second state to block the former president from running again because of his actions before and during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. The decision by Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows (D) is sure to be appealed. The Colorado Supreme Court last week found Trump could not appear on the ballot in that state under a part of the U.S. Constitution that prevents insurrectionists from holding office. The Colorado Republican Party has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case, which could resolve for all states whether Trump can run again. Both states have temporarily paused their decisions so Trump can pursue appeals. Developing... Keep a close eye on the Supreme Court. Hopefully, the global cabal blackmail group doesn't get to them. Based on their decision. We'll either know they're working with military intelligence[MI] or not. I was always taught. Hope for the best. Expect the worst. I don't trust anyone working in these cabal controlled institutions. There's a reason why the dems chose state Sen. Shenna Bellows as their new Secretary of State in Maine. She was the first-ever ranked-choice vote as the first woman to hold the position. Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/12/28/maine-trump-primary-ballot/

Donald Trump removed from Maine primary ballot by secretary of state Maine is the second state to block the former president from running again under a part of the Constitution that prevents insurrectionists from holding office. washingtonpost.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Election interference. Republican. Deepstate. Trump. Octogon intel: #BREAKING Vivek Ramaswamy believes the Republican establishment is rooting for Trump to be forcibly removed from the ballot so they can prop up their chosen candidate. He stated that any state Trump is being removed from that the republican contenders for president should also remove their names from the ballot. If they don't, they are in on it, too. Lately, Vivek has been on a roll releasing comms. As I've been saying for this past year. The proof is in the pudding. Dominion, through actionable court proceedings, won their lawsuit against FOX, and many others stated that their voting machines were good. Courts agreed. Thus, they will continue to use the same systems. In the election fraud case in Georgia, many of the Trump team loyalists have pleaded guilty and decided to testify against Trump. That case and several others against Trump are coming up in a few short months. The precedent for those cases rests in the current Georgia case. I have a feeling that Trump will provide irrefutable evidence at these trials proving his innocence. Now, if the jury/judge decides to convict anyway, this will be another stolen election. I'm praying that it won't. But I am prepared if it does. So should you. Vivek is telling you right here:

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Appeal. J6. Maine. Election interference intel: #BREAKING Trump appeals Maine ruling that he's ineligible for 2024 primary ballot Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, a Democrat, found that Trump is ineligible for the state’s Republican primary ballot due to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. President Donald Trump on Tuesday filed an appeal of the decision by Maine’s top election official that he is ineligible to appear on the state’s primary ballot. “[T]he Secretary’s Ruling was the product of a process infected by bias and pervasive lack of due process; is arbitrary, capricious, and characterized by abuse of discretion,” Trump's attorneys wrote in the appeal. Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, a Democrat, ruled last week that the former president is constitutionally barred from appearing on the state’s primary ballot, citing his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. But Bellows’ office said her decision would not be enforced until the courts weigh in. Maine’s Republican primary is March 5. In her 34-page decision, Bellows wrote that Trump’s conduct around the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol compelled her to rule him ineligible. “The weight of the evidence makes clear that Mr. Trump was aware of the tinder laid by his multi-month effort to delegitimize a democratic election, and then chose to light a match,” she wrote, adding that he “used a false narrative of election fraud to inflame his supporters and direct them to the Capitol to prevent certification of the 2020 election and the peaceful transfer of power.” In an interview with NBC News last month, Bellows said her preference would have been to wait for the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on the matter, which centers on the 14th Amendment, but she believed Maine law required her to act now. “The country would be well served if the United States Supreme Court issues clear guidance on this unprecedented constitutional question for all to follow,” Bellows said. Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-challenge-maine-ruling-2024-primary-ballot-appeal-rcna131761

Trump appeals Maine ruling that he's ineligible for 2024 primary ballot Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows found that Trump is ineligible for the state’s Republican primary ballot due to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. nbcnews.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Election interference. Fraud trial. NYC. Cabal intel: #BREAKING Trump makes closing arguments at the conclusion of the fraud case in New York City. No jury. Only a judge will render the verdict in the case. Hopefully, by the end of business day today, or tmr morning. 1 down. 3 cases to go. Video credit: wehaveitall

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Immunity. Charges. Ballots. Supreme Court. Election intel: #BREAKING TRUMP TO SC: "All presidents must have complete & total presidential immunity, or the authority & decisiveness of a President of the United States will be stripped & gone forever. Hopefully, this will be an easy decision. God bless the Supreme Court!"

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

RNC. Resolution. Haley. Trump. Election intel: #BREAKING RNC Moving to Declare Trump Its Presumptive Nominee An RNC committeeman has submitted the proposal despite Nikki Haley’s vow to stay in the race. The Republican National Committee (RNC) is reviewing a draft resolution that, if approved, would declare Donald Trump the party’s presumptive 2024 presidential nominee even as Nikki Haley continues to wage a vigorous campaign against the former president and frontrunner. The draft resolution, obtained by The Dispatch Thursday morning, was proposed by David Bossie, an RNC committeeman from Maryland and close Trump ally. His effort to put the national party on a general election footing behind Trump follows RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel saying after the former president defeated Haley in Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary that it was time for Republicans to unite behind the frontrunner and focus on defeating Joe Bidan. “RESOLVED that the Republican National Committee hereby declares President Trump as our presumptive 2024 nominee for the office of President of the United States and from this moment forward moves into full general election mode welcoming supporters of all candidates as valued members of Team Trump 2024,” reads a key portion of the draft resolution. Under current RNC rules, Trump still has to win the requisite number of nominating convention delegates—1,215—to become the party’s unchallenged presumptive nominee. After the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary, Trump leads Haley in the race for delegates 32 to 17. But passage of this resolution, possibly next week at the RNC winter meeting in Las Vegas, could begin a preemptive process of the national party working with the former president as if he had already done so. And under RNC rules, that is permissible. This resolution, even in draft form, also functions as another sign that the GOP establishment is anxious to coalesce behind Trump and put an end to a presidential primary that, after his victories in Iowa and New Hampshire, the former president looks poised to win. Developing... Source: https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/dispatch-politics/rnc-moving-to-declare-trump-its-presumptive-nominee/

RNC Moving to Declare Trump Its Presumptive Nominee An RNC committeeman has submitted the proposal despite Nikki Haley’s vow to stay in the race. - Start a free trial today for full access. thedispatch.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Lawsuit. Trials. Jury. COMMS. Defamation. Cabal intel: #BREAKING Jury just ruled that Donald Trump must pay E. Jean Carroll over $83 million in defamation damages The nine-person jury began deliberations in federal court in New York at 1:40 p.m. ET and reached a verdict in just under three hours. The award included $11 million for damage to Carroll's reputation, $7.3 million for emotional harm and other damages, and $65 million in punitive damages. The decision came after contentious closing arguments that saw Trump storm out of the courtroom. He returned for his own attorney's closing arguments but left the courthouse at 4 p.m. before the jury returned its verdict. He posted about it on his social media platform on Truth Social a short time later. "Absolutely ridiculous!" he wrote, adding he would be appealing. "They have taken away all First Amendment Rights. THIS IS NOT AMERICA!" Carroll did not comment as she left the courthouse. The cabal has done this to use as Cannon fodder to try and use against him this election. They all need talking points, including Haley. This is also comms to let other juries know how to proceed in Trump’s other upcoming trials this year. As I've stated countless times concerning Trump’s trials. He's going to present all of the evidence in the world that can't be refuted. One of 2 things will happen. Out of all of the scenarios, the world will learn the truth about the election and J6, etc. First scenario. He'll get convicted anyway despite showing all of the evidence. That'll be the 1st marker for MI. Sparking what is to come. 2nd scenario, he's found innocent and vindicated of everything. Then Cabal goes into survival mode. All ops will get escalated globally, sparking the 2nd marker. Both scenarios will spark ops. Get ready. Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/verdict-reached-e-jean-carrolls-defamation-damages-trial-trump-rcna135919

Trump must pay E. Jean Carroll over $83 million in defamation damages, jury finds Former President Donald Trump must pay writer E. Jean Carroll over $83 million in damages for repeatedly defaming her, a jury found Friday. nbcnews.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. E. Jean Carroll. Epstein. Theater. Actors. COMMS. Cabal intel: #REPORT E. Jean Carroll named the mice that runs around her blue & white striped house that she named the 'Mouse House. She also has a dog named “Tits,” and paints rocks and trees blue in her backyard that runs by a river. What does her house remind you of? These are comms. These are criminals. They are cabal.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. IRS. Taxes. Elon. Leaks. MI intel: #BREAKING Ex-IRS Contractor Who Leaked Trump, Griffin Tax Data Gets Five Years in Prison A former Internal Revenue Service contractor who stole and leaked the tax returns of former President Donald Trump, Ken Griffin, Elon Musk, and other billionaires was sentenced to five years in prison. Charles Littlejohn, 38, had pleaded guilty Oct. 12 to stealing Trump’s tax data from the IRS and leaking it to the New York Times. He also admitted taking tax information about thousands of other wealthy Americans, including Jeff Bezos, that he passed to ProPublica. The judge called it the biggest heist in IRS history and “an intolerable attack on our democracy. Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-29/irs-leaker-of-trump-griffin-tax-data-gets-five-years-in-prison?embedded-checkout=true

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Bidan. Carroll. Election intel: #REPORT Carroll: "I'll do everything I can" to help Bidan beat Trump in 2024.” This means she'll lie, cheat, and steal.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Trial. Appeals. Judges. Election interference intel: #BREAKING Trump D.C. trial drops off court’s March calendar, clearing way for N.Y. case Administrative move comes as anticipation mounts over how — and when — an appeals court will decide former president’s claim of immunity from criminal prosecution. President Donald Trump’s March 4 trial date on charges of plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election has been dropped from the public calendar of the federal court in Washington, a sign of what has long been anticipated — that his claim of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution would delay his trial while it remains on appeal. The change did not appear on the official criminal case docket before the U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, who has made clear since Trump filed his appeal on Dec. 7 that all trial deadlines would be suspended while he challenges the case. On appeal, Trump is arguing that the government does not have authority under the Constitution to bring charges against him for actions he took while president after the 2020 election through the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack, when he attempted to prevent Congress from confirming Joe Biden’s election victory. A delay in the D.C. case makes it increasingly likely that the first of Trump’s four criminal trials could be held this spring in Manhattan on New York state charges of business fraud in connection with hush money payments during the 2016 election. That trial has nominally been set for March 25, but the court, in that case, has signaled deference to Trump’s federal election subversion case. New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan has scheduled a pretrial hearing in two weeks — Feb. 15 — and is expected to decide after that if the trial will go forward as planned. Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/02/01/trump-trial-calendar-jan-6-delay/

Trump’s D.C. trial removed from March calendar, clearing way for N.Y. case A delay in Trump’s case in D.C. makes it likely that the first of his four criminal trials could be his New York state prosecution accusing him of business fraud. washingtonpost.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. FOIA. DOJ. FBI. Fraud. Ballots. Election interference intel: #BREAKING Brand new FOIA documents just uncovered reveals that the DOJ and FBI uncovered alarming 2020 election ballot fraud in Detroit, Michigan, and covered it up In the emails, a DOJ official says, "This allegation, and accompanying photos, is alarming. I would like FBI to look into this, please." Someone at the Michigan Attorney General's office also responded to the complaint, "Talked to the FBI on this and it's not going to be in their lane or ours in terms of apparent criminal actions, but MDOS[Michigan Department of State] may want to call and try and head this off." Source: yehuda_miller

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Immunity. Federal. Appeals. Courts. Cabal intel: #BREAKING Federal Appeals Court Rejects Trump’s Claim of Absolute Immunity The ruling answered a question that an appeals court had never addressed: Can former presidents escape being held accountable by the criminal justice system for things they did while in office? A federal appeals court on Tuesday rejected former President Donald J. Trump’s claim that he was immune to charges of plotting to subvert the results of the 2020 election, ruling that he must go to trial on a criminal indictment accusing him of seeking to overturn his loss to President Biden. The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit handed Mr. Trump was a significant defeat, but it was unlikely to be the final word on his claims of executive immunity. Mr. Trump, who is on a path to locking up the Republican presidential nomination, is expected to continue his appeal to the Supreme Court. Still, the panel’s 57-page ruling signaled an important moment in American jurisprudence, answering a question that had never been addressed by an appeals court: Can former presidents escape being held accountable by the criminal justice system for things they did while in office? Trump will file an appeal to the Supreme Court. Trump is now in the cabal playing field. Brace yourselves this year, guys. Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/06/us/politics/trump-immunity-appeals-court.html

Federal Appeals Court Rejects Trump’s Claim of Absolute Immunity The ruling answered a question that an appeals court had never addressed: Can former presidents escape being held accountable by the criminal justice system for things they did while in office? nytimes.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Fraud. Judge. Rulings. Octigon intel: #BREAKING Judge set to rule in Trump's $370 million civil fraud case A New York state judge is expected to rule on Friday in a $370 million civil fraud case against former U.S. President Donald Trump, who is accused of inflating his net worth to dupe bankers into giving him better loan terms. Justice Arthur Engoron's ruling could deal a major blow to Trump's real estate empire as the businessman turned politician seeks the Republican nomination to challenge Democratic President Joe Biden in the Nov. 5 U.S. election. The lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James accused Trump and his family businesses of overstating his net worth by as much $3.6 billion a year over a decade. Trump has denied wrongdoing and called the case a political vendetta by James, an elected Democrat. In addition to monetary penalties, James is seeking to permanently ban Trump from New York's real estate industry and sharply limit his ability to do business in the state. She is also seeking five-year industry bans for Trump's two adult sons, Don Jr. And Eric, who are also defendants in the case. Developing... Source: https://www.reuters.com/legal/judge-set-rule-trumps-370-million-civil-fraud-case-2024-02-16/#:~:text=Justice%20Arthur%20Engoron's%20ruling%20could,the%20Nov.%205%20U.S.%20election.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE Judge orders Trump and his companies to pay more than $350 million in the New York civil case. Bars Trump from running businesses in the city for three years.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Motion. Judge. Carroll. COMMS. Octogon intel: #UPDATE Judge Denies Trump’s Delayed Payment Request In E. Jean Carroll Case The New York judge who oversaw E. Jean Carroll’s defamation lawsuit against former President Donald Trump rejected the former president’s request to delay paying Carroll more than $80 million in damages, according to a Sunday court filing. Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, requested an “administrative stay” on Friday to pause Trump’s required payments to Carroll after he made defaming statements against the former writer in 2019. Kaplan said Sunday he would not grant a pause without allowing Carroll and her team to respond and gave them until Thursday at 5 p.m. to respond to Trump’s motion. In Habba’s Friday motion, she asked Kaplan to stay the motion for at least 30 days until Trump’s post-trial motions were resolved, claiming there was a “strong probability” the verdict could be reduced or eliminated on appeal. If they're giving Trump and attorneys a hard time now in just civil suits. Just imagine what they're going to do in the criminal trials. This corrupt 2-tiered justice system is designed to railroad those the cabal wants locked up. It doesn't make a difference how much money a person may have. Sometimes, it does in rare cases. Be prepared for what is to come. https://www.msn.com/en-US/finance/-companies/judge-denies-trumps-delayed-payment-request-in-e-jean-carroll-case/ar-BB1iRzRB?ocid=sapphireappshare

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Interest. Bankrupt. Orders. Civil. COMMS. Octogon intel: #BREAKING $100 MILLION in interest added to Trump's judgment accruing interest at $100k daily In New York, former President Donald Trump's bills are racking up. The judgment in his civil fraud trial was officially entered with the court today — $454,156,783.05 for him alone, plus Trump is now accruing over $100,000 of post-judgment interest each day. This is on top of the recent $83.3 million verdict against him in the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial. Trump and the other defendants in the civil fraud case — his sons Donald Jr. and Eric Trump and two other Trump Organization executives — have 30 days to appeal the decision by Judge Arthur Engoron, which found them liable for fraud for misrepresenting the value of Trump properties. The message is loud and clear. The Octogon intends to bankrupt Trump. Usually, in civil cases. The lawyers tie up litigation on appeals for years. Not in Trump's cases. They want the full amount in 30 days or face hefty interest, fines, penalties, and possible jail time. Next up is Trump's criminal cases. Where he faces decades in prison. Be prepared for what is to come. Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-civil-fraud-judgment-over-450-million-100000-interest-per-day/

Trump's civil fraud judgment is officially over $450 million, and climbing over $100,000 per day The amount former President Donald Trump owes in his New York civil fraud case is $454,156,783 — plus $111,983 of post-judgment interest accruing each day. cbsnews.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Properties. Assets. Seizure. COMMS. Financial. NY. Octogon intel: #REPORT Attorney General Letitia James says she's prepared to seize Trump's assets if he can't pay his $354 million civil fraud fine.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Appeals. NY. Courts. Patriot intel: #UPDATE Donald Trump appeals $454 million loss in New York real estate fraud case President Donald Trump filed an appeal Monday against the dramatic $454 million court loss he suffered in a New York real estate fraud case. Trump's liability includes penalties of about $355 million plus interest that started running at different times for different Trump properties. Interest will continue accumulating at 9% a year until the judgment is paid under state law. Trump filed the appeal document Monday along with his two oldest sons, former Trump Organization executives, and several business entities. Although Trump didn't lay out his appellate arguments on Monday, legal experts expect he will argue that the fraud he was found liable for didn't involve traditional victims. James made the case that Trump inflated his net worth to get better loan terms, but the lenders themselves haven't sued Trump alleging they were harmed by the inflation. "We trust that the Appellate Division will overturn this egregious fine and take the necessary steps to restore the public faith in New York’s legal system," Trump lawyer Alina Habba said in a statement Monday. I have his appeal pdf file. it's 102pgs long. If his appeal is accepted or rejected. Will set a precedent on how Trump’s other cases play out this year. Source: usatoday

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Fraud. Pause. Judgment. Election interference intel: #BREAKING Trump cannot line up full bond in New York fraud case, offers to post $100 million Donald Trump on Wednesday lost a bid to pause a $454.2 million civil fraud judgment against him for overstating his net worth and real estate values to dupe lenders, meaning he must soon find the cash or post a bond to prevent New York authorities from seizing his property while he appeals. The decision by Associate Justice Anil Singh of the New York Appellate Division must be affirmed by a full panel of the mid-level state appeals court. Singh granted Trump's request for a stay of a portion of Justice Arthur Engoron's Feb. 16 decision barring the former president from running any New York corporation or seeking loans from the state's banks for three years. In asking for the stay earlier on Wednesday, Trump's lawyers said he is unable to post a bond for the full amount of the judgment while he appeals and wants instead to secure a $100 million bond. A bonding company would be on the hook for any payout if Trump loses his appeal and proves unable to pay. In their filing with the Appellate Division, Trump's lawyers said a stay of Engoron's decision was needed because Trump would suffer "irreparable harm" if James were free to sell his real estate assets to raise capital to pay the judgment. The lawyers also said the "exorbitant and punitive amount of the judgment coupled with an unlawful and unconstitutional blanket prohibition on lending transactions would make it impossible to secure and post a complete bond." They said a $100 million bond, together with Trump's "vast" real estate holdings and ongoing oversight by a court-designated monitor for the Trump Organization, would be more than sufficient to secure the judgment. Developing... Source: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-cannot-line-up-full-bond-new-york-fraud-case-offers-post-100-mln-2024-02-28/

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

COMMS. Trump. Supreme Court. Illinois. Eligibility. Octogon intel: #BREAKING Illinois judge says 14th Amendment bars Trump from 2024 primary ballot A judge in Cook County, Illinois, on Wednesday ruled that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, also known as the "insurrection clause," bars former President Donald Trump from the 2024 Republican primary ballot. The order overrules a January determination from the Illinois State Board of Elections that Trump could remain eligible. Cook County Circuit Judge Tracie Porter placed an immediate stay on her decision until March 1 "in anticipation of an appeal to the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, or the Illinois Supreme Court." Trump plans to appeal the ruling, a source familiar confirms. The Supreme Court is currently debating Trumps appeal. The ultimate ruling from the SC will also set the precedent on how things will play out for the rest of this year. I personally don't think it'll be great news. I really hope I'm wrong. The precedent will be set either way. Developing...

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE This could be game over: Supreme Court hands Trump big win by taking immunity case The justices agreed on Wednesday to decide whether Trump enjoys "total immunity" from prosecution. The timing of that decision likely means a trial over Trump's role in Jan. 6 won't begin — much less end — before the election. There's nothing Trump wants more in this case than a delay. If he wins in November and hasn't been tried before Inauguration Day, there's a good chance he never will be. "This could well be game over," election law expert Rick Hasen. Trump's first briefs are due to the high court in about three weeks. Oral arguments will be in late April. That sets the stage for a ruling in late June, at the end of the court's term. That's about as fast as the Supreme Court is capable of moving. The justices have kept the actual trial on ice in the meantime. The fundamental issue in this case — whether presidents are fully immune from prosecution over anything they did in office, even after they've left it — is one of the most profound questions of presidential power the court has ever had to answer. A lower court, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Trump's claims of immunity, ruling that he could be prosecuted for Jan. 6. Between the lines: The justices had options here. They could have declined to hear Trump's appeal. They wouldn't have had to tackle the question of presidential immunity, and Trump's trial would have proceeded before the election. That's what some legal experts were anticipating, based on how long it took the justices to announce whether they'd hear the case. Once they agreed to hear the appeal and decide whether presidents are beyond the reach of the criminal-justice system, keeping the trial paused makes sense. If you're not sure whether someone can be prosecuted, it's logical not to prosecute them until you've figured that out. Source: https://www.axios.com/2024/02/29/trump-wins-delay-immunity-case-supreme-court

"This could be game over:" Supreme Court hands Trump big win by taking immunity case A delay is what Trump wanted most — even if he loses at the end of it. axios.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Supreme Court. Ballots. Rulings. Election intel: #BREAKING Trump was wrongly removed from Colorado ballot, US supreme court rules Donald Trump was wrongly removed from Colorado’s primary ballot last year, the US supreme court has ruled, clearing the way for Trump to appear on the ballot in all 50 states. The court’s unanimous decision overturns a 4-3 ruling from the Colorado supreme court that said the former president could not run because he had engaged in insurrection during the January 6 attack on the US Capitol. The Colorado decision was a novel interpretation of section 3 of the 14th amendment, which bars insurrectionists from holding office. “We conclude that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office. But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency,” the court wrote in an unsigned opinion. Congress, the court said, had to enact the procedures for disqualification under Section 3. “State-by-state resolution of the question whether Section 3 bars a particular candidate for President from serving would be quite unlikely to yield a uniform answer consistent with the basic principle that the President … represent[s] all the voters in the Nation,” the court added. Maine and a judge in Illinois had also excluded Trump from the ballot – decisions that are now likely to be quickly reversed. All nine justices agreed with the central holding in the case: that the Colorado supreme court had wrongly barred Trump from appearing on the ballot. But agreement did not extend beyond that. "For present purposes, our differences are far less important than our unanimity: All nine Justices agree on the outcome of this case," Justice Barrett wrote in her concurring opinion. "That is the message Americans should take home." Trump, praised Monday's ruling. "It was a very important decision," he said in Mar-a-Lago hours after it was announced, calling it "very well-crafted. And I think it will go a long way toward bringing our country together." He added, "I have great respect for the Supreme Court, and I want to just thank them for working so quickly and so diligently and so brilliantly." Moves and countermoves. The cabal thought it would be easier to simply just remove Trump from the ballot as a contingency if Trump so happens to win his court cases. The states that elected to remove Trump from the ballot are compromised. The patriots there need to expose all corruption from the local governments there. Colorado. Illinois. Maine. Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/04/trump-scotus-colorado-ruling

Trump was wrongly removed from Colorado ballot, US supreme court rules Court’s decision clears way for ex-president to appear on primary ballot in all states theguardian.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Dossier. Judgements. Octogon intel: #BREAKING Trump is ordered to pay legal fees after failed lawsuit over the Steele dossier President Donald Trump has been ordered to pay a six-figure legal bill to a company founded by a former British spy that he unsuccessfully sued for making what his lawyer called “shocking and scandalous" false claims that harmed his reputation. A London judge, who threw out the case against Orbis Business Intelligence last month saying it was “bound to fail," ordered Trump to pay legal fees of 300,000 pounds[$382,000], according to court documents released Thursday. The Octogon has the judges. They are sleepers. This is just setting the stage for Trump’s upcoming criminal trials. Be prepared. Source: https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/trump-ordered-pay-legal-fees-after-failed-lawsuit-107891658

ABC News – Breaking News, Latest News and Videos Page Unavailable abcnews.go.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Supreme Court. Judges. Charges. COMMS. Election interference intel: This is a win. But the battle is far from over. #BREAKING Georgia judge tosses some charges against Trump and others in 2020 election case A Fulton County judge on Wednesday tossed out several counts brought against former President Donald Trump and five others in the case involving an alleged attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia. The brief order from Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee states that six of the counts in the 41-count indictment returned by a Fulton County grand jury in August must be quashed. Of those six counts, Trump was charged with three of them. Joining Trump in the challenge to the six counts were former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and lawyers Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Ray Stallings Smith, and Robert Cheeley All had pleaded not guilty to the charges brought against them. Steve Sadow, Trump's lawyer, said the court's decision to quash the counts is the correct one. "The ruling is a correct application of the law, as the prosecution failed to make specific allegations of any alleged wrongdoing on those counts," he said in a statement. "The entire prosecution of President Trump is political, constitutes election interference, and should be dismissed." Eastman's attorney, Buddy Parker, said in a statement that "the court stated clearly the state failed to provide what exactly in the U.S. and Georgia constitutions the defendants solicited the public figures to violate, a clear error. We await the state's position on its intention in moving forward on the remaining charges." Allyn Stockton, Giuliani's local lawyer, said the quashing of the six counts was expected, as "there simply was not enough detail to put the defendants on notice of what to defend against." McAfee's ruling The six counts relate to various alleged attempts to solicit state officials to violate their oaths of office, both to the Georgia Constitution and the U.S. Constitution. The judge wrote that the state failed to specify what those violations were, saying the allegations were "so generic as to compel this Court" to quash the six charges. "The court's concern is less that the state has failed to allege sufficient conduct of the defendants — in fact, it has alleged an abundance. However, the lack of detail concerning an essential legal element is, in the undersigned's opinion, fatal," McAfee wrote. He said that though the six counts as written contain "all the essential elements of the crimes," they "fail to allege sufficient detail regarding the nature of their commission, i.e. the underlying felony solicited." Additionally, they don't give the defendants enough information to prepare their defenses "intelligently," McAfee wrote, as they could have violated Georgia and U.S. Constitutions "and thus the statute in dozens, if not hundreds, of distinct ways." Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-georgia-case-some-charges-dismissed-2020-election/#

Georgia judge tosses some charges against Trump and others in 2020 election case A Fulton County judge on Wednesday tossed out several counts brought against former President Donald Trump and five others. cbsnews.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

COMMS. Georgia. Judge. Fani Willis. Octogon intel: #BREAKING Judge rules Fani Willis can stay on Georgia case, but only if prosecutor steps down in [17] page ruling If Fani pack steps down. They would have to pick an entire team. That would delay the case indefinitely. So will she fire her prosecutor bae?

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Attorney. Michigan. Arrests. Election interference intel: #BREAKING Pro-Trump Michigan attorney arrested after hearing in DC over leaking Dominion documents A Michigan attorney who unsuccessfully sued to overturn former President Donald Trump's 2020 loss has been arrested after a hearing on a separate case in DC. Stefanie Lambert was arrested by the U.S. Marshals after a hearing over possible sanctions against her for disseminating confidential emails from Dominion Voting Systems, the target of conspiracy theories over former President Donald Trump's 2020 election loss. Lambert obtained the Dominion emails by representing Patrick Byrne, a prominent funder of election conspiracy theorists who are being sued by Dominion for defamation. Earlier Monday, Lambert had acknowledged passing on the records from Dominion Voting Systems to “law enforcement.” She then attached an affidavit that included some of the leaked emails and was signed by Dar Leaf, a county sheriff in northern Michigan who has investigated false claims of widespread election fraud from the 2020 election, to a filing in her own case in Michigan. The rest of the documents were posted to an account under Leaf’s name on X. Lambert contended that the Dominion documents obtained under discovery were evidence of “crimes” and needed to be disclosed. Dominion is trying their best to hide exculpatory evidence. If Dominion is not stopped. They will steal the election again. This means they will start another pandemic. To get massive mail-in ballots again. Patterns. Source: https://apnews.com/article/voting-machines-dominion-defamation-68d3f3a4e840ccb7a81d72837c4f6b3e?taid=65f8e50fa8059200016d3705&utm_campaign=TrueAnthem&utm_medium=AP&utm_source=Twitter

Pro-Trump Michigan attorney arrested after hearing in DC over leaking Dominion documents A Michigan attorney who unsuccessfully sued to overturn former President Donald Trump's 2020 loss has been arrested after a hearing on a separate case in Washington, D.C. apnews.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Trial. New York. Election interference intel: #BREAKING New York judge in hush-money trial rejects Trump's request for delay until after SCOTUS rules on immunity Trump's lawyers had asked to adjourn the New York trial indefinitely until Trump's immunity claim in his Washington, DC, election interference case was resolved Manhattan Judge Juan M. Merchan deemed Trump’s request untimely, ruling that his lawyers had plenty of opportunities to raise the immunity issue before they did earlier this month. "This Court finds that Defendant had myriad opportunities to raise the claim of presidential immunity well before March 7, 2024," Merchan wrote, adding that Trump and his lawyers could have made the argument on September 29, 2023, which he says was just six days before he made the same presidential immunity argument in Special Counsel Jack Smith's investigation into Jan. 6 and election interference. Trump's trial begins on April 15th, 2024. The cabal will try and damage, sentence, and pass judgments by any means necessary up until the election Developing... Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/new-york-judge-hush-money-trial-rejects-trumps-request-delay-scotus-rules-immunity

New York judge in hush-money trial rejects Trump's request for delay until after SCOTUS rules on immunity Manhattan Judge Juan M. Merchan has rejected the former president’s bid for a delay in the hush money trial until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on his immunity claims in another case. foxnews.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Markers. COMMS. Trump. Trial. Judge. Courts. Denial. Election interference intel: #BREAKING Judge again declines Trump's latest appeal to delay NY hush money case A New York appeals court on Wednesday declined another bid by former President Trump to delay his hush money trial for the third time this week. The former president’s lawyers took aim at three rulings by Judge Juan Merchan: Refusing to recuse, not delaying the trial until the Supreme Court rules on Trump’s presidential immunity claim and requiring Trump to seek permission before filing new motions before trial. Trump is using a maneuver under New York state law, known as an Article 78 proceeding, that involves suing the judge over their decisions. The filings were placed under seal and are not publicly available. The Hill has requested comment from Trump’s lawyers. It marked the latest of a series of eleventh-hour efforts by Trump’s lawyers to stop jury selection from beginning Monday, which would mark the first criminal trial of a former president. The three appeals will now go to a full five-judge panel for consideration. The Octogon controls the judges, jury, and prosecutors. We'll see if the Supreme Court rules by Friday or Monday. Which is highly unlikely. If not, the trial will proceed. And then the only way the Supreme Court can rule is on appeal if found guilty. This would mean all appellate courts would have to deny the appeal first before ultimately bringing it before the Supreme Court. Most of the time, that process could take years. This is a sinister plot by the cabal. Developing... Source: https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4586672-trumps-latest-hush-money-trial-delay-effort-denied-by-appeals-court/

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Trial. Judge. Prosecution. Jury. Election interference intel: #BREAKING Trump’s Manhattan Criminal Trial Begins With Jury Selection Here’s what else to know about Mr. Trump’s trial: This is the Manhattan criminal case against Mr. Trump, and it was brought by the district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, a year ago. Mr. Trump is facing 34 felony counts of falsifying business records and, if convicted, could face up to four years in prison. The case, one of four indictments facing the former president and presumptive Republican nominee, may be the only one to make it to trial before Election Day. Jury selection will be crucial for both sides. Prosecutors have some advantage, as the jury pool is drawn from Manhattan, one of the most Democratic counties in America. Mr. Trump’s team will be looking for red needles in a blue haystack. Mr. Trump has twice sought Justice Merchan’s recusal, citing his daughter’s work as a Democratic political consultant. Justice Merchan has declined to step aside, noting a ruling by a judicial ethics commission that found his daughter’s work posed no conflict for him. “There is no agenda here,” Justice Merchan said in court on Monday, adding, “we want to follow the law, we want justice to be done.” Mr. Trump has also attacked the judge’s daughter on social media. Hundreds of potential jurors have been summoned. Those who say they cannot be fair or otherwise serve are being excused, and the remaining prospective jurors will answer 42 questions compiled before the trial. Lawyers on both sides will be able to remove a limited number of them without explanation. The lawyers can also ask to remove a potential juror “for cause” by providing specific reasons they believe that person cannot be fair. In addition to the payment to Ms. Daniels, Mr. Bragg’s office is expected to highlight two other deals involving The National Enquirer, a tabloid that has longstanding ties to Mr. Trump. In one deal, the tabloid bought the silence of a man who had heard that Mr. Trump had fathered a child out of wedlock, a rumor that turned out to be false, and in the other, it paid Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model, who wanted to sell her story of an affair with Mr. Trump. The prosecution’s witness list is expected to include David Pecker, the former publisher of The National Enquirer, as well as Hope Hicks, a former aide to Mr. Trump. Ms. Daniels and Ms. McDougal could also testify.■ The judge contends that if Trump misses any day of the trial, he will be arrested and sent to jail. Developing... Source: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/15/nyregion/trump-hush-money-trial

No Jurors Picked on First Day of Trump’s Manhattan Criminal Trial Donald J. Trump faces charges he falsified business records to cover up a sex scandal while serving as president. More than half of the first group of prospective jurors was dismissed almost immediately. nytimes.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Comms. Trump. Judge. New York. Prison. Trial intel: #BREAKING New York judge says Trump can't attend Supreme Court arguments on presidential immunity The New York judge overseeing former President Trump’s hush money trial said Monday that Trump can not attend arguments on presidential immunity at the Supreme Court next week. It came after the judge earlier delayed a decision on allowing Trump to attend his son Barron’s high school graduation in May. The decision to not allow Trump to be in Washington, D.C., on April 25, when the Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments on a presidential immunity claim Trump is making in his federal criminal case, came just before the New York trial adjourned Monday. “Arguing before the Supreme Court is a big deal, and I can certainly appreciate why your client would want to be there, but a trial in New York Supreme Court … is also a big deal,” Judge Juan Merchan said to Trump lawyer Todd Blanche, rejecting his request to let the former president play hooky.■ These are further comms suggesting that the judge, jurors, and prosecution are in cohoots with the Octogon. I definitely don't trust this magi judge. Protected. Well insulated. Are prison comms. Source: https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4595849-ny-judge-trump-supreme-court-presidential-immunity/

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump & Barron: #BREAKING A Heartbroken Trump just wrote: "Who will explain for me, to my wonderful son, Barron, who is a GREAT Student at a fantastic School, that his Dad will likely not be allowed to attend his Graduation Ceremony, something that we have been talking about for years, because a seriously Conflicted and Corrupt New York State Judge wants me in Criminal Court on a bogus “Biden Case” which, according to virtually all Legal Scholars and Pundits, has no merit, and should NEVER have been brought. "This Fake Case is solely meant to attack Crooked Joe Biden’s Political Opponent, ME, who is seriously leading him in the Polls, for purposes of Election Interference. The Judge, Juan Merchan, is preventing me from proudly attending my son’s Graduation. Seems very unfair, doesn’t it? But this whole event is unfair. Every one of the many Fake Cases that are perpetuated by the White House in order to help the Worst President in History, by far, get Re-Elected, are UNJUST SCAMS. We won’t let that happen, but we will MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!" The cabal is doing Trump dirty. Karma. The cabal will get theirs in the end. Justice can't come quick enough.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Trial. Jurors. New York. Election Interference intel: #BREAKING Lawyers has completed their selection of12 jurors to serve in Trump hush-money case Lawyers in Donald Trump's historic criminal trial on Thursday selected 12 jurors who will assess his guilt or innocence over the coming weeks in a case stemming from a hush-money payment to a porn star. Lawyers for the defense and the prosecution still in their selection phase. Source: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-hush-money-jury-selection-resumes-lawyers-probe-bias-2024-04-18/

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. NY AG. Letitia James. Octogon intel: #BREAKING New York AG Letitia James asks the judge to void Trump's bond over his civil fraud verdict New York Attorney General Letitia James on Friday asked that a judge void former President Donald Trump's bond in his civil fraud case, questioning whether the company that issued it has the funds to back it up. In a 26-page filing ahead of a pre-scheduled hearing on Monday, James expressed concern about whether Knight Specialty Insurance Company could secure the $175 million bond. She also argued that the collateral put up by the former president should be under the full control of the company. One of James' concerns about KSIC is that the insurer "is not authorized to write business in New York and thus not regulated by the state’s insurance department." She added that the company "had never before written a surety bond in New York or in the prior two years in any other jurisdiction and has a total policyholder surplus of just $138 million." Developing... Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/york-ag-letitia-james-asks-233142759.html

New York AG Letitia James asks judge to void Trump's bond in his civil fraud verdict New York Attorney General Letitia James on Friday asked that a judge void former President Donald Trump's bond in his civil fraud case, questioning whether the company that issued it has the funds to back it up. yahoo.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE The court has upheld the $175 million bond tied to Trump. Friday, I reported that James was challenging the court to not accept Trumps $175 million payment. The court rejected James' motion. Who doesn't want $175 million?

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

COMMS. Trump. Memo. Judge. Orders. Patriot intel: #REPORT Trump just released this memo hours ago. It's a comm. This will set the precedent on how this trial will go and his remaining 4 trials.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Immunity. Precedents. Trump. Supreme Court. Future comms intel: #BREAKING Supreme Court case set to argue about immunity for President Trump The Supreme Court has scheduled a special session to hear arguments over whether former President Donald Trump can be prosecuted over his efforts to undo his 2020 election loss to President Joe Biden. The case, to be argued Thursday, stems from Trump’s attempts to have charges against him dismissed. Lower courts have found he cannot claim immunity for actions that, prosecutors say, illegally sought to interfere with the election results. The Republican ex-president has been charged in federal court in Washington with conspiring to overturn the 2020 election, one of four criminal cases he is facing. A trial has begun in New York over hush money payments to a porn star to cover up an alleged sexual encounter. The Supreme Court is moving faster than usual in taking up the case, though not as quickly as special counsel Jack Smith wanted, raising questions about whether there will be time to hold a trial before the November election, if the justices agree with lower courts that Trump can be prosecuted. The patterns suggest that Trump will not get immunity from prosecution. What does this mean and why does it matters? This will set future direction to go after all of the other living presidents. But unfortunately, it'll have to start with Trump. The letter of the law has to be followed, especially because of this corrupt 2 tired justice system. Every T crossed. Every I dotted. Every R and N cannot be run together. Think rn = m. Think corney/comey. If everything is not done right. This nation is over. You will have new foreign occupants in the Whitehouse. You think no one is fighting back now? No one will definitely fight back then. Our nation stands on the precipice. Source: https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-trump-immunity-prosecution-capitol-riot-9fd5dc5947dab82bbd18d3efcb4267d8

What to know in the Supreme Court case about immunity for former President Trump The core issue being debated before the Supreme Court on Thursday boils down to whether a former president is immune from prosecution for actions taken while in office. apnews.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Secrets service. Trump. Trial. Arrest comms: #BREAKING Secret Service prepares if Trump is jailed for contempt in hush money case The U.S. Secret Service held meetings and started planning for what to do if former President Donald Trump were to be held in contempt in his criminal hush money trial and Judge Juan Merchan opted to send him to short-term confinement, officials familiar with the situation told ABC News. Merchan on Tuesday reserved a decision on the matter after a contentious hearing. Prosecutors said at this point they are seeking a fine. “We are not yet seeking an incarceratory penalty," assistant district attorney Chris Conroy said, "But the defendant seems to be angling for that." Officials do not necessarily believe Merchan would put Trump in a holding cell in the courthouse, but they are planning for contingencies, the officials said. There have not been discussions yet about what to do if Trump is convicted and sentenced to prison. Developing... Source: https://abcnews.go.com/US/secret-services-prepares-potential-trump-contempt-order-hush/story?id=109542824

Secret Service prepares for if Trump is jailed for contempt in hush money case Judge Merchan on Tuesday reserved decision after a contentious hearing. abcnews.go.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Supreme Court. Immunity. Clarence Thomas. Trial intel: #BREAKING Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas raised the question to Trump’s lawyers if they have challenged special counsel Jack Smith's authority to bring charges against the former president, which could provide a loophole that may disqualify Smith. Mr. Sauer said that Trump attorneys have not raised such concerns "directly" in the current case at the Supreme Court however, Trump’s attorney John Sauer agrees with the "analysis provided by AG Edwin Meese and AG Michael B. Mukasey," referring to the amicus brief the two former attorneys general submitted to the Supreme Court on March 19. In the brief, the two attorneys general argue that Mr. Smith "does not have authority to conduct the underlying prosecution." Developing... Source: leadingreport

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Trial. Jury. Deliberations. Cabal intel: #BREAKING Jury Now Deliberating In Trump’s Hush Money Trial—And Trump Can’t Leave Until There’s A Verdict Jurors began deliberating Wednesday over whether former President Donald Trump should be criminally convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records, bringing nearly six weeks of testimony and arguments in the historic trial to an end—though it’s unclear how long it will take them to reach a verdict. Jurors started deliberating at approximately 11:30 a.m. Eastern time Wednesday after Judge Juan Merchan delivered the jury instructions, following closing arguments on Tuesday that stretched into the evening hours. Parties in the case—including Trump—can’t leave the courthouse during the jury’s deliberations until there’s a verdict, Merchan told the parties. All parties, including the Jurors, can not leave until a verdict is made. Developing... Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2024/05/29/jury-now-deliberating-in-trumps-hush-money-trial/?sh=2ab9e5bf23c0

Jury Won’t Reach Verdict In Trump Trial Today As Court Ends For The Day It’s unclear how long it could take the jury to reach a verdict. forbes.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

COMMS. Judge. Jury. Octogon intel: The cabal are desperately trying by any means necessary to find Trump guilty of any offense so they can sentence him to prison. #BREAKING The judge in Trump's case tells jurors they could be split ‘4-4-4,’ and he will still treat them as unanimous verdicts This is insane!

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE The jurors just rang the courtroom! Either they have a question or verdict. Developing...

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE Jury asks the judge a question via note: They asked for a witness testimony transcript from former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker. Developing...

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE The jury just asked to rehear the judge’s instructions. Developing...

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE The kury in the Trump trial was dismissed for the day. The court resumes tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. ET. Apparently, the jury can only leave if the judge dismisses them. I will post all updates as they come in on this thread. Be sure to bookmark all pills and all threads.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE These are the jury instructions from the judge: 👇

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#BREAKING Media. Trump and team head back into the courtroom. Could be another jury question. Developing...

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE Chaos continues to ensue outside of the courthouse. Apparently, according to the reporters emails. The people returning back to the courtroom were from a lunch break. Credit: NYP

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. Soc media. Judge. Corruption. Patriot intel: #BREAKING Trump just posted minutes ago on his app Truth Social and went in on judge Merchan Will the jury reach a verdict at 6pm? 6 o'clock can be dangerous.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#UPDATE The jury doesn't want to stay until 6pm today. The judge left it up to them. Jury is said to leave 430pm est. No verdict is expected today. Developing...

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

I strongly believe the jurors have already made their decision. And going home early to marinate on it. They'll return tmr with a Not Guilty verdict.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#BREAKING VERDICT REACHED IN TRUMP TRIAL!

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

#BREAKING TRUMP FOUND GUILTY ON ALL 34 COUNTS!

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

COMMS. Trump. Verdict. Sentencing. Cabal intel: #BREAKING Trimp sentencing is set for July 11th, 2024. The probation interview is being set, too. Judge just told the jury there free to discuss the trial with anyone. The verdict shouldn't surprise anyone. These are Octogon courts. Their minds were already set. The Octogon controls the judges, courts, jurors, prosecutors, district attorneys. The cabal needs Trump out of the way by any means necessary. Cabal is not going down without a fight. Trumps other trials will be similar. This entire fiasco has to play itself out between now and election day. That's if there is an election. I've been telling you they're poised to take it again. Bidan won't make it. Harris becomes president and names Gavin Newsom her VP. Pandemic part 2 is already slated. The summer war has already been set. This is all corruption to high firmament. Where do we go from here? Prep. That's all I'm going to say publicly.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump COMMS: #BREAKING Trump donation page crashed shortly after the verdict was read The sentencing date is 4 days before the GOP Convention on July 18th, where they officially nominate Trump for president.

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

COMMS. Trump. Supreme Court. Rulings. MI Intel: #BREAKING Trump wins Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity. Will delay Trumps cases until November and beyond. Major blow to the prosecution[s] Supreme Court Ruling: Trump v. United States (23-939) The nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority; he is also entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts; there is no immunity for unofficial acts.■ I've told everyone since the beginning. The SC ruling is very important and that it would go in Trump's favor. Why? Because military tribunals are needed. If Trumps presidential immunity wasn't granted. This would mean the cabal presidency of Bidan. Obama. Bush. Clinton. Would also be brought up on indictments and charges. That can't happen. Why? We have a double jeopardy law. This means someone can't be charged with the same crime twice. The Octogon Group controls the courts, judges, jurors, lawyers, prosecutors, and politicians. So yes, it would've been nice to have them all publicly charged, indicted, and arrested. But all of them would've been cleared of everything. These deepstate cabal[Octogon] members have to be tried in military tribunals. That's the only way to legally and lawfully end this deepstate cabal in America. This ruling should come as no surprise to those who have been following the patterns. Source: https://www.supremecourt.gov/

Home - Supreme Court of the United States supremecourt.gov

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

Trump. COMMS. Sentencing. Judges. Patriot intel: #REPORT Judge in Trump's hush money trial delays sentencing following Supreme Court immunity ruling The judge overseeing Donald Trump's New York criminal case approved a delay of the former president's sentencing Tuesday after his lawyers asked for more time to argue that the Supreme Court's immunity decision calls for a new trial. The sentencing hearing, previously scheduled for July 11, will now take place Sept. 18 at the earliest, according to a letter posted on the court's docket. The delay guarantees that Trump won't be sentenced until after he is formally nominated for president at the Republican National Convention, which begins July 15, and that sentencing will happen less than two months before the presidential election. This is perfect timing, actually. It gives us a chance to prep and finish up your preps before all hell breaks loose. At the same time, it's giving the cabal the opportunity to get their black operations together. As they prepare for Trump to retake the throne. Be ready. Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/judge-trumps-hush-money-trial-delays-sentencing-supreme-court-immunity-rcna160028

Judge in Trump's hush money trial delays sentencing following Supreme Court immunity ruling The judge overseeing Donald Trump's New York criminal case approved a delay of the former president's sentencing Tuesday after his lawyers asked for more time to argue that the Supreme Court's immunity decision calls for a new trial. nbcnews.com

@WayneTechSPFX - WayneTech SPFX®️

🚨GOOD NEWS ALERT!🚨 Courts. Judges. Trump. Classified. Patriot intel: #BREAKING Judge dismisses Trump "classified documents" case A Trump-appointed judge in Florida has dismissed the criminal case against Donald Trump that charged him with illegally holding on to classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort. The US district judge Aileen Cannon made the ruling after a hearing in which the former president’s legal team urged her to drop the charges brought by special counsel Jack Smith, and notably, after the supreme court said the president has immunity for official acts. Trump’s team had argued that he is the victim of selective prosecution and is being targeted by Democrats as he seeks to regain the presidency. A huge win against the cabal! Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/jul/15/donald-trump-republican-national-convention-speech-milwaukee-shooting-joe-biden-us-politics-latest-news-updates

Trump joins crowd at Republican convention hall with bandaged ear, in first public appearance since assassination attempt – as it happened Ex-president emerges to cheers and chants of ‘USA! USA! USA!’ as he appears amid supporters theguardian.com

@willscharf - Will Scharf

BREAKING: President Trump files motion to dismiss D.C. case A short while ago in federal court in Washington, D.C., President Trump filed a motion to dismiss the case pending against him there for his alleged actions in the aftermath of the 2020 elections. The motion cites presidential immunity as a ground to dismiss the case in its entirety. This is a very big deal. The motion persuasively argues that the D.C. case should be dismissed, and if past practice is any guide all proceedings could and should be stayed while this issue is litigated fully. Notably, this same reasoning should apply to the ongoing Georgia prosecution as well. A number of legal commentators have anticipated this move, and in this thread I’m going to get into the weeds and review the core argument made—that presidential immunity is an absolute bar to the prosecution of President Trump for his alleged acts in office that underlie the federal prosecution in D.C. 1/6

@willscharf - Will Scharf

(A) Presidential Immunity At its heart, President Trump is arguing that presidents, even after their terms in office are over, are absolutely immune from criminal prosecutions arising out of their acts in office that fall within the “outer perimeter” of their official responsibilities as president, unless they have first been both impeached and convicted by the House of Representatives and Senate. And he’s arguing that all of the acts he is alleged to have committed fall within this absolute immunity. This view, as the motion filed today makes clear, is deeply rooted in bedrock legal principles, in caselaw, in the Constitution, and in actual practice dating back centuries. In Nixon v. Fitzgerald, the Supreme Court ruled that a president has absolute immunity from civil liability for acts within the outer perimeter of their official responsibilities. In short, you cannot sue a former president personally because his official acts harmed you. This is unquestioned Supreme Court precedent, based on very serious, core separation of powers concerns. If a president were susceptible to civil suit for his official acts, the Court held that this would “raise unique risks to the functioning of government” in light of the “singular importance of the President’s duties.” The purpose of presidential immunity, the Fitzgerald Court’s view, is to prevent concerns about being sued clouding the president’s judgment and crippling his ability to act—presidents need to be able to discharge their duties to the best of their abilities without having to worry about being haled into court when their terms expire. This well-established immunity doctrine has never been tested in the criminal context, for the simple reason that no president has been subjected to the sort of relentless prosecutions that President Trump has now been faced with, but the motion persuasively argues that the reasoning in Fitzgerald should still apply. 2/6

@willscharf - Will Scharf

(B) Impeachment Clause This view is also rooted in the actual text of the Constitution. The Impeachment Clause of Article I provides that, although impeachment proceedings do not themselves carry a punishment beyond removal from office, a party convicted after impeachment "shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.” By specifying that a president impeached and convicted could be subject to indictment, etc., the Constitution plainly and clearly implies that absent impeachment and conviction a president cannot be criminally prosecuted for his official acts. Democrats impeached President Trump twice, and on both occasions the Senate acquitted him. Absent a conviction at an impeachment trial, presidential immunity applies to all of President Trump’s acts that fall within the outer perimeter of his official responsibilities, and for these acts at least he cannot be prosecuted. 3/6

@willscharf - Will Scharf

(C) Scope of Immunity Are the acts that underlie President Trump’s indictment in D.C. within this “outer perimeter” of his official responsibilities as president? I think the answer is clearly yes. First, it is very important to note that in the context of assessing immunity, the motive of a president is irrelevant. Why the president did something is immaterial; the question is what the president did and whether that was within this very broad outer perimeter of his official responsibilities. And because the scope of presidential authority and of presidential responsibilities is so vast, the catchment of presidential immunity is similarly expansive. When you actually review the alleged acts that underlie the D.C. indictment, my view is that each and every one clearly falls within the other perimeter of President Trump’s official responsibilities. We are talking about things like •Making public statements about the administration of the 2020 federal election; •Communications with public officials, both in the states and in the federal government, about the administration of the 2020 federal election; and •Taking steps, like assembling alternate slates of electors, to allow Congress and/or the Vice President to take action on the federal election fraud that he believed had occurred. Remember, for the purposes of assessing the scope of immunity, intent and veracity/falsity are irrelevant. Your views on whether President Trump’s views on the election were accurate are irrelevant. Your views on why President Trump did what he did are irrelevant. If the acts themselves were presidential acts, falling within the outer perimeter of presidential responsibilities, they cannot form the basis for a criminal prosecution of President Trump, because presidential immunity applies. As a result, since the entire indictment in the D.C. case against President Trump is predicated on acts that he is immune from prosecution for, the case should be dismissed. 4/6

@willscharf - Will Scharf

(D) Appealability One final note on timing: any denial of this motion to dismiss, or any similar motion in Georgia, is likely immediately appealable, as is the case in where Congressional legislative immunity is implicated. Which means, depending on how long it takes Judge Chutkan to rule, this issue could be before the D.C. Circuit and potentially the Supreme Court before long. 5/6

@willscharf - Will Scharf

Lastly, if you like this kind of analysis and want to see more of it, RT this thread and follow me here. And if you’d like to find out more about me, check me out on social media or at http://www.votescharf.com. 6/6

Vote Will Scharf votescharf.com

@TomFitton - Tom Fitton

Breaking: I've carefully reviewed the latest brief filed by Trump's legal team which alleges that the US Constitution prohibits the Biden regime's unprecedented attack on our constitutional system through a crazed prosecution of Trump for daring to question Biden's election victory. Trump's legal team makes a powerful and persuasive constitutional case to DISMISS Biden regime's effort to jail him for simply doing his job as president to try to ensure the laws concerning elections were faithfully enforced and followed. The brief's introduction: The President of the United States sits at the heart of our system of government. He is our Nation’s leader, our head of state, and our head of government. As such, the founders tasked the President—and the President alone—with the sacred obligation of “tak[ing] Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” U.S. CONST. art. II, § 3. To ensure the President may serve unhesitatingly, without fear that his political opponents may one day prosecute him for decisions they dislike, the law provides absolute immunity “for acts within the ‘outer perimeter’ of [the President’s] official responsibility.” Nixon v. Fitzgerald 457 U.S. 731, 756 (1982) (quoting Barr v. Matteo, 360 U.S. 564, 575 (1959) (plurality opinion)). Breaking 234 years of precedent, the incumbent administration has charged President Trump for acts that lie not just within the “outer perimeter,” but at the heart of his official responsibilities as President. In doing so, the prosecution does not, and cannot, argue that President Trump’s efforts to ensure election integrity, and to advocate for the same, were outside the scope of his duties. Instead, the prosecution falsely claimsthat President Trump’s motives were impure— that he purportedly “knew” that the widespread reports of fraud and election irregularities were untrue but sought to address them anyway. But as the Constitution, the Supreme Court, and hundreds of years of history and tradition all make clear, the President’s motivations are not for the prosecution or this Court to decide. Rather, where, as here, the President’s actions are within the ambit of his office, he is absolutely immune from prosecution. Spalding v. Vilas, 161 U.S. 483, 494, 949 (1896) (“The ‘allegation of malicious or corrupt motives’ does not affect a public official’s immunity and “[t]he motive that impelled [the official] to do that of which the plaintiff Case 1:23-cr-00257-TSC Document 74 Filed 10/05/23 Page 7 of 52 2 complains is … wholly immaterial.”). Therefore, the Court should dismiss the indictment, with prejudice. Midland Asphalt Corp. v. United States, 489 U.S. 794, 801 (1989) (“Dismissal of the indictment is the proper sanction when a defendant has been granted immunity from prosecution…”) (citation omitted).

@America1stLegal - America First Legal

/1🚨BREAKING — New AFL whitepaper reveals that the President of the United States has absolute authority over his presidential papers, undermining an essential element of the Biden DOJ’s Mar-a-Lago prosecution. We explain in the thread below…

@America1stLegal - America First Legal

/2 This whitepaper details why–as a matter of constitutional law, the Presidential Records Act (PRA), and historical practice–the President of the United States has absolute authority over presidential papers. Neither Congress nor the federal courts may lawfully abrogate or limit this authority.

@America1stLegal - America First Legal

/3 This constitutional fact has significant implications for Special Counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution against Donald J. Trump in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The Department of Justice has charged Donald Trump with violating 18 U.S.C. § 793(e), which provides:

@America1stLegal - America First Legal

/4 In obtaining the search warrant to raid Mar-a-Lago in 2022, the Biden DOJ relied upon the definition of a “Presidential Record” in 42 U.S.C. § 2201 to support its position that Donald Trump retained documents he did not have the authority to retain at the conclusion of his presidency, and that somehow, the National Archives and Records Administration possessed the authority to require them to be returned.

@America1stLegal - America First Legal

/5 As explained in the whitepaper — text, precedent, and executive practice reinforce the historical tradition. The records a President creates or receives while performing the duties of his office are his presidential records. That test does not depend on the content of the records, or whether the records are classified.

@America1stLegal - America First Legal

/6 The test does not change when a President leaves office. If, for example, a former President acquires new records after leaving office, those new records would not enjoy the same constitutional status as his presidential records acquired while in office.

@America1stLegal - America First Legal

/7 But the Presidential records a President takes with him upon vacating the presidency are his, to do with as he pleases. The President can keep them, sell them, destroy them, or donate them, as all Presidents have done.

@America1stLegal - America First Legal

/8 Other commentators and analysts have asserted that the president has the absolute right under the PRA to determine which records are his, but they have not acknowledged the broader constitutional issues at the heart of the matter...keep reading.

@America1stLegal - America First Legal

/9 …Congress does not have the authority under the Constitution to tell the president which records are his and which are not.

@America1stLegal - America First Legal

/10 Since the founding of our republic, presidents leaving office have taken custody of their presidential records—the president’s records are his personal property because they were prepared by him, or for him, in furtherance of his official duties. The records also belong to him because the Constitution requires it.

@America1stLegal - America First Legal

/11 The documents that a president prepares or receives during his term in office belong to him. A reading of the Presidential Records Act that fails to account for a former president’s right to possess and control his records is inconsistent with the text, history, and precedent of presidential records.

@America1stLegal - America First Legal

/12 Thus, the politically-motivated Florida prosecution of President Trump is impossible under the law. https://aflegal.org/america-first-legal-whitepaper-the-president-of-the-united-states-has-absolute-authority-over-his-presidential-papers-undermining-an-essential-element-of-the-biden-dojs-mar-a-lago-prosecuti/

America First Legal Whitepaper: The President of the United States Has Absolute Authority Over His Presidential Papers, Undermining An Essential Element of the Biden DOJ’s Mar-a-Lago Prosecution Even without the Presidential Records Act, the President has sole authority over his presidential papers. WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, America First Legal (AFL) released a whitepaper detailing why–as a matter of constitutional law, the Presidential Records Act (PRA), and historical practice–the President of the United States has absolute authority over presidential papers. Neither Congress nor […] aflegal.org

@America1stLegal - America First Legal

/13 FULL REPORT: https://media.aflegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/10195042/AFL-PRA-Whitepaper-10.10.23.pdf?_ga=2.221149784.1994182294.1696968775-1784050686.1696558575

@TomFitton - Tom Fitton

Tonight, a DC federal appellate panel granted Trump's stay pending appeal of Judge Chutkan's unprecedented and anti-constitutional gag order. Indeed, Trump's legal team made a powerful agrument against the Biden regime and Judge Chutkan: No court in American history has imposed a gag order on a criminal defendant who is actively campaigning for public office—let alone the leading candidate for President of the United States. That centuries-long practice was broken on October 17, 2023, when the district court entered its Opinion and Order, A1 (the “Gag Order”), muzzling President Trump’s core political speech during an historic Presidential campaign. Given the Gag Order’s extraordinary nature, one would expect an extraordinary justification for it. Yet none exists. President Trump has made months of public statements about this case, but the Department of Justice (“the prosecution”) submitted no evidence of any actual or imminent threat to the administration of justice. Instead, when asked about the supposed threat to the case, the prosecution admitted, “of course this prejudice is speculative.” Based this speculation, the district court entered a sweeping, viewpoint-based prior restraint on the core political speech of a major Presidential candidate, based solely on an unconstitutional “heckler’s veto.” The Gag Order violates the First Amendment rights of President Trump and over 100 million Americans who listen to him. President Trump’s uniquely powerful voice has been a fixture of American political discourse for eight years, and central to the American fabric for decades. The prosecution’s claim that his core political speech suddenly poses a threat to the administration of justice is baseless. The prosecutors and potential witnesses addressed by President Trump’s speech are high-level government officials and public figures, many of whom routinely attack President Trump in their own public statements, media interviews, and books. President Trump’s viewpoint and modes of expression resonate powerfully with tens of millions of Americans. The prosecution’s request for a Gag Order bristles with hostility to President Trump’s viewpoint and his relentless criticism of the government—including of the prosecution itself. The Gag Order embodies this unconstitutional hostility to President Trump’s viewpoint. It should be immediately stayed. President Trump requests a ruling on this motion by November 10, 2023, and requests an administrative stay pending the Court’s ruling. President Trump has notified the prosecution, who note that they oppose this motion. President Trump respectfully asks that this appeal be expedited to the greatest extent possible.

@TomFitton - Tom Fitton

The appellate court ruling STAYING Judge Chutkan unprecedented gag order suggests President Trump is likely to succeed on the merits once the appeals court panel fully considers his appeal. The arguments in favor of overturning Judge Chutkan's gag order entered at the request of the Biden administration are powerful and should be embraced by every American who values the First Amendment. As Trump's attorneys state in the introduction of their opening brief (filed on Nov 8): The Supreme Court has “never allowed the government to prohibit candidates from communicating relevant information to voters during an election.” Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, 536 U.S. 765, 781-82 (2002). Accordingly, no court has ever imposed a gag order on the political speech of a candidate for public office, let alone the leading candidate for President of the United States—until now. On October 17, 2023, the district court entered a sweeping prior restraint on the speech of Defendant-Appellant Donald J. Trump (“President Trump”) in the middle of his Presidential campaign. J.A.229-31 (the “Gag Order”). The Gag Order restricts President Trump from making public statements about key aspects of his prosecution at the hands of the Administration he is seeking to replace—issues that are central to, and inextricably entwined with, the 2024 Presidential campaign. The Gag Order violates President Trump’s most fundamental First Amendment rights. Even worse, it gives no consideration to the First Amendment rights of President Trump’s audience, the American public, to receive and listen to his speech. Given its extraordinary nature, one would expect an extraordinary justification for the Gag Order. None exists. The Gag Order rests entirely, and wrongfully, on a classic heckler’s veto—i.e., the district court’s speculation that President Trump’s audiences might react to his speech with “harassment” or “threats” to prosecutors, witnesses, or court staff. The First Amendment forbids this USCA Case #23-3190 Document #2025974 Filed: 11/08/2023 Page 11 of 67 2 heckler’s veto, and even if it were legally viable—which it is not—no convincing evidence supports it. President Trump has made many public statements about this case in the three months since his indictment, and yet the Department of Justice (“the prosecution”) submitted no evidence of any “threats” or “harassment” to prosecutors, witnesses, or court staff during that time. Instead, the prosecution admitted, “of course this prejudice is speculative.” A prior restraint cannot be based on speculation. The district court cannot silence President Trump based solely on the anticipated reaction of his audiences. The district court lacks the authority to muzzle the core political speech of the leading candidate for President at the height of his re-election campaign. President Trump is entitled to proclaim, and the American public is entitled to hear, his core political messages. The Gag Order should be immediately reversed

@simonateba - Simon Ateba

I'm not a lawyer, and I don't work for anyone's social media account, but I completely disagree with the ruling against Trump last night. It's a total disgrace and unconstitutional. It's actually a shame and will not stand on appeal. The DC judge claimed that when Trump was speaking on January 6 before the protests at the US Capitol, that speech was not protected by his First Amendment rights. Second and more shockingly, the DC judge, Tanya S. Chutkan, also claimed that Trump was not protected by "presidential immunity" on January 6, 2021, while he was still president. These are very false conclusions by the judge. If Trump had sent American troops to capture a terrorist that day or announced it at that gathering, was that a presidential duty or not? The prosecutors claim that the January 6 event was organized by the campaign. That's completely nonsense. When you're President, you're president until you're no longer in office. But I am no lawyer, and I may be wrong. I just believe that this will not stand on appeal.

@simonateba - Simon Ateba

For those who have not been following, the case is so crazy, was Trump a barber that day? Was he a painter? Could he grant pardon that day or announce it at that event? Was he a driver or the President? And just to clarify again, the judge ruled that Trump and other former presidents "do not have absolute (presidential) immunity for federal crimes committed while in office." Has a crime been established? Was Trump protected by the First Amendment that day? Could he talk about the election? Could he say these elections were rigged against me? Doesn't the First Amendment protect him? You cannot destroy the law and the Constitution to convict one mam ahead of 2024. I'm also against those who claim the judge is ruling this way because she was not born in the United States. That's the wrong way of looking at it. Whether born here or elsewhere, Washington works the same way.....

@LauraLoomer - Laura Loomer

BREAKING: 🚨The US Supreme Court just rejected Jack Smith’s request to bypass the appellate court regarding President Trump’s challenge to his January 6 indictments under the defense of presidential immunity. This is a major blow to Jack Smith and the Deep State who were hoping to try President Trump before the 2024 election by bypassing an appeal. BTFO JACK SMITH! #Trump2024

@LauraLoomer - Laura Loomer

President Trump says he is entitled to Presidential immunity because he was doing his duty as President by investigating a rigged and stolen election. “It was my obligation to do so, and the proof found is voluminous and irrefutable.” https://t.co/C73vcOeF2z

@TomFitton - Tom Fitton

In Trump's opening appellate brief challenging the Biden regime's unprecedented attempt to prosecute a former president, Trump's lawyers lay out the dangers of Jack Smith's political attack on our constitutional republic: "During the 234 years from 1789 to 2023, no current or former President had ever been criminally prosecuted for official acts. That unbroken tradition died this year, and the historical fallout is tremendous. The indictment of President Trump threatens to launch cycles of recrimination and politically motivated prosecution that will plague our Nation for many decades to come and stands likely to shatter the very bedrock of our Republic—the confidence of American citizens in an independent judicial system. Under our system of separated powers, the Judicial Branch cannot sit in judgment over a President’s official acts. That doctrine is not controversial. It was treated as self-evident and foundational from the dawn of the Republic, and it flows directly from the exclusive vesting clause of Article II. In 1803, Chief Justice Marshall endorsed it, writing in Marbury v. Madison that a President’s official acts 'can never be examinable by the courts.' The structure of our government, the text of the Constitution and its early commentators, common-law immunity doctrines, our political history, the Supreme Court’s analogous immunity doctrines, and the policy considerations rooted in the separation of powers all dictate that no President, current or former, may be criminally prosecuted for his official acts unless he is first impeached and convicted by the Senate. Nor may a President face criminal prosecution based on conduct for which he was acquitted by the U.S. Senate. The indictment against President Trump is unlawful and unconstitutional. It must be dismissed." The brief later details how the Biden/Jack Smith operation is trying to criminalize Trump's privileged official presidential acts (citations omitted): "...all five types of conduct alleged in the indictment constitute official acts. They all reflect President Trump’s efforts and duties, squarely as Chief Executive of the United States, to advocate for and defend the integrity of the federal election, in accord with his view that it was tainted by fraud and irregularity. First, President Trump’s public statements and tweets about alleged fraud and irregularity in the federal election fall within the outer perimeter of Presidential duty, to which communicating with the public on matters of federal concern is absolutely central. This is especially apparent with respect to President Trump’s tweets; his Twitter account has been held to be an official government channel of communication based on 'overwhelming' evidence. President Trump’s other public statements are also plainly official. Second, President Trump’s communications with the U.S. Department of Justice about investigating widespread reports of election fraud, and deliberating about replacing the Acting Attorney General, are quintessential Presidential acts. The President shall 'take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,' U.S. CONST. art. II, § 3, which include the numerous prohibitions on federal election crime. Directing the Attorney General to enforce these falls squarely within the Take Care power. Deliberating about whether to replace a Cabinet-level officer is a core exercise of the appointment and removal power. Third, communications with state officials about their exercise of official duties with respect to a federal election falls within a President’s official duties. The President’s Take Care duty 'include[s] the rights, duties, and obligations growing out of the constitution itself … and all the protection implied by the nature of the government under the constitution.' This includes taking steps to ensure the integrity of federal elections, such as communicating with state officials who play a critical role in administering those federal elections. Presidential electors 'exercise federal functions under, and discharge duties in virtue of authority conferred by, the Constitution of the United States.' Fourth, communicating with Members of Congress, including the Vice President in his capacity as President of the Senate, about their exercise of their official duties lies at the core of Presidential responsibility. The President has intimate and extensive responsibility in the legislative process. Article II specifically provides that the President 'recommend to [Congress’s] Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.' This includes the Executive Branch 'mak[ing] its views known to Congress on all matters in which it has responsibilities, duties, and opinions.' Historical precedent from President Grant’s intervention in the disputed Hayes-Tilden election supports this conclusion. Fifth, organizing contingent slates of electors to support the President’s advocacy to the Vice President and Congress is likewise an official act. The indictment itself alleges that these acts were intertwined with President Trump’s attempts to lobby the Vice President and Members of Congress. Thus, they fall under the President’s official duties both because those duties extend to 'the rights, duties, and obligations growing out of the constitution itself' and 'all the protection implied by the nature of the government under the constitution,' and because they are necessary and preparatory to, and thus intertwined with, the plainly official acts of communicating with Congress about the certification of the federal election." Trump's legal team makes a key argument that the Left's failed impeachment of Trump constitutionally proscribes any subsequent criminal prosecution on the same issues: "The Impeachment Judgment Clause thus protects Presidents from harassing criminal prosecutions by requiring Congress first to make the political judgment that the President should be convicted. If, as here, the Senate acquits the President, the Senate has necessarily concluded that the President should remain in office and is not disqualified from service. For a prosecutor to conclude otherwise undermines that conclusion—indeed, a successful prosecution voids it—and arrogates to himself a judgment the Constitution reserves for Congress." During this Christmas season, let's pray the Lord showers the DC appeals court with the gifts of wisdom, discernment, and courage to confront and stop the Biden's regimes assault on the very structure of our constitutional government. For, as the DC appeals court is notoriously political and reflexively anti-Trump, it would be truly a miracle if the rule of law prevails at this stage of the legal proceedings. And, no matter what happens in the appellate court, the Supreme Court will almost certainly be the next stop in this historic battle for constitutional government.

@julie_kelly2 - Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

Some former Bushies and current NeverTrumpers just filed an amicus brief in DC appellate court siding with Judge Chutkan and Jack Smith in presidential immunity matter. They found another part of the Constitution they argue that Trump violated. This is a doozy... https://t.co/REuxol1tgO

@julie_kelly2 - Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

The list includes John Danforth, Barbara Comstock, Chris Shays, Christie Todd Whitman, Mickey Edwards, Paul Rosenzweig, and John Bellinger. These dunces claim if immunity is allowed in this matter--they suggest it would not extend to other presidential acts such as using "lethal force abroad" bc neocons gonna neocon--a president would use the US military to stay in power.

@julie_kelly2 - Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

These "experts" as they call themselves lift most of the evidence from J6 committee, Smith's indictment, a Lin Wood interview, books by Danforth and Jon Karl, a Politico article, and Jenna Ellis' sob story. https://t.co/POk0vwLAH5

@KeithOlbermann - Keith Olbermann⌚️

@GuntherEagleman By the way, fathead, if this court now grants Trump this hallucination of "presidential immunity" it applies to Biden too. And he could arrest the justices and cancel the election and you couldn't do shit about it

@LauraLoomer - Laura Loomer

WATCH: During his oral argument in front of SCOTUS just now, President Trump’s lawyer John Sauer made a strong point by stating that if Presidential immunity is canceled, @JoeBiden could face charges for his open borders policies. #PresidentialImmunity https://t.co/K5DGygG7cO

@Snowden - Edward Snowden

The journalist who first noticed it deleted her tweet without explanation, but the transcript shows the government really did argue today that the reason no President has ever been prosecuted is that 𝐧𝐨 𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐚 𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐞. Wild. https://t.co/uYxW0G8B8A

@Snowden - Edward Snowden

Here's the suppressed source tweet: https://t.co/tss2RaQBhE

@costofglory - Alex Petkas - Cost of Glory

The US is entering uncharted waters. Political prosecutions are what brought down the Roman Republic. Here's how. 🧵 https://t.co/eqcYcxMT7Q

@costofglory - Alex Petkas - Cost of Glory

Donald Trump is the first US president to be indicted, let alone ruled a felon by a US court. The court system of any society is designed to be a neutral arbiter of disputes; Trust in the courts is crucial to prevent spirals of retributive violence. https://t.co/8vjynQVdZJ

@costofglory - Alex Petkas - Cost of Glory

In Rome, an office holder was immune from prosecution while holding office A consul could not be prosecuted during his 1 year term Same for a "proconsul" = a consul w/ term extended, usually serving as a general or provincial governor in 50 BC, Julius Caesar was a Proconsul. https://t.co/VAgu1jPLFr

@costofglory - Alex Petkas - Cost of Glory

Caesar's enemies - Cato and friends - were publicly vowing to prosecute Caesar when his term ended Caesar had been a successful general for nearly 10 years, conquered all of Gaul Cato claimed they had 10 years worth of crimes to prosecute him for. https://t.co/bE0Ou1q5tx

@costofglory - Alex Petkas - Cost of Glory

Caesar wanted to run for Consul again, to renew his immunity. Unfortunately, to run for consul in Rome, you have to lay down your proconsular office & enter the city. Caesar would have to become a private citizen in Rome for several months (Plenty of time for a prosecution) https://t.co/KfvnBmjGzE

@costofglory - Alex Petkas - Cost of Glory

Caesar asked the authorities for an exception - to "run in absentia" (in recognition of his achievements on behalf of Rome) Thus he could keep immunity over the transition to new office In 52, a law was passed to allow this But by 50, Caesar's enemies had unwound the law.

@costofglory - Alex Petkas - Cost of Glory

Cato & Friends now forced Caesar into a dilemma: Either a) Lay down your office & face prosecution, OR b) start a Civil War (in 50, Caesar's legal term of office was expiring) https://t.co/5zc7MT94GJ

@costofglory - Alex Petkas - Cost of Glory

Cato & Friends drew Rome's other greatest leader, Pompey, onto their side Caesar tried to negotiate Pompey dug in his heels Ultimatums were issued. They all thought Caesar would back down. https://t.co/0M6kycGca5

@costofglory - Alex Petkas - Cost of Glory

Caesar took the Nuclear Option and crossed the Rubicon in January, 49 BC (The Rubicon River was the boundary of Caesar's province: crossing it amounted to a declaration of war) This explains why political trials can become so dangerous: https://t.co/HGFmPkpIPk

@costofglory - Alex Petkas - Cost of Glory

If there is no neutral arbiter, the recourse is usually violence Caesar claimed Cato & Senate were corrupt, motivated by personal animosity (they did undo some laws, after all) Cato & co. said "Caesar is a threat to the Republic" Who could adjudicate, except the gods of war? https://t.co/xIyeJevB0Q

@costofglory - Alex Petkas - Cost of Glory

The threat of prosecution motivates heads of state to cling to power in many "third world" countries. A precedent has been set. The Biden family now have reason to fear prosecution if they lose the election The stakes have been raised, massively https://t.co/LuX4vZuEtN

@costofglory - Alex Petkas - Cost of Glory

From Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon in 49 BC ... to avoid political prosecution Until Actium in 31 BC, Rome passed through a long period of civil war Which ended in the establishment of a monarchy. Is the die cast? This is why we study history. https://t.co/iKz01GuigN

@costofglory - Alex Petkas - Cost of Glory

For the full story, listen to some of my bios from the Cost of Glory Podcast. Such as Pompey, Episodes 83-85 https://t.co/9URRccHmpC

@harryjsisson - Harry Sisson

According to the Supreme Court, Biden could now send in Seal Team 6 to take all of them out. He could send in the military to take out Trump. He has “immunity” for official acts now!

@harryjsisson - Harry Sisson

All of these MAGA lunatics are saying that this is suggesting violence when the first 5 words are “according to the Supreme Court…” Also, this is in reference to Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent which included this exactly https://t.co/9zfEafCPUN

@DefiantLs - Defiant L’s

🔥Top 7 FUNNIEST Elon Musk Comebacks 🧵A thread 🧵 1. AOC and her obsession https://t.co/3c1m08hYJr

@DefiantLs - Defiant L’s

2. Socialist down https://t.co/bUezctvHtO

@DefiantLs - Defiant L’s

3. Be gentle with girls Elon https://t.co/8pwu01QNJs

@DefiantLs - Defiant L’s

I highly recommend you follow @ResisttheMS, if you're not already. They report the news that you won't see on the mainstream media. https://t.co/6RGW4gq1wh

@DefiantLs - Defiant L’s

4. Newsom sucks https://t.co/P3qHD9d9nS

@DefiantLs - Defiant L’s

5. Poetry https://t.co/LXUqN94t3i

@DefiantLs - Defiant L’s

Another great account to follow is @CNviolations. He posts brutal community notes and the funniest memes that expose the woke left. https://t.co/r0VHfrZecL

@DefiantLs - Defiant L’s

6. Simply put https://t.co/PnFTPjRjOg

@DefiantLs - Defiant L’s

7. Asking the real questions https://t.co/pH5BFAiMlP

@PressSec - Karoline Leavitt

🚨It's a media hoax that President Trump is causing a “constitutional crisis.”   The real crisis is taking place within our judiciary, where activist judges are abusing their power to unilaterally block the President's basic executive authority and thwart the will of the people. https://t.co/YnaL4EmSoV

@angelwoman501 - Patriot Lady

This is another federal activist judge who has blocked President Trump's cuts to DEI teacher training. When is SCOTUS going to put a stop to these judges interfering with President Trump's article II rights? https://t.co/s3bJbENymI

@nataliegwinters - Natalie Winters

Meet the federal Judge who just blocked President Trump’s cuts to DEI teacher training. His resume is full of DEI activism, he served on the board of groups currently suing President Trump, and trained far-left activists how to avoid arrests during protests. 🧵🧵🧵 https://t.co/KSp77nbT2X

@WallStreetApes - Wall Street Apes

Official Hearing: Federal Judges are violating the US Constitution with universal injunctions against Donald Trump’s orders “There is clearly a potential constitutional crisis involving the judicial branch's effort to fully override the legislative and executive branches. 15 district judges effectively seize control of various executive branch duties in the first 6 weeks of the current presidency through nationwide injunctions. This is potentially a judicial coup d'etat. It clearly violates the constitution and more than 200 years of American history.” “President Thomas Jefferson's agenda: President Jefferson concluded that impeaching the judges would take too much time. He and the Congress simply abolished the courts in which they served via the Judiciary Act of 1802. This is a constitutional balance of power. The legislative and executive branches can reshape the judiciary branch. It is a useful reminder in considering the current situation unelected lower court judges have been steadily grabbing power for years.”

@harryjsisson - Harry Sisson

According to the Supreme Court, Biden could now send in Seal Team 6 to take all of them out. He could send in the military to take out Trump. He has “immunity” for official acts now!