Thomas Paine: American Philosopher, & Revolutionary

From 1776 through the formation of The Constitution I helped create America. Now I have returned to help save America. American Patriots must join together, speak out in free and open discussion to fight the “woke” anti-American mob, and further the cause of FREEDOM.

The Constitution, the Law, and the Case

Article II of the Constitution, Section 1, Clause 8 concerns the oath the President must affirm to before taking office.  It reads, “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States , and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Article II, Section 3, Clause 1 reads in part, “he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

One of those laws that the President is faithfully executing is the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.  Interestingly, when you Google that term, the entire first page of results is populated with left-wing propaganda.  For example, the Brennan Center is one of the first results, and the very first paragraph claims that, “Although the law was enacted to prevent foreign espionage and sabotage in wartime, it can be — and has been — wielded against immigrants who have done nothing wrong, have evinced no signs of disloyalty, and are lawfully present in the United States.” [1]

only “in wartime”?  

done nothing wrong ?

lawfully present in the United States ?

Wow!  Talk about misinformation, disinformation, and deception.  In one sentence, this “journalist” misrepresents the facts three times.

Worse than the outright lies, the useful idiots who consume this type of “journalism” actually believe the crap they are spewing, and are rising up in open rebellion against the best interests of the country.  When you have Democrat politicians standing in front of rolling cameras calling for “resistance”, it’s going to get worse before it gets better.

Let’s go straight to the actual law itself.

Title 50, U. S. Code, Chapter 3 – Alien Enemies § 21

“Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being of the age of fourteen years and upward, who shall be within the United States and not actually nationalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies.” [2]

There it is in black and white.  Pay particular attention to the italicized portion that does not require a declared war.  That portion does refer to an incursion perpetrated by a “nation or government” and the ensuing portion requires the President to issue a proclamation, but Trump has covered that base also, to wit:

The President has publicly proclaimed Tren de Aragua as a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization operating in conjunction with and sponsored by the Nicolas Maduro regime.  The Proclamation further provides detailed information on its leaders and its activities.  In other words, TdA is a state-sponsored terrorist organization that has been furthering its “objectives of harming United States citizens, undermining public safety, and supporting the Maduro regime’s goal of destabilizing democratic nations in the Americas, including the United States.” [3]

That meets the requirements of a deliberate invasion and predatory incursion into the United States.  The Defense rests!

So what does the destructive left roll out from their never-ending insane resistance arsenal?

Activist District Judges.  Judge James Boasberg, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, an Obama appointee with strong Democrat ties (more on that in a moment), issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to stop the flight containing 261 known terrorists bound for El Salvadore.  But despite a claimed verbal order, the TRO was not issued in writing until after the plane was outside U.S. airspace and it landed safely in El Salvadore, where the terrorists were sent to a secure prison under terms agreed upon by the Trump administration.  I heard that agreement is to cost the U.S. $6 million annually (unconfirmed), however that is a bargain compared to the damage that was being inflicted on our homeland.

The Plaintiff’s argument is that the terrorists were not afforded the right to “due process” under the 5^th Amendment.  I could remind everyone of the Biden administration’s denial of due process for J6 Defendants who languished in prison for 2 or 3 years, but that’s another story that favors conservatives by comparison.  The central question is; do “Alien Enemies” have the constitutional right to due process, i.e., a hearing and/or trial?  The answer has already been given above, in the last segment of the Act herein quoted, as such, “shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies.”  There is no prerequisite for any hearing or trial.  As the late great Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia, once said about the Constitution, “It says what it says, and doesn’t say what it doesn’t say.”  

The case has been tied up ever since its filing and the current status is that the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has refused to lift Boasberg’s March 15^th order barring Trump’s administration from deporting known terrorist immigrants under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. [4] 

The split decision will undoubtedly go to the Supreme Court.

The Judicial Branch and Early Congressional Acts

Article III of the Constitution establishes the judicial branch of the government wherein it is stated in Section 1, “The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”

Section 2, Clause 2 states, “In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be a party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction.  In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.”

The Supreme Court is the only court mentioned in the Constitution and all “inferior” courts are subject to congressional approval.  Congress first created the District and Circuit court system by the Judiciary Act of 1789.

James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay wrote a defense of the Constitution in The Federalist, wherein “they explained their judgment that a strong national government must have built-in restraints: ‘You must first enable government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.’ The writers of the Constitution had given the executive and legislative branches powers that would limit each other as well as the judiciary branch.”

In Federalist No. 78, published May 28, 1788, under the title, The Judicial Department, Hamilton wrote that  the judiciary branch was the weakest of the three, calling it the “least dangerous” branch, and argued that federal judges should have the power to examine the constitutionality of the actions and laws of the executive and legislative branches.  He sought to bring the judiciary into a more balanced status as an equal branch.

Some would say the judiciary branch is now too powerful.  It was never intended by Hamilton for administrative actions of the President of the United States to be subject to the approval of unelected District Judges, nor do they have the constitutional authority to conduct the affairs of state or foreign policy.  We have elections whereby the government is chosen by consent of the people.  Constitutional Republics are not controlled by individual unelected bureaucrats from any branch.   

The Judiciary Act of 1789, approved September 24, 1789, just two years after the ratification of the Constitution, was enacted to establish the Judicial Courts of the United States. 

It was enacted by the Senate and the Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled, that:

• The Supreme Court consist of a Chief Justice and five Associate Justices, any four of whom would be a quorum.
• The United States shall be divided into thirteen Districts, defined geographically.
• There shall be a District Court in each of those Districts that consists of one Judge, called a District Judge, who shall be appointed (not elected).
• There shall be three Circuit Courts, dividing the thirteen Districts geographically into the “eastern”, “middle”, and “southern” circuits, and that there shall be held annually, two courts, which shall be called Circuit Courts, and consist of any two justices of the Supreme Court, and the District Judge of such districts, any two of whom shall constitute a quorum, further defining when such courts should meet.
• That the Justices of the Supreme Court and all the District Judges shall take the following oath, to wit: “I, (name), do solemnly swear or affirm, that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent on me as, according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the Constitution, and the laws of the United States.  So help me God.”

There are many other provisions that define the authority of the courts and how they are mandated to administer justice.  The full transcript of the Act can be reviewed HERE. [5]

I just wanted to cover the bare basics here and highlight the oath that specifically requires all judges to act impartially, because that is precisely the problem we are witnessing today, i.e., the coordinated obstruction of administrative acts designed to undermine the constitutional authority of the President of the United States.

The Judicial Act of 1789 has stood the test of time, as much of it still defines how jurisprudence is administered today, but the Supreme Court justices are no longer required to “sit in” on Circuit Court proceedings, a practice known as “riding circuit”, or “circuit riding.”  It was a concern that they would be inclined to go along with decisions made in the appellate courts.

That concern, and the attempt by lame duck President John Adams, to expand the federal court system favorable to his Federalist Party, led to the Judicial Act of 1801.

The Judiciary Act of 1801

The Judiciary Act of 1801, often referred to as the “Midnight Judges Act”, became law on February 13, 1801, and reduced the number of seats on the Supreme Court from six to five, effective upon the next vacancy, and created 16 new judges that were rapidly appointed by Adams, before he left office.

The bill expanded the circuit courts, creating three additional circuits with three more circuit judges in each circuit, except for the sixth circuit, which received only one.  He passed it under the guise of relieving the Supreme Court justices of the burden of “riding circuit.”

The Act also reduced the number of District Courts from 13 to 10, reorganizing some of the districts, and gave the circuit courts jurisdiction to hear “all cases in law or equity, arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States, and treaties made , or which shall be made, under their authority”, a form of jurisdiction not previously granted to federal courts.

Thomas Jefferson was declared 3^rd President of the United States, after being so decided by the House of Representatives, due to an electoral tie with his Vice President, Aaron Burr, and was inaugurated on March 4, 1801, just 19 days later.

Jefferson was determined to repeal the Judiciary Act of 1801 and rescind the Federalist “midnight” judgeships.

Jefferson viewed the 1801 Act as an egregious attempt by Adams to stack the federal court system with partisan Federalist appointees that threatened the balance of power.   

The Judiciary Act of 1802

Jefferson’s Democrat-Republican party majority in both houses of Congress led to easy passage of The Judiciary Act of 1802, adopted April 29, 1802, and reinstated the makeup of the Supreme Court to six justices, although no seat was ever vacated under the 1801 Act.  It also restructured the six circuit courts and assigned one Supreme Court justice to each circuit, reinstating the requirement of “circuit riding”.  Each circuit court consisted of only two judges and they would refer to the Supreme Court and question of law upon the two would disagree.  No District Judge could hear appeals of his own decisions, so appeals from the district courts were to be decided by the circuit justice alone.  More importantly, only one judge was required to constitute a quorum, and Supreme Court justices were eventually relieved of their “circuit riding” obligations by 1840.

Jeffersonian Republicans asserted that Congress’s right to establish inferior courts implicitly allowed it to abolish such courts.  In other words, if Adams was able to convince Congress to adopt the Judicial Act of 1801, then Jefferson was entitled to lobby Congress to repeal it, which means any Congress has the authority to define the federal court system as they deem appropriate for the times.  Jefferson was leery of the federal court system gaining too much power over the administration of his executive decisions, particularly when all these new Federalist judges could bog down his efforts to limit the government’s size and cut taxes.  Sound familiar ?

Despite outcry from the Federalists, the Supreme Court upheld the authority of Congress to alter the structure of lower federal courts in Stuart v. Laird (1803), a case that would support Trump’s effort to do the same today.

Marbury v. Madison – Decided February 24, 1803    

Perhaps the most important decision in American constitutional law ever ruled by the Supreme Court was the case brought by William Marbury of Maryland, appointed as a Justice of the Peace for the County of Washington, in the District of Columbia.  Marbury was among more than two dozen District Judges and Justices of the Peace appointed by outgoing President John Adams just two days before he left office in March 1801, in an effort to pack the courts with Federalists and stymie President-Elect Thomas Jefferson and his Democratic-Republican majority.  Outgoing Secretary of State, John Marshall, was not able to deliver all of the commissions, including Marbury’s, before Jefferson’s inauguration, and the new Secretary of State, James Madison, refused to deliver them at the direction of Jefferson, who viewed them as invalid.   

Marbury filed suit with the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus forcing Madison to deliver his commission. [6] 

In the interim, John Marshall had been appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and he wrote an opinion that held Madison’s refusal to deliver the commission illegal, however, the Court did not order Madison to comply, based on the finding that Congressional adoption of the Judiciary Act of 1789 expanded the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction beyond what was originally set forth in the Constitution.  Marbury’s case did not fall into either category regarding foreign dignitaries or state parties, as per Section 2, clause 2, and was therefore outside of the Supreme Court’s “original jurisdiction”.

The Supreme Court struck down the pertinent section of the 1789 Act and announced that the courts have the power to invalidate laws they find to be in violation of the Constitution, now commonly referred to as “judicial review”.

In essence, “any law repugnant to the Constitution is null and void”, a clause I cite regularly in my posts and comments.  Perhaps Marshall was reminded of Hamilton’s concern for “judicial review”.

Activist Federal District Judges Undermining the Presidency

Less than two months into Trump’s second term it became clear that the Democrat Party, their leadership, and their propaganda machine in the mainstream media were conducting a coordinated attack on literally everything he was attempting to accomplish for the American people.

Trump’s efforts to deport violent criminal gangs like TdA and MS-13:-

Democrats: Wait.  We care more about illegal immigrant criminals than the safety of U.S. citizens.  Call Judge Boasberg, a 2011 Obama appointee.

Boasberg’s wife, Elizabeth (nee Manson), contributed $10,000 to Democrats and is the founder/board member of an Abortion Clinic in McLean, VA.  She is also an 18-year board member of Verite, an NGO ensuring global supply chains of US corporations comply with fair labor standards.  There might be a connection between NGO and money laundering.

Boasberg’s daughter, Katherine, works for another NGO by the name of Partners for Justice as a “capacity building associate”, funded by, you guessed it, USAID.  The far-left group provides legal advice to criminal aliens and gang members. [7]

Seems like Judge Boasberg should have recused himself from this case.

Trump’s efforts to expose the fraud, waste and abuse of federal taxpayer dollars through DOGE examinations –

Democrats: Wait.  We don’t care about saving taxes.  In fact, we need more taxes.  You can’t stop our gravy train.  We need that money kicked back to our re-election campaigns. Call Judge Paul Englemayer, a 2011 Obama appointee, who blocked Elon Musk’s access to Treasury records. [8]

Trump’s agenda to close the border, reduce the dangers of dangerous illegal immigration like gang members and terrorists, drug trafficking, human trafficking, and the burdens on our infrastructure by concerted efforts to apprehend criminal illegals –

Democrats: Wait.  Again, we don’t give a rat’s ass about the safety of American citizens.  We need to maintain our virtue signaling compassion for the less fortunate.  Call Judge Theodore Chuang, a 2014 Obama appointee, blocked DHS and ICE agents from conducting deportation operations in houses of worship, as a freedom of religion violation.  OK, wait outside until they come out, duhh.  And by the way, there is NO SUCH THING as “sanctuary” from federal law.  If you believe there are Safety Zones for criminals, you’ve been watching too much propaganda.

Trump’s efforts to slim down the bloated federal government, an initiative first undertaken by Thomas Jefferson –

Democrats: Wait:  You can’t just eliminate the jobs of all those “non-essential” government employees, you know, the ones who aren’t critical and the ones who don’t even show up to the office.  We need them to keep voting for us.  Call Judge Amy Berman Jackson, another 2011 Obama appointee, who ordered the Head of the Office of Special Counsel to be reinstated to block Trump from reducing the size of the federal workforce.   

You get the picture.  It’s resistance on every front.

At this point, it seems like they are projecting the desire for unsuspecting conservatives, Patriots, and all Trump supporters, to believe the party is rudderless, in disarray, and searching for leadership.  I’m not buying the ruse.  If you look at the efficiency with which they roll out little protests all over the country, and the sheer volume of fronts on which they engage resistance to everything Trump is doing, it almost screams COORDINATION to me. 

We know for a fact that the entire Democrat Party “marches” in lock-step, on every issue.  They have no defectors.  They are united to a fault.  That is simply not possible without clear leadership.  Schumer is being challenged.  Pelosi is a “has-been”.  Her replacement, Hakeem Jeffries is a “wannabe”.  Bernie and AOC are the latest “cool candidates”.  But one person stands out as their Supreme Leader, and he is the only one commanding the total respect of the party.  He has a track record of undermining everything Trump wants to do, and he is doing it again.  It might sound like a wild conspiracy theory, but it’s as simple as this;

Barack Obama calls George Soros (think, speed dial) and directs the latest “protest” with details, Soros calls his stand-by activist groups to order deployments, and sends those leaders money to fund the operations.  But the money isn’t Soros money.  It’s YOUR money.  It’s taxpayer money laundered through a couple “wash cycles” that was fraudulently earmarked for “worthy” USAID programs like $29 million to “strengthen the political landscape in Bangladesh”.  

I’ve said it thousands of times and I’ll keep saying it until he is indicted for treason.  Barack Obama is orchestrating everything we see going on in the political arena today.  His agenda is to “fundamentally transform” America into a communist nation, and frankly, We the People, for the most part, aren’t even aware of the threat.  We are in the midst of an ideological war that we must win.

The Democrat Party is not going away anytime soon.  They may be hoping we are celebrating a little too much and getting complacent, but Obama is practiced in the art of deception and as long as he is in command, We the People must be vigilant. 

The Democrat Party, which is essentially the Communist Party of America, controls the social consciousness through their Propaganda Media Complex.  With alarming regularity, they disseminate misinformation, disinformation, and outright lies designed to fool disengaged voters.  They don’t even care about backlash from conservatives bold enough to challenge them, because they turn immediately to ridicule, a strategy recommended by Saul Alinsky in Rules for Radicals.  Then they assume the moral high ground as if their self-righteous egos were somehow superior.  We the People must expose them as the far-left Marxists that they are.  Boycotts, social media campaigns targeting their advertisers.  Total assault on their credibility.  The Democrat Party may turn a new leaf under new leadership, but if it continues to stand on the platform they have been pushing since Obama rose to power, they must be totally destroyed.  We must go on offense.  We must strike while the iron is hot.  We must do everything we can possibly think of to discredit the Democrat Party on every front.  America is no longer governed by two legitimate political parties with different ideas on how to improve the lives of our citizenry.  There are only Patriots and Communists now and Patriots cannot allow Marxists to rule our descendants.    

Comments welcomed.

FOOTNOTES

[1]  Yon Ebright, K. ; The Alien Enemies Act, Explained ; Brennan Center ; October 9, 2024

The Alien Enemies Act, Explained | Brennan Center for Justice

[2]  United States Code: Alien Enemies, 50 U.S.C. §§ 21-24 ; p. 4410 ;

Library of Congress

United States Code: Alien Enemies, 50 U.S.C. §§ 21-24 (1940)

[3]  Proclamation by the President of the United States of America ; Invocation of the Alien Enemies Act Regarding the Invasion of the United States by Tren de Aragua ; March 15, 2025

Invocation of the Alien Enemies Act Regarding the Invasion of The United States by Tren De Aragua – The White House

[4]  Kunzelman, M. ; Appeals Court Won’t Lift Order That Barred Trump Administration From Deportations Under Wartime Law ; AP ; Updated March 26, 2025 at 8:54 PM EDT

Appeals court won’t halt order barring Trump administration from deportations under wartime law | AP News

[5]  Federal Judiciary Act (1789) ; National Archives

Federal Judiciary Act (1789) | National Archives

[6]  Marbury v. Madison ; Wikipedia

Marbury v. Madison – Wikipedia

[7]  Dowling, M. ; Judge Boasberg’s Daughter Provides Legal Advice to Criminal Aliens ; Independent Sentinel ; March 18, 2025

Judge Boasberg’s Daughter Provides Legal Advice to Criminal Aliens

[8]  Rahman, K. ;Full List of Judges Who Have Thwarted the Trump Administration So Far ; Newsweek ; Updated February 11, 2025 12:40 PM EST

The Headline seems to be bragging as a badge of honor

This piece predates the Boasberg injunctionFull List of Judges Who Have Thwarted the Trump Administration So Far – Newsweek

Thomas Paine: American Philosopher, & Revolutionary

From 1776 through the formation of The Constitution I helped create America. Now I have returned to help save America. American Patriots must join together, speak out in free and open discussion to fight the “woke” anti-American mob, and further the cause of FREEDOM.

Biden Pardons His Family 22 Minutes Before Trump is Sworn In

I suppose it’s not surprising that former President Biden pardoned five members of his own family as his last act in office.  He lied to the American people repeatedly that he would not pardon his son and then he did.  Hunter Biden was indicted for tax evasion and weapons charges.

In September of 2024, Hunter was convicted in Los Angeles of three felony tax evasion counts and six misdemeanor counts after pleading guilty with no plea bargain.  His plea was accepted by the Judge who scheduled sentencing for December 16, 2024, whereby he faced a maximum sentence of 17 years in prison. [1]   

Would any sane person plead guilty without seeking a deal unless he had been assured by his father that he would be pardoned from all his crimes?  

In a separate case, brought in Delaware, Hunter was convicted of three felonies related to the purchase of a revolver in 2018 when he lied on a mandatory gun-purchase form by saying he was not illegally using or addicted to drugs.  At the time, the President said he would accept the outcome and “continue to respect the judicial process as Hunter considers an appeal”. [2]

Now we know that Hunter never had anything to worry about.  Hunter was granted a “full and unconditional pardon” for all crimes he “committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 2014 through December 1, 2024,” by his father on December 1, 2024, just 11 days before he was scheduled to be sentenced in his gun conviction case. [3]

The pardon just happens to cover the period of time when Hunter first conducted business deals with the corrupt Ukrainian energy company Burisma.

As you may recall, Joe Biden bragged in a 2018 video taken during a Council on Foreign Relations interview, about withholding a billion dollars in aid to Ukraine unless they fired the Prosecutor who was investigating his son’s business arrangements with Burisma.  Low and behold, they fired the Prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, and Biden, then President Obama’s V.P. and liaison for the Ukraine, authorized the aid.  This interview was clear evidence that Joe Biden was corrupt, and a window into the money laundering operations his son was conducting for the personal benefit of the Biden family.  Hunter Biden had no experience whatsoever in the energy sector and no legitimate reason to be engaged in business deals in the Ukraine.  Since then, all kinds of evidence has surfaced regarding Hunter’s business deals in China, Kazakhstan, and other foreign countries, with over 100 offshore shell companies and secret accounts popping up.  Somehow investigations were stonewalled and the Propaganda Media Complex covered for them until Biden got into the White House in January 2021, at which point we were all supposed to forget about it.

Fast forward to January 20, 2025, Joe Biden’s final day in office, and loose ends need to be wrapped up, so Biden calculates the timing of his last act as President to be announced just minutes before President-Elect Trump is sworn in as the 47^th President.  In fact, the announcement that Biden was granting a “full and unconditional pardon” to five members of his own family, wasn’t made until Trump and the entire Inauguration Party were in position in the Capitol Rotunda.

There was no way for Trump to be informed of the pardon before he finished his speech.  Judging by the remarks Trump made that essentially blasted the previous administration for a horrendous performance, you can assume he would have criticized Biden’s pardon in the harshest terms.  Later that night, as Trump was signing Executive Orders and fielding questions from the White House Press Corps, he was asked by Peter Doocy of Fox News whether Biden had left the traditional letter in the drawer of the Resolute Desk, to which Trump reacted and pulled out an envelope addressed to “47”.  I have to wonder whether we will ever hear about the complete content of that letter, but I’d surmise there is some “juicy” thumb-nosing language that basically boasts that the Bidens are untouchable.

As Quid Pro Joe, the experienced criminal, once said, “Nobody fucks with the Bidens.”

The Senate Confirmation Hearing of Pam Bondi

On Wednesday, January 15, 2025, the Honorable Pamela Jo Bondi, former defense lawyer during President Trump’s first impeachment trial, and Attorney General for the state of Florida from 2011 to 2019, appeared before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary for confirmation hearings on her nomination for Attorney General of the United States.

Ms. Bondi has the support of numerous legal and law enforcement organizations and is expected to be confirmed, but Democrats never pass on an opportunity to degrade the character of their political opposition with personal attacks and attempts to cast doubt on the worthiness of a nominee.  The hearing for Attorney General was more of the same.

Every Democrat on the committee had certainly seen the memo, from Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-IL), or perhaps a higher authority, that Ms. Bondi should be repeatedly questioned on their “concerns” that she might use her position to weaponize the Justice Department against political opponents of the Trump administration.  Imagine “lieutenants” of the Biden regime acting all high and mighty and offended that the Attorney General would even think of such an abuse of power.  Apparently, they are tone deaf and totally blind to that exact strategy perpetrated against then former President Trump for four long years in all-out lawfare designed to prevent him from retaking the White House.  Mindboggling hypocrisy.

She consistently stated that she would follow the law, which is the proper response.

During the hearing, Sen. Blumenthal (D-CT) asked the nominee, “Can you say ‘no’ to the President of the United States when he asks you to do something unethical or illegal?”  Notice Blumenthal presumes Trump will ask her to do something, not whether she would say no if he asks.

Next up for the Democrats was Sen. Hirono (D-HI), the 77 year-old disgrace representing Hawaii.  Her first question was, “Since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?”  Does she have some evidence to present that would embarrass Ms. Bondi, or is that just an attempt to degrade the nominee’s character?

Later, Hirono states that “in fact, President Elect Trump considers the DOJ to be his law firm” and follows that up with, “If President Elect Trump asks, suggests, or hints that you, as Attorney General, should investigate one of his perceived enemies, would you do so?”

Ms. Bondi reiterated that the DOJ would make charging decisions, saying, “It is the Department of Justice’s decision to determine what cases will be prosecuted.”

I have a simple solution that could allay the Democrat fears, and would keep President Trump’s hands clean.

Open letter to the President of the United States

We the People respectfully suggest to Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, that you, sir, refrain from making any directives, requests, or suggestions, to the Attorney General regarding prosecutorial discretion of any American citizens.

It will not be necessary for you to communicate directly, or indirectly, with the Attorney General in regards to any perceived political targeting you may have been subject to from the previous administration.  Further, we recommend that you record every conversation you have with the Attorney General in an effort to defend yourself against any future lawfare.

We the People have your back.  We know who the corrupt politicians are and we will urge the Attorney General to investigate, indict and prosecute all of them to the letter of the law.

We the People simply ask that you remain “on the sideline”.  We’ve got this one.

This is not a revenge campaign.  This is a justice campaign, and We the People demand justice.

Signed, We the People

The Attorney General Must Enforce the Law

Open letter to the Attorney General of the United States

We the People hereby request that the Attorney General of the United States conducts thorough investigations into the actions taken by all corrupt politicians that violate existing federal statutes, specifically for violations of federal statute 18 U.S. Code § 595 – Interference by administrative employees of Federal, State, or Territorial Governments, and other crimes that may be discovered, including but not limited to:

18 U.S. Code § 594 – Intimidation of Voters

18 U.S. Code § 610 – Coercion of Political Activity

18 U.S. Code § 1505 – Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

We hereby refer for prosecution, the following:

Joseph R. Biden, Jr., former President of the United States

Merrick B. Garland. former Attorney General of the United States

Christopher A. Wray, former Director of the FBI

John L. Smith, former Special Counsel for the U.S. Dept. of Justice

Alvin Bragg, Manhattan District Attorney

Letitia A. James, Attorney General for the State of New York

Fani T. Willis, District Attorney for Fulton County, Georgia

Jared S. Polis, Governor of Colorado

 . . . and others as may be determined during the course of investigations.

It is of utmost importance that full investigations be undertaken to assure the American people that the unprecedented “lawfare” conducted against political opponents shall be prevented in the future by holding those who perpetrated these acts accountable for their corrupt behavior.

This is not a campaign of revenge or retribution.  This is the proper course for exacting justice, deterring abuse of power, and restoring faith in the Department of Justice.

Signed, We the People

Comments welcomed.

FOOTNOTES

[1]  Robert Hunter Biden Convicted on Three Felony Tax Offenses and Six Misdemeanor Tax Offenses ; U.S. Department of Justice Press Release ; September 5, 2024

Special Counsel David C. Weiss’s Office | Robert Hunter Biden Convicted on Three Felony Tax Offenses and Six Misdemeanor Tax Offenses | United States Department of Justice

[2]  Chase, R., Lauer, C., Kunzelman, M., Durkin Richer, A., Long, C. ; President Joe Biden’s Son, Hunter Biden, is Convicted of all 3 Felonies in Federal Gun Trial ; AP News ; June 11, 2024

Hunter Biden convicted of all 3 felonies in federal gun trial | AP News

[3]  Lee, C., Fitzpatrick, S. ; President Biden Pardons His Son Hunter Biden ; NBC News ; December 1, 2024

President Biden pardons his son Hunter Biden

Thomas Paine: American Philosopher, & Revolutionary

From 1776 through the formation of The Constitution I helped create America. Now I have returned to help save America. American Patriots must join together, speak out in free and open discussion to fight the “woke” anti-American mob, and further the cause of FREEDOM.

The 2024 Election

I had planned to save this essay until the final votes had been tabulated but it has now been 2-1/2 weeks since Election Day and some states are still counting.  We knew going in that “election officials” were not to be trusted, particularly in the seven “battleground” states (AZ, GA, MI, NC, NV, PA, and WI) where the presidential election would be decided.  I suspect that Obama’s 30,000+ member army of activists, a.k.a. “Organizing for Action”, are not only thoroughly entrenched in the federal bureaucracy, but also have infiltrated the key states by obtaining certification as “election officials”.  They are they operatives who clandestinely rig vote tabulations by programming the machines to switch votes, re-scanning selected ballots, stealing mail-in ballots, harvesting pre-fabricated phony ballots, and other methods.  Obama’s army certainly isn’t limited to a “ready-to-march” bunch of college kids and angry suburban women waiting for the next “mostly peaceful protest” to be announced.  They are working to advance Obama’s “fundamental transformation” of America communist agenda with utmost determination.

As it turned out, and I still can’t believe it, Trump’s MAGA movement was perhaps “too big to rig”.  Patriots, many of whom have been quietly waiting to come out of the woodwork, voted in great numbers in a total rejection of the Democrats record of failure on many fronts.  All the polls in the last few months, particularly after Kamala was inserted by coup, projected a razor-thin race that could be determined by a few thousand votes here and there.  Many pundits believe the polls were as phony as the Democrat ballots.  They were skewed and biased by “news organizations” (I use that term lightly) who had the incentives to discourage voter turn-out and make it seem like Harris had an excellent chance to win so that the Democrat rigging would go unnoticed and election denials would be unacceptable.  They had successfully stolen the 2020 election and they had every reason to believe they could do it again.

Here are some results of the presidential race per the latest available data

Image depicts the Electoral College vote and the popular vote totals of the presidential election as of 22 Nov 2024.  It is noteworthy that Trump’s popular vote margin was much higher on the morning of 6 Nov 2024.  Apparently, late counting of votes is almost exclusively Democrat votes. [1]

Speaking of Cheating

It’s amazing how vehemently the full spectrum of liberalism denies there is any “widespread” cheating In our elections, yet every time you turn around, you hear of another story, typically from a state that just happens to be one of the so-called “battleground” states. 

Here is one right here in Pennsylvania, close to where I live, that was in the news this week.  It has been featured on Fox News (where would we be without them?) and has been summarized by Breitbart in an article titled, “Bucks County Pennsylvania, Election Official Apologizes for Saying Court Precedent ‘Doesn’t Matter Anymore’”.

Essentially, the Bucks County Board of Commissioners Vice-Chair, Robert Harvie, Jr. and Commissioner Diane Ellis-Marseglia, in a November 12 meeting, moved in a 2-1 vote to count 405 mis-dated, or undated, mail-in ballots, in bold defiance of the state Supreme Court.  Two days later, in a November 14 meeting, the day after the state announced a mandatory recount in the Senate race between incumbent Bob Casey (D) and Senator-Elect Dave McCormick (R) who held a lead of over 17,000 votes and had been declared the winner by the AP, the same two Commissioners moved to count provisional ballots missing required signatures, despite the State Supreme Court ruling that ballots missing signatures were not legitimate, Ellis-Marseglia openly stating that, “I think we all know that precedent by a court doesn’t matter anymore in this country, and people violate laws any time they want.”  The two Commissioners then voted to count the ballots over objections from the County legal counsel.

On Wednesday, November 20, the day the recount began, in front of an angry crowd, Ellis-Marseglia apologized for her previous comments, probably under advice that she could be prosecuted for several federal election crimes.

The point is, this is not an isolated incident.  Stories like this pop up all the time and it just shows how Democrats see themselves as immune from legal jeopardy.  They truly believe they are above the law because they get away with virtually anything they want.  We the Patriots need to stand up and be heard.  We the Patriots urge the Attorney General of the United States to hold these people accountable for every statute they violate.  The Trump administration has a clear mandate to clean up corruption everywhere it is found. [2]  

Gratitude to All Who Helped Preserve Our Republic

We the Patriots have good reason to celebrate Trump’s great victory as he was the last hope to save America from the destruction wreaked by Obama and his radical Marxist Democrat Party.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all of you for seeing the light and getting out there to cast your ballot.  Every ballot counted (at least we hope so) towards preserving our republic, our American values, our culture, our institutions, and our freedoms.

We Have Won a Major Battle But The War is Not Over

The 2024 election was our Saratoga, our Trenton, a tremendous victory that may have turned the tide against seemingly insurmountable odds, but the war is not over.  The enemy is regrouping every day.  Obama is not going to disband his army and ride off into retirement.  His life-long hatred of America and everything she stands for has not been extinguished.  We have dealt him a serious blow but our resolve must be sustained.  This war against his communist agenda is in the early stages.  We must completely destroy the leadership and the direction of the Democrat Party.  Their Marxist ideology must be eradicated from American politics.

We must fight them at the ballot box at every opportunity, and in the meantime, we must ensure that the Department of Justice under the presumed direction of newly nominated Pam Bondi, former Attorney General for the state of Florida, is doing everything they can to prosecute the criminal elements of the Democrat Party.  No quarter.  No immunity.  No dead-end investigations that take years to recognize what we already know.

Obama’s army will be difficult to root out completely, but that is the task at hand.

It cannot be forgotten that radical Marxists adhere to the mantra “by any means necessary”.  There is nothing they wouldn’t do to gain, and retain power, because their ultimate goal is permanent one-party rule.

May the ghosts of our forefathers guide us in defeating the leviathan that has hijacked the federal bureaucracy.  Do not get complacent.  Stay committed to the cause.  Stay the course.  Yorktown is on the horizon.    

Comments welcomed.

FOOTNOTES

[1]  2024 Election Results ; Google ; as of 22 Nov 2024

2024 election results popular vote – Google Search

[2]  Breitbart News ; “Bucks County Pennsylvania, Election Official Apologizes for Saying Court Precedent ‘Doesn’t Matter Anymore’”.

wearebreitbart Instagram article

Thomas Paine: American Philosopher, & Revolutionary

From 1776 through the formation of The Constitution I helped create America. Now I have returned to help save America. American Patriots must join together, speak out in free and open discussion to fight the “woke” anti-American mob, and further the cause of FREEDOM.

Where Are We Now ?

For the past seemingly endless months, we have witnessed the public political mud-slinging from both sides ad nauseum and are probably looking forward to Election Day 2024.  The good news is, we are in the final week.  The bad news is, one side is going to lose their collective minds over the results, whether the vote count is legitimate, or fraudulent.  With just days to go, we are being led to believe the race for President is a “toss up” and tension is building.

On one hand, we have polls compiled by numerous organizations that emphasize how close the race is in the seven battleground states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) showing a trend towards Trump whereby not long ago, he was trailing by a couple points. 

Current polling as of 29 October 2024: Real Clear Politics Average in the seven battleground states show Trump leading by narrow margins in six, and Harris with a slim margin in Michigan. [1]

On the other hand, none of those polls can be trusted.  In 2016 Hillary thought she was going to win comfortably.  I’m not sure the polls aren’t part of the propaganda being thrust on us with the full intention of deceiving the voting populace.  The point is, DON’T TRUST ANY POLL.  We the People cannot afford to get comfortable like Hillary did.  We MUST vote and we MUST vote AGAINST the Democrats and their Propaganda Media Complex.

On the Brink of History

We are now on the brink of history in American politics.  Either Trump will win despite tremendous headwinds generated by the Democrat machine with their well-entrenched weaponized federal bureaucracy, and their propaganda arm comprised of all the mainstream media outlets, or Harris will somehow prevail despite the overwhelming sentiment felt across the country in opposition to her failed co-administration with Joe Biden.

There is no denying the Biden-Harris record of complete failure, falling on the wrong side of virtually every issue, from the economy and inflation, to the border crisis, to the resulting soaring crime rate, to their disastrous foreign policy, to their unchecked corruption, and their relentless attacks on the Constitution in an effort to implement Obama’s “fundamental transformation” of America into a communist nation.  Democrats and their radical left-wing Marxist minions are literally destroying America, by design.  The only issue they poll favorably on is abortion, by appealing to women on their health care.  So, the Harris campaign has produced a slew of ads that blatantly lie about Trump’s position on abortion, expecting them to believe the ads, because they know that their voting base is too stupid to be aware of the facts.  The ads I’m referring to claim Trump will enact a nation-wide abortion ban.  That of course, is totally false as the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022, essentially returning the abortion issue back to the states.  It is now in the hands of the people of each state to decide what types of abortion, if any, are acceptable.  The federal government has nothing to do with it.  Trump has nothing to do with it beyond his appointment of three SCOTUS judges who were part of the decision rendered during Biden’s administration.  Trump has even stated that he supports abortion on the three so-called “exceptions” of rape, incest, and the health of the mother. The voters that lose their minds on this issue should realize their fight is at the state level.

Every other issue is clearly in Trump’s wheelhouse.  So the Harris campaign has resorted to name-calling and pandering with false promises. 

When you witness the rallies each candidate holds, it’s pretty obvious the Trump campaign has generated a lot more enthusiasm just by the sheer numbers of attendees.  This past Sunday, he drew over 20,000 to his rally at Madison Square Garden in the heavily Democratic stronghold of New York City, with an estimated 50,000 more outside.  In contrast, Harris recently held a rally in Arizona attended by about 3,000 people and over 2,000 of them were bussed in from California.

Of course, I and most of you, are viewing this through a “red” lens, and feel the groundswell is in our favor, but it’s hard to ignore the simple logic and common sense that guides us in recognizing the much better choice.

If Harris comes out the other side of Election Day, or perhaps I should say Election Week, as the “winner”, there is going to be intense scrutiny of the vote totals, similar to 2020.  The left and the Propaganda Media Complex will vilify and ridicule all inquisitions as “election denial” just like last time, but we will have good reason to be skeptical.  After all, Harris was the most unpopular Vice President in history until four days after Biden’s disastrous debate with Trump on 27 June 2024.  That’s when the Democrat Party shifted into Plan B and ousted Biden in a coup to install Harris, who never earned a single vote, and was all of a sudden the media darling of the left.  By the time the smoke had cleared, she was the DNC nominee and the Democrats were calling Trump a “threat to our democracy”.  Hypocrisy on steroids.

President-Elect Harris would be an almost certain stolen election.  I still believe they stole the 2020 election for “basement” Joe, and I believe they stole several races in the 2022 mid-terms, so it’s not like they haven’t perfected it yet.  Trump may get 100,000,000 votes, but they will fabricate 105,000,000 phony ballots.  And that, my fellow Patriots, is my biggest fear.  I truly believe the only way Trump can win is by getting over 50% of all registered voters, AND making sure those votes are certified.  It would be nearly impossible to deny a majority of all registered voters.  But even then, you can be sure the Democrats would devise a scheme to delegitimize the vote.

The Last Chance to Save America

They always say “this is the most important election ever”, but in this case it’s true.  This is literally the last chance to save America from the throes of communism.  This is not a drill.

If you have been paying attention, you may have come to understand that our American values have been threatened by the emergence of Barack Hussein Obama.  In a campaign speech at Columbia, Missouri on the 30^th of October 2008, Obama said, “we are five days away from the fundamental transformation of the United States”.  No one dared to ask what he meant by that.  As it turned out, he has been relentlessly chipping away at our freedoms, attacking the Constitution, and overwhelming our institutional systems using Saul Alinsky’s blueprint for creating a socialist state.  Obama was heavily influenced by Frank Marshall Davis, identified as an activist member of the Communist Party USA and tracked by the FBI in the 30’s and 40’s.  He was schooled under Islamic doctrines in Indonesia, worked as a community organizer under the Marxist playbook of Saul Alinsky.  He even branded his 30,000 member activist army “Organizing for Action”, a thinly veiled reference to Alinsky’s “Organization for Action”.  He is a master of deception, a highly-regarded stratagem of jihad.  You can read more about Obama in depth in my earlier blog posts, but suffice it to say here, he is the head of the snake, the mastermind behind everything that has transpired and everything happening today.  When the Democrat Party was in the planning stages of “how to steal elections”, you can be sure it was Obama who encouraged them and convinced them they could get away with it simply by running out the clock while being protected by the media.  He did it in 2012 with the Benghazi scandal just seven weeks before the election of 2012.  They pulled it off in 2020 and they are doing it again right now.  Democrats, as of this writing, are above the law.  If Trump can pull off the miracle, We the People should demand the end of their impunity.

Just yesterday in a virtual event Biden in referencing a comedian at Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally who joked that Puerto Rico was a floating island of garbage, said, “the only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters”, essentially calling Trump’s supporters “garbage”.  They tried to spin the comment by claiming he meant the comedians’ fans, but that excuse doesn’t make sense.

In the lead up to the 2008 election, when Obama was a Senator running for his first term, he referred to Republicans as “clingers”, meaning they had been clinging to their guns, religion, and resentments against politicians who offered hollow promises.  He was the first to alienate half the country and it doesn’t appear to be a situation where he misspoke.  It was a deliberate attempt to divide the country that has continued to this day, following Alinsky’s blueprint outlined in his book Rules for Radicals.

Under The Ideology of Change, Alinsky wrote,

“The prerequisite for an ideology is possession of a basic truth. For example, a Marxist begins with his prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists. From this he logically proceeds to the revolution to end capitalism, then into the third stage of reorganization into a new social order or the dictatorship of the proletariat, and finally the last stage—the political paradise of communism.” [2]

Obama is so heavily invested in his agenda to convert America into a communist nation, it is impossible to overlook all the evidence.

We the People have suffered the consequences of America’s biggest mistake for far too long.  The choice is clear.  This is your last chance to save America.  Give him one more term and the “transformation” will be complete.  Failure is not an option.

It is literally Patriots vs. Marxists.

It is literally America vs. Communism.

“Fight fight fight”

  —  Donald J. Trump, Butler, Pennsylvania, July 13, 2024

Vote TRUMP for President 

IT IS TIME FOR THE GARBAGE TO TAKE OUT THE TRASH !

Comments welcomed.

FOOTNOTES

[1]  Top Battlegrounds – RCP Average

[2]  Alinsky, Saul D. ; Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals ;  Random House, New York, Vintage Books Edition, 1989 ; p. 25

Thomas Paine: American Philosopher, & Revolutionary

From 1776 through the formation of The Constitution I helped create America. Now I have returned to help save America. American Patriots must join together, speak out in free and open discussion to fight the “woke” anti-American mob, and further the cause of FREEDOM.

Two Events

We have just witnessed an extraordinary sequence of events in American history that transpired over the course of nine days, from Saturday the 13^th through Sunday the 21^st of July 2024.  In that brief period we watched the near assassination of former President Donald J. Trump on live television and barely a week later, incumbent President Joseph R. Biden dropped out of the race under pressure from high-ranking members of his own party and the national media.

What was behind both of those happenings remains unclear amid a plethora of unanswered questions.

The Assassination Attempt on Trump

At 6:11 PM on a hot afternoon on the fairgrounds of the Butler Farm Show in Butler Township Pennsylvania, a 20 year old loner from Bethel Park, a suburb south of Pittsburgh, fired eight shots from the rooftop of the AGR building with intent to assassinate the former President who was just a few minutes into his speech at a campaign rally.  The first shot grazed the upper part of Trump’s right ear just milliseconds after he turned his head.  Trump had turned to his right, facing he gunman, and had turned his head further towards his right shoulder, seconds earlier and then turned his head back straight just as the shooter, identified as Thomas Matthew Crooks, squeezed his trigger.  If Trump had not returned his head forward at that critical moment, he would have suffered a kill shot.  The AR-15 recovered on the roof after a Secret Service sniper killed the shooter had been purchased legally by the gunman’s father and fires a 5.56 NATO bullet that leaves the barrel at 3,251 feet per second.  The distance from the shooter’s position to the podium where Trump was speaking was estimated at 130 yards, meaning the projectile would have travelled that distance in less than 1/8^th of a second.  Some say it was divine intervention that saved Trump’s life, that God wasn’t finished with him yet.

Butler Farm Show fairgrounds showing locations of vicims and AGR building where Thomas Matthew Crooks fired eight shots in assassination attempt.

The AGR building complex where Crooks ascended to the rooftop had a clear line of sight to the stage but was for some reason, not included in the “interior perimeter” by the Secret Service advance assessment team.  Typically the Secret Service is advised of the upcoming campaign schedule and performs a site survey of the proposed venue, then coordinates security with state and local authorities.  The Secret Service has acknowledged they are responsible for the overall security procedures but left the AGR building in the hands of local police.  The Butler Township Police have stated they assigned 1/3^rd of their total force to the event but they were only tasked with traffic control.  Clearly, a building that close to the stage with an open line of sight should have been deemed a serious threat and manned by Secret Service Agents. 

After several critical seconds while Secret Service counter-sniper teams zeroed in on Crooks, taking him out with a head shot from the roof of a small building behind the stage, the agents covering Trump were told the shooter was down, he told them he was OK, rose to his feet, raised his right fist in defiance and shouted “fight, fight, fight” with blood streaming down his cheek.  Then the Secret Service Agents rushed him to a waiting government SUV not knowing whether another threat was lurking and he was whisked away.

Iconic image captured by photojournalist Evan Vucci shows Trump standing tall with raised fist in front of a large American flag.

But not all was fine and dandy that Saturday evening.  There were two gunshot victims in serious condition rushed to the hospital and one man fatally shot in the head as he bravely covered his wife and daughters in the grandstands beyond Trump.  Corey Comperatore, a 50 year old former fire chief of the Buffalo Township Fire Department was the fatality.  The two other victims were 74 year old James Copenhaver and 57 year old David Dutch.  They are both now in stable condition and expected to survive their serious wounds.  

Two days later the Republican National Convention convened in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and though Trump was not scheduled to make his nomination speech until Thursday night the 25^th, he showed up each night with his freshly bandaged ear in a show of strength.  The convention was a rousing success, energizing the Republican Party in support of the man who narrowly escaped certain death.

Biden Throws in the Towel Under Pressure

By the time the RNC Convention wrapped up Democrat Party elites were openly calling for Joe Biden to terminate his campaign.  What brought that on?

It had become abundantly clear that Biden’s mental acuity has been severely diminished with his disastrous presidential debate performance on 27 June.  During that 90 minute exposè he looked like a deer in the headlights and often seemed to be incapable of gathering his thoughts.  The Democrats tried to cover for him, brushing it off as a “bad night”, and putting on a phony face for two weeks leading up to the RNC Convention as Biden defiantly stated he was their best bet to defeat Trump, but the damage had been done and even the extremely biased Propaganda Media Complex was turning on him.  It wasn’t long before congressional leaders were hopping on the bandwagon.  On Wednesday 17 July Biden tested positive for COVID while campaigning in Nevada.  He looked very weak navigating the short stairway of Air Force One en route to Rehoboth Beach, Delaware for recuperation.  Going into the weekend of 19 July, rumors were circulating that Biden was about to drop out and Sunday afternoon at about 1:46 PM it was announced via a letter posted to X, formerly Twitter,

also announcing that he was endorsing his Vice President, Kamala Harris, to receive his pledged delegates as the nominee of the Democrat Party.  It was not what he wanted to do, but intense pressure from allies within his own party forced the issue in a virtual palace coup d’ ètat.

And just like that, the party that has been warning Americans that Trump was a “threat to our democracy” has just disenfranchised 14 million Democrat voters who overwhelmingly supported him as their nominee and declared that they should replace him with a puppet of their choosing.  It would be one thing if Biden had recently been diagnosed with a terminal disease, but his inner circle and many party elites knew of his dementia a long time ago and have been lying about it for years.  The closely guarded cover up has been perpetrated on the American people for virtually the entire time.  Then they proceeded to rig the primary system and scam their own voters.  Now that his polling numbers don’t look so promising, they have no further use for him and a new face that received exactly zero votes, must be installed.  If that’s not a threat to our democracy, what is? It might be Harris, but don’t be shocked if they trot out somebody else at the convention, which opens on 19 August in Chicago.  Who do we know that rose from oblivion in Chicago and coincidently failed to endorse Kamala Harris?  Who better to stand in the spotlight as he pulls the strings of power to complete his “fundamental transformation” of America into a communist nation than Michelle Obama?  The media would be giddy with excitement and proclaim her as the savior of the Democrat Party.  The entire country would be bombarded 24/7 with campaign ads designed to make their low-information voters forget all about July and that one ‘bad night” June.  They will actually expect all of us to forget Biden’s disastrous administration and fall in line with their vision moving “forward”.  The party that just destroyed democracy will try to make you think they are saving us from a dictatorial Trump so they can rule us instead.

The Investigation

It had been nine days in July when we saw the attempted assassination of former President Donald J. Trump and the formal ending of incumbent President Joe Biden’s campaign, but many questions remain unresolved and it will take some time to complete several ongoing investigations.

The Secret Service has been reviewing the specific planning and execution of the Butler event that was an admitted catastrophic failure.  The Director of the service, Kimberly Cheatle, was subpoenaed to testify before the House Oversight Committee on Monday 22 July where she was grilled by members of both parties, looked as if she was withholding information, and coerced to resign before appearing again the next day.

United States Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle testifies before the House Oversight and Accountability Committee during a hearing in the Rayburn House Office Building on July 22 in Washington, D.C.

Christopher Wray, Director of the FBI appeared before Congress on Wednesday 24 July and appeared to be honest and forthcoming but suspicions of a cover up linger on the minds of many Americans. Due to some very puzzling open questions:

WHY was the AGR building left unguarded ?

WHY was there no response to the man on the roof with a rifle threat for 20 minutes after he was seen?

WHY was Trump allowed to take the stage despite the identified threat ?

WHAT communications are contained on Crooks’ cell phone ?

For now, I’m still in the “lone wolf’ camp but every shred of evidence must be analyzed for connections and any detail could persuade me that a conspiracy has been committed.  We the People demand answers and complete transparency.

Comments welcomed.

RETURN TO : Democrats Install Kamala by Crafty Coup

Thomas Paine: American Philosopher, & Revolutionary

From 1776 through the formation of The Constitution I helped create America. Now I have returned to help save America. American Patriots must join together, speak out in free and open discussion to fight the “woke” anti-American mob, and further the cause of FREEDOM.

The Federal Case Against Trump

On August 1, 2023, a federal grand jury indicted former President Donald J. Trump him on four counts for conduct that occurred during his Presidency following the November 2020 election.

The following is a summary of the allegations, written from the perspective of federal prosecutors.  It should be recognized that some of the language is presumptive, particularly in reference to terms such as “false claims”, “fraudulent electors”, and “false certificates”.  In real time, those actions were likely taken under circumstances in which the President had legitimate concerns.  

The indictment alleged that after losing that election, Trump conspired to overturn it by spreading knowingly false claims of election fraud to obstruct the collecting, counting, and certifying of the election results. According to the indictment, Trump advanced his goal through five primary means.

First, he and his co-conspirators “used knowingly false claims of election fraud to get state legislators and election officials to . . . change electoral votes for [Trump’s] opponent, Joseph R. Biden, Jr., to electoral votes for [Trump].” [1]

Second, Trump and his co-conspirators “organized fraudulent slates of electors in seven targeted states” and “caused these fraudulent electors to transmit their false certificates to the Vice President and other government officials to be counted at the certification proceeding on January 6.” [2]

In 1876, there was a disputed presidential election whereby Rutherford B. Hayes, the Republican Gov. of Ohio, won 165 electoral votes, but lost the popular vote to New York Gov. Samuel Tilden, who had secured 184 electoral votes.  However, those were the results of the initial count and there were 20 electoral votes unresolved from Florida, Louisiana, South Carolina, and Oregon.  Those 20 disputed electoral votes were presented to Congress by each party as “alternate” slates of electors from the respective four states.  There was no claim by the losing Democrat Party that they were “fake” electors.   Both slates were simply submitted to Congress for consideration.  To address the issue, Congress established an Electoral Commission which awarded all 20 disputed votes to Hayes, who became POTUS 19 by a single electoral vote.  So, despite precedent regarding the exact same circumstances, somehow when Trump attempts to ensure a free and fair election, in his official capacity as the sitting President, submitting an “alternate” slate of electors is construed as a crime, according to the Democrat Party and their advocates in the Propaganda Media Complex.

Third, Trump and his co-conspirators attempted to use the Justice Department “to conduct sham election crime investigations and to send a letter to the targeted states that falsely claimed that the Justice Department had identified significant concerns that may have impacted the election outcome.” [3] 

As President, it is entirely within his constitutional authority to communicate and coordinate with the Department of Justice, part of the Executive branch.

Fourth, Trump and his co-conspirators attempted to persuade “the Vice President to use his ceremonial role at the January 6 certification proceeding to fraudulently alter the election results.”  And when that failed, on the morning of January 6, they “repeated knowingly false claims of election fraud to gathered supporters, falsely told them that the Vice President had the authority to and might alter the election results, and directed them to the Capitol to obstruct the certification proceeding.” [4] 

The President has every right to communicate and direct his Vice President.  It is the prosecution’s assertion that the election results were legitimate and that Trump’s claims were “false”.  On January 6^th 2021, he did NOT “knowingly” repeat “false claims” as he had evidence of over 1,000 independent affiants who swore under penalty of perjury that they witnessed massive voter fraud.  At that time he had every reason to question those vote results and it is entirely within the scope of his authority to ensure that elections are free and fair.  Nor did he direct his supporters to obstruct the certification proceeding.

Fifth, when “a large and angry crowd . . . violently attacked the Capitol and halted the proceeding,” Trump and his coconspirators “exploited the disruption by redoubling efforts to levy false claims of election fraud and convince Members of Congress to further delay the certification.” [5] 

There are a lot of conflicting accounts related to events at the Capitol on January 6^th.  We saw videos of Trump supporters being escorted into the building by Capitol Police. We saw videos of anarchists breaking windows.  We saw videos of Trump supporters sitting in “official” chairs.  But there are multiple reports of Antifa and FBI operatives coercing the more “violent” behaviors in leadership roles.  Despite media and DNC claims of death on the scene, the only casualty was the killing of an unarmed 14-year Air Force veteran by the Capitol Police officer who was never charged.  Also, Trump offered to provide 10,000 National Guard troops ahead of time, but Nancy Pelosi declined the offer. And I have always wondered why the joint session needed to “run for cover”, or even delay their meeting, as it is almost certainly a secure room in which they were meeting.  It almost reeks of a government setup. 

Based on this alleged conduct, the indictment charged Trump with (1) conspiracy to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U. S. C. §371, (2) conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding in violation of §1512(k), (3) obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding in violation of §1512(c)(2), §2, and (4) conspiracy against rights in violation of §241.1 [f]

Let’s examine those statutes.

18 U. S. C. §371 – Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States

If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

If, however, the offense, the commission of which is the object of the conspiracy, is a misdemeanor only, the punishment for such conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor.  [6]

§1512(k) – Tampering with a witness, victim, or informant

(k) Whoever conspires to commit any offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.

§1512(c)(2) – Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant

(c)  Whoever corruptly—

     (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,  [7]

§2 – Principals

• Whoever commits an offense against the United States, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.  [8]

§241.1 [f] – Conspiracy against rights

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—  [9]

The Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision in Trump v. United States

On July 1, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) issued their decision in Trump v. United States that dealt with the question of presidential immunity for alleged criminal acts committed while a sitting President was in office.  It is a monumental decision in that SCOTUS has declared that any President has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions he may have taken while in office that fall within the sphere of his ambit, or purview, as official duties granted by the Constitution.  In their Opinion, written by Chief Justice Roberts, they meticulously distinguished the difference between absolute and presumptive immunities, and repeatedly stressed that the President is not protected from acts determined to be “unofficial”.

The Supreme Court acted fairly, they acted properly in their interpretation of the Constitution, and they acted with the highest possible degree of integrity.  The reaction from the uber-liberal media and prominent Democrats was despicable.  You can be sure that under the next Democrat administration there will be a push to pack the Supreme Court with as many liberal judges as necessary to swing the balance of power in their favor so they can dominate all three branches of government under an iron fist.  For now, the Supreme Court is the last firewall between our constitutional republic and communism.

The result of their decision, an outline of which I have provided under “Opinion of the Court”, is that the case brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith is remanded to the lower courts because their prosecution made no distinction between “official” and “unofficial” acts and the Supreme Court is not a court of first review.

Opinion of the Court

Full Disclosure:  Most of the text below is copied directly from the Opinion written by SCOTUS.  It is not all quoted due to the many sets of quotation marks within.  All footnotes are provided to quickly access the pertinent pages.  I’ve added my own comments to certain sections.  My remarks in this segment are italicized.

The first eight pages of this pdf document [10] is the syllabus of key points rendered in the Opinion, which provides more detail.  The court concluded the syllabus portion of their decision by writing:

“Enduring separation of powers principles guide our decision in this case. The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law. But under our system of separated powers, the President may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for his official acts. That immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office.” [11]

 “We conclude that the separation of powers principles explicated in our precedent necessitate at least a presumptive immunity from criminal prosecution for a President’s acts within the outer perimeter of his official responsibility. Such an immunity is required to safeguard the independence and effective functioning of the Executive Branch, and to enable the President to carry out his constitutional duties without undue caution.  At a minimum, the President must therefore be immune from prosecution for an official act unless the Government can show that applying a criminal prohibition to that act would pose no “dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch.” [12]

In other words, no President can be expected to act unencumbered if he needs to be consulted on legal jeopardy, particularly when dealing with matters requiring grave decisions.

No President should be subject to prosecution for decisions that may result in grave consequences, and must therefore have some protection against legal jeopardy that might encumber decisions regarding grave matters.  He must be free to act swiftly when necessary in order to uphold his oath of office to preserve and protect the citizenry.

“As for a President’s unofficial acts, there is no immunity . . .

The separation of powers does not bar a prosecution predicated on the President’s unofficial acts.” [13]

Here, the Court clearly decides that the President is not protected for “unofficial” acts, or acts committed beyond the scope of his constitutional authorities.

For example, the President can’t order the assassination of his primary political rival and expect to be immune from prosecution for obvious criminality.

The office of the presidency does not entitle the President to act as a King, or Dictator, as you likely heard many prominent Democrats and their Propaganda Media Complex talking heads crying about.  They are either lying or have obviously not read the Opinion in an effort to fear-monger the voters.  They actually expect you to believe everything they say without question.  And as usual, they all portray this using the exact same catch phrases, as if a memo was dispatched from central command.  This particular clause of the decision is clearly explained on page 4 of the syllabus.  Were they all so lazy and ignorant enough to not bother reading the first 4 pages before pontificating on its ramifications?  These reprobates need to be held to account.  Perhaps somebody should organize a campaign to boycott advertisers of the mainstream media and demand a return to legitimate journalism.  We the People want fair and balanced news, not propaganda designed to secure the permanent power structure of one political party.

“Determining whether a former President is entitled to immunity from a particular prosecution requires applying the principles we have laid out to his conduct at issue. The first step is to distinguish his official from unofficial actions. In this case, however, no court has thus far considered how to draw that distinction, in general or with respect to the conduct alleged in particular. Despite the unprecedented nature of this case, and the very significant constitutional questions that it raises, the lower courts rendered their decisions on a highly expedited basis. Because those courts categorically rejected any form of Presidential immunity, they did not analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment to decide which of it should be categorized as official and which unofficial.”  [14]

This is where SCOTUS is essentially reprimanding the lower courts for hastily prosecuting this case while failing to consider constitutional provisions or existing case law and laying the groundwork for their decision to remand back to the lower courts for thorough analysis.  The mere fact that the D.C. Circuit expedited this case in an attempt to convict Trump before the November election is further evidence that this case is politically motivated and arguably depicts election interference, an act that redirects criminality on those who brought the case. 

“Certain allegations—such as those involving Trump’s discussions with the Acting Attorney General—are readily categorized in light of the nature of the President’s official relationship to the office held by that individual. Other allegations—such as those involving Trump’s interactions with the Vice President, state officials, and certain private parties, and his comments to the general public—present more difficult questions. Although we identify several considerations pertinent to classifying those allegations and determining whether they are subject to immunity, that analysis ultimately is best left to the lower courts to perform in the first instance.”  [15]

I would strongly argue that the President’s communications with his Vice President and state officials is certainly within the “outer perimeter” of his official responsibility to ensure elections are free and fair.  I can’t see any way that could be disputed. 

“In dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire into the President’s motives. Such an inquiry would risk exposing even the most obvious instances of official conduct to judicial examination on the mere allegation of improper purpose, thereby intruding on the Article II interests that immunity seeks to protect. Indeed, “[i]t would seriously cripple the proper and effective administration of public affairs as entrusted to the executive branch of the government” [16]

Here, the court is saying that once it has been determined the alleged act falls within the scope of the President’s authority, motive cannot be considered further.  The investigation is over.

“The indictment broadly alleges that Trump and his coconspirators sought to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election.   It charges that they conspired to obstruct the January 6 congressional proceeding at which electoral votes are counted and certified, and the winner of the election is certified as President-elect.  As part of this conspiracy, Trump and his co-conspirators allegedly attempted to leverage the Justice Department’s power and authority to convince certain States to replace their legitimate electors with Trump’s fraudulent slates of electors.” [17]

My only comment with this particular statement is that SCOTUS misrepresents Trump’s attempt to submit “alternate” slate of electors, as was previously done in the election of 1876.  They were not “fraudulent” slates.

“Trump and his co-conspirators initiated with state legislators and election officials in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin regarding those States’ certification of electors.” [18]

“And the President cannot be prosecuted for conduct within his exclusive constitutional authority.  Trump is therefore absolutely immune from prosecution for the alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department officials.” [19]

In reference to Trump’s communications with his acting Attorney General, he is absolutely immune from prosecution and any inquiry regarding alleged motive.  I would argue, the same absolute immunity applies with respect to his communications with his Vice President and any state officials, such as the Georgia Secretary of State.

“The indictment’s allegations that Trump attempted to pressure the Vice President to take particular acts in connection with his role at the certification proceeding thus involve official conduct, and Trump is at least presumptively immune from prosecution for such conduct.” [20]

Here, the Court guides the lower courts future considerations by classifying all of Trump’s communications with the Vice President as actions that are at least presumptively immune.

“Trump and his co-conspirators initiated with state legislators and election officials in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin regarding those States’ certification of electors.” [21]

As I said above, the 5 states mentioned here were merely attempting to submit “alternate” slates of electors as the states of Florida, Louisiana, South Carolina, and Oregon did in the election of 1876.  Those 20 electoral votes were all awarded to Rutherford B. Hayes and elected him as the 19^th President by a single vote.  That could not have happened if those “alternate” slates had not been permitted to be submitted to the joint session of Congress.

Again, I argue the President has not only the right, but the duty, to ensure that elections are free and fair, and is entitled to communicate with state election officials.

The indictment alleges that Trump attempted to convince officials in those states to examine their election results and procedures and when they refused to alter their processes, he coerced them to submit “false certificates”, or “fraudulent” slates to the Vice President.  This is where I might suggest those state officials may not have had enough time to effectively audit every single vote to determine its validity and it would have been prudent to submit the “alternate” slates in case further examination revealed massive fraud.  In other words, delay the certification pending state audits.

The Supreme Court has remanded, the case, with guidance, back down to the “lower courts” for consideration of the distinction between official and unofficial actions allegedly committed by former President Trump in reference to his constitutional authority, something the District Court and the D.C. Circuit Court had hastily disregarded.  The reasoning is that SCOTUS is a court of final review and that prescribed analysis is best left to a court of first review.  In other words, SCOTUS has determined that the lower court(s) must first make determinations that correlate certain allegations to unofficial acts, then subject to appeal, before coming back to the Supreme Court.  

The SCOTUS Decision in Fischer

On the June 30, 2024 broadcast of Life, Liberty and Levin, host Mark Levin mentioned that Special Counsel Jack Smith was applying a creative legal theory to the Trump case in manipulating the interpretation of U.S. Code §1512, which is cited by Smith in two of the four federal charges against Trump.  Those charges relate to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, a federal law that established regulations and auditing requirements for public companies.  The law was passed in response to corporate scandals and the bursting of the dot-com bubble, and was created to protect shareholders, employees, and the public from fraudulent financial practices and accounting errors.  It has nothing to do with the so-called “insurrection” of January 6^th, and should be dropped entirely.  That leaves sections 371 and 241.

As defined in the segment titled “The Federal Case Against Trump”, the 371 statute reads, in part, “to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose . . . “

WHAT?  This statute was intended to address fraud committed by federal contractors.  I still don’t know how it’s applicable to Trump.

As defined in the segment titled “The Federal Case Against Trump”, the 241 statute reads, in part, “If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution . . . “  This statute was enacted in 1948 to protect the civil rights and prevent intimidation of black voters by the Ku Klux Klan.  It’s a pretty shaky charge to bring against Trump.

This case concerns the prosecution of petitioner Joseph Fischer for his conduct on January 6, 2021. That day, both Houses of Congress convened in a joint session to certify the votes in the 2020 Presidential election. While they did so, a crowd of supporters of then-President Donald Trump gathered outside the Capitol. As set forth in the criminal complaint against Fischer, some of the crowd eventually “forced entry” into the building, “breaking windows,” and “assaulting members of the U. S. Capitol Police.”  This breach of the Capitol caused Members of Congress to evacuate the Chambers and delayed the certification process. The complaint alleges that Fischer was one of those who invaded the building.

On Friday, June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court rendered a decision in Fischer v. United States, in which they cited 18 U.S. Code §1512(c)(1), wherein it states,  

(c)  Whoever corruptly—

     (1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (§1512(c)(2)as shown above) [22]

Judge Walker of the D.C. Circuit Court read the element of the statute – “corruptly” – as requiring a defendant to act with “an intent to procure an unlawful benefit.”

Chief Justice Roberts opinion [23] opens thusly;

“The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 imposes criminal liability on anyone who corruptly ‘alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding.’ 18 U. S. C. §1512(c)(1). The next subsection extends that prohibition to anyone who ‘otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so.’ §1512(c)(2). We consider whether this ‘otherwise’ clause should be read in light of the limited reach of the specific provision that precedes it.” [24]

“Prior to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, Section 1512 imposed criminal liability on anyone who ‘knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person’ to, among other things, shred documents. 18 U. S. C. §1512(b)(2)(B) (2000 ed.). But the Enron accounting scandal revealed a loophole: Although Enron’s ‘outside auditor, Arthur Andersen LLP, had systematically destroyed potentially incriminating documents,’ the statute curiously failed to impos[e] liability on a person who destroys records himself.  As a result, prosecutors had to prove that higher-ups at Enron and Arthur Andersen persuaded someone else to shred documents rather than the more obvious theory that someone who shreds documents is liable for doing so.  The parties agree that to plug this loophole, Congress enacted Section 1512(c)—the provision at issue here—as part of the broader Sarbanes-Oxley Act. It would be peculiar to conclude that in closing the Enron gap, Congress actually hid away in the second part of the third subsection of Section 1512 a catchall provision that reaches far beyond the document shredding and similar scenarios that prompted the legislation in the first place. The better conclusion is that subsection (c)(2) was designed by Congress to capture other forms of evidence and other means of impairing its integrity or availability beyond those Congress specified in (c)(1).” [25] 

In Count Three, the only count now before us, the Government charged Fischer with violating 18 U. S. C. §1512(c)(2). Fischer moved to dismiss that count, arguing that the provision criminalizes only attempts to impair the availability or integrity of evidence. The District Court granted his motion in relevant part. It concluded that the scope of Section 1512(c)(2) is limited by subsection (c)(1) and therefore requires the defendant to “‘have taken some action with respect to a document, record, or other object.’”

The Court thus decided:

To prove a violation of Section 1512(c)(2), the Government must establish that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or as we earlier explained, other things used in the proceeding, or attempted to do so. See supra, at 9. The judgment of the D. C. Circuit is therefore vacated, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. On remand, the D. C. Circuit may assess the sufficiency of Count Three of Fischer’s indictment in light of our interpretation of Section 1512(c)(2). [26]

Wherein the Justice Department is citing 18 U. S. C. §1512(c)(2) in the Fischer case, they are citing Trump for violating 18 U. S. C. §1512(c)(1), making the Fischer  decision relevant to Trump’s case.  Neither on January 6^th, nor in the New York case, did Trump “impair the availability or integrity of evidence”.  It is arguable that he personally obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding on January 6^th, but the happenings in and around the Capitol were actions of other actors, some of whom may not have been true Trump supporters.  And when the transcript of his speech that morning is reviewed, it is clear that he urged the crowd to “peacefully and patriotically” march down to the Capitol.  He clearly did not incite a riot, or engage in any sedition, or insurrection, or the federal indictment would have included those charges.

The Status in the Four Jurisdictions

In New York – Trump was convicted on May 30, 2024 of falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment reimbursement to his lawyer, who was the star witness against him. 

In January 2017, Trump, Weisselberg and Cohen (Lawyer A) agree the lawyer would be paid the $420,000 (previously paid by Cohen) through 12 monthly payments of $35,000 over the course of 2017, according to court documents. Cohen (Lawyer A) was to send an invoice to the Trump Org each month falsely requesting a payment of $35,000 for legal services rendered. Cohen (Lawyer A) does not have a retainer agreement with Trump or the Trump Organization, according to prosecutors.

However, paying the woman for her silence is NOT a crime.  The alleged crime was “falsifying” the accounting ledgers by classifying the payments as “legal expenses” to conceal the criminal conduct of the “scheme to boost his election chances.” [27]

Election interference is covered by federal statutes.

All the reimbursements were made after Trump was inaugurated.

The New York state laws cited in the indictment are thoroughly reviewed in my previous post.  You can see my analysis HERE

Judge Juan Merchan has a conflict of interest because his daughter works for a Democratic consulting firm that donated to the Biden campaign in 2020, though he refused to recuse himself.

On July 1, 2024, Trump’s legal team requests Judge Merchan to throw out the conviction on the grounds that the jury saw evidence that should have been protected by presidential immunity, citing the SCOTUS decision.

Judge Merchan has delayed the previously scheduled sentencing hearing from July 11 to September 18, 2024 pending further review.

In Georgia – District Attorney Fani Willis was scheduled for a review by the Fulton County Board of Ethics for conflict of interest in that she may have benefitted financially through her romantic involvement with a prosecutor she hired to assist her in the case.  On March 7, 2024, Fulton County punted their review saying she was not a county employee, but a state constitutional officer and referred any review to the Georgia State Ethics Commission.

That prosecutor, Nathan Wade, stepped down from his position under an ultimatum issued by Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott MacAfee.  The case is currently being reviewed by the Georgia Court of Appeals in consideration of filings by Trump and 8 co-defendants who have moved to disqualify Willis.  Arguments are tentatively scheduled to begin on October 4, 2024, with rulings not expected until mid-March 2025. 

The SCOTUS immunity decision casts further doubt on the case because Trump, as President, had every right to communicate with state employees and inquire about election integrity, and certainly falls within the scope of his “official” duties to ensure the election was free and fair.  His call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger asking him (perhaps rhetorically) to “find 11,780 votes” is asserted by prosecutors to be the most damning evidence.  There is no proof that Trump was demanding Raffensberger to manufacture phony ballots.  The context of the call is extremely important in that it may show Trump’s quote to simply be a wish.

Furthermore, election interference falls under the jurisprudence of federal courts.

In Washington D.C. – On Aug. 1, 2023, former President Donald Trump was indicted by a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C. on four counts related to alleged attempts to subvert the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Trump faces four felony charges in the D.C. election “subversion” case.  The charges are those specified under the heading “The Opinion of the Court” above.

In early February of this year, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkin pushed back the March 4 trial date, awaiting a ruling from the Supreme Court on Trump’s petition claiming presidential immunity. 

As we now know, SCOTUS has issued an Opinion in this case. (see “Opinion of the Court” above)

In Florida –

Judge Aileen Cannon is meticulously reviewing pre-trial motions, including Trump’s legal team questioning the authority of Special Counsel Jack Smith that may be in violation of the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. The Constitution does allow the appointment of “inferior” officers by the President alone, by the heads of departments, or by the judiciary, so I believe Smith’s appointment may be constitutional, having been appointed by the Attorney General.  However, she has several other motions to consider and has declined to be rushed to trial by Smith.

Where Do We Go From Here ?

Due to these two Supreme Court decisions, all four cases brought against former President Donald J. Trump are essentially “tied up in court” and there is virtually no chance that any of them will proceed to trial before the November election.  Even the New York “hush money” trial that convicted Trump of filing false business records is in limbo. 

The entire strategy of the Democrat Party has seemed to backfire.  Their plan was to “get Trump” by any means necessary in order to prevent him from having any chance to regain the White House.  They concocted a scheme to encumber him by creatively interpreting several statutes, as defined above, and slamming him with lawfare in four different jurisdictions, all in an effort to keep him off the campaign trial and potentially imprison him.  But shockingly, Trump’s numbers in the polls were immediately boosted following the verdict in New York and Biden sank even lower than he was before.  However, their lawfare game is not over. Trump still faces some headwinds that need to be argued in the lower courts and potentially return to the Supreme Court.

The good news for the Democrats, is that the SCOTUS immunity decision is probably more beneficial for them than it is for Trump, because Trump’s actions are far less egregious than the actual crimes committed by Biden and his puppet-master, Barack Obama. They should be dancing in the streets because it probably exonerates them from several charges.  Instead, all we hear is a bunch of activist talking heads melting down on CNN, MSLSD, ABC, NBC, CBS, and all the rest of the phony journalists in the Propaganda Media Complex.  Their hatred of Trump is on full display.  Can you imagine the outrage they will portray when the next Attorney General indicts Obama for treason and Biden for bribery, money laundering, and other potential crimes ? 

For some time now, Democrat messages have been warning their idiotic followers that the Trump administration will conduct a revenge campaign against his adversaries, but it won’t be revenge, it will be JUSTICE.  He has already proven he was forgiving by not urging the indictment of Hillary but after what they’ve done to him, they will deserve being prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  We the People DEMAND JUSTICE!

Comments welcomed.

FOOTNOTES

[1]  Supreme Court of the United States ; Opinion of the Court ; Donald J. Trump, Petitioner v. United States ; on Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ; July 1, 2024 ; considering the scope of a President’s immunity from criminal prosecution ; Pp 1-2

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf

[2]  ibid., Opinion of the Court, p. 2 

[3]  ibid., Opinion of the Court, p. 2 

[4]  ibid., Opinion of the Court, p. 2 

[5]  ibid., Opinion of the Court, p. 2 

[6]  18 U.S. Code §371 ; Cornell Law School ; Legal Information Institute

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/371

[7]  18 U.S. Code §1512 ; Cornell Law School ; Legal Information Institute

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1512

[8]  18 U.S. Code §2 ; Cornell Law School ; Legal Information Institute

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2

[9]  18 U.S. Code §241 ; Cornell Law School ; Legal Information Institute 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241

[10]  Trump v. United States ; Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ; Case No. 23-939 ; Argued April 25, 2024 – Decided July 1, 2024 ; full text, 119 pages

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf

[11]  ibid. ; syllabus, p. 8, section (e)      

[12]  ibid. ; Opinion of the Court, p. 14 

[13]  ibid. ; Opinion of the Court, p. 15 

[14]  ibid. ; Opinion of the Court, p. 16 

[15]  ibid. ; Opinion of the Court, p. 17 

[16]  ibid. ; Opinion of the Court, p. 18 

[17]  ibid. ; Opinion of the Court, p. 18 

[18]  ibid. ; Opinion of the Court, p. 25 

[19]  ibid. ; Opinion of the Court, p. 21 

[20]  ibid. ; Opinion of the Court, p. 23 

[21]  ibid. ; Opinion of the Court, p. 25 

[22]  18 U.S. Code §1512 ; Cornell Law School ; Legal Information Institute

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1512

[23]  Supreme Court of the United States ; Opinion of the Court ; Joseph W. Fischer, Petitioner v. United States ; on Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ; Case No. 55-72 ; Argued April 16, 2024 – Decided June 28, 2024 ; full text, 43 pages

considering the applicability of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act with respect to the actions of petitioner on January 6 ; Pp 1-2

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-5572_l6hn.pdf

[24]  ibid. ; Opinion of the Court, p. 1

[25]  ibid. ; Opinion of the Court, Pp. 9-10

[26]  ibid. ; Opinion of the Court, p. 16

[27]  Katersky, A. & Charalambous, P. ; Timeline: Manhattan DA’s Stormy Daniels Hush Money Case Against Donald Trump ; ABC News ; July 2, 2024 ;

Under dateline: April 4, 2023

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/timeline-manhattan-district-attorney-case-donald-trump/story?id=98389444