Wednesday, September 27, 2023

Timeline: What Did the Feds Not Do About Alleged Biden Family Corruption and When Did They Not Do It?

By Ben Weingarten, RealClearInvestigationsSeptember 27, 2023

A timeline of events focusing on federal authorities’ pursuit of alleged Biden family corruption. This resource will be updated as warranted.


(Click links just below to jump to desired section.)

Nov. 2018-June 2020: Hunter Biden Probe Begins; President Trump Impeached While Pursuing Biden-Ukraine Information; Alleged Justice Department Undermining of Probe Begins
June 2020-Dec. 2021: Evidence of Influence-Peddling With Nexus to Joe Biden Grows; Alleged Sabotage of Hunter Biden Probe Intensifies
Jan. 2022-Jan. 2023: Prosecution Sought and Denied; IRS Whistleblowers Blindsided by What They Characterize as U.S. Attorney David Weiss’ Apparent Lack of Authority
Feb. 2023-May 2023: Hunter’s Counsel Pleads Case Over Weiss’ Head; IRS Whistleblowers Emerge – and Face a Chill; Plea Deal DevelopsJune 2023: FBI Stonewalls Congress Over Alleged Burisma-Biden Bribes; Trump Indictments Grow; Plea Deal Emerges; Weiss Strains To Harmonize His Story With Attorney General Merrick Garland About His Claimed Ultimate Authority
July 2023: Burisma-Biden Bribes Document Released; Whistleblowers Testify About Obstructed Case Publicly; Hunter Biden’s Plea Deal Collapses in Court
Aug. 2023-Present: Another Trump Indictment; Weiss Gets Special Counsel Authority He Wasn’t Supposed To Need; Biden Impeachment Inquiry Opens; Hunter Hit With Gun Indictment

Timeline in Detail

The IRS whistleblowers prepare to testify under penalty of perjury.

Nov. 2018-June 2020:
Hunter Biden Probe Begins;
President Trump Impeached While Pursuing Biden-Ukraine Information;
Alleged Justice Department Undermining of Probe Begins

Nov. 2018: The Internal Revenue Service’s Washington D.C. office opens investigation into Hunter Biden, code name “Sportsman,” as an offshoot of a probe into a foreign-based amateur online pornography platform.

According to IRS Special Agent Joseph Ziegler, the case agent who will later turn whistleblower, evidence will emerge Biden paid prostitutes to cross state lines – potential Mann Act violations. It is not clear whether the Justice Department pursues.

Jordan responds to Fulton County's Fani Willis regarding Trump prosecution: 'Your position is wrong' 

  Story by Rachel Schilke •1h
Jordan responds to Fulton County's Fani Willis regarding Trump prosecution: 'Your position is wrong'© Provided by Washington Examiner

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) hit back at Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis's response to the committee's investigation into her criminal case against former President Donald Trump, saying her "position is wrong."

Willis blasted Jordan in a letter at the beginning of September, arguing that he was interfering with her prosecution through his records requests. However, Jordan's latest response sent on Wednesday argued that her judgment on congressional authority was incorrect.

"Your letter contends that the Committee, by conducting oversight into apparently politicized local prosecutions, is 'obstruct[ing] a Georgia criminal proceeding' and 'advanc[ing] outrageous partisan misrepresentations.' Your position is wrong," Jordan wrote in the letter obtained by the Washington Examiner.

He said the committee can "only conclude" from her response to the committee's records requests to investigate whether her case against Trump is politically motivated that she is "actively and aggressively engaged in such a scheme."

Willis had argued that her case was a local and state matter and, therefore, Congress did not have grounds to investigate. However, Jordan argued that the prosecution of a former president "implicates substantial federal interests."

"If state or local prosecutors can engage in politically motivated prosecutions of senior federal officers for acts they performed while in federal office, this could have a profound impact on how federal officers choose to exercise their powers," Jordan wrote.

He added that the special grand jury report showed she "contemplated an even more extensive intrusion into federal interests" after jurors recommended charges against senators — including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

Wednesday's letter is the latest step in the House Judiciary Committee's investigation into Willis's office and the case against Trump, which was launched on Aug. 24. A grand jury indicted Trump and 18 co-defendants on Aug. 14 for racketeering charges related to efforts to overturn Georgia's 2020 election, marking the fifth indictment and fourth criminal case for the former president.

Jordan and House Republicans on the committee have accused Willis of using the 41-count indictment to interfere with the 2024 presidential election, of which Trump is the GOP front-runner. The Ohio congressman's first request for records came hours before Trump turned himself in to Fulton County officials to be arraigned and have his mug shot taken.

The committee has raised concerns about the indictment's legitimacy, with records requests aiming at discovering whether Willis had "coordinated" with the Justice Department — particularly special counsel Jack Smith, who delivered an indictment against Trump for similar reasons to the Georgia case.

"The information that we seek will allow us to assess the extent to which your indictment is politically motivated and whether Congress should therefore draft legislative reforms to, among other things, protect former and current Presidents from politically motivated prosecutions," Jordan added in Wednesday's letter.

Jordan said Willis's decision to indict Trump also raises conflict of interest concerns between federal and local law enforcement.

"Federal law requires the United States Secret Service to protect a former President," Jordan wrote. "Therefore, your indictment raises the potential for conflict between the federal law-enforcement officials required to protect President Trump and local law-enforcement officials required to enforce your indictment and exercise control of him throughout his presence in the local criminal justice system."

A judge ruled in mid-September that Willis could not try all 19 defendants together, meaning Trump will not be tried on Oct. 23 and defendants Sidney Powell and Kenneth Chesebro are the only two heading to trial next month.

Trump is also facing several legal cases at the state and federal level across the country. A New York judge ruled on Tuesday that the former president committed fraud for several years while growing the Trump Organization empire.

Thursday, September 21, 2023

Republican takes Jan. 6 and Justice Dept. claims to new places    Story by Aaron Blake •1d

Spartz compares Justice Department to KGB

Conservative efforts to downplay the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and allege the political “weaponization” of the government seem to ratchet up with each passing week.

But rarely have they reached such a fever pitch, at least at the official level, as they did Wednesday with Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.).

During a House Judiciary Committee hearing featuring Attorney General Merrick Garland, Spartz both suggested that the scene at the Capitol on Jan. 6 was actually something of an innocent family affair and also seemed to compare the U.S. government to the Soviet KGB.

“There probably were some people that came on January 6th here, you know, that had bad intent,” Spartz allowed. “But a lot of good Americans from my district came here because they are sick and tired of this government not serving them. They came with strollers and the kids, and there was [a] chaotic situation because the proper security wasn’t provided.”

It wasn’t initially clear whether Spartz was talking about the rally on the Ellipse that preceded the Jan. 6 insurrection or the crowd near the Capitol whose participants ultimately violently forced their way in. But it was soon evident she was referring to the latter.

“They were throwing smoke bombs into the crowd with strollers with kids,” she said. “People showed up, you know, FBI agents, to people’s houses. You had, in my district, in my town, FBI phone numbers all over the district. … People are truly afraid.”

There do not appear to be many publicly available images of small children and strollers in the most contested areas near the Capitol on Jan. 6. Nor have many Republicans previously raised this as a complaint. A Wall Street Journal timeline states that smoke and tear gas were wafting through the crowd as of 1:13 p.m. By that point, scuffles between law enforcement and angry protesters had broken out.

Spartz’s comments build on increasing suggestions about supposed persecution of the hundreds who were convicted or pleaded guilty to taking part in the insurrection. Many times, GOP leaders have pushed back on these efforts, but that hasn’t stopped the claims, the minimizing of the events and even suggestions that the crowd was goaded.

More than two years ago, it was Rep. Andrew S. Clyde (R-Ga.) suggesting at another hearing that the day’s events were akin to a “normal tourist visit” rather than an insurrection. House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) responded at the time by saying, “What happened on the 6th was atrocious.”

In early 2022, the Republican National Committee cited the “legitimate political discourse” of Jan. 6 in a resolution censuring two members who served on the House Jan. 6 committee. Again, some leaders pushed back.

After McCarthy this year provided security tapes of the insurrection to then-Fox News host Tucker Carlson, Carlson predictably used the tapes to whitewash the events. Numerous Republicans again spoke out against it.

Despite the occasional pushback, these views have flourished within the conservative movement, spurred recently by severe sentences for members of extremist groups who were convicted of seditious conspiracy for their roles. GOP presidential candidates have joined former president Donald Trump in floating pardons for some figures.

A poll last year showed more Republicans regarded Jan. 6 as a “legitimate protest” (61 percent) even than a “riot” (45 percent) — a reversal from the months after the insurrection.

But Spartz didn’t stop there. She also broke ground over related GOP claims about the supposed “weaponization” of the government. She referenced the report by special counsel John Durham, which reflected poorly on the FBI but largely failed to live up to the Republican hype about what it would lay bare regarding those who had investigated Trump’s ties to Russia.

“I look at [the] Durham report and the … [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] violations,” Spartz said. Spartz’s comments weren’t entirely clear, but ultimately the congresswoman, who was born in what was then the Soviet republic of Ukraine, added, “It’s like KGB.”

While Republicans have often put forth speculative theories about the Justice Department’s supposed weaponization, comparing it to one of the most notorious spy agencies in recent world history is taking things to another level. The KGB routinely cracked down on dissent with invasive and heavy-handed tactics, including assassination. The KGB and its predecessors have been accused of playing a role in millions of deaths.

Garland wasn’t given much of a chance to weigh in on what Spartz was saying. But early on, she asked him whether he was aware of how many Americans feared persecution from the U.S. government.

Garland responded, “I think that constant attacks on the department and saying —.” But Spartz quickly interrupted him, and then lit into the kind of presentation that may well perpetuate that fear of persecution.

Tuesday, September 19, 2023

I could be wrong, but....I seem to remember a video with Epps using a bullhorn, directing people...???

Ray Epps Charged With Jan. 6 Crime—

After Conspiracy Theory Claimed He 

Worked For FBI

Forbes Breaking News   Sep 19, 2023

Sep 19, 2023
Ray Epps—a supporter of former President Donald Trump who was spotted at the January 6 Capitol riot—was charged with disorderly conduct for his alleged involvement in the attack, after the lack of charges against Epps led personalities like Tucker Carlson to baselessly claim Epps was a government provocateur.

Only saw a half hour on TV. This is the full interview

Full Trump Interview: ‘I don’t consider us to have much of a democracy right now’   NBC News


Sep 17, 2023 Meet The Press NOW | NBC News NOW
In this full, unedited interview with Meet the Press, former President Trump discusses his views on the 2020 election, abortion rights, foreign policy and more.

In Case You Missed It...!

3 Min Ago: Supreme Court JUST ANNOUNCED To Eliminate Concealed Carry Laws 

Best Guns 

Aug 24, 2023 UNITED STATES 3 Min Ago: Supreme Court JUST ANNOUNCED To Eliminate Concealed Carry Laws

Saturday, September 16, 2023

Gov. Gavin Newsom Officially Calls for Convention to Change US Constitution

Story by Richard Moorhead •20h   The Western JournalF

And of course THEY are protected by
GUNS and more GUNS

Wednesday, September 13, 2023

late post but first I read of it.....

Supreme Court Issues 6-3 Order Eliminating Concealed Carry Laws & Creating Carry Across State Lines!  

  Armed Scholar   Aug 22, 2023

In this video I break down an huge win using the Supreme Court's recent decision to push national concealed carry reciprocity.

Tuesday, September 12, 2023

Thanx to...."IT AINT HOLY WATER"

Video of Pentagon after hit by plane 

on 9/11...WHADDIA MEAN 




Alan Dershowitz Said Smith Might Could Face Criminal Charges Over Trump’s Indictments Due To ‘A Lie By Omission’

Matthew Holloway  Sept 12, 2023

OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.

Harvard Law Professor Emeritus and Trump attorney Alan Dershowitz told Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade that Biden DOJ Special Counsel Jack Smith could potentially face indictment himself for the crime of depriving former President Donald J. Trump of his rights under the U.S. Constitution. The law under which Smith could be charged is as incendiary as the charge itself, as the Special Counsel seems to have run afoul of the Ku Klux Klan Statute 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Dershowitz appearing with Kilmeade on The Brian Kilmeade Show on August 3rd said that “The indictment is based on lies. The indictment itself contains a blatant lie by Jack Smith,” he stressed that the indictment contains “lies of omission.” The constitutional scholar explained that Smith “describes the speech of January 6th, but he describes the speech in the indictment and deliberately and willfully leaves out the key words of the speech, namely that the president told his people to protest peacefully and patriotically.”

He continued, telling Kilmeade,

“By leaving out those words. It’s a lie by omission. And under the standards set out in the indictment, you know, Jack Smith could be indicted.”

Derschowitz took it a step further adding, “Theoretically, it’s not going to happen, obviously, under the Ku Klux Klan statute that he says any people who conspire to deny somebody their constitutional rights is guilty of a crime.”

“That would mean that Jack Smith tried to deny Trump his constitutional rights in this indictment,” Dershowitz observed adding, ”I make that point not to argue that Jack Smith should be indicted, of course not. To make the point that the indictment is so broad, so wide, so all-encompassing, it could include so much political conduct.”

Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the statute specifically addresses acts or omissions by a judicial officer “Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable.” This suggests that the Trump legal team could seek a declaratory decree from the court, if not an actual indictment of Smith, and then indict him should he violate that decree.


As previously reported by Explain America, Dershowitz told Fox News‘ Sean Hannity Monday that Trump’s critics are pursuing an alternate tack already attempting to invoke the 14th Amendment to disqualify him from holding office, hoping the 3rd clause of the amendment will serve as an “impeachment substitute.”

“He said… ‘I thought it would be easier and smoother to go [via] the 14th Amendment’ – well, of course. You don’t need any proof. You don’t need [a] 50 percent vote in the House. You don’t need a two-thirds vote in the Senate. You don’t need specific charges: treason, bribery, other high crimes and misdemeanors. You don’t need due process,” he explained.

“You [would] just need a couple of secretaries of state, Prof. Laurence Tribe and Adam Schiff to say it’s our opinion that this is an insurrection. We don’t think what happened after the George Floyd killing was an insurrection. We don’t think what happened with open borders or sanctuary cities is an insurrection. But we do think this was an insurrection,” Dershowitz added.

Monday, September 11, 2023

I don't remember where I got this link, and I don't want to step on any toes SO, I apologize in advance if this was your post. It's just that I think EVERYONE needs to see this.


Feb 19, 2015    YOUTUBE LINK BELOW

A little kate in my posting, SO, In case you missed this

California Democrats pass state tax on 
guns and ammunition after 
nearly a decade of attempts 

 LINDSEY HOLDEN September 7, 2023


California lawmakers will send a state excise tax on guns and ammunition to Gov. Gavin Newsom after years of failed attempts by Democratic legislators.

The Senate voted 27-9 on Thursday to approve Assembly Bill 28, which would require manufacturers, vendors and dealers to pay an 11% tax on guns and ammunition to fund violence prevention efforts. The bill passed with exactly the two-thirds threshold needed for approval of a tax.

Gun and ammunition-sellers would pay the new state tax on top of the 10 to 11% federal excise tax they already pay to fund wildlife conservation efforts.

Assemblyman Jesse Gabriel, D-Woodland Hills, authored the bill after former Assemblyman Marc Levine, D-San Rafael, failed multiple times to get excise tax bills through the Legislature.

Prior to Levine’s attempts, at least three other lawmakers had pushed similar taxes on guns and ammunition since 2013. Gabriel’s bill was the first of its kind to pass out of the Assembly.

When the assemblyman first put the bill forward, there were questions about whether it was “in the realm of possibility,” he said after the Senate vote.

“I introduced this bill at the very beginning of session,” Gabriel said. “A few weeks later, we have mass shootings in Half Moon Bay and in Monterey Park and in all these places.”

“Frankly, I think part of the reason the bill passed is the public is demanding this of us,” he added. “They are demanding that we have more solutions that will do more to protect their kids, to protect their communities.”
Lawmakers debate tax effectiveness

Many senators on Thursday cited their children and grandchildren and school safety concerns in their arguments for backing the bill. Floor debate lasted for about an hour before lawmakers voted.

Sen. Angelique Ashby, D-Sacramento, urged her colleagues to support AB 28 as a “mechanism to address gun violence.” She made her plea in the name of her school-age daughter and California children, as well as Amber Clark, a Natomas librarian who was fatally shot in 2018.

“Like so many Americans, I do hug my little daughter each morning as I drop her off at school,” Ashby said. “And as I drive away, I push out of my mind the unthinkable. Otherwise, it would be impossible for me to face the tasks I’m responsible for every day.”

But Republicans, and a handful of Democrats, said the tax would do little to prevent gun violence, and retailers would pass on the added cost on to customers. In this way, it would penalize law-abiding firearm owners, hunters and students taking part in shooting sports, they said.

“When you add another 11% on, all it’s going do is decrease the number of hunters,” said Sen. Bill Dodd, D-Napa. “Sooner or later, this will be like the tobacco tax. And sooner or later, this money’s going to go down, down, down.”

Gun control groups cheered AB 28’s passage and urged Newsom to sign it.

“This bill is an innovative approach in tackling gun violence and a crucial step to improve the safety of all California families,” said Cassandra Whetstone, a volunteer with the California chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, in a statement.

Gun rights advocates said they plan to sue the state over the legislation if the governor makes it law.

“The passage of this bill will be seen for what it is ... an unconstitutional tax on an enumerated right,” said Rick Travis, legislative director for the California Rifle and Pistol Association, in an email.

The measure now heads to Newsom, who must sign or veto bills by Oct. 14.

 Trump lawyers move 

'insurrection' clause 

lawsuit aiming to bar him 

from the ballot to federal 


 Story by By NICHOLAS RICCARDI, Associated Press •

Photo: Former President Donald Trump visits with campaign volunteers at the Elks Lodge, July 18, 2023, in Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Attorneys for former President Donald Trump moved a lawsuit seeking to bar him from running again for the White House from state to federal court in the first step of what promises to be a tangled legal battle that seems destined for the U.S. Supreme Court.

The liberal group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed the initial lawsuit on Wednesday in Colorado state court, arguing a Civil War-era clause prohibiting higher office for those who once swore an oath to the Constitution and then engaged in “insurrection” prevents Trump from running in 2024.

The initial state judge in Denver assigned the case recused himself for an unspecified conflict of interest, and then Trump’s attorneys on Thursday moved the case to federal court — asserting that the matter should be adjudicated at the federal level since it raises a constitutional issue. The plaintiffs in the case will argue it should first go back to state court, but both sides anticipate that ultimately the top echelons of the federal system will have to consider the issues the lawsuit raises.

“Plaintiffs’ challenge to Colorado’s ability to place Donald Trump on the presidential ballot depends solely on the Fourteenth Amendment,” Trump’s lawyers wrote. “Trump’s basis for removal of the state court action is federal question jurisdiction under Section 3 of Fourteenth Amendment.”

CREW’s case is the first of what’s expected to be many challenges filed in various states by the group and Free Speech for People, another liberal nonprofit. Activists in other states have filed lawsuits in which they represent themselves, but legal observers contend the more robust complaints by the nonprofits are more likely to end up at the nation’s highest court, which has never ruled on the clause.

Trump on Friday slammed the liberal organization, contending it’s affiliated with a number of his critics and people with whom he clashed as president. He called the group “TRUMP DERANGED CREW” on his social media network Truth Social said it was “ridiculously” and “Unconstitutionally” trying to disqualify him

CREW said it will ask a federal judge to return the case to state court. It has also requested a speedy ruling on the issues before Colorado’s Republican primary ballot is finalized on Jan. 5.


The world is laughing , we should be outraged that over 30% that still support him, we should be totally outraged at Chuck Schummer and those in the Democratic Party that in the name of democracy are interfering with the election process in both parties by not allowing the public’s choice and only the elites their choice of candidates. We should be outraged and more important we should be enraged enough and care enough to vote out those whose age and health, be it mental or physical incompetent to do their jobs.. it’s our way of life and our children’s way of life that is at stake, check out Nevada and guns,, the role of parents in children’s care. So many issues and so little time.


Friday, September 8, 2023

The dems say they are doing this to make sure TRUMP can't take office again...BUT how about those of us who WANT TRUMP as our President again??? Don't our votes count??

Donald Trump Is Being Denied His Constitutional Right to Due Process  

  Opinion by Alan Dershowitz•6h

Former U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to the media at Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport after surrendering at the Fulton County jail on August 24, 2023 in Atlanta, Georgia. Trump was booked on multiple charges related to an alleged plan to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia.© Joe Raedle/Getty Imag

The four criminal trials currently scheduled for former President Donald Trump are amongst the most significant and controversial trials in American history. It is imperative that they also be among the fairest trials in our history. Regardless of the results—acquittal, conviction, hung jury—the trials must be perceived as having been fair. The defendant must receive the benefit of all of his constitutional and statutory rights. Not only is Donald Trump on trial in these cases, but the American system of justice is on trial, not only in America but around the world.

The defendant is not only a former president; he is also the leading candidate to run against the incumbent president. Never before in our history has a leading presidential candidate been indicted, especially in the run-up to the election. If the trials themselves are unfair or even reasonably perceived to be unfair, our nation will be further divided and our standing in the world of democracies will be further damaged.

There is great desire among those who strongly oppose what Trump did in the past and what they believe he is likely to do in the future to "get" him. Many believe that the noble end of preventing Trump from being our next president justifies ignoble means, including stretching the Constitution and the law so as to assure his conviction. They believe that the reelection of President Trump would be more dangerous than compromising his constitutional rights.

That is a shortsighted view that endangers future generations of Americans.

At the moment, it appears as if Donald Trump will be denied his most fundamental constitutional right—to present his defenses to an unbiased jury. In this respect, there are two major constitutional issues: the timing of the trials and the location of the trials.

When it comes to the timing of Trump's trials, the goal of the "get Trump" posse is to secure convictions and try to influence the November 2024 election. Even if these convictions were subsequently to be reversed on appeal, they will have served their intended purpose in influencing centrist voters, which is why they are prepared to rush to legal injustice—to serve what they view as "political" justice.

As of now, with the exception of the one trial that's scheduled to begin next month, the rest are scheduled right in the middle of the primary season, beginning in March.

As a lawyer with 60 years of experience litigating and teaching about complex criminal cases, I have absolutely no doubt that a fair trial cannot be accomplished within this time frame.

Consider the Fulton County Rico prosecution. There are 19 defendants, some of whom have demanded a speedy trial as soon as October, while others have insisted on their right to prepare fully for what promises to be a many-months-long trial. The prosecutors insist on trying all the defendants together rather than allowing each of them or at least groups of them to be tried separately.

I am aware of no RICO trial involving multiple defendants, millions of documents, and extremely complex legal and factual issues having ever been fairly tried in such short a period of time.

The same is true of the D.C. case, where the judge insisted the public has a right to a speedy trial under the 6th Amendment. "There is a societal interest in providing a speedy trial separate from, and at times in opposition to, the accused," Judge Tanya S. Chutkan said when setting the date.

This is nonsense: Only the defendant has the right to demand a speedy trial.

The interest of the government lies solely on providing the defendent a fair trial. If a speedy trial will result in an unfair trial, the Constitution demands a reasonable delay sufficient to assure every defendant the right to present the defense fully and effectively.

Convicting Trump in a speedy but unfair trial absolutely undermines the neutrality of our legal system. In the District of Columbia case, the government has already produced more than 12 million pages of discovery. In this haystack of material, there will be some exculpatory needles, and it will take time to find them and to investigate. It will certainly take many months of work to permit effective assistance of counsel, which is required by the Constitution. At this point, that important right is being denied to Donald Trump.

The second issue is the location of Trump's trials. It is difficult enough to seek 12 objective and neutral jurors anywhere in our divided country, but three of the four trials are now scheduled for areas that are overwhelmingly anti-Trump.

In the District of Columbia, more than half of the potential jury pool voted against Trump. Many of those potential jurors hate him with a passion that would surely influence their deliberations. In New York, more than 70 percent of potential jurors voted against Trump, and many of them harbor a hatred that would make deliberations impossible. The numbers in Fulton County are somewhat similar to those in New York. Only the Florida federal trial is in a place where neutrality is possible.

Nor is it likely that biased jurors can be weeded out to the end perfect jury selection system. Accordingly, the juries in three of these cases will likely begin with a presumption of guilt rather than the constitutionally required presumption of innocence.

Changes of venue are permitted for good cause, and there is more than good cause here to do so in order to assure the former president a fair jury.

But as of now, Donald Trump is being denied his constitutional right to due process. The world is watching.

Follow Alan Dershowitz on Twitter @AlanDersh and Facebook @AlanMDershowitz.

His new podcast, "The Dershow," is on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and YouTube He is the author of Get Trump: The Threat to Civil Liberties, Due Process, and Our Constitutional Rule of Law.

The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.

Tuesday, August 29, 2023

New report says Special Counsel Jack Smith grilled witnesses about Rudy Giuliani’s drinking  msnbc  Aug  29, 2023

Aug 29, 2023 #Giuliani #JackSmith #January6Senior Politics reporter for Rolling Stone Asawin Suebsaeng and former Assistant U.S. Attorney Glenn Kirschner join Ali Velshi – in for Nicolle Wallace to discuss new reporting from Rolling Stone that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s prosecutors are particularly interested in "Rudy Giuliani’s drinking on and after election day, investigating whether Donald Trump was knowingly relying on an inebriated attorney while trying to overturn a presidential election.”


46 minutes ago BOARD WALK

Conservative groups draw up plan to 

dismantle the US government and 

replace it with Trump’s vision   Story by By LISA MASCARO, AP Congressional Correspondent •19h

WASHINGTON (AP) — With more than a year to go before the 2024 election, a constellation of conservative organizations is preparing for a possible second White House term for Donald Trump, recruiting thousands of Americans to come to Washington on a mission to dismantle the federal government and replace it with a vision closer to his own.

Led by the long-established Heritage Foundation think tank and fueled by former Trump administration officials, the far-reaching effort is essentially a government-in-waiting for the former president’s return — or any candidate who aligns with their ideals and can defeat President Joe Biden in 2024.

With a nearly 1,000-page “Project 2025” handbook and an “army” of Americans, the idea is to have the civic infrastructure in place on Day One to commandeer, reshape and do away with what Republicans deride as the “deep state” bureaucracy, in part by firing as many as 50,000 federal workers.

“We need to flood the zone with conservatives,” said Paul Dans, director of the 2025 Presidential Transition Project and a former Trump administration official who speaks with historical flourish about the undertaking.

“This is a clarion call to come to Washington,” he said. “People need to lay down their tools, and step aside from their professional life and say, ‘This is my lifetime moment to serve.’”

The unprecedented effort is being orchestrated with dozens of right-flank organizations, many new to Washington, and represents a changed approach from conservatives, who traditionally have sought to limit the federal government by cutting federal taxes and slashing federal spending.

Instead, Trump-era conservatives want to gut the “administrative state” from within, by ousting federal employees they believe are standing in the way of the president’s  to governing.  agenda and replacing them with like-minded officials more eager to fulfill a new executive’s approach to governing.


Joe Biden Used a Fake Name to Conduct Official Government Business  

 Katie Pavlich | August 29, 2023  Townhall  

President Joe Biden continues to claim he was "never in business" with his son Hunter. But documentation produced by the House Oversight Committee shows he used a number of aliases when communicating through email with Hunter and his business partner, Devon Archer.

One of the names Biden used was "Robert L. Peters" and in addition to his communication with Hunter, he used that name to conduct official government business.

Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer sent a letter to the National Archives earlier this month requesting all documents containing President Biden's pseudonym.

“Joe Biden has stated there was ‘an absolute wall’ between his family’s foreign business schemes and his duties as Vice President, but evidence reveals that access was wide open for his family’s influence peddling. We already have evidence of then-Vice President Biden speaking, dining, and having coffee with his son’s foreign business associates," Comer released said about the investigation. "We also know that Hunter Biden and his associates were informed of then-Vice President Biden’s official government duties in countries where they had a financial interest. The National Archives must provide these unredacted records to further our investigation into the Biden family’s corruption."

Fulton County DA Destroyed: Her 'Smoking Gun' Against Trump Is a Toy Pistol  By Deroy Murdock August 27, 2023  The Daily Caller 

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis must be drooling.

In a dark day for America, Democrats made President Joe Biden’s chief political rival fly to their stronghold of Atlanta, surrender to law-enforcement officials, and get photographed and fingerprinted like a common criminal.

Consequently, Willis and her fellow Democrats now boast a mugshot of former President of the United States Donald J. Trump. They will deploy it in campaign ads from now until Armageddon. It probably already inhabits dart boards in the White House and the Democrat National Committee.

The next step in Trump’s persecution will be Willis’ Stalinesque show trial. Exhibit A will be Trump’s allegedly illegal phone call on January 2, 2021. America’s lying Left-wing media already have made this conversation notorious.“In recorded call, Trump pressures Georgia official to ‘find’ votes to overturn election,” Reuters huffed in a headline the next day.ABC News growled: “Trump demands Georgia secretary of state ‘find’ enough votes to hand him win.”National Public Radio snarled on June 21, 2022: “Former President Donald Trump famously pressured Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a fellow Republican, to overturn the state’s presidential election result in a January 2021 phone call that lasted more than an hour.”

Willis, these “news” outlets, and other Trump haters want Americans to believe that Trump told Raffensperger, “I want you to fabricate 11,780 votes” or less nefariously, “I want you to find me 11,780 votes.”

Trump said no such thing.

According to a Washington Post transcript, his actual words were: “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have, because we won the state.”

That comment, Trumpophobes claim, makes him a criminal.

Nice try!

The Simpsons pretictions  11 days ago 

TRUTH about the 2nd Amendment - Forgotten History

Aug 9, 2023 #forgottenhistorychannelThe First Congress proposed a Bill of Rights as protection for those fearful of a strong national government. The Bill of Rights came into effect in December 1791, after ratification by three-fourths of the state legislatures and contains the first ten amendments. These are considered the benchmark laws, inviolate, untouchable, and irrevocable. The most contentious throughout US history is the 2nd Amendment. Hosted by Colin D. Heaton. Forgotten History is a 10th Legion Pictures Production.

Mark Levin says Trump prosecutor violated grand jury rules  Fox News  August 29, 2023

Fox NewAug 29, 2023
'Life, Liberty & Levin' host Mark Levin on the upcoming Trump federal trial which starts one day before Super Tuesday.

Monday, August 28, 2023

"This is the BEGINNING OF THE END for Joe Biden" Tucker Carlson ROASTS BIDEN


Aug 23, 2023"This is the BEGINNING OF THE END for Joe Biden" Tucker Carlson ROASTS BIDEN

But THEY say only Trump....

Trump lawyer plays video montage 

of Democrats doubting election results

 at impeachment trial

Forbes Breaking News

Feb 12, 2021 WASHINGTONTrump lawyer David Schoen plays video montage of Democrats doubting election results.

Sunday, August 27, 2023

If you thought you saw a "flying saucer" chances are, it could have been this. or something like it 

It was an experimental nuclear warhead delivery system under development during the Cold War by defense contractor North American Aviation, managed out of Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio. In the 1950s and early 1960s, the U.S. military and NASA experimented with designs that resembled flying saucers. One of these LRV projects was declassified in 1999. If you saw a flying disc back in the day near one of these bases, it might have been one of these unique aircraft.

PZL M-15 Belphegor

Thursday, August 24, 2023



The Best Political Ad of the Season Has Just Been Released


This just about sums up the news from the Whitehouse today/everyday

Well....I guess we know who this guy is voting for....In his OPINION!!

Chris Christie was the biggest surprise of the Republican debate   

Opinion by Christopher Tremoglie•10h Washington Examiner

Chris Christie was the biggest surprise of the Republican debate© Provided by Washington Examiner

Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie built a reputation for being one of former President Donald Trump’s biggest critics. Through media appearances and on social media, Christie’s been relentless in attacking Trump.

So, it was only natural to think Christie would continue this verbal assault when on the debate stage. Instead, Christie looked like a savvy politician with an excellent vision to fix the country and beat President Joe Biden in 2024. He was impressive and arguably the biggest surprise of the Republican debate.

He displayed the traits and qualities that made him successful in New Jersey during his early years in office. He gave articulate, intelligent responses but was fearless and aggressive in a non-offensive or pompous manner. He told anecdotes from when he was a prosecutor and governor and related those experiences to how he would solve many of the issues facing the country today. Quite frankly, Christie looked like a conservative Republican who could defeat Joe Biden and take on the toxic left-wing politicians in the Democratic Party.

For example, consider Christie’s comments about handling the out-of-control violent crime plaguing the nation. He wasted no time and announced his plan.

“The problem is not gonna be solved by more money. The problem is that these prosecutors in these localities in the states are refusing to do their job and arrest violent criminals,” Christie said. “So what a President Christie would do is appoint an attorney general who would instruct each of the 93 U.S. attorneys that they are to take over the prosecution of violent crime in every one of those cities that are failing to do so. We have plenty of room in federal prisons to lock up these violent criminals and clean up what’s going on all across this country in these individual cities.”

Granted, many Republican voters, especially those who support Trump, will not want to admit how well Christie performed. One of his only misfires was when he declined to endorse Trump for president if he was the party’s nominee in 2024. To appear on the debate stage, a candidate was required to agree to pledge support to whomever the Republican nominee might be. Christie’s refusal to support Trump violates that pledge and requirement to be on the debate stage.

Nevertheless, while he was not a popular candidate heading into the debate, objectively, Christie did a fine job at the debate. He demonstrated the qualities that all voters should 
want in a candidate.

If people could look past his criticisms of Trump, or separate his opinions about the former president from his policies to better the country, voters would realize he could be a solid candidate.