Category Archives: Donald Trump

The ongoing Comelec drive to take down election-related posters includes those displayed on private property that exceed the maximum size of 2 x 3 prescribed in Comelec Resolution No. 10730. Pushback and resistance from the campaigns have been immediate and audible. This contention focuses the spotlight on the 2015 decision of the Supreme Court en banc in Diocese of Bacolod vs. Comelec (GR No. 205728, 21 January 2015).

This decision, penned by Justice Marvic Leonen, involved the right of the Diocese of Bacolod to display on its own compound two tarpaulins advertising the Roman Catholic Churchs stand against the Reproductive Health Law and listing candidates in the 2013 mid-term elections who were either for or against the statute. The basic facts are simple and straightforward:

On February 21, 2013, petitioners posted two (2) tarpaulins within a private compound housing the San Sebastian Cathedral of Bacolod. Each tarpaulin was approximately six feet (6) by ten feet (10) in size. They were posted on the front walls of the cathedral within public view. The first tarpaulin contains the message IBASURA RH Law referring to the Reproductive Health Law of 2012 or Republic Act No. 10354. The second tarpaulin is the subject of the present case. This tarpaulin contains the heading Conscience Vote and lists candidates as either (Anti-RH) Team Buhay with a check mark, or (Pro-RH) Team Patay with an X mark. The electoral candidates were classified according to their vote on the adoption of Republic Act No. 10354, otherwise known as the RH Law. Those who voted for the passing of the law were classified by petitioners as comprising Team Patay, while those who voted against it form Team Buhay.

Then as now, measured against the maximum dimensions for election paraphernalia prescribed in pertinent Comelec regulations, 6 x 10 tarps are certainly outsized. Thus, because of its immediate and obvious relevance, Diocese has been repeatedly referred to, and invoked, in recent pronouncements both from Comelec and from the legal teams protesting the takedowns.

A clear understanding of this decision is indeed critical in at least two senses. To begin with, in the immediate sense, citizens and campaigners, as well as Comelec and law enforcement agencies, must know what they can, and cannot do, in the remaining days of this campaign period. There must be an accurate, across-the-board understanding of the true dimensions of the campaign window opened by Diocese.

More than just an authoritative election guideline, however, Diocese is an extraordinary invitation for Filipinos to reverse the traditional dynamic of election speech and conduct. It is an exhortation to the electorate not merely to listen passively to what the candidates and parties have to say, but to re-discover its own voice, to freely tell the candidates and parties what matters most to them. It is, in short, an invitation to popular and democratic empowerment. In the Courts own words:

Too often, the terms of public discussion during elections are framed and kept hostage by brief and catchy but meaningless sound bites extolling the character of the candidate. Worse, elections sideline political arguments and privilege the endorsement by celebrities. Rather than provide obstacles to their speech, government should in fact encourage it. Between the candidates and the electorate, the latter have the better incentive to demand discussion of the more important issues. Between the candidates and the electorate, the former have better incentives to avoid difficult political standpoints and instead focus on appearances and empty promises.

Large tarpaulins, therefore, are not analogous to time and place. They are fundamentally part of expression protected under Article III, Section 4 of the Constitution.

From these insights and to give effect to the constitutional command to accord the greatest protection to free expression, and to political speech in particular, the Court articulated the law in this way:

Regulation of speech in the context of electoral campaigns made by persons who are not candidates or who do not speak as members of a political party which are, taken as a whole, principally advocacies of a social issue that the public must consider during elections is unconstitutional. Such regulation is inconsistent with the guarantee of according the fullest possible range of opinions coming from the electorate including those that can catalyze candid, uninhibited, and robust debate in the criteria for the choice of a candidate.

Turning to more immediate and practical concerns, the following questions are most probably foremost in the minds of many conscientious Filipinos involved in these elections, whether as voters, campaign workers, Comelec officials, or law enforcers. For them, the answers supplied by Diocese will be instructive.

Q: ISNT THE COMELEC REGULATION CLEAR, THAT EVEN TARPS DISPLAYED IN PRIVATE PROPERTY CANNOT EXCEED 2 X 3?

A: These maximum dimensions for tarps, whether in private or public places, are applicable only to election paraphernalia. Tarps that primarily express advocacies or opinions on matters important to the voter are not election paraphernalia, however, even if they incidentally exhort other members of the electorate to vote for or against particular candidates or parties. These tarps contain constitutionally protected speech that lie beyond Comelecs regulatory reach. Again, as the Court said, regulation of election-related speech by non-candidates that are principally advocacies of a social issue that the public must consider is unconstitutional. By necessary implication, tarps displayed on private property which are not election paraphernalia because they mainly advocate on issues, may exceed 2 x 3 in size.

Q: BUT WHAT ABOUT THE USUAL TARPS THAT ASK THE PUBLIC TO VOTE FOR A PARTICULAR CANDIDATE OR PARTY?

A: These traditional vote for tarps are election paraphernalia that are subject to Comelec size regulation. Therefore, even if displayed in private property, they cannot exceed the maximum prescribed dimensions of 2 x 3.

Regulation of election paraphernalia will still be constitutionally valid if it reaches into speech of persons who are not candidates or who do not speak as members of a political party if they are not candidates, only if what is regulated is declarative speech that, taken as a whole, has for its principal object the endorsement of a candidate only. xxx

These distinctions between vote for and advocacy tarps, and between election paraphernalia and expressions of advocacy and opinion, are critical. The Court itself dwelt at length on this matter:

The message of petitioners in this case will certainly not be what candidates and political parties will carry in their election posters or media ads. The message of petitioner, taken as a whole, is an advocacy of a social issue that it deeply believes. Through rhetorical devices, it communicates the desire of Diocese that the positions of those who run for a political position on this social issue be determinative of how the public will vote. It primarily advocates a stand on a social issue; only secondarily even almost incidentally will cause the election or non-election of a candidate.

The court continues:

The messages in the tarpaulins are different from the usual messages of candidates. Election paraphernalia from candidates and political parties are more declarative and descriptive and contain no sophisticated literary allusion to any social objective. Thus, they usually simply exhort the public to vote for a person with a brief description of the attributes of the candidate. For example Vote for [x], Sipag at Tiyaga, Vote for [y], Mr. Palengke, or Vote for [z], Iba kami sa Makati.

Given the remarkably detailed description of constitutionally protected advocacy and opinion, tarps that merely banner the slogans and catchphrases usually devised and deployed by parties and candidates will not suffice to remove them from the reach of Comelec regulation.

Q: DOES THIS MEAN THAT A PARTY OR CAMPAIGN ORGANIZATION CAN DISTRIBUTE ADVOCACY TARPS AND DIRECT ITS CAMPAIGN WORKERS TO ARRANGE FOR THEIR DISPLAY IN PRIVATE PROPERTY?

A: No, this may not be done. Constitutionally protected advocacy that may not be interfered with by Comelec must truly and authentically emanate from the electorate. Advocacy tarps sponsored in any way by candidates or campaign organizations must submit to Comelec regulation, including size regulation, even if displayed exclusively in private property.

In upholding the right of the Diocese of Bacolod to display its outsized tarps, the Court invoked the clear limitation imposed by law on the extent of Comelec regulation, and then declared those large Team Patay/Team Buhay tarps as exempt from such regulation because they were found not to have been paid for by any candidate or party. Thus:

These provisions show that election propaganda refers to matter done by or on behalf of and in coordination with candidates and political partiesxxx The tarpaulin was not paid for by any candidate or political party. There was no allegation that petitioners coordinated with any of the persons named in the tarpaulin regarding its posting. On the other hand, petitioners posted the tarpaulin as part of their advocacy against the RH Law.

Q: ISNT COMELEC REGULATION OF TARPS IN PRIVATE PROPERTY A VIOLATION OF PROPERTY RIGHTS THAT ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE CONSTITUTION?

A: Not always. The definitive element is still the content of the tarp. A tarp displayed on private property that primarily contains advocacy is not subject to Comelec size regulation. In contrast, a vote for tarp will always be subject to regulation and must conform to the prescribed 2 x 3 maximum dimensions, even if this is displayed in private property. The constitutional protection of property rights, and the greater limitation upon state interference in such rights, are triggered when they are coupled with a liberty interest (the property owners interest in the free expression of his advocacies and opinions). As noted by the Court, the guarantee of free speech is rendered meaningless, if there is no protected space (the private property) within which the speech can be made:

Freedom of expression can be intimately related with the right to property. There may be no expression when there is no place where the expression may be made. Comelecs infringement upon petitioners property rights as in the present case also reaches out to infringement on their fundamental right to speech.

Respondents have not demonstrated that the present state interest they seek to promote justifies the intrusion into petitioners property rights. Election laws and regulations must be reasonable. It must also acknowledge a private individuals right to exercise property rights. Otherwise, the due process clause will be violated.

Q: WHAT DOES ALL THESE MEAN FOR THE VARIOUS CONTENDING CAMPAIGNS?

A: For immediate and practical utility, it should be clear that Comelec may not take down outsized tarps displayed in private property when the following conditions are all met: (a) the tarp primarily advocates for a position on an issue relevant to the electorate even if it also, incidentally, invites people to vote for or against particular candidates; and (b) the tarp is displayed with the consent of the owner of the property, without any collusion with, or sponsorship by, any party or candidate.

Diocese is a powerful reiteration of the primacy accorded free expression in our hierarchy of constitutional values, and of the dictum that (S)peech with political consequences is at the core of the freedom of expression and must be protected by this court. But its true contribution to Philippine democracy is the disruption it proposes. It proposes that during elections, it is the voice of the voter, not the candidates, that should ring loudest. It is indeed a radical notion, most especially in the Philippines, that it should be the voter talking to the candidate about what truly matters, rather than the other way around.

Traditional campaigns run and engineered by elite political strategists and manned by veteran political operators, will have to suffer increasingly stringent Comelec control over almost all facets of the electoral exercise. On the other hand, campaigns based on grassroots initiative and authentic volunteerism will be in the best position to benefit from the democratic disruption Diocese invites us to. Rappler.com

Original post:

[OPINION] Diocese of Bacolod v. Comelec: Giant tarps, free speech, and democratic disruption - Rappler

Mazars decision to withdraw was clearly a result of the A.G.s and D.A.s vicious intimidation tactics used also on other members of the Trump Organization, Mr. Trump said in his statement. Mazars, who were scared beyond belief, in conversations with us made it clear that they were willing to do or say anything to stop the constant threat which has gone against them for years.

Numerous inquiries. Since former President Donald Trumpleft office, there have been many investigations and inquiries into his businesses and personal affairs. Heres a list of those ongoing:

Investigation into criminal fraud. The Manhattan district attorneys office and the New York attorney generals officeare investigating whether Mr. Trump or his family business, the Trump Organization, engaged in criminal fraud by intentionally submitting false property values to potential lenders.

Investigation into tax evasion. As part of their investigation, in July 2021, the Manhattan district attorneys office charged the Trump Organization and its chief financial officer with orchestrating a 15-year scheme to evade taxes.A trial in that case is scheduled for summer 2022.

He pointed out that, in its letter informing the Trump Organization that its financial statements from 2011 to 2020 should no longer be relied upon, Mazars also said it had not concluded that the statements, as a whole, contained material discrepancies. The firm did say, however, that the totality of circumstances, including its own investigation into the financial statements, had led it to conclude they were unreliable.

Mazars did not respond to a request for comment.

The somewhat muddled nature of the explanation by Mazars makes it hard to assess the motivation, and potential legal implications, behind its decision to part ways with Mr. Trump. Lynn Turner, the former chief accountant at the Securities and Exchange Commission, said the new information that Mazars learned of could require its previous financial statements to be revised. Although those original statements contained many disclaimers, coming into possession of significant new facts could leave the firm vulnerable to a lawsuit.

They aint gonna issue that letter otherwise, he said.

In addition to signing off on Mr. Trumps statements of financial condition, which were used mostly when seeking bank loans or other credit, Mazars also prepared his tax returns, though the firm did not raise doubts about those in its letter.

Intentionally filing false tax returns with the government is a criminal offense, and there has been no indication that prosecutors are pursuing that avenue. As such, Mr. Trumps tax filings have long been considered perhaps the most accurate portrayal of his financial condition.

The New York Times in 2020 obtained decades of tax return information for Mr. Trump and his companies, which revealed that for all his claims of stellar business acumen and high net worth, he actually lost money in many years, had huge bank loans coming due and faced a long-running I.R.S. audit that could cost him $100 million. He often paid little or no federal income taxes.

Original post:

Trump Makes New Claims About His Wealth After Accountants Drop Him - The New York Times

Clinton Responds To Report Alleging Attempted Infiltration Of Trump Towers, White House

(Washington, DC) Hillary Clinton is blasting reports that her 2016 presidential campaign paid operatives to try and infiltrate Trump Tower servers and servers in the White House. Clinton tweeted that former President Trump and Fox News are desperately spinning up a fake scandal to distract from Trumps real scandals. She added, the more Trumps misdeeds are exposed, the more they lie. The reports are rooted in Special Counsel John Durhams ongoing investigation of the origins of the Russia investigation.

An indictment from Durham reportedly accuses Clinton operatives of trying to establish an inference and false narrative linking Trump to Russia. Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann has already been indicted for allegedly making false statements to the FBI about a possible connection between the Trump Organization and Russia.

The rest is here:

Reports say Hillary Clinton--who delegitimized Donald Trump's election--may have paid operatives to spy on Trump. Her response doesn't disappoint. -...

Most of the Republican candidates backed by former President Donald Trump are expected to win their midterm races in November, according to a betting aggregator.

The odds for his preferred contenders demonstrate that Trump still has a firm grip on the Republican Party, US Bookies has suggested.

The aggregator's predictions will be welcomed by Trump loyalists who are hoping to re-take the House and the Senate from the Democrats in November. Republicans have opened up a significant lead ahead of the midterms, a new poll has found.

Ron Johnson, who is running for re-election as senator for Wisconsin, has the best odds of the Trump allies. He is the overwhelming favorite to win his race at 1-10, according to US Bookies.

A US Bookies spokesperson said: "Control of Congress will likely come down to a few key races during the 2022 midterm elections and it looks like Donald Trump's endorsement will be a significant factor in securing Republican control.

"Most Trump-endorsed candidates are odds-on favorites to win, with some of the only exceptions being gubernatorial candidates."

Trump ally Herschel Walker has odds of 1-3 to win a Georgia Senate seat lost to the Democrat Raphael Warnock in a special election in 2021.

US Bookies has also highlighted the political cost to Republicans who oppose Trump, particularly Rep. Liz Cheney of Wisconsin.

Trump has repeatedly targeted Cheney, who said last week that the hearings of the House select committee investigating the Capitol riot would show the violence was caused by his baseless claims of election fraud. Cheney is vice chair of the committee and one of the former president's fiercest critics in the GOP.

The US Bookies spokesperson said: "Liz Cheney's story proves that not only does Trump's endorsement usually help Republicans win elections but that speaking against the former president also comes with grim results.

"Cheney now holds 4-1 to be re-elected to her seat in the House of Representatives, with Trump-endorsed Harriet Hageman being the odds-on 1-3 favorite."

However, some GOP candidates who are competing against Trump picks are holding their own. In Alabama, the former president has endorsed Mo Brooks for Senate.

A US Bookies spokesperson added: "Of the congressional candidates endorsed by Trump who are favorites to win their respective elections, Mo Brooks has the worst odds. Brooks' 5-4 odds to win are best among all candidates, but fellow Republican Katie Britt is very close behind at 11-8."

Newsweek has contacted Trump's office for comment.

Although betting on elections is not legal in any U.S. state, US Bookies said its aggregate figures were for "illustrative purposes" and based on betting markets in Europe and the rest of the world, where it is legal.

Some polls have shown the Democrats gaining ground in recent weeks. Analysis from poll tracker FiveThirtyEight found there had been an upswing of support for the Democratic Party since late January, but it still needed to close a big gap in order to keep control of the House and Senate.

Should Republicans make significant gains in November it will allow them to significantly weaken President Joe Biden's agenda.

See original here:

Majority of Donald Trump-Backed Candidates Expected to Win MidtermsBookmakers - Newsweek

On Jan. 5, marking the one-year anniversary of Jan. 6, Attorney General Merrick GarlandMerrick GarlandOvernight Health Care CDC to change guidance, including masking Senate Democrats urge DOJ to open criminal investigation into Sackler family members McConnell's unconstitutional blockade of Garland poisoned subsequent proceedings MORE promised that, following the facts, the Justice Department would pursue anyone, no matter how powerful, responsible for planning and carrying out the assault on the U.S. Capitol. The Justice Department remains committed to holding all January 6 perpetrators, at any level, accountable under law whether they were present that day or were otherwise criminally responsible for the assault on our democracy.

One month later, its fair to ask: General, what are you waiting for? Why hasnt Donald TrumpDonald TrumpTrump-nominated FAA administrator to resign at end of March Republican voters split over RNC censure of Cheney and Kinzinger: poll Trump issues endorsements in Texas congressional races MORE yet been charged with any crime? How much more evidence do you need?

True, DOJ has aggressively pursued those who actually broke into the Capitol, arresting over 725 rioters so far, several of whom are already serving prison terms. And the departments reportedly still tracking down another 350 persons involved. But going after foot soldiers is not enough. What about the leader of the insurrection? What about Donald Trump? Every day, we see more evidence of his criminal conduct.

Read the account of Trumps second impeachment trial in Rep. Jamie RaskinJamin (Jamie) Ben RaskinPress: Time for Merrick Garland to flush Donald Trump Press: Clubbing cops is not 'legitimate political discourse' Jan. 6 panel hesitates in asking Pence to testify MOREs (D-Md.) powerful new book, Untitled. While their goal was to remove Trump from office, not convict him of a crime, the impeachment managers laid forth a litany of Trumps illegal actions leading up to and on the day of Jan. 6: personally pressing local election officials to falsify election results; inciting supporters to block election officials from certifying the election: all part of an attempt to overthrow the duly-elected U.S. government.

Documents obtained, over Trumps objections, by the January 6 Select Committee reveal even more criminal behavior: efforts by Trump and his lawyers to persuade people to create false slates of presidential electors; lying in multiple courts of law about alleged voter fraud; pressuring the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department, and the Pentagon to seize local voting machines. Again, all with the intent of overturning the government.

Now the latest: A request from the National Archives that the Justice Department investigate possible criminal activity by Donald Trump by refusing to turn over 15 boxes of presidential papers some of them classified and marked top secret and taking them to Mar-a-Lago, instead. Clearly, this was no accident. These boxes contained items, like his famous love letters from North Korean leader Kim Jung Un, that Trump had cherry-picked for his hoped-for presidential library. Trump knew what the Presidential Records Act required, he just didnt care.

For the same reason, Trump apparently used his cell phone to call House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthyKevin McCarthyRepublican voters split over RNC censure of Cheney and Kinzinger: poll GOP eyes ambitious agenda if House flips DC delegate: Possible bill to repeal home rule 'radical' and 'very unexpected' MORE (R-Calif.), Rep. Jim JordanJames (Jim) Daniel JordanThe real reason Jim Jordan is ranting against Jan. 6 committee staff Press: Time for Merrick Garland to flush Donald Trump Overnight Defense & National Security Top commander vents on Afghan evacuation MORE (R-Ohio), and others on Jan. 6 leaving no official record of White House calls, as required by law.

In fact, according to Trumps former White House Press Secretary Stephanie GrishamStephanie GrishamPress: Time for Merrick Garland to flush Donald Trump Former Trump press aide Sarah Matthews appears before Jan. 6 panel Trump facing legal, political headwinds as he eyes comeback MORE, a general disdain for the law, led by the president himself, permeated the Trump White House. Everybody knew, for example, he ripped up presidential documents in violation of the law. So what? He would roll his eyes at the rules, so we did, too, Grisham told the Washington Post.

Capping it all off is reporting from New York Times reporter Maggie HabermanMaggie Lindsy HabermanDocument dump turns toxic for Trump Press: Time for Merrick Garland to flush Donald Trump Rubio: White House records at Mar-a-Lago 'not a crime, I don't believe' MOREs new book, Confidence Man, that plumbers were often summoned to theWhite House residence to free toilets clogged by official papers Trump had ripped up and tried to flush. Which gives new meaning to the phrase document dump.

What more evidence does he need? Its time for Merrick Garland to flush Donald Trump.

Press is host of The Bill Press Pod. He is author of From the Left: A Life in the Crossfire.

Read the rest here:

Press: Time for Merrick Garland to flush Donald Trump | TheHill - The Hill

Republicans who missed out on former President TrumpDonald TrumpTrump-nominated FAA administrator to resign at end of March Republican voters split over RNC censure of Cheney and Kinzinger: poll Trump issues endorsements in Texas congressional races MOREs coveted endorsements are grasping for ways to tie themselves tohim and his political movement, betting his message will prove more powerful in contentious primary races than the man himself.

The strategy is playing out in GOP primaries across the country, including in South Carolina, where Trump last week endorsed Republican Katie Arringtons primary challenge to Rep. Nancy MaceNancy MaceRepublicans spurned by Trump in primaries still embrace him Lieu, Mace call on NIH to phase out animal experiments Mace touts early support of Trump after he endorses primary challenger MORE, a once-loyal ally who drew the former presidents ire by criticizing him following the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.

Mace, a first-term congresswoman who worked on Trumps 2016 campaign, responded by filming a video of herself praising the former president and touting her support for him outside Trump Tower in New York City.

I remember in 2015 when President Trump announced his run. I was one of his earliest supporters, she said. I actually worked for the campaign in 2016. I worked in seven different states across the country to help get him elected. I supported him again in 2020 because of policies I believe in.

Im standing in front of Trump Tower with a message this morning#SC01 #LowcountryFirst pic.twitter.com/CpmMYA63qt

Maces video underscores the conundrum that several Republicans are facing: how to use Trumps message to appeal to Trumps voters without the backing of Trump himself.

The titular head of Trumpism is Trump himself, and yet, when hes endorsing in these races, youre still seeing traction by candidates who have found their own embrace of Trumpism but dont have the titular head behind them, one GOP strategist said. And a lot of them have a good fighting chance here.

Georgia Gov. Brian KempBrian KempRepublicans spurned by Trump in primaries still embrace him Raffensperger calls for extra security at Georgia polling sites No 'mass exodus,' but GOP sees Trump grip loosening MORE (R) is employing a similar strategy in his primary fight against former Sen. David PerdueDavid PerdueRepublicans spurned by Trump in primaries still embrace him No 'mass exodus,' but GOP sees Trump grip loosening Trump pushes back at those saying he's lost grip on GOP MORE (R), who jumped into the race late last year at Trumps urging and was promptly endorsed by the former president.

Just days after Perdue unveiled his first campaign ad a 30-second spot featuring Trump himself touting his support for the former senator Kemps leadership committee responded with an ad spot of its own hammering Perdue for outsourcing jobs throughout his lengthy business career despite Trumps campaign promise to bring back jobs sent overseas.

President Trump worked hard putting America first, a narrator says in the ad. But David Perdue sent American jobs to China over and over again, by the thousands, and made millions.

That line of attack has become familiar in other Republican primaries that Trump has weighed in on.

In the Alabama GOP Senate primary, Republican Katie Britt accused her Trump-endorsed primary opponent Rep. Mo BrooksMorris (Mo) Jackson BrooksRepublicans spurned by Trump in primaries still embrace him Trump pushes back at those saying he's lost grip on GOP These people have been subpoenaed by the Jan. 6 panel MORE of turning on the former president when he described two of Trumps judicial appointees in Alabama as liberal, activist judges after a three-judge panel rejected a new congressional map passed by the state legislature.

Likewise, former North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory (R) on Tuesday attacked Rep. Ted BuddTheodore (Ted) Paul BuddRepublicans spurned by Trump in primaries still embrace him Midterm primaries might be critical to balance of the Senate Trump under fire over Tennessee primary nod MORE, his Trump-backed rival for the states Republican Senate nomination, for voting against legislation supported by the former president, including a 2018 immigration and border security bill that included funding for Trumps long-promised wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Im more conservative than my two opponents, McCrory said on the conservative podcast Locked In. I mean, I cannot think of anything that Ted Budd has accomplished in six years. In fact, he voted against the wall. He voted against the immigration bill that Donald Trump wanted.

More than a year after losing the 2020 presidential election and leaving the White House, Trump remains the most sought-after endorsement for Republican candidates.

But while hes managed to crown front-runners in some primary contests, other preferred candidates of his are still facing tough nominating fights as Republicans who missed out on his endorsement decide to take their chances against their Trump-backed rivals.While a few including Rep. Liz CheneyElizabeth (Liz) Lynn CheneyRepublican voters split over RNC censure of Cheney and Kinzinger: poll Republicans spurned by Trump in primaries still embrace him The real reason Jim Jordan is ranting against Jan. 6 committee staff MORE (R-Wyo.), a favorite target of Trump are doing so by putting significant distance between themselves and the former president, more seem to be trying to prove to GOP voters theyve loyally aligned themselves with Trump and his policies.

Hes wading into primaries and people just arent dropping out. Theyre not running away from him, Keith Naughton, a veteran Republican strategist, said. No one is running away from him on these primaries, and I think its showing hes still important but theres an erosion.

Theres also some evidence that Trumps endorsement at least in some races may not be as powerful as he and his allies had hoped. A Quinnipiac University poll out of Georgia late last month found that only 44 percent of likely Republican primary voters said they are more likely to vote for a candidate who has Trumps support, while 50 percent said his endorsement does not make a difference to them.

That same poll showed Kemp leading Perdue 43 percent to 36 percent.

And while Democratic opponents could seize on their appeals to Trump in the primary contests as Annie Andrews, the Democrat challenging Mace, did almost immediately not having Trumps outright endorsement could prove to be an asset for some GOP candidates heading into the general election.

A recent NBC News poll found that only 21 percent of voters said that they would be more likely to vote for a congressional candidate backed by Trump, while 42 percent said his endorsement would make them less likely to vote for a candidate. Thirty-six percent said it wouldnt have an impact on how they cast their ballots.

Still, Trump is particularly eager for his preferred candidates to emerge from their respective primaries, seeing their victories as a reflection of his own political strength, especially as he eyes a potential White House bid in 2024. In a statement this week, the former president insisted upon the strength of his endorsement, saying that it is much stronger today than it was even prior to the 2020 election.

Trump is also set to step up his midterm campaigning in the coming weeks and months, including holding a rally in South Carolina, where hes endorsed primary challenges against two Republican incumbents, Mace and Rep. Tom RiceHugh (Tom) Thompson RiceRepublicans spurned by Trump in primaries still embrace him Trump endorses GOP challenger to South Carolina Rep. Tom Rice The fates of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump MORE.

Whether such rallies will actually give his preferred candidates the boost that they need, however, is an open question.

When hes doing these rallies, hes not doing them for one candidate. The candidates are just the sideshow, one Republican operative said. These rallies are more of a Trump show than they are an endorsement show.

Read the rest here:

Republicans spurned by Trump in primaries still embrace him | TheHill - The Hill

At an October dinner at Stanford University for the Federalist Society, he spoke about the deranged society that a completely deranged government had created, according to a recording of the event obtained by The New York Times. The United States was on the verge of a momentous correction, he said.

My somewhat apocalyptic, somewhat hopeful thought is that we are finally at a point where things are breaking, Mr. Thiel said.

Mr. Thiel, 54, has not publicly said what he believes about the 2020 election. But in Mr. Trump, he sees a vessel to push through his ideological goals, three people close to the investor said. The two men met recently in New York and at the former presidents Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Fla. Mr. Thiel also funded an app company run by John McEntee, one of Mr. Trumps closest aides, two people with knowledge of the deal said.

Unlike traditional Republican donors who have focused on their partys winning control of Congress and the White House, Mr. Thiel has set his sights on reshaping the Republican agenda with his brand of anti-establishment contrarianism, said Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trumps former chief strategist.

I dont think its just about flipping the Senate, said Mr. Bannon, who has known Mr. Thiel since 2016. I think Peter wants to change the direction of the country.

Mr. Thiels giving is expected to make up just a small fraction of the hundreds of millions of dollars that are likely to flow through campaigns this cycle. But the amounts he is pouring into individual races and the early nature of his primary donations have put him on the radar of Republican hopefuls.

In the past, many courted the billionaire Koch brothers or Sheldon Adelson, the casino magnate, who died in 2021. This year, they have clamored for invitations to Mr. Thiels Los Angeles and Miami Beach homes, or debated how to at least get on the phone with him, political strategists said.

Read the original here:

Peter Thiel, the Rights Would-Be Kingmaker - The New York Times

Fani Willis, Atlantas district attorney, has remained steadfast in investigating former President Donald Trump.

Willis is the first Black woman to be named Fulton County district attorney. The Howard University and Emory University graduate is best known for prosecuting the Atlanta Public Schools cheating scandal, which led to jail time for nine of the 11 educators involved.

USA Todayreported on her first day in the position, she was still unpacking her boxes while considering the legal implications of a phone call between the former president and Georgias Chief Elections Officer Brad Raffensperger that was leaked on Youtube. During the call, which was made Jan. 2, Trump pressed Raffensperger to find more votes to overturn Joe Bidens win in the state.

I knew an investigation may be warranted on day onethe literal physical day I walked into the office, Willis told USA Today in a recent interview. Willis added Trumps phone call was enough to raise eyebrows and even cause grave concern that it was already necessary to at least preliminarily look at other facts.

Last month Willis sent a letter to Fulton County Superior Court Chief Judge Christopher Brasher asking him to impanel a special grand jury, writing her office received information indicating a reasonable probability that the State of Georgias administration of elections in 2020, including the States election of the President of the United States, was subject to possible criminal disruptions.

Basher granted Willis the grand jury.

The investigation into Trump has led to Willis receiving death threats. After a firebomb was thrown into Fulton County Commissioner Marvin Arringtons office and Trump calling for the protests of prosecutors trying to lock him up, Willis requested federal protection for her and her staff, but added the threats and incidents do nothing to change her mind about the investigation.

I dont care. It doesnt bother me, I dont lose one hour of sleep over it, Willis told the FOX 5 I-Team.

The rhetoric quite frankly, almost 95% of the time is racist in nature and I want to make sure we stay safe.

Willis is one of three investigations into the former President and one of two being conducted by a Black woman. New York Attorney General Letitia James is also conducting an investigation into Trump and his organization.

See original here:

Meet Fani Willis, Who Is Conducting One of Three Investigations Against Donald Trump - Black Enterprise

Half of Republican voters agree that the party should move on from former President Donald Trumps claims that fraud cost him the 2020 election including 48 percent of those who voted for him, according to a poll released Wednesday.

The Politico-Morning Consult survey asked whether the GOP should continue to focus on the 45th presidents allegations or move on from them.

Among those who identified as Republicans, 50 percent said the party should move on from Trumps claims while 37 percent wanted to continue to focus on them.

Another 12 percent responded dont know/no opinion.

Among those who voted for Trump in 2020, 48 percent opted for move on, while just 36 percent wanted to dwell on the alleged fraud, with 15 percent answering dont know.

However, when asked if Trump should continue to press the case that he was robbed of a second term, 53 percent of Republicans said they strongly or somewhat supported him doing so with only 36 percent saying they opposed. Among Trumps voters, 52 percent said they supported his grievance, while 37 percent said they opposed it.

Overall, nearly two-thirds of Americans 64 percent think the Republican Party should move on from the 2020 election, while 23 percent disagree and 13 percent dont know or have no opinion.

When polled about their opinions on the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, a majority of Americans (54 percent) described it as an illegitimate form of public discourse, compared to 21 percent who said it was legitimate, while 25 percent didnt know or had no opinion.

Trump 2020 voters were split on the question, with 34 percent calling the riot illegitimate, 34 percent calling it legitimate and 31 percent saying they didnt know or didnt have an opinion.

More than three-quarters of President Biden voters (76 percent) said the riot was illegitimate discourse, with only 11 percent saying it was legitimate and 13 percent in the dont know/no opinion column.

Earlier this month, the Republican National Committee censured Reps. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) for participating in the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 riot.

The pair are the only Republicans on the nine-member panel.

The censure resolution claimed Cheney and Kinzinger support Democrat efforts to destroy President Trump more than they support winning back a Republican majority in 2022 and accused them of participating in a Democrat-led persecution of ordinary citizens engaged in legitimate political discourse.

The poll surveyed 2,005 registered voters between Feb. 12 and 13 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 2 percentage points.

Continued here:

Half of GOP voters want party to 'move on' from Trump voting fraud claims: poll - New York Post

Morgan Ortagus: I know I am the best person to fight for Middle Tennesseans in Congress andPresident Donald Trump thinks so too.

Morgan Ortagus| Guest Columnist

How Americans can have a better dialogue about Jan. 6

David Plazas spoke with Samar Ali of Millions of Conversations who offered valuable advice on how Americans can talk about the events on Jan. 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol.

Nashville Tennessean

President Donald Trumps agenda rightfully means a lot to so many Americans. When you look at what he accomplished in just four years, its easy to see why.

President Trump fought tooth and nail for conservative policies. He moved government out of the way and created the strongest economy in decades. He stood up to our adversaries and stood with our allies, which President Obama and now President Biden failed to do.

He was the most pro-life president in history. He stemmed the flow of illegal immigrants into our country and began building the much-needed wall. He promoted freedom at home and abroad, and he always put America first.

But for me, Trumps Presidency was intensely personal.

Counterpoint: Trump's support shouldn't entitle Morgan Ortagus to serve Tennessee in Congress | Opinion

Hear more Tennessee Voices: Get the weekly opinion newsletter for insightful and thought provoking columns.

It was an incredible honor to serve in President Trumps State Department as his spokesperson, where I helped him and Secretary Mike Pompeo implement the America First foreign policy agenda.

I was on the frontlines as we stood up to the Chinese Communist Party, took major strides toward peace in the Middle East by implementing the historic Abraham Accords, and made it clear to the world that we would stand strong with our ally, Israel. Above all, we fought for religious liberty for every individual.

Like so many Tennesseans, I am infuriated by what Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in Congress are doing to our country. Put simply: they are putting their radical agenda over whats best for the American people, all in their pursuit to make the United States look like a socialist country.

Im not going to capitulate and stand idly by as Joe Biden and the Democrats in Washington seek to destroy the country I love. Thats why, with President Trumps endorsement, I am asking Middle Tennesseans to send me to Congress, where I will fight for our conservative values and for American greatness.

Sign up for Latino Tennessee Voices newsletter:Read compelling stories for and with the Latino community in Tennessee.

I became a Mom a little over a year ago to a baby girl,Adina. Being a mom is the best job I have ever had, but its an incredibly difficult job, as Im sure every parent would agree. As I hold her, I often think about all the potential she has.

But her potential is limited in the America Democrats want.

Democrats want an America where children are creatures of the state; an America where you can be canceled because of something you said 20 years ago; an America where there is no rule of law; an America where parents dont have a say in our children'seducation and teachers unions dictate what our children learn and if they are even allowed in the classroom.

Democrats want an America where you are dependent on the government for everything.

Another view: A new Contract with America will let Americans hold Congress accountable | Opinion

Thats not the America I grew up in. Thats not the America I signed up to defend as a U.S. Navy Reserve Officer and thats not the America I want for my child or yours.

But that is the America Democrats envision unless were willing to stand up and fight back.

Sign up for Black Tennessee Voices newsletter:Read compelling columns by Black writers from across Tennessee.

Ive never shied away from a fight, and I know I am the best person to fight for Middle Tennesseans in Washington.

President Trump thinks so too.

I know that together we can champion conservative values and get our country back on track.

I hope that youll get involved with our campaign and help us take back the House and fire Nancy Pelosi. But most importantly, I hope you will stay in the fight for our country.

Because America is worth fighting for. Always.

Morgan Ortagus is a candidate for Tennessees 5th Congressional District, and served as the spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State from 2019 to 2021. She and her husband Jonathan live in Nashville with their daughter, Adina.

Read more:

Protecting Trump's accomplishments is personal, which is why I'm running for Congress | Opinion - Tennessean