Connect with us


President Trump Pleads ‘NOT GUILTY’ in Jan. 6 Case

President Trump Pleads 'NOT GUILTY' in Jan. 6 Case

( – In an unprecedented turn of events, former President Donald Trump faced federal court on Thursday in Washington D.C., vehemently entering a plea of ‘not guilty’ to all charges linked to Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation.

This probe delves into the alleged 2020 election interference and the Capitol riot’s tumultuous aftermath on January 6, 2021.
The Weight of the Charges
There are four serious federal charges that Trump is facing.

  • Conspiracy to defraud the United States.
  • Conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding.
  • Obstruction of an attempt to obstruct an official proceeding.
  • Conspiracy against rights.

Each charge carries weighty implications, with potential penalties ranging from 5 to 20 years in prison per count. The gravity of these charges underscores the severe challenges Trump confronts as he navigates this complex legal battlefield. according to reports.

Courtroom Dynamics

U.S. Magistrate Judge Moxila Upadhaya directed the day’s proceedings inside the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Notably, Judge Tanya Chutkan, recognized for handling multiple cases associated with the January 6 Capitol breach, is set to helm the forthcoming trial.

A trial date has been tentatively marked for August 28. Still, the defense, emphasizing the depth and complexity of the case, has lobbied for an extended timeline.

Trump’s Defiant Stance

Post-court appearance, Trump wasted no time in addressing the media. He painted the indictment as a politically motivated move, arguing that the charges represent a broader assault on democracy and the GOP’s strength going into 2024.

As he looked ahead to the election, he also took a moment to reminisce. He lamented the perceived decline of Washington, D.C., since his tenure.

Echoes of Political Motivation

Trump isn’t alone in crying foul. Alina Habba, a key figure on his legal team, accentuated the claim that the indictment’s timing aims to shift focus away from current controversies embroiling the Biden family.

Labeling it as nothing short of “election interference,” she highlighted what many in the Trump camp perceive as a concerted effort to undermine their candidate.

A Web of Legal Entanglements

Beyond the charges of the day, Trump’s legal woes are manifold. He has previously countered 37 counts in Florida, allegations surrounding improper retention of classified records from his tenure as president.

Add a New York indictment over alleged falsifications related to hush-money payments in his 2016 campaign, and a complex picture emerges.

Campaign Finances Under Scrutiny

While Trump remains a GOP frontrunner for the 2024 presidential campaign, financial disclosures indicate a significant drain on resources.

With approximately $42.8 million spent this year, predominantly on legal challenges, and a remaining $31.8 million in the war chest, it’s evident that the legal and political road ahead is fraught with challenges.

The unfolding legal narrative surrounding Trump is pivotal for the man himself. It could significantly shape the GOP’s fortunes and America’s political landscape leading up to 2024.

As the story evolves, all eyes remain on the courtroom and the campaign trail alike.

Copyright 2023.


Democrat Mayor Welcomes Illegals to Denver


During a recent interview with CNBC, Denver Mayor Mike Johnston’s comments regarding the city’s approach to immigration underscore a troubling trend of prioritizing the interests of migrants over the well-being of American citizens.

Johnston’s admission that Denver is grappling with an influx of migrants is a damning indictment of the city’s failed open-door policies. Rather than acknowledging the inherent risks and challenges associated with unchecked migration, Johnston attempts to portray Denver’s approach as a delicate balancing act between compassion and pragmatism. However, his words betray a dangerous naivety that threatens to undermine the safety and prosperity of Denverites.

By championing an ideology of unlimited hospitality, Denver has effectively placed the burden of its misguided altruism squarely on the shoulders of its own citizens. Johnston’s assertion that the city is proud of its ability to manage the migrant crisis is not only arrogant but also deeply troubling. Instead of celebrating the city’s failure to control its borders, Denver should be prioritizing the needs and concerns of its own residents.

Johnston’s plea for federal assistance serves as a thinly veiled attempt to absolve Denver of its responsibility for the consequences of its reckless immigration policies. It is outrageous that hardworking taxpayers are expected to foot the bill for the city’s misguided generosity. Denverites should not be forced to accept cuts to city budgets and services in order to accommodate migrants who enter the country illegally.

Furthermore, Johnston’s insistence on portraying migrants as victims deserving of unwavering support only serves to exacerbate the problem. By perpetuating the myth of the noble migrant in need of rescue, Johnston glosses over the very real dangers and disruptions caused by uncontrolled immigration. Denverites deserve better than a mayor who prioritizes virtue signaling over their safety and prosperity.

It is time for Johnston and other proponents of open borders to face the harsh reality of their policies. Unrestricted immigration poses serious threats to national security, public safety, and economic stability. Denver cannot continue down this reckless path without risking irreparable harm to its own citizens.

In light of these challenges, it is imperative that Denver enact sensible immigration policies that prioritize the needs and interests of American citizens. This includes strengthening border security, enforcing immigration laws, and implementing measures to deter illegal immigration. Anything less would be a betrayal of the trust placed in Johnston by the people of Denver.


Illegals Get the VIP Treatment from Biden's DHS!

POLL: Should American cities welcome illegals?


Continue Reading


Texas Dem. Rep: No Taxes For Black Americans


In a recent episode of the “Black Lawyers Podcast,” Rep. Jasmine Crockett, a Democrat from Texas, ignited a firestorm of controversy with her proposal to exempt Black Americans from paying taxes as a form of reparations. This suggestion has triggered widespread outrage among conservatives, who see it as yet another attempt to further racialize American politics and deepen divisions within society.

Crockett’s proposition, which she herself admitted may not be successful due to the fact that many within the Black community are already struggling financially and may not be paying taxes, has been met with condemnation from conservative voices across the country. Critics argue that such a plan would not only be ineffective in addressing the underlying issues faced by Black Americans but would also exacerbate racial tensions and perpetuate a victimhood narrative.

By singling out one racial group for special treatment through tax exemptions, Crockett’s proposal threatens to further polarize an already divided nation along racial lines. Conservatives view this as yet another example of the left’s obsession with identity politics, where race takes precedence over individual merit and personal responsibility.

Moreover, Crockett’s suggestion of tax exemptions as a form of reparations is seen as deeply misguided and unfair. Conservatives argue that reparations, if they are to be considered at all, should be based on need and merit, rather than race. By proposing blanket tax exemptions based solely on race, Crockett fails to address the complex socioeconomic factors that contribute to inequality and disadvantage in America.

Conservatives also express concern about the lack of consistency and coordination between federal and state approaches to reparations. Crockett’s call for tax exemptions at the federal level raises questions about how such measures would interact with existing state-level initiatives, potentially leading to confusion and inequity in the distribution of resources.

As the debate over reparations continues to intensify, conservatives are calling for a more thoughtful and inclusive approach that focuses on addressing the root causes of inequality and promoting economic opportunity for all Americans, regardless of race. Crockett’s proposal, they argue, only serves to further entrench racial divisions and undermine efforts to achieve genuine unity and progress in the United States.



POLL: Should the federal government exempt black Americans from taxes?

Continue Reading


Whoopi Goldberg Claims Conservatives Want to “Bring Back Slavery”


In a recent episode of ABC’s “The View,” Whoopi Goldberg stirred controversy with her startling claim that some Republicans are inclined to “bring slavery back.” The comment, made during a discussion about the Arizona Supreme Court’s decision to reinstate an 1864 abortion ban, has sparked widespread condemnation, with critics lambasting Goldberg for her inflammatory and unsubstantiated rhetoric.

Goldberg’s assertion, delivered in the heat of the panel discussion, has been roundly denounced as not only inflammatory but also deeply irresponsible. By equating Republican policies on abortion with a desire to resurrect one of the darkest chapters in American history, Goldberg not only demonstrated a profound lack of understanding of the issues at hand but also showcased a troubling disregard for reasoned discourse.

Conservative voices have been particularly vocal in their condemnation of Goldberg’s remarks, highlighting the egregious nature of her comparison and the harm it does to meaningful dialogue. They argue that such hyperbolic and baseless accusations only serve to further polarize an already divided political landscape, making it increasingly difficult to find common ground on important issues.

Moreover, critics have pointed out the dangerous precedent set by Goldberg’s rhetoric, warning of the potential consequences of allowing such inflammatory statements to go unchallenged. They argue that by indulging in sensationalism and distortion, Goldberg not only does a disservice to the public discourse but also undermines the credibility of her own platform.

In the wake of the controversy, Goldberg has faced mounting pressure to retract or clarify her remarks, with many calling on her to apologize for the offense caused. However, as of yet, Goldberg has remained steadfast in her position, offering no indication of contrition or acknowledgment of the harm caused by her words.

Goldberg’s comments are part of a greater problem in American media and politics: One where conservative Americans are routinely demonized for their beliefs without consequence. This rhetoric should alarm all patriotic Americans interested in the free and honest discussion of ideas and politics.


POLL: Do you think conservatives want to bring back slavery?


Continue Reading