Jack Smith Parrots Phony ‘Fake Electors’ Smear In Latest Get-Trump Court Brief
Historical precedent hasn't stopped radical left-wing prosecutors from filing charges against Republican electors who partook in the 2020 process.Historical precedent hasn't stopped radical left-wing prosecutors from filing charges against Republican electors who partook in the 2020 process.CNN host ADMITS the economy gives Trump a ‘HUGE edge over Harris’
Election day is less than two months away, and liberals are starting to get nervous.
While CNN host Kate Bolduan notes that Kamala Harris has “an eye-popping lead over Trump among women,” Donald Trump has “a huge edge over Harris when it comes to the economy.”
And according to CNN’s David Chalian, the race is closer than the left had hoped.
Harris is leading outside the margin of error in the battleground states of Wisconsin and Michigan while Trump is leading outside the margin of error in Arizona. The numbers are too close to call in Georgia, Nevada, and Pennsylvania.
“This shows that the candidates have multiple paths to 270, but that this is indeed a tossup race,” Chalian tells Bolduan.
However, Harris has lost support with black voters in places like Pennsylvania, where 92% of black voters went for Biden in the 2020 election. Now, 84% are polling for Harris.
“There’s still room here for Harris to grow and consolidate the black vote, which is going to be necessary if she is going to win in places like Georgia and Pennsylvania,” Chalian explains.
Dave Rubin of “The Rubin Report” is concerned, yet hopeful.
“Something interesting is brewing here,” he says. “Trump needs a major win, not a little win.”
“Even if he won by a little, they’ll somehow make it seem like he didn’t win,” he continues. “Look, anything can happen in 60 days. Pandemic nine, the zombie invasion, Russia, Russia, Russia."
"Anything can happen, of course," he continues, noting that it's amazing that the polls are "so freaking close after the Trump indictments and the sham trials and everything they’ve done to him.”
Want more from Dave Rubin?
To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
New York Judge DELAYS Trump sentencing following SCOTUS immunity ruling
It’s been quite the week for former President Donald Trump.
Not only did his debate against President Joe Biden send Democrats scrambling — the Supreme Court ruled that the president has immunity when executing "official acts."
Following that decision, Trump’s team moved to overturn the conviction of the former president in the Manhattan case, where he was found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records.
As a result, Trump’s sentencing hearing has been postponed until September. While many conservatives are taking it as a win, Sara Gonzales remains skeptical.
“Part of me is like what else are they planning?” Gonzales says, adding, “They don’t give up that easily.”
“It’s either that or they see all of this imploding before their very eyes, and they don’t want to look stupid, so they’re like, ‘Yeah, we’ll just delay it, and then maybe people will forget about it,’” she continues, “But you’ve got to believe that they are completely scrambling to figure out what to do.”
“All of these bombshells they thought that they had are now seemingly getting totally overturned,” she adds.
Matthew Marsden finds it interesting that the liberal response to the Supreme Court’s ruling has been overwhelmingly one of fear.
“It’s amazing how the liberals went absolutely bonkers and said that the Supreme Court ruling was about Trump,” Marsden says. “It’s just about the law; it’s about the Constitution.”
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Jill Biden SCARED Trump will end public education; ban pornographic books from schools
While President Joe Biden struggles in the polls almost as badly as he does forming a coherent sentence, Jill Biden is attempting to show her husband in a more positive light.
The first lady claimed Saturday that the future of public education in America depends on whether or not the president is re-elected, telling the crowd that “Donald Trump doesn’t want to strengthen our public education system, he wants to destroy it.”
“A world in which public schools are privatized and their funding is gutted, teachers unions are marginalized and lesson plans are censored and books are banned. In America, we don’t ban books,” she continued.
“If Donald Trump is elected, we get chaos and division,” she added for additional dramatic effect.
Though meant to instill fear in the American people, it’s not working on Sara Gonzales.
“I already said I was in, like you couldn’t be selling this harder for me. If I didn’t know any better, I would think these people were plants to psyop people into voting for Donald Trump,” Gonzales says, adding, “That sounds awesome.”
“You’re telling me Donald Trump wants to destroy the institution that you guys built that isn’t teaching our kids reading, writing, arithmetic. It’s not teaching them how to critically think,” she continues.
And not only are American children being inundated with “pornographic material” and “which fake pronouns to use,” billions of taxpayer dollars are going toward what Gonzales calls a “failed system.”
“In America, we do actually care and wish to keep our children away from pornographic material,” Gonzales adds.
Supreme Court hears Trump's immunity claim
On Thursday, the United States Supreme Court heard arguments on whether Donald Trump is immune from prosecution in the alleged election interference case, which was put on hold in February.
Thursday morning, Trump told reporters, "A president has to have immunity," the Associated Press reported.
"If you don't have immunity, you just have a ceremonial president," he added.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and consider "whether and if so to what extent does a former President enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office."
Three sets of judges, including the Supreme Court, have attempted to address the question over the last six months.
The Supreme Court could decide to reject Trump's immunity claim outright, which would return the case to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, allowing proceedings to resume. It could reverse the lower courts' rulings by declaring that the former president may not be prosecuted, halting the case. Or, the court could find that the president has some immunity. If it determines Trump has some immunity, it could also decide that the allegations against the former president are not protected under that immunity, or it could send the decision back to the district court.
Regardless of the Supreme Court's ruling on the immunity claim, it should not impact the ongoing New York trial, where Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged Trump with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.
Trump has also made an immunity claim in a separate federal indictment in Florida, where he was charged with allegedly retaining classified documents.
During Thursday's trial, Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson stated, "I don't understand how the president stands in any different position with respect to the need to follow the law as he is doing his job than anyone else. ... If there's no threat of criminal prosecution, what prevents the president from just doing whatever he wants?"
Justice Samuel Alito noted that the results of the case would "have effects that go far beyond this particular prosecution."
Justice Elena Kagan pushed Trump's lawyer D. John Sauer about how far presidential immunity could go.
"How about if a president orders the military to stage a coup?" Kagan asked, presenting a hypothetical scenario.
"If it's an official act, there needs to be impeachment and conviction beforehand," Sauer responded.
The Supreme Court and Sauer spent a portion of the hearing debating what types of acts could be considered official versus not official. Sauer conceded that some of Trump's alleged conduct in the case may not be regarded as official acts.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned Sauer about his claim that a president must be impeached in the Senate prior to being criminally prosecuted.
"There are many other people who are subject to impeachment, including the nine sitting on this bench," Barrett said, "and I don't think anyone has ever suggested that impeachment would have to be the gateway to criminal prosecution for any of the many other officers subject to impeachment."
Oral arguments lasted more than two hours on Thursday. The Supreme Court will continue public session on May 9.
Anything else?
Trump's legal team requested acting Justice Juan Merchan postpone the New York trial on Thursday to allow Trump to appear at the Supreme Court hearing. His request was denied, Blaze News previously reported.
Merchan told Trump's attorney, "Arguing before the Supreme Court is a big deal, and I can certainly appreciate why your client would want to be there, but a trial in New York Supreme Court ... is also a big deal."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Jack Smith Signals He’ll Try To Circumvent SCOTUS If It Says Obstruction Charges Aren’t Real Crimes
Smith is trying to stretch Section 1512 in hopes of bypassing a potential ruling deeming the government's abuse of the law illegal.Democrats Want Convicts To Vote, But No Ballot Access For Non-Convict Trump
Democrats don't support extending to former President Donald Trump the same voting access they'd give to convicted criminals.Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com
‘Ugly Parts of Our Past’ | 3/5/24