A grand jury on Tuesday, February 10, refused to indict a coalition of Democratic lawmakers over their participation in a controversial “illegal orders” video last fall.
The failed federal indictment was pursued by the office of U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeanine Pirro, as first reported by The New York Times.
The lawmakers urged military service members and intelligence community personnel to defy illegal orders in a joint video statement released in November. The video followed the Trump administration’s decision to carry out deadly boat strikes in the Caribbean.
“We know you are under enormous stress and pressure right now, Americans trust their military, but that trust is at risk. This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens like us. You all swore an oath to protect and defend this constitution,” the lawmakers said in the video.
President Trump called the video “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!” in a post on Truth Social. He later suggested the lawmakers should be prosecuted, removed from office, imprisoned and even killed.
The video featured Democratic legislators with military and intelligence backgrounds, including Sens. Elissa Slotkin (Mich.) and Mark Kelly (Ariz.) and Reps. Jason Crow (Colo.), Chrissy Houlahan (Pa.), Chris Deluzio (Penn.) and Maggie Goodlander (N.H.).
The FBI had previously requested interviews with all six members of Congress, and the lawmakers said in January that they were under investigation by the Justice Department. The Times reported that federal prosecutors were seeking to indict lawmakers for breaching a law forbidding interfering with the U.S. military’s loyalty, morale or discipline.
he Hill has reached out to the U.S. attorney’s office for comment.
Several lawmakers responded to the news on the social platform X late Tuesday night. Slotkin, a former CIA analyst, confirmed she was named in the federal indictment.
“Today, it was a grand jury of anonymous American citizens who upheld the rule of law and determined this case should not proceed,” Slotkin said. “Hopefully, this ends this politicized investigation for good.
“But today wasn’t just an embarrassing day for the Administration,” she continued. “It was another sad day for our country. Because whether or not Pirro succeeded is not the point. It’s that President Trump continues to weaponize our justice system against his perceived enemies.”
Deluzio similarly condemned the Trump administration’s attempts to charge him and his fellow lawmakers. “I will not be intimidated for a single second by the Trump Administration or Justice Department lawyers who tried and failed to indict me today,” he said. “American citizens on a grand jury refused to go along with this attempt to charge me with a crime for stating the law in a way Trump and his enablers didn’t like. They may want Americans to be afraid to speak out or to disagree—but patriotism demands courage in this moment. DON’T GIVE UP THE SHIP!”
Kelly called the indictment “an outrageous abuse of power by Donald Trump and his lackies.” “It wasn’t enough for Pete Hegseth to censure me and threaten to demote me, now it appears they tried to have me charged with a crime — all because of something I said that they didn’t like,” he wrote. “That’s not the way things work in America. Donald Trump wants every American to be too scared to speak out against him. The most patriotic thing any of us can do is not back down.”
Crow on Wednesday night also confirmed the indictment. “Donald Trump’s DOJ just tried—and failed—to indict me in front of a grand jury, he said in a statement. “Americans should be furious that Trump and his goons tried to weaponize our justice system again against his political opponents. His attempts to intimidate and silence us will always fail.”
“We will continue to fight back against their rising tyranny, along with all Americans of good conscience. Courage is contagious,” he added.
By Stacy M. Brown NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent
Donald Trump’s presidency has long carried a familiar weight for Black America. What feels different now is that the force once aimed primarily at Black and brown communities is no longer contained there. With the fatal shooting of Renee Good, a 37-year-old white mother of three, by an ICE agent in Minneapolis, the unchecked power of the federal government has moved into spaces many Americans once believed were insulated. Good was killed during an immigration operation after her vehicle moved forward as agents blocked a roadway. Federal officials quickly labeled the shooting self-defense and branded Good, a “domestic terrorist,” even as video and eyewitness accounts raised questions and Minnesota officials accused the Trump administration of weaponizing immigration enforcement. Protests spread across the state, and Minnesota, Minneapolis, and St. Paul sued the federal government, calling the deployment of immigration agents a “federal invasion.” As the unrest grew, Trump responded with a Truth Social post aimed at Minnesotans that read less like a call for calm and more like a threat. He warned that a “DAY OF RECKONING & RETRIBUTION IS COMING,” while painting entire communities as overrun by criminals and praising ICE for removing “thousands of criminals,” claims local leaders sharply disputed. For many Black Americans, the moment felt grimly familiar. “This is what unchecked power looks like,” said Rev. Al Sharpton, founder and president of National Action Network. “Donald Trump sent up his latest test balloon for erasing Black history with his twisted, alarming claims that white Americans were discriminated against from the civil rights protections that many fought, bled, and in many cases died for.” Sharpton’s remarks came after Trump told The New York Times that white people were “very badly treated” by laws adopted during the Civil Rights Movement. The president framed civil rights protections as a form of “reverse discrimination,” echoing a broader administration effort to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives across the federal government. “The facts simply don’t match up to the reality Donald Trump has chosen to live in,” Sharpton said. “Even more than 60 years after the Civil Rights Act or the Voting Rights Act, many Black Americans continue to lack access to equitable education, capital dollars, or even their right to exercise democracy.” Under Trump, those disparities have widened. His administration has eliminated DEI programs, curtailed civil rights enforcement, and backed legal efforts that have weakened affirmative action and pushed the Voting Rights Act closer to irrelevance. Civil rights leaders say the policies are not abstract. They translate into lost jobs, closed pathways, and communities left unprotected. The timing of Trump’s comments struck another nerve. “That he made these statements on the eve of the King federal holiday is perhaps the most telling,” Sharpton said. “The Trump administration has already made attempts to minimize this holiday, as well as Juneteenth, while propping up his own birthday.” At the same time Trump has elevated claims of discrimination against white Americans, his administration has expanded aggressive immigration enforcement that critics say operates with little transparency or accountability. Investigations have documented immigration agents using banned chokeholds, detaining U.S. citizens, and conducting masked operations that leave communities fearful of leaving their homes. The consequences now extend beyond immigrant communities. Good’s killing, and the administration’s rapid defense of the agent involved, has jolted Americans who once viewed federal force as distant or theoretical. Members of the Congressional Black Caucus say the pattern is unmistakable. In a separate statement, caucus leaders condemned Trump for bypassing Congress to carry out an unauthorized military operation in Venezuela, calling it a grave abuse of power and warning that the president is increasingly willing to act without legal restraint, whether abroad or at home. “While Nicolás Maduro is, in fact, an illegitimate leader, the deployment of U.S. military power to impose political change in a sovereign nation without the consent of Congress threatens to draw the United States into an indefinite conflict,” the caucus said in its statement. For Black institutions, the pressure has been economic as well as political. The Black Press of America, founded nearly two centuries ago to give voice to people denied access to mainstream media, has seen corporate advertisers and sponsors retreat under the Trump era’s hostility toward racial equity. Newsrooms have shrunk. Resources have dried up. The mission has grown harder just as the stakes have risen. What Black America has warned about for years is now playing out in real time. A presidency that treats civil rights as disposable, dissent as criminal, and federal power as personal authority does not stop at one community.
Publisher Simon & Schuster announced that the campaign memoir of former Vice President Kamala Harris, 107 Days, has sold 350,000 copies in one week. The sales total includes print, ebooks, and audiobooks. The numbers released by the publisher reflect that Harris’ book will be the top political book of 2025. The book goes into the details of Harris’ unexpected 107-day 2024 presidential campaign. The former Vice President became a famous nominee after President Biden dropped out of the race for The White House on July 21, 2024. Biden dropped out after a disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump on June 27, 2024. Biden appeared confused and was slow to answer many questions and many attributed his issues to his age. Shortly before Biden’s withdrawal there was internal debate on whether there should be a hastily put together Democratic primary. But with only a short time left in the campaign before Election Day — Vice President Harris became the nominee. But the campaign was only 107 days because of Biden’s late timing in exiting the race. While there has been internal criticism within the Democratic Party pushing back against what Harris relays in her book, the strong interest and response by the public in the form of strong book sales and packed appearances is evidence of strong public interest. According to Simon & Schuster, the book has already been ordered for a 5th printing. A 5th printing of “107 Days” will bring the number of hardcover copies in print to 500,000. Harris’ book has a chance to be a historic best seller. Michelle Obama’s memoir “Becoming” is widely considered the most-read political memoir of all time. The 2018 book sold over 8 million copies globally and discussed issues of identity, race, ambition, family, and public service.
By Stacy M. Brown Black Press USA Senior National Correspondent
Donald Trump’s second stint in the White House has proven to be a gold mine — for Donald Trump. An investigation by The New Yorker has tallied more than $1 billion in personal and family gains tied directly to his two presidencies, from foreign mega-projects to luxury perks and merchandise sales that blur, if not obliterate, the lines between public office and private profit. When Trump first took office in 2017, he assured Americans he would not “destroy the company he built” but would turn daily operations over to his sons. He claimed such a handoff would avoid the appearance of exploiting the presidency. Eight years later, that promise is in shreds. The New Yorker reports that Trump and his family have reaped massive windfalls, including Persian Gulf real estate and golf course contracts in Saudi Arabia, Oman, Dubai, and Qatar that would be inconceivable without the presidency. Jared Kushner’s private-equity firm, Affinity Partners, secured a $2 billion investment from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s sovereign wealth fund, along with hundreds of millions more from the UAE and Qatar, generating hundreds of millions for Kushner personally. Mar-a-Lago’s revenues have quintupled since Trump entered politics, producing at least $125 million in extra profit from members willing to pay as much as $1 million to join.
Trump’s personal merchandising empire — separate from his campaign store — has brought in $27.7 million selling MAGA-style hats, koozies, and flip-flops. Donor-funded PACs have spent over $100 million covering his personal legal bills. The Emir of Qatar offered him a Boeing 747-8 as a “gift” for his use after leaving office, worth an estimated $150 million. A massive Hanoi golf and hotel complex, advanced by Vietnam’s Communist Party with “special attention” from the Trump administration, is projected to bring $40 million in licensing profits. Major media companies — ABC, Meta, X, and CBS — have collectively paid $63 million to Trump’s presidential library foundation to settle defamation claims that legal experts described as baseless but were resolved under the weight of presidential power. Meanwhile, Trump and his family have dived into cryptocurrency, NFTs, and token sales, pocketing at least $14.4 million from licensing fees and digital currency holdings. Ethics watchdog Fred Wertheimer told The New Yorker that “when it comes to using his public office to amass personal profits, Trump is a unicorn — no one else even comes close.” The total haul stands at roughly $1.02 billion — a sum no prior occupant of the Oval Office has approached. “We will never really know,” Robert Weissman of Public Citizen stated.
By Stacy M. Brown, NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent
Donald Trump’s return to the presidency has ignited debates about his legitimacy and a surge of interest in emigration. While Trump won all seven swing states and secured the presidency, his share of the popular vote—49.83%—places him among the least popular modern American presidents. His 1.55% margin over Vice President Kamala Harris falls far short of historical landslides like Lyndon B. Johnson’s 1964 triumph, where Johnson won 61.1% of the popular vote.
And with a growing number of Trump voters expressing buyer’s remorse, many political analysts have questioned whether the election victory reflects broad public support for his policies. “If there ever was a mandate, this isn’t it,” Georgetown University political scientist Hans Noel told MSN News. Earlier projections showing Trump winning as much as 53% of the popular vote have proven inaccurate and have added further scrutiny to claims of a sweeping mandate.
Cornell University professor Peter Enns, whose model accurately predicted Trump’s swing state victories, said economic dissatisfaction during Joe Biden’s presidency played a key role in voter decisions. “If this election can be explained by what voters thought of Biden and Harris and economic conditions, it really goes against the notion of a mandate for major change from Trump,” Enns told the Guardian newspaper.
Americans Explore Emigration in Droves
In the wake of Trump’s win, many Americans have begun looking for opportunities abroad. Google reported a 1,270% spike in searches for “move to Canada” as polls closed on the East Coast. Queries about moving to New Zealand climbed nearly 2,000%, while those for Australia rose 820%. According to Google data, searches for emigration had reached historic levels.
Immigration lawyers across North America have been inundated with inquiries. “Every half hour, there’s a new email enquiry,” said Evan Green, managing partner at Green and Spiegel, Canada’s oldest immigration law firm. Green noted that clients’ concerns extend beyond Trump himself to broader societal divisions. “The majority of Americans voted for him, and some people don’t feel comfortable living in that kind of society anymore. People are afraid they are going to lose freedoms.”
Several celebrities have also signaled plans to leave the United States. Sharon Stone intends to move her family to Canada, while America Ferrera is reportedly eyeing the U.K. as a new home base. Minnie Driver has announced plans to leave Los Angeles for the U.K., citing discomfort with the country’s political direction. Whoopi Goldberg, Cardi B, and Elon Musk’s daughter Vivian Wilson are among others expressing interest in relocating.
For those seeking guidance, destinations such as Panama City, Budapest, Belize, and Phuket, Thailand, are being recommended for American expats. The locations reportedly offer affordable living and pathways to residency.
Diaspora Citizenship in Ghana
In Ghana, the African diaspora is reconnecting with its roots. On November 19, 524 diaspora members received Ghanaian citizenship during a landmark Accra International Conference Centre ceremony. The event, part of President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo’s ongoing efforts to strengthen ties with the diaspora, builds on the success of the 2019 “Year of Return” campaign.
“Your ancestors left these shores under tragic and inhumane circumstances,” Akufo-Addo exclaimed. “Today, we reclaim that connection by welcoming you as part of our Ghanaian family.” He reminded attendees that the initiative goes beyond symbolism, providing tangible opportunities for the diaspora to shape Africa’s future.
“Being Ghanaian is about embracing values such as respect, equity, and peace,” Akufo-Addo said. “These principles are at the heart of our identity, and we invite you to embody them as you integrate into our society.”
After Donald Trump told journalists on Wednesday that his presidential opponent Kamala Harris “turned Black” for political gain, Trump’s comments have impacted the way many multiracial voters are thinking about the two candidates. “She was only promoting Indian heritage,” the former president said during an interview at the National Association of Black Journalists convention last week. “I didn’t know she was Black until a number of years ago, when she happened to turn Black, and now she wants to be known as Black.” “Is she Indian or is she Black?” he asked. She’s both. Harris, whose mother was Indian and her father is Jamaican, would make history if she is elected president. She would be both the first female president, the first Asian American president, and the second Black President after Barack Obama. Multiracial American voters say they have heard similar derogatory remarks about their identities their whole lives. Some identify with Harris’ politics more than others but, overall, they told NBC News that Trump’s comments will not go unnoticed. Bria Beddoe, 31, who is African American and Trinidadian, said she had mixed feelings about Harris and was hesitant to give her full support to the candidate. She said she doesn’t support Harris’ past criminal justice policies as a district attorney and she doesn’t think President Joe Biden is doing enough to support Gaza. But she said Trump’s rhetoric helped to change her perspective. “I was not super on board for Kamala Harris being the presidential candidate, but then when I saw the way that they were slandering her and the things that they chose to slander her about, it definitely made me more sympathetic to her … and made me want to support her,” she said. Beddoe, who lives in Washington, D.C., said she’s experienced similar ridicule and disbelief over her Black, Indian, Chinese and Portuguese roots. As a result, Beddoe said, she sympathizes with Harris and the ways she’s been racialized throughout her political career. “I grew up not being believed by people until they saw a member of my family,” she said. “It’s been a very triggering time to see all these people try to say, ‘Well, you’re not this because you look like this, and you identify as this.” How Harris has been racialized throughout her career Harris’ heritage and the way she talks about it has been a topic of conversation throughout her political career, especially after she joined Biden’s ticket as his vice-presidential pick in 2020. She’s been criticized by some for not emphasizing her roots enough, and most recently she’s been labeled by Trump and others on the right as a “DEI candidate” who only made it by playing “the race card.” Some have entirely left her South Asian background out of the conversation, others minimize her Blackness. “It’s almost like people are talking about her as two separate women,” Dhanashree Thorat, an assistant professor at Mississippi State University who studies race, feminism, and systemic oppression, told NBC News when Harris was campaigning with Biden in 2020. “You have Kamala who’s a Black woman and Kamala who’s a South Asian. And she’s not two separate people.” Those who knew her say she was steeped in her heritage on both sides. Emily Grullón, 33, of Los Angeles, said Trump’s comment only highlight the microaggressions mixed-race people often experience in the United States. She said she hopes this controversy will prompt a national conversation about these experiences. “Was I surprised at his comments? Not so much,” said Grullón, who is an Afro-Indigenous Latina with Dominican roots. “I don’t support his comments, but I’m glad we can now have this discussion.” Grullón, an assistant professor of occupational therapy at Southern California University of Health Sciences, said she’s had people question her Blackness and express shock at her ability to speak Spanish. “It’s like we don’t fit in anywhere,” Grullón said. “I hope there’s more awareness now that the mixed experience is pretty nuanced.” She said her heritage plays a major role in the way she votes. Grullón said she has her reservations about Harris. She said she doesn’t agree with Harris’ stance on the Israel-Hamas war and doesn’t believe Harris to be the “saving grace” the country needs. But “I believe she’s a better candidate than Biden,” Grullón said, adding that she holds more “progressive” views than Harris. “I vote with my values,” she said, adding that she’s supporting Harris reluctantly. “Those values are who’s going to speak on the needs of the communities that I come from, and those who are most affected within our communities. And it’s certainly not Donald Trump.” Harris addressed Trump’s comments hours later in Houston, at an event for the historically Black sorority Sigma Gamma Rho. “It was the same old show — the divisiveness and the disrespect,” Harris said. “And let me just say the American people deserve better. The American people deserve better.” Trump doubled down on questioning Harris’ racial identity later in the day, writing in a social media post, “Crazy Kamala is saying she’s Indian, not Black. This is a big deal. Stone cold phony. She uses everybody, including her racial identity!” Trump has relied on his familiar tactic of attacking Harris’ race and gender since Biden dropped out of the presidential race and endorsed Harris. But some have said Trump’s race- and gender-centered attacks may alienate women and voters of color. Joe Hill, who is Bolivian and white, said Trump’s attacks have only pushed him further into Harris’ corner. “They make me want to be more supportive and more active, whether it’s donating $15 to her campaign or commenting on a post, making my voice heard,” Hill, 41, of Florida, said, adding that he’d already planned to vote for Harris in November. Hill said his mother is an immigrant with Jamaican and Indian parentage, like Harris, and he didn’t speak English when he moved to the U.S. as a child. As a result, he grew up embracing and learning about both his Bolivian heritage and American identity. “What Trump said about her is stuff I’ve heard!” Hill said. “Having two very different cultures, and loving both equally, and someone questioning that is so awful.
In the Tuesday, March 5th Primary election, 2,047 people voted in Greene County, with 1,829 (90%) voting Democratic and 215 (10%) voting Republican. This was a relatively low turnout election for Greene County.
In the most contested local race, District Attorney Gregg Griggers won the Democratic nomination for the 17th Judicial Circuit position, currently held by Judge Eddie Hardaway, who was age limited from running and required to retire.
In Greene County, Griggers received 1,061 (61%) votes to 682 (39%) for Attorney Rob Lee. In the three-county district (Greene, Sumter, and Marengo) Griggers polled 4,940 (64%) to 2,799 (36%) for Rob Lee. In Sumter County, Lee won by a margin of 976 (51%) to 945 (49%) for Griggers. In Marengo County, Griggers received 2,934 (72%) to 1,141 (28%) for Lee.
In the Greene County Democratic Primary for President, Joe Biden led with 1,458 (87%) to 78 votes for Dean Phillips and 140 votes for Uncommitted. Joe Biden also won the state’s Democratic delegates.
In the Republican Presidential Primary, in Greene County, Donald Trump led with 191 (91%) to 17 for Nikki Haley and 3 for Uncommitted.
Trump won the state of Alabama by more than 80% of the votes.
In Greene County, incumbent U. S. Representative Terri Sewell won the Democratic nomination by 1,623 (94%) of the votes to 105 for challenger Chris Davis. Sewell was also nominated district wide for her Congressional position. She will be running against Christian Horn who won the Republican nomination against Robin Litaker.
For Statewide Amendment No. 1, allowing the Alabama Legislature to vote on local bills before the budget is completed, won by 1,056 (61%) to 690 (39%) in Greene County but lost narrowly statewide (50.8% to 49.2%) in unofficial returns available this morning.
In the new 2nd District Congressional race, there will be a run-off on April 16, 2024, in both the Democratic and Republican parties. In the Democratic Primary, Shomari Figures leads with 24,825 (44%) votes to 12,774 (22%) for Anthony Daniels, out of a total of 57,129 votes cast. Figures and Daniels will be in the Democratic runoff.
In the Republican Primary, out of 56,968 votes cast, Dick Brewbaker led with 22,556 (40%) votes to 15,075 (27%) for Caroleen Dobson. They will meet in the Republican runoff.
It is interesting to note that Democrats received only 161 more total votes in this race than the Republican field. Despite the victory in re-districting this Alabama 2nd Congressional District, to allow for a Black Democrat to win, the district will be highly contested through the November General Election and whoever wins the primaries will need to keep campaigning to win in November.
A three-judge panel from the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday unanimously ruled against former U.S. President Donald Trump’s claims of immunity in a criminal case stemming from his efforts to overturn his 2020 loss.
“For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant. But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as president no longer protects him against this prosecution,” states the 57-page opinion.
The panel included one judge appointed by former GOP President George H.W. Bush and two appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, who is seeking reelection this year. Trump is the Republican front-runner despite four ongoing criminal cases and arguments he is constitutionally disqualified from holding office again after engaging in insurrection on January 6, 2021.
Welcoming the development, the watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington declared: “Donald Trump is not above prosecution. The law and the Constitution apply to him just like they apply to every other American. This is a major victory for our democracy and the rule of law.”
The ruling aligns with the panel’s skepticism during arguments last month. When one judge had challenged the limits of immunity by asking Trump’s attorney whether a president could “order SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival,” the lawyer responded that “he would have to be and would speedily be impeached and convicted before the criminal prosecution.”
The panel’s decision comes after Judge Tayna Chutkan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia—who rejected Trump’s immunity claim in December—last week postponed his election interference trial, which had been scheduled for March. Trump is expected to appeal Tuesday’s decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, whose right-wing supermajority includes three justices he appointed.
The mandate from the appellate court opinion denying Trump immunity “issues in six days on February 12,” noted Los Angeles Times senior legal affairs columnist Harry Litman. “That’s very quick and puts him in a box having to find a stay before then,” from the full D.C. Circuit or the Supreme Court, or Chutkan can proceed with the trial.
The high court in December rejected a request from Special Counsel Jack Smith—who is overseeing Trump’s two federal cases rather than the U.S. Justice Department because of the November election—that the justices skip over the appeals court to swiftly settle the immunity debate.
Tim Scott’s suspension of his presidential campaign came as a “surprise” to his campaign staff members, his allies and his supporters, the latter of whom were sent a last-minute fundraising solicitation shortly before the Republican Senator from South Carolina made his announcement, according to reports. Scott, who was never able to be a serious polling threat to front-runner Donald Trump, let alone several other candidates, made his announcement Sunday afternoon during an interview on Fox News conducted by Republican and former South Carolina U.S. Rep. Trey Gowdy. “When I go back to Iowa it will not be as a presidential candidate,” Scott told Gowdy, who appeared to react as if he was not expecting to hear that breaking news. “The voters, who are the most remarkable people on the planet … They’re telling me, ‘not now, Tim.’ I don’t think they’re saying, Trey, ‘no,’ but I do they’re saying, ‘not now.’” The announcement was apparently either unplanned or top secret among campaign staffers who theoretically should have known Scott planned to quit. Politico reported that “[multiple campaign staff members confirmed … that they had no prior knowledge of Scott’s decision before he” announced that he was dropping out of the race on live television. Also from Politico: Scott’s Sunday night announcement came after he canceled a scheduled swing through Iowa this weekend, a change the campaign on Friday attributed to him having the flu. Scott started the interview by saying he was “looking forward to getting back on the campaign trail” after he recovers from the flu before adding that he would no longer be a candidate. While it’s naive to assume that the upper levels of Scott’s campaign were blindsided by his announcement, previous suspensions of presidential campaigns — both in this current and past political cycles — have been absent of such reports of a “surprise.” In part because he was never able to break through on the polling front, political analysts predicted Scott’s campaign suspension as being inevitable. Only the timing of it was in question. Scott was noncommittal about which candidate he’d endorse for the Republican presidential nomination and encouraged voters to do their own research. Scott’s announcement to suspend his campaign came just days after he finally made good on his promise to reveal his long-spoken-about girlfriend. He posed with Mindy Noce, a design and renovation manager in Charleston, South Carolina, following a lackluster performance in the third Republican primary debate on Wednesday night. With Republican donors reportedly pressing the issue of Scott being single while seeking the presidency, his bachelorhood dominated headlines in September as Scott was unable to avoid the scrutiny of being unmarried. Beyond his personal life, Scott displayed an astounding tone-deafness during the third debate – and, by extension, his short-lived campaign – by doubling down on his presidential promise for a national abortion ban less than 24 hours after voters in Ohio cast ballots to defeat such a proposition. Scott’s staunch refusal to acknowledge racism in America certainly didn’t help his cause, as evidenced by the way he recently scolded a Black congregation in a Chicago church that he suggested was overly focused on race — a tactic that polling showed resonated with white voters, in particular. Nadia Brown, a political scientist and professor at Georgetown University, described Scott last week to ABC News in terms of a political and racial token. “What Tim Scott and those of his ilk are doing, they’re trying to play on these emotional push pins that most African Americans don’t see. It’s not landing for them,” Brown said. “I think that is a call out to other conservatives, particularly white conservatives, who want to say, ‘I have a Black senator,’ or, ‘I feel comfortable voting for a Black candidate.’” The remaining Republican candidates for president include Trump, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy.
By Stacy M. Brown, NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent
Donald Trump, who holds the ignominious distinction of being the only twice-impeached U.S. president, has become the first commander-in-chief to have criminal charges referred against him. The dubious achievement occurred on Monday, Dec. 19, when the House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol formally requested that the U.S. Department of Justice charge Trump with inciting, assisting, or engaging in insurrection against the United States and “giving aid or comfort” to an insurrection. Chaired by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Mississippi) and vice chair Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyoming), the committee released a 161-page summary that focused on Trump’s involvement in the effort to overturn his 2020 election loss to President Joe Biden. The committee concluded that Trump’s efforts “makes him responsible for the violence that unfolded, and unfit to hold office.” The panel then laid out a criminal case for the Justice Department, including a cache of evidence. Based upon the assembled evidence, the committee has reached a series of specific findings, including the following 17 powerful conclusions against Trump: • Beginning election night and continuing through January 6th and thereafter, Trump purposely disseminated false allegations of fraud related to the 2020 Presidential election to aid his effort to overturn the election and for purposes of soliciting contributions. “These false claims provoked his supporters to violence on January 6th,” the committee determined.
• Knowing that he and his supporters had lost dozens of election lawsuits, and despite his own senior advisors refuting his election fraud claims and urging him to concede his election loss, Trump refused to accept the lawful result of the 2020 election. Rather than honor his constitutional obligation to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” President Trump instead plotted to overturn the election outcome. • Despite knowing that such an action would be illegal, and that no State had or would submit an altered electoral slate, Trump corruptly pressured Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to count electoral votes during Congress’s joint session on January 6th.
• Trump sought to corrupt the U.S. Department of Justice by attempting to enlist Department officials to make purposely false statements and thereby aid his effort to overturn the Presidential election. After that effort failed, Trump offered the position of Acting Attorney General to Jeff Clark knowing that Clark intended to disseminate false information aimed at overturning the election. • Without any evidentiary basis and contrary to State and Federal law, Trump unlawfully pressured State officials and legislators to change the results of the election in their States.
• Trump oversaw an effort to obtain and transmit false electoral certificates to Congress and the National Archives. • Trump pressured Members of Congress to object to valid slates of electors from several States.
• Trump purposely verified false information filed in Federal court. • Based on false allegations that the election was stolen, Trump summoned tens of thousands of supporters to Washington for January 6th. Although these supporters were angry and some were armed, Trump instructed them to march to the Capitol on January 6th to “take back” their country.
• Knowing that a violent attack on the Capitol was underway and knowing that his words would incite further violence, Trump purposely sent a social media message publicly condemning Vice President Pence at 2:24 p.m. on January 6th.
• Knowing that violence was underway at the Capitol, and despite his duty to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed, Trump refused repeated requests over a multiple hour period that he instruct his violent supporters to disperse and leave the Capitol, and instead watched the violent attack unfold on television. This failure to act perpetuated the violence at the Capitol and obstructed Congress’s proceeding to count electoral votes.
• Each of these actions by Trump was taken in support of a multi-part conspiracy to overturn the lawful results of the 2020 Presidential election.
• The intelligence community and law enforcement agencies did successfully detect the planning for potential violence on January 6th, including planning specifically by the Proud Boys and Oath Keeper militia groups who ultimately led the attack on the Capitol. As January 6th approached, the intelligence specifically identified the potential for violence at the U.S. Capitol. This intelligence was shared within the executive branch, including with the Secret Service and the President’s National Security Council.
• Intelligence gathered in advance of January 6th did not support a conclusion that Antifa or other left-wing groups would likely engage in a violent counter demonstration, or attack Trump supporters on January 6th. Indeed, intelligence from January 5th indicated that some left-wing groups were instructing their members to “stay at home” and not attend on January 6th.20 Ultimately, none of these groups was involved to any material extent with the attack on the Capitol on January 6th. • Neither the intelligence community nor law enforcement obtained intelligence in advance of January 6th on the full extent of the ongoing planning by President Trump, John Eastman, Rudolph Giuliani and their associates to overturn the certified election results. Such agencies apparently did not (and potentially could not) anticipate the provocation President Trump would offer the crowd in his Ellipse speech, that President Trump would “spontaneously” instruct the crowd to march to the Capitol, that President Trump would exacerbate the violent riot by sending his 2:24 p.m. tweet condemning Vice President Pence, or the full scale of the violence and lawlessness that would ensue. Nor did law enforcement anticipate that President Trump would refuse to direct his supporters to leave the Capitol once violence began. No intelligence community advance analysis predicted exactly how President Trump would behave; no such analysis recognized the full scale and extent of the threat to the Capitol on January 6th.
• Hundreds of Capitol and DC Metropolitan police officers performed their duties bravely on January 6th, and America owes those individual immense gratitude for their courage in the defense of Congress and our Constitution. Without their bravery, January 6th would have been far worse. Although certain members of the Capitol Police leadership regarded their approach to January 6th as “all hands-on deck,” the Capitol Police leadership did not have sufficient assets in place to address the violent and lawless crowd.
• Capitol Police leadership did not anticipate the scale of the violence that would ensue after President Trump instructed tens of thousands of his supporters in the Ellipse crowd to march to the Capitol, and then tweeted at 2:24 p.m. Although Chief Steven Sund raised the idea of National Guard support, the Capitol Police Board did not request Guard assistance prior to January 6th. The Metropolitan Police took an even more proactive approach to January 6th, and deployed roughly 800 officers, including responding to the emergency calls for help at the Capitol. Rioters still managed to break their line in certain locations, when the crowd surged forward in the immediate aftermath of Trump’s 2:24 p.m. tweet. The Department of Justice readied a group of Federal agents at Quantico and in the District of Columbia, anticipating that January 6th could become violent, and then deployed those agents once it became clear that police at the Capitol were overwhelmed. Agents from the Department of Homeland Security were also deployed to assist.
• President Trump had authority and responsibility to direct deployment of the National Guard in the District of Columbia, but never gave any order to deploy the National Guard on January 6th or on any other day. Nor did he instruct any Federal law enforcement agency to assist. Because the authority to deploy the National Guard had been delegated to the Department of Defense, the Secretary of Defense could, and ultimately did deploy the Guard. Although evidence identifies a likely miscommunication between members of the civilian leadership in the Department of Defense impacting the timing of deployment, the Committee has found no evidence that the Department of Defense intentionally delayed deployment of the National Guard. “An insurrection is a rebellion against the authority of the United States,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Maryland). “It is a grave federal offense anchored in the Constitution. … Anyone who incites others to engage in rebelling, assists them in doing so or gives aid and comfort to those engaged in insurrection is guilty of a federal crime.” Raskin continued:“The Committee believes that more than sufficient evidence exists for a criminal referral of former President Trump for assisting or aiding and comforting those at the Capitol who engaged in a violent attack on the United States,” Raskin continued. “The Committee has developed significant evidence that President Trump intended to disrupt the peaceful transition of power.”
