Greene County Democrat

Tag: Former President Donald Trump

  • Newswire : Exonerated Five sue Donald Trump for defamation over false debate remarks

     Central Park Five in recent photo

    By Stacy M. Brown, NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent

     


    The five men wrongfully convicted in the 1989 Central Park assault case, known as the “Exonerated Five,” have filed a defamation lawsuit against former President Donald Trump after he made false statements during a September 10, 2024, presidential debate. The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Pennsylvania, claims that the 34-times convicted Trump falsely asserted they had “pleaded guilty” to the crime and falsely stated they “killed a person ultimately” during the assault, claims that have widely been debunked.

    Antron McCray, Kevin Richardson, Raymond Santana, Korey Wise, and Yusef Salaam—who spent years in prison before their 2002 exoneration—accuse Trump of defaming them, painting them in a false light, and intentionally inflicting emotional distress by continuing to spread falsehoods about their case. The lawsuit references Trump’s debate comments, which were broadcast to millions of viewers, as particularly harmful given the ongoing efforts by the men to rebuild their lives after their wrongful convictions.

    While Trump has lashed out at the innocent men, the twice-impeached former president is awaiting sentencing after being convicted of 34 felony charges in New York. A civil jury also found Trump guilty of sexually assaulting a journalist, and a judge levied a verdict of nearly $500 million against the Republican presidential nominee for committing massive business fraud.

    The court filing provides a detailed account of Trump’s decades-long association with the case, beginning in 1989 when he famously took out full-page ads in New York City newspapers calling for the death penalty in response to the arrests of the five teens. The lawsuit notes that, despite the exoneration of the five men based on DNA evidence and the confession of the actual perpetrator, Matias Reyes, Trump has continued to make inflammatory and false remarks about their guilt.

    “Plaintiffs never pled guilty to any crime and were subsequently cleared of all wrongdoing. Further, the victims of the Central Park assaults were not killed,” the lawsuit states, pointing to the fact that the actual perpetrator’s confession and DNA evidence absolved the men of all charges. The lawsuit also notes that Trump’s remarks were made negligently, with knowledge of their falsity or reckless disregard for the truth.

    The men, now in their 50s, have since become advocates and public figures, working to address the injustice they suffered. Yusef Salaam, a New York City Council member, was present at the September 10 debate and later confronted Trump in person. When Salaam introduced himself, Trump reportedly waved him off, saying, “Ah, you’re on my side then,” to which Salaam replied, “No, no, no, I’m not on your side.”

    The lawsuit asks for unspecified compensatory and punitive damages with a focus on the emotional harm and damage to Trump’s reputation that his repeated lies have caused. “These statements have caused the plaintiffs serious reputational damage and severe emotional distress, especially given their wrongful convictions and efforts to move past this chapter of their lives,” the filing states.

    In 2002, the men were exonerated after DNA evidence linked Reyes, a serial rapist, to the assault on a female jogger in Central Park. Their convictions were vacated, and the City of New York ultimately paid the men a $41 million settlement in 2014. Despite these facts, Trump has maintained his stance.

    “Trump’s statements were false and defamatory in numerous respects,” the lawsuit asserts. “The exoneration of the plaintiffs is a matter of public record, yet Trump’s continued public statements attempt to rewrite history and cast doubt on their innocence.”

    The lawsuit also draws attention to Trump’s previous statements, including a 1989 ad in which he called for the death penalty and a 2013 tweet where Trump referred to the exoneration as a “one-sided piece of garbage” and continued to imply their guilt. Despite overwhelming evidence proving their innocence, Trump’s remarks have perpetuated misinformation, resulting in ongoing harm to the plaintiffs, the filing states.

     

  • Newswire: Lawmakers face September 30 deadline to avoid government shutdown

     U. S. Capitol building with yellow tape

    By Stacy M. Brown, NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent


     
    After a six-week summer recess, lawmakers return to the Capitol on Monday with a looming crisis: preventing a government shutdown. They have just three weeks to act before federal funding runs out on September 30, and the stakes couldn’t be higher. The twice impeached and 34 times convicted former President Donald Trump has urged Republicans to embrace a shutdown unless his demands are met, putting millions of jobs and essential services at risk just weeks ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

    The prospect of a shutdown would close federal agencies and national parks and curtail essential public services while furloughing millions of federal workers. The presidential race overshadows this impending crisis, as Congress will break again at the end of the month, not returning until after the election. Before leaving in July, the political landscape shifted when President Joe Biden exited the presidential race, positioning Vice President Kamala Harris as the new Democratic standard bearer. In the campaign’s final weeks, Republicans under Trump are preparing to change their strategy against Harris.

    At the heart of Congress’s immediate challenge is securing a funding bill to keep the government operational. With an unlikely complete funding agreement, lawmakers are looking for a stopgap measure. But even that has become a political minefield. Under pressure from Trump and right-wing factions, the Republican-led House proposed a stopgap bill that would extend funding through March 28, 2025. However, it comes with a controversial addition—the SAVE Act, a GOP-backed measure that would overhaul national voting laws by requiring proof of citizenship to vote.
    Democrats have vehemently opposed the act, arguing it would disenfranchise voters by making it harder for eligible Americans to access required documents like passports or birth certificates.

    Beyond the political gamesmanship, the consequences of a shutdown would hit home in Washington, D.C., Maryland, and Virginia, where federal workers and government operations are crucial to local economies. National landmarks like the Smithsonian Museums and the National Zoo may remain open temporarily with prior-year funding, but there is uncertainty about other attractions like the National Mall’s memorials.

    The economic impact could be severe in Maryland, home to over 240,000 federal worker households. State officials are preparing to use local funds to offset the disruption, but workers commuting to Washington, D.C., or Northern Virginia may be furloughed.

    Virginia would bear the brunt of the shutdown, with its substantial federal civilian and military workforce. The state’s economy is deeply intertwined with federal spending, particularly in regions like Hampton Roads, home to a significant number of active-duty military personnel. The shutdown could jeopardize essential programs, including the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), and affect operations at Virginia’s 22 national parks.

    The ripple effects would extend to the Washington, D.C., Metro system, which relies heavily on federal workers for ridership. With the Metro system already facing challenges in recovering from pandemic-related drops in usage, a shutdown could be another blow.

    “There’s no question that this is not a good thing for the country, but it’s certainly not a good thing for Metro specifically,” Randy Clarke, Metro’s general manager, said during a recent interview. “And the timing is really challenging because ridership is really starting to grow back. So, you know, we’re going to be watching this very closely, and we’re hoping that if

  • Newswire : Trump doubles down on racist remarks, advocates for white immigration only

    Immigrants from Latin America try to cross Rio Grande River,on Texas border

    By Stacy M. Brown, NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent

    
Former President Donald Trump has reignited controversy with inflammatory remarks suggesting a preference for immigrants from predominantly white nations while denigrating those from Latin America, and primarily Black nations. At a private event, Trump reportedly joked about welcoming immigrants from “nice” countries like Denmark, Switzerland, and Norway, again demonstrating his racial bias in immigration policy.
    Trump’s comments, revealed by New York Times correspondent and CNN analyst Maggie Haberman, highlight a troubling stance on immigration that aligns with his past rhetoric. The twice-impeached and four-times indicted former president’s insinuation that only immigrants from certain nations are desirable for entry into the United States drew swift condemnation from the Biden-Harris campaign.
    “[The comments] are alarming,” said James Singer, a spokesperson for the Biden-Harris campaign. Singer also noted how Trump has repeatedly praised dictators and declared he’d be a dictator on day one if he’s re-elected. Trump’s campaign declined to comment about what the presumptive GOP nominee said at the private dinner.
    “Why can’t we allow people to come in from nice countries, I’m trying to be nice,” Trump reportedly said. “Nice countries, you know, like Denmark, Switzerland? Do we have any people coming in from Denmark? How about Switzerland? How about Norway?”
    In addition to his discriminatory remarks, Trump blasted Latin American immigrants, likening them to notorious gang members. Critics have said such language perpetuates harmful stereotypes and exacerbates divisions within society.
    Further, Trump’s speculations about the future of American democracy have raised alarms. Suggesting that the 2024 election could be the last one in the country’s history, Trump’s comments continue his concerning trend of authoritarian rhetoric that undermines democratic norms.
    “This could very well be the last election this country ever has,” Trump said, echoing sentiments often heard at his rallies.
    Trump’s engagement with billionaire backers on taxation matters has further highlighted concerns about cronyism and inequality. By prioritizing tax cuts that primarily benefit the wealthy, opponents said Trump’s policies perpetuate economic disparities and favor the interests of the elite.
    The Biden-Harris campaign noted the list of billionaires backing Trump, arguing that they’re scammers, racists, and extremists. Among them:
    John Paulson wants to cut Social Security and opposed financial regulations to protect Americans after the 2008 crash, which he profited from.
    Robert Bigelow, who complained he couldn’t evict tenants out of his buildings during the pandemic and supports Florida’s extreme Don’t Say Gay law.
    John Catsimatidis, who compared taxes on the wealthy to Hitler killing Jews and his business, has been forced to pay millions in lawsuits over unfair labor practices and consumer safety violations.
    José “Pepe” Fanjul refused to fire his assistant, who was married to (two!) KKK leaders commented via a company spokesperson that “we wouldn’t terminate them for that.”
    Jamie McCourt pocketed over $10 million from her stock shares before public citizens were made aware of the pandemic’s severity, all while Trump played down the virus.
    Former GOP Senator Kelly Loeffler, who touted 2020 election lies, backed an anti-LGBTQ adoption agency and supported ripping away health care from millions of Americans by repealing the Affordable Care Act.
    Robert Mercer opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, calling it a major mistake, and believed the government was backward for helping “weak people get strong.”
    New York Jets owner, Jeff Yass has avoided $1 billion in taxes and wants to privatize Social Security.
    Woody Johnson has repeatedly disparaged women for their looks and questioned why the Black community celebrates Black History Month.
    Steve Wynn, who was accused by dozens of workers of sexual misconduct.
    Chicago Cubs owner Todd Ricketts, who made his money screwing over retirees by shedding pension obligations and health care promises, opposes the idea that the “government can serve to protect the public’s well-being.”
    Phil Ruffin fought against housekeepers trying to unionize at his Vegas hotel (jointly owned by Donald Trump) and furloughed more than 4,000 of his own employees without pay.
    Wilbur Ross, whom the Biden-Harris campaign said made his fortune laying off American workers and using bankruptcy to strip retirees of health benefits.
    Meanwhile, Singer said its vital American voters reject Trump’s authoritarian impulses and uphold the values of democracy and inclusivity.

    “Independence Day in Donald Trump’s America will apparently no longer be July 4,” Singer stated. “He’s promised publicly he’ll be a dictator on his first day, and now privately muses about this November’s election being our country’s last.

  • Newswire : Black and Latino voters are missing or incorrectly listed in U.S. voter databases

    By Stacy M. Brown
    NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent

    An eye-opening report titled “Surfacing Missing Voters: Addressing Data Systems, Tools, and Engagement Models that Invisibilize Black and Brown Communities,” authored by Miriam McKinney Gray for the Democracy & Power Innovation Fund (DPI), has unveiled a concerning reality: Nearly 25 million Black and Latino eligible voters are effectively absent from voter databases, making them virtually unreachable by traditional outreach methods. 

    The revelation is crucial as America heads toward the all-important November general election between Democratic incumbent Joe Biden and the twice-impeached and four-times indicted former president Donald Trump.
    Drawing from U.S. Census data and a recent Stanford study, the report estimated that approximately 24.76 million Black and Latino voters are either missing or inaccurately listed in databases sold by vendors.

    The disparities revealed in the report are stark, with 40 percent of Black and Latino individuals missing from voter outreach efforts, compared to only 18 percent of white individuals. The paper-thin margins seen in recent crucial races serve as evidence that such glaring disparities in representation could significantly impact the results of future elections. During the 2020 election, Biden beat Trump in the popular vote by approximately 81.2 million to 74.2 million votes, or a 51.3 percent to 46.9 percent margin.

    “For instance, almost half of eligible Black and Latino voters won’t be seen or contacted by traditional campaigns. This is a five-alarm fire for our democracy,” said Miriam McKinney Gray, founder and CEO of McKinney Gray Analytics, who analyzed the data based on U.S. Census records and a Stanford study. 

    “The only way many people will learn about the election is through independent power-building organizations. Groups like Voces de La Frontera in Wisconsin and Detroit Action are using friends-and-family organizing to find missing voters and manually rebuilding lists of voters who have been wrongly purged from government voter rolls.”
    Twenty-five million Black and Latino people “are invisible to the very campaigns that want their support. From our research on Black values, we know who they are and the tools needed to reach them,” said Dr. Katrina Gamble of Sojourn Strategies. “It’s not too late to change course, but that takes breaking barriers that campaigns have blindly accepted for decades. We think democracy is worth it, and so are the people who have been excluded.”

    Gamble is conducting groundbreaking nationwide research into the differences in values and political behavior of the Black electorate and analyzing clusters or segments of Black voters for the first time.
    All involved said the report spotlights the systemic marginalization of Black and brown communities within the ostensibly inclusive, data-driven digital systems of voter engagement prevailing in the United States. It identifies aggressive voter purges and biases inherent in vendor-generated models appended to voter files as key factors exacerbating this invisibility.

    According to the Democracy & Power Innovation Fund report, “One serious consequence of missing or incorrect data in purchased voter databases is that it distorts the algorithms that assign vote propensity scores to individual voters.”
    “Traditional campaigns regularly and intentionally leave out people with low vote propensity scores, deeming them not worth the investment. To put it plainly, this approach is wrong,” stated Ranada Robinson, Research Director for New Georgia Project.

    Similarly, Prentiss J. Haney, Senior Advisor to the Ohio Organizing Collaborative, highlighted the limitations of relying solely on political industry databases, noting that such dependence leads to the exclusion of millions of Black and Latino voters and inaccurate race modeling.

    To address these disparities and ensure a more equitable electoral process, the report proposes philanthropic investments in community-based data collection, support for antiracist modeling efforts, and adopting broad relational organizing strategies.
    The report called for concerted efforts to rectify the systemic biases ingrained within existing data systems and engagement models. The author asserted that a failure to address these issues risks perpetuating the disenfranchisement of marginalized communities and undermining democratic principles.

    “The people unseen by voter files are still capable, if organized, to make moves and wield their latent power,” added Joy Cushman, Senior Advisor to DPI. “People deemed ‘low propensity’ by models and the political industry are defying the odds and still turning out to vote. And many are doing even more than that: they are becoming active members and leaders in power-building organizations, mobilizing their friends and family to vote as we

     

  • Newswire : Trump repeatedly says ‘The Blacks’ in shameless exploitation of legal woes to woo African American voters

    By Stacy M. Brown,
NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent

    In a brazen display of political manipulation, former President Donald Trump took to the stage at the Black Conservative Federation Gala in South Carolina, using racially charged rhetoric and shamelessly attempting to forge a connection between his multiple criminal indictments and the historical struggles of Black Americans.
    The twice-impeached and four-times indicted former president is facing 91 felony counts, including racketeering and conspiracy to obstruct justice. A New York jury determined that he should pay nearly $90 million for sexually assaulting a journalist. A judge has ordered him to pay about a half-billion in penalties for committing massive business fraud. Yet Trump boasted about his legal battles, suggesting that the Black community supports him because they identify with the discrimination he claims to face.
    “I got indicted a second time, a third time, and a fourth time and a lot of people said that that’s why the Black people like me because they have been hurt so badly and discriminated against,” Trump declared callously, drawing applause from the audience.
    Attempting to equate his privileged legal battles with the systemic oppression endured by Black Americans throughout history, Trump asserted, “I think that’s why the Black people are so much on my side now because they see what’s happening to me happens to them. Does that make sense?”
    Throughout the evening, Trump continued his disturbing narrative, pointing to his mugshot from the Fulton County election interference case as a symbol embraced by the Black population. “My mug shot; we’ve all seen the mug shot. And you know who embraced it more than anybody else: the Black population. It’s incredible,” he remarked, exploiting the image for political gain and suggesting that African Americans are particularly familiar with mugshots.
    In a tasteless attempt at humor, Trump made racially insensitive comments about the brightness of the lights on stage, stating, “These lights are so bright in my eyes that I can’t see too many people out there. But I can only see the Black ones. I can’t see any white ones. You see, that’s how far I’ve come. That’s how far I’ve come.” The remarks played into racial stereotypes, leaving some on stage uncomfortably laughing.
    Trump’s calculated appearance included Black political allies, such as Reps. Byron Donalds and Wesley Hunt, as well as former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson, all of whom are Black but have little to no ties to fellow African Americans. The event has ignited widespread condemnation for its blatant attempt to exploit racial tensions and manipulate the struggles of Black Americans for political gain.
    The former president’s shameless tactics at the gala underscored a troubling trend of divisive rhetoric and opportunistic exploitation, raising questions about the ethical boundaries of political discourse and the extent to which leaders are willing to go to secure support within specific communities.
    “There’s just so much controversy,” Ebony McBeth, a Columbia resident and transportation worker, told the Associated Press. “I would go for Biden just because Trump has his own agenda.”
    Isaac Williams Sr., a retired cook from Columbia and a lifelong Democrat, said he disliked both parties but found Trump to “have mobster tendencies. He’s only out for himself.”

  • Alabama’s 2nd District voters seek progressive representation, new poll reveals key issues

    Candidates: Anthony Daniels, Merika Coleman, Napoleon Bracy, Shomari Figures

    By: Bill Britt, Alabama Political Reporter

    Voters in Alabama’s newly redrawn 2nd Congressional District are expressing a strong desire for a representative who champions a progressive agenda, focusing on issues such as voting rights, the rising cost of living, and the affordability of health care. This sentiment is highlighted in a poll released in late December by the SPLC Action Fund and its affiliate, the New Southern Majority, a federal independent expenditure (IE) PAC.

    The newly created district stretches from Bullock and Macon counties in east Alabama, through Montgomery and counties south of the city, connected to Pritchard in Mobile county on the western side of the state.
    Brandon Jones, the director of political campaigns for the SPLC Action Fund, emphasized the significance of these findings. “This research demonstrates that voters across Alabama’s new congressional district want true, progressive representation,” he stated. Jones further noted that the candidates’ stances on progressive policies will play a crucial role, as voters are eager to harness the political power their district now offers.
    The poll results show a highly competitive race, with a significant 47 percent of voters still undecided. State Rep. Napoleon Bracy is currently leading with 15 percent support, followed by Shomari Figures at 9 percent, State Rep. Anthony Daniels at 8 percent, State Sen. Merika Coleman with 6 percent, Darryl Sinkfield at 5 percent, State Rep. Jeremy Gray at 4 percent, and State Rep. Juandalynn Givan at 2 percent. Notably, Sinkfield recently announced his withdrawal from the race. Some say the poll may have been weighted with Mobile county voters.
    It is interesting to note that several of the major candidates for this Congressional District live outside the district. State Representative and Democratic Majority Leader, Anthony Daniels, lives in Huntsville. He was born in Midway, Bullock County in the district. State Senator Merika Coleman represents and lives in Bessemer. State Representative Givan lives in Birmingham. State Representative Napoleon Bracy and Shomari Figures live in Mobile County, within the district. The U. S. Constitution does not require that a Congressperson live in the district but only within the state represented.
    In January, the organizations plan to host a candidate forum in Montgomery, offering voters a direct opportunity to engage with the candidates and understand their perspectives on critical issues and their vision for promoting equity and justice in the Deep South.
    The poll also revealed nuanced concerns among voters: 20 percent are primarily worried about voting rights, while 15 percent are focused on inflation and rising costs, and 12 percent on making health care more affordable. Additionally, voters highlighted equal access to quality K-12 public schools (78 percent), expanding Medicaid (75 percent), attracting new, well-paying jobs (71 percent), advocating for voting rights through early voting options (67 percent), and ensuring the affordability of college and higher education (66 percent) as top priorities.
    When asked in an open-ended question about the issue that matters most to them personally, voters again listed voting rights (22 percent), health care (16 percent), education (15 percent), and good-paying jobs (11 percent) as their primary concerns.
    Regarding opinions on national figures, the poll found that only 10 percent of voters in the District have a favorable view of former President Donald Trump, with a significant 86 percent viewing him negatively. In contrast, Vice President Kamala Harris received a 76 percent favorability rating, with President Joe Biden’s favorability at 77 percent. Former President Barack Obama remains the most favorably viewed, with an 88 percent favorable rating.

    This poll, which surveyed 450 likely voters in the upcoming March Democratic primary, was conducted by Impact Research, based in Montgomery.
    Some additional information and edits added by Greene County Democrat

     

  • Newswire: Gunfire erupts in Colorado Supreme Court break-in following controversial Trump ballot decision

    Insurrectionist mob attacks U. S. Capitol on January 6, 2021

    By Stacy M. Brown
NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent

    In the early hours of Tuesday, January 2, police arrested an individual for entering the Colorado Supreme Court building and discharging a firearm within the premises, according to an official news release from the Colorado State Patrol.
    The break-in and shooting come about two weeks after a 4-3 ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court, resulting in the removal of former President Donald Trump from the state’s 2024 ballot. The court’s decision was grounded in interpreting the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban,” deeming Trump ineligible to hold office.
    The incident unfolded between 1:15 a.m. and 3 a.m., concluding with the unnamed suspect surrendering to law enforcement. Authorities didn’t report any injuries from the shooting, but the incident underscored the continued violence engulfing American politics.
    Recent statements by President Joe Biden highlighted his concerns about Trump’s embrace of political violence. Biden, preparing for a potential 2024 rematch against the twice-impeached and four-times indicted former president, emphasized Trump’s threat to democracy, which hit a low point with his challenges to election integrity and pursuit of political opponents.
    “He’s threatened to use the U.S. military on the streets of America,” Biden said during a recent fundraiser in Bethesda, Maryland. “Once again, he embraces political violence instead of rejecting it. We can’t let this happen.”
    Further, data analysis indicates a significant increase in threats against public officials nationwide, with 83% of Americans expressing concern about political violence. This rise is mainly associated with Trump’s fervent supporters, contributing to a climate where challenging the former president carries political and personal risks for elected officials.
    The threats have increased as Trump’s legal problems worsen. In 2023, the former president was slapped with four indictments and 91 felony charges, many of them stemming from his alleged attempts to overturn his 2020 election loss to Biden.
    Additionally, a civil jury found Trump responsible for sexually assaulting a writer, and a judge ordered him to pay $5 million. In a separate civil business fraud trial in New York, a judge found that Trump and his company committed widespread fraud. He is currently weighing whether to levy fines of as much as $250 million against Trump and prohibit the Trump Organization from doing business in the Empire State.
    Threats against members of Congress have escalated over recent years, reaching about 9,700 in 2021. The trend persists as the calendar turns to 2024, with ongoing concerns and increased security expenditures among candidates for the House and Senate.
    According to a recent Navigator poll, most Americans are concerned about political violence, with 85% saying they are worried about its future. Democrats exhibit a higher level of concern than Republicans, associating terms like “January 6,” “Trump,” and “white supremacy” with political violence, researchers found. Republicans are perceived as more likely to use political violence, with differing opinions among independents.

    “Some of the recent increase in American violence (both political and otherwise) might be attributable to the pandemic. But the spike in threats began well before COVID-19,” Vox’s senior correspondent, Zack Beauchamp, wrote. “Something else is going on—something that’s raising the temperature of American politics, making people feel more angry, afraid, and like they need to take political matters into their own hands.”
    That “something,” Beauchamp stated, is Donald Trump. “No figure in American politics commands Trump’s devoted following; no figure is as capable of heightening the stakes of American politics to the breaking point,” Beauchamp concluded.

  • Newswire : Denver Court hears arguments on Trump’s eligibility for 2024 ballot

    Members of mob, incited by Trump, surround U. S. Capitol on January 6, 2021

     

    Stacey Brown, NNPA Newswire National Correspondent

    Denver district court is considering a lawsuit to prevent former President Donald Trump from appearing on Colorado’s 2024 ballot due to his alleged involvement in the U.S. Capitol attack on January 6, 2021. Colorado Judge Sarah Wallace recently rejected Trump’s attempt to dismiss the case, which was filed last month on behalf of six voters in the Denver district.
    The lawsuit is based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. It argues that people who have participated in insurrection or rebellion after promising loyalty to the Constitution should not be able to hold office. Trump, who is currently facing 91 criminal charges after four federal and state indictments, could potentially receive a prison sentence of over 800 years. The lawsuit accuses him of breaking his promise as president by attempting to overturn the 2020 election, which ultimately led to the January 6 insurrection.
    Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), along with several law firms, filed a lawsuit on behalf of six voters from the Republican Party and independent voters. Eric Olson, from CREW, began his testimony by explaining what Trump did before January 6. This included a tweet he sent in December 2020 asking his supporters to come together in Washington, D.C. Olson highlighted Trump’s frequent mentions of January 6. He stated that Trump motivated his followers by making false allegations of election fraud.
Olson showed a video clip of Trump’s speech on the Ellipse on January 6. In the speech, the former president said, “Let’s go to the Capitol.” He argued that Trump was acutely aware of the influence of his words and that his speech before the Capitol riot exacerbated the situation.
    Olson also pointed to a post-speech tweet where Trump criticized then-Vice President Mike Pence, asserting that Pence lacked “the courage to do what he should have done.” That followed a clip of Trump supporters outside the Capitol chanting, “Hang Mike Pence.”
    “We are here because Trump claims, after all that, that he has the right to be president again,” Olson asserted. “But our Constitution, the shared charter of our nation, says he cannot do so.”
    During his opening arguments, Scott Gessler, Trump’s legal representative, decried the lawsuit as “antidemocratic” and said Monday’s hearing was “politicized.” Gessler argued that Trump used the word “peace” several times during his speech at the Ellipse on January 6, as well as in his tweets on the same day. He claimed that the lawsuit wants the court to approve the January 6 Committee’s report, which he described as a biased and harmful report.
    Officer Daniel Hodges, from the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department, testified about his terrifying ordeal during the Capitol attack. Hodges described observing Capitol rioters donning tactical gear, an occurrence that left him “very uncomfortable.” He suffered many injuries when rioters attacked the Capitol, including bruises, a head injury, cuts on his face, and bleeding from his mouth. Hodges also attested that a rioter attempted to gouge his eye. He remembered protesters yelling that the election was stolen and encouraging others to fight for Trump. They also criticized law enforcement for being on the wrong side of history.
During his remote testimony, Rep. Eric Swalwell, a Democrat from California, stated that Trump had clearly indicated before the 2020 election that he would not acknowledge the results if he was not the winner. Swalwell claimed that Trump escalated his rhetoric after legal challenges to the election results were dismissed. He told the lawmakers’ increasing worry when Trump announced, “We’re going to the Capitol” in his Ellipse speech. He then described the distressing experiences of himself and his colleagues as rioters entered the Capitol.

    In her ruling last week, Wallace dismissed Trump’s argument that Congress, not the courts, can handle questions about ballot eligibility. She disagreed with Trump’s statement that state election officials cannot enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
    Wallace argued that the clause allows Congress to remove a constitutional disability if a person is disqualified. However, the clause does not specify which government body would decide on such disability initially.
    “The Court notes, however, it would be strange for Congress to be the only entity that is empowered to determine the disability and then also the entity that is empowered to remove it,” Wallace wrote. “States can, and have, applied Section 3 pursuant to state statutes without federal enforcement legislation,” Wallace said.
    The judge’s ruling followed a decision by Chief U.S. District Judge Philip A. Brimmer to dismiss Trump’s request to move the Colorado ballot case to federal court. In a four-page order, Brimmer, a nominee of George W. Bush, stated that Trump, who was found responsible for sexually assaulting a journalist by a civil jury this year, did not properly follow the necessary procedures to involve Colorado’s Democratic Secretary of State, Jena Griswold, or get her approval to transfer the case to federal court. As a result, Trump’s attempt to move the case is considered “defective.”

    Trump is also facing other challenges to his eligibility to appear on the 2024 presidential ballot. The Minnesota Supreme Court will hear arguments on Thursday concerning a lawsuit to remove Trump from the ballot in Minnesota. The current lawsuit also references a lesser-known provision in the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. Similar legal challenges are underway in New Hampshire, Arizona, and Michigan.

  • Newswire: Biden visits the picket line in Michigan to show solidarity with striking UAW

    President Joe Biden joins striking United Auto Workers on the picket line, in Van Buren Township, Mich. United Auto Workers President Shawn Fain stands at left.

    By Betsy Klein and Nikki Carvajal, CNN

    President Joe Biden on Tuesday joined members of the United Auto Workers in Michigan on the picket line, a historic moment for a modern president that comes amid a tense reelection race against a familiar foe. Biden is the first sitting U. S. President to join a union picket line.
    The trip comes as Biden faces consistently low polling numbers on his handling of economic issues, and, back in Washington, the looming threat of a government shutdown this week. Both a prolonged strike and a shutdown could have economic consequences – something the White House is seeking to avoid as Biden tries to convince voters his economic policies are working. He’s also appearing in the battleground state of Michigan just one day before his chief political rival – whom he defeated in the 2020 presidential election – comes to the crucial swing state to make his own appeal to union workers.
    Former President Donald Trump, the front-runner in the GOP presidential primary race, is scheduled to skip the second Republican debate to deliver a prime-time speech to an audience of current and former union members, including from the UAW, in Detroit on Wednesday. Trump has slammed the president for the visit, claiming Biden “had no intention” of walking the picket line until Trump said he would make a speech in Michigan. 
    Biden, wearing a UAW hat, spoke into a bullhorn to the workers on the picket line recounting that “the fact of the matter is that you guys, UAW, you guys saved the automobile industry” during the late 2000s and early 2010s. Biden said the companies have recovered and are doing “incredibly well” now.
    “You should be doing incredibly well too,” Biden said.Biden told the autoworkers marching that they “deserve the significant raise you need, and other benefits,” reiterating, “We saved them, it’s about time they step up for us.”
    He added, “Folks, you’ve heard me say many times, Wall Street didn’t build this country, the middle class built this country, and unions built the middle class. That’s a fact, so let’s keep going. You deserve what you’ve earned, and you’ve earned a hell of a lot more than you’re getting paid.”
    Biden is attempting to use the trip to support autoworkers without getting involved in the specifics of the negotiations. Amid mounting political pressure to ramp up his public support, Biden is expressing solidarity with the union members, who are striking against the Big Three automakers – General Motors, Ford and Stellantis – for a second week. 
    “I think the UAW gave up an incredible amount back when the automobile industry was going under,” Biden said Monday during a meeting with his HBCU advisory board when asked whether he supports the UAW’s asks in the negotiations. “They gave everything, from their pensions on. And they saved the automobile industry. And I think that now that the industry is roaring back, they should participate in the benefit of that.
    “If you take a look at the significant increase in salaries for executives, growth in the industry, they should benefit from it. So, yes, I support – I’ve always supported the UAW.”
    The answer was reflective of the fine line that the president is attempting to walk by standing in solidarity with striking autoworkers while not getting directly involved or putting his thumb on the scale of negotiations. The administration lacks any legal or legislative authority to act as a participant in the negotiations, but top officials, including Biden, have met with UAW leadership to discuss broader policy changes that would be seen as favorable, even as the union has criticized the administration’s support of a transition to electric vehicle manufacturing. 

  • Newwire : Judge sets pre- Super Tuesday trial date for Trump’s election interference case

    Federal Judge, Tanya Chutkan

    By Stacy M. Brown, NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent

    In a decision that could significantly impact the 2024 race for the White House, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, overseeing the election interference case against former President Donald Trump, has scheduled the trial to commence on March 4, 2024. The date falls during the Republican presidential primaries and just one day before Super Tuesday.
    Chutkan considered arguments presented by both Trump’s legal team and federal prosecutors regarding the optimal trial timing. Special counsel Jack Smith proposed an earlier start in January, with jury selection beginning in December. Trump’s legal representatives countered by advocating for a postponement until April 2026, following the 2024 presidential election.
    Judge Chutkan asserted on Monday, addressing the opposing proposals, “These proposals are obviously very far apart. Neither of them is acceptable.” Chutkan emphasized that the trial’s scheduling must prioritize the fair and prompt administration of justice. She noted that the trial schedule wouldn’t be altered based on the professional obligations of another defendant, even if that defendant happened to be a professional athlete.
    Trump’s legal team argued that proceeding to trial in the upcoming year would infringe upon the former president’s rights, citing the extensive volume of discovery materials that federal prosecutors have submitted. The four-time indicted, twice impeached ex-president’s lawyer, John Lauro asserted that, “This is a request for a show trial, not a speedy trial. Mr. Trump is not above the law, but he is not below the law.”
    Following Chutkan’s ruling, Lauro insisted that Trump’s defense team would not be adequately prepared to represent their client given the set trial date. Earlier, Chutkan deemed the special counsel’s proposed timeline too immediate, but called Trump’s suggested timeline of 2026 unreasonable. “Discovery in 2023 is not sitting in a warehouse with boxes of paper looking at every single page,” Chutkan remarked.
    Meanwhile, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee announced that the arraignment for Trump and his co-defendants in the Georgia election case is scheduled for 9:30 a.m. on September 6. Trump faces charges of felony racketeering and various conspiracy counts, part of a comprehensive investigation by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis into efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in the battleground state.
    Trump and his co-defendants, including his former lawyer Rudy Giuliani, will be arraigned as part of this high-stakes legal proceeding. The sweeping indictment encompasses 41 counts and involves individuals such as Mark Meadows, former White House chief of staff, lawyers John Eastman, Sidney Powell, Kenneth Chesebro, Jenna Ellis, and former Department of Justice official Jeffrey Clark. All defendants are charged with violating Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (RICO) Act, among other alleged offenses.