Julie Kelly @julie_kelly2

Part of me is gratified by this maniacal speech. Why?

Because it proveswe are prevailing over the J6 narrative. Biden, Matthew Graves, Merrick Garland, celeb J6 copstheir stunts over the past few daysshow they are LOSING control over Jan 6a fedsurrectionthey thought for sure would not just take out Trump but the entire MAGA movement.

They thought it would end the GOP and result in mass defections to the Democratic Party. They thought it would end questions about the 2020 election.

They didn't think anyone would ever question what happened, how it happened, or expose the lies it was built upon. They thought their dirty secrets would be hidden forever.

But it's allcollapsing right when they need the narrative to hold most. Jack Smith's J6 prosecution of Trump is teetering. SCOTUS could overturn the most common felony count.

Polls show more people now vs 2021 think the 2020 election was illegitimate. They don't blame Trump (aside from nearly 100 percent of Democrats) for January 6. The public, according to WashPo poll, is split as to whether Jan 6 was mostly peaceful or violent. And suspicion about the animating role of the FBI and other government agencies continues to grow.

That's why Biden is ranting and raving and cheering the imprisonment of political dissidents and denouncing truth seekers and pretending he's George Washington at Valley Forge.

THEY F*CKING LOST JANUARY 6.

It was never supposed to happen.

https://x.com/julie_kelly2/status/1743392959846883457?s=20

(Where's the Meme, with "Trump Only Getting Stronger?" Time to post that all over the internet?)

Letitia James wants $370 MILLION from Trump and to bar him from doing business in New York in his civil fraud trial, bombshell new filing reveals

By Kelly Laco, Executive Editor Of Politics For Dailymail.Com

Published: 13:50 EST, 5 January 2024 | Updated: 16:46 EST, 5 January 2024

• The AG writes the alleged fraud schemes were 'so outrageous that they belie innocent explanation'

• James, who Trump has repeatedly attacked as partisan and 'racist,' had originally sued the former president for $250 million

•Final arguments are scheduled for next weekand a ruling in the 11-week explosive trial could come by the end of the month

New York Attorney General Letitia James is demanding over $370 million from Donald Trump and wants to bar him from doing any business in the state as the explosive civil fraud trial into his family's business practices comes to a close.

The fraud case brought by James accuses the Republican frontrunner for president of inflating the value of properties, including his Mar-a-Lago home in Florida, to get better terms on loans. James, who Trump has repeatedly attacked as partisan and 'racist,' had originally sued the former president for $250 million.

The new bombshell filing Friday argues that the massive sum is warranted due to the former president's 'myriad deceptive schemes' that were employed by his business and co-defendants to 'inflate asset values and conceal facts.' She writes the alleged fraud schemes were 'so outrageous that they belie innocent explanation.'

Trump's attorneys fired back, saying that James has 'no evidence' and insisted there was not a single witness who backs up those scathing allegations.

Judge Arthur Engoron has already found Trump, and his sons Don Jr. and Eric, liable for fraud. The post-trial briefs followed an 11-week explosive trial to determine how much money Trump and his business should fork over - which winded down last month.

New York Attorney General Letitia James is demanding over $370 million from Donald Trump and wants to bar him from doing any business in the state as the explosive civil fraud trial into his family's business practices comes to a close

'He rambled, he hurled insults,' New York AG Letitia James said after a dramatic appearance by former President Donald Trump .Closing arguments before Engoron are scheduled for next week and he could rule by the end of the month.

The former president took to his Truth Social account to blast the $370 million sum requested by James, who he called 'corrupt.''I did nothing wrong,' he wrote in all caps, calling his financial statements 'great' and 'very conservative.''NOW THE CORRUPT A.G. WANTS $370,000,000 AS BUSINESSES FLEE NEW YORK. THEY SHOULD PAY ME,' he exclaimed. He went on to call it 'prosecutorial misconduct' and a 'DOJ witch hunt.'

Trump attorneyAlina Habbaadded in a statement to DailyMail.comthat the new penalty is 'absurd'and can be described as 'nothing less than a form of politically motivated persecution of the leading Republican presidential candidate.' 'My clients did nothing wrong, there were no victims and the case presented has proven that his statements were under valued,' she continued.

Trump's legal team finally rested their defense in his New York fraud trial on December 13, after one final courtroom skirmish where Judge Arthur Engoron told them there was 'no way' he would rule in their favor.

The final squabble came after Trump failed to appear in his own defense as he originally forecast and son Eric made a surprise appearance to watch the final moments of the family business's case.

That came after the former president posted on X that 'I have already testified to everything & have nothing more to say.''We do rest,' Trump lawyer Chris Kise told the judge, who Trump attacked as 'crooked' throughout the trial while also firing off posts targeting his wife and chief judicial clerk.

Trump lawyer Chris Kise indicated took a series of steps on general court matters 'for appellate purposes,' prompting a quip from Engoron. The fraud case brought by James accuses Trump of inflating the value of properties, including his Mar-a-Lago home in Florida, to get better terms on loans

'You're going to appeal,' he said, ABC News reported.Kise said he planned to make a motion for a 'directed verdict.' That would be an opportunity for the judge to rule there was no sufficient evidence to the prosecution's case, effectively ending a matter where he has already made a finding of fraud. Kise indicated that Trump's team planned to appeal

'There is no way I am going to grant that,' Engoron told him. 'You'd be wasting your time.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12931509/Letitia-James-wants-370-MILLION-Trump-bar-doing-business-New-York-civil-fraud-trial-bombshell-new-filing-reveals.html

The Supreme Court will decide if Donald Trump can be kept off 2024 presidential ballots

By MARK SHERMAN and NICHOLAS RICCARDI

Updated 6:08 PM EST, January 5, 2024

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Friday it will decide whether former President Donald Trump can be kept off the ballot because of his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss, inserting the court squarely in the 2024 presidential campaign.

The justices acknowledged the need to reach a decision quickly, as voters will soon begin casting presidential primary ballots across the country. The court agreed to take up Trump’s appeal of a case from Colorado stemming from his role in the events that culminated in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Underscoring the urgency, arguments will be held on Feb. 8, during what is normally a nearly monthlong winter break for the justices. The compressed timeframe could allow the court to produce a decision before Super Tuesday on March 5, when the largest number of delegates are up for grabs in a single day, including in Colorado.

The court will be considering for the first time the meaning and reach of a provision of the 14th Amendment barring some people who “engaged in insurrection” from holding public office. The amendment was adopted in 1868, following the Civil War. It has been so rarely used that the nation’s highest court had no previous occasion to interpret it.

Colorado’s Supreme Court, by a 4-3 vote, ruled last month that Trump should not be on the Republican primary ballot. The decision was the first time the 14th Amendment was used to bar a presidential contender from the ballot.

Trump is separately appealing to state court a ruling by Maine’s Democratic secretary of state, Shenna Bellows, that he was ineligible to appear on that state’s ballot over his role in the Capitol attack. Both the Colorado Supreme Court and the Maine secretary of state’s rulings are on hold until the appeals play out.

The high court’s decision to intervene, which both sides called for, is the most direct involvement in a presidential election since Bush v. Gore in 2000, when a conservative majority effectively decided the election for Republican George W. Bush. Only Justice Clarence Thomas remains from that court.

Three of the nine Supreme Court justices were appointed by Trump, though they have repeatedly ruled against him in 2020 election-related lawsuits, as well as his efforts to keep documents related to Jan. 6 and his tax returns from being turned over to congressional committees.

At the same time, Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh have been in the majority of conservative-driven decisions that overturned the five-decade-old constitutional right to abortion, expanded gun rights and struck down affirmative action in college admissions.

Some Democratic lawmakers have called on Thomas to step aside from the case because of his wife’s support for Trump’s effort to overturn the results of the election, which he lost to Democrat Joe Biden. Thomas is unlikely to agree, and there was every indication Friday that all the justices are participating. Thomas has recused himself from only one other case related to the 2020 election, involving former law clerk John Eastman, and so far the people trying to disqualify Trump haven’t asked him to recuse.

The 4-3 Colorado decision cites a ruling by Gorsuch when he was a federal judge in that state. That Gorsuch decision upheld Colorado’s move to strike a naturalized citizen from the state’s presidential ballot because he was born in Guyana and didn’t meet the constitutional requirements to run for office. The court found that Trump likewise doesn’t meet the qualifications due to his role in the U.S. Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021. That day, the Republican president had held a rally outside the White House and exhorted his supporters to “fight like hell” before they walked to the Capitol.

The two-sentence provision in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment states that anyone who swore an oath to uphold the constitution and then “engaged in insurrection” against it is no longer eligible for state or federal office. After Congress passed an amnesty for most of the former confederates the measure targeted in 1872, the provision fell into disuse until dozens of suits were filed to keep Trump off the ballot this year. Only the one in Colorado was successful….

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-trump-insurrection-2024-election-0baac5ba0c1868e437e365af17eeab24