TY Baker
Brown: Now breaking news, a source familiar with Senator Mark Warner's thinking tells me that the private meeting that he was trying to organize.. That's no longer happening. It’s been scrapped
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1810098210196861423
Media leaks are stopping the Democrat coup against Joe Biden
https://x.com/alx/status/1810106642932867255
I have to see if this works…
Was seeing if posting the gif in the image would work, it didn't.
Marine Le Pen’s National Rally party won EVERY single French department except for Paris in the EU Elections.
Every single department.
That’s like Trump winning every single state except DC.
And I’m supposed to believe they came 3rd in the Parliamentary Elections? No way.
https://x.com/CilComLFC/status/1810101454507573560
Was aimning at an animated gif, in the png. let me see if Imgflip can do it.
Spammer didn't like the boobs.
This November, democracy is on the line and President
@JoeBiden
is answering the call.
https://x.com/TheDemocrats/status/1810082639807729940
Steven Calabresi: “President Donald Trump's Manhattan Convictions are Unconstitutional: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg alleged that the documents were allegedly falsely altered to conceal a contribution of money in violation of federal campaign finance laws or in pursuance of winning the 2016 election by defrauding the voters of information they had a right to know. Neither argument passes First Amendment scrutiny. The federal campaign finance laws were partially upheld in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976)….
….“The U.S. Supreme Court needs to hear this case as soon as possible because of its impact on the 2024 presidential election between President Trump and President Biden. Voters need to know that the Constitution protected everything Trump is alleged to have done with respect to allegedly paying hush money to Stormy Daniels…The federal Supreme Court needs to make clear what are the legal rules in matters of great consequence to an election to a federal office like the presidency. A highly partisan borough, Manhattan, of a highly partisan city, New York City, in a highly partisan state, like New York State, cannot be allowed to criminalize the conduct of presidential candidates in ways that violate the federal constitution. The Roman Republic fell when politicians began criminalizing politics. I am gravely worried that we are seeing that pattern repeat itself in the present-day United States. It is quite simply wrong to criminalize political differences.”
….“The First Amendment Freedom of Speech Clause also rules out of order Alvin Bragg's argument that Trump defrauded American voters by preventing them from hearing about Trump's affaire with Stormy Daniels. Theories as broad as this one is, of ‘defrauding voters’ would end up eliminating the freedom of speech in American elections…There was thus no predicate crime that Trump could have been concealing when he allegedly altered business records at The Trump Organization. Trump's convictions in the Manhattan trial are unconstitutional because they violate the First Amendment as it was originally understood….
….“Campaign finance limits prevent speech by people who want to engage in it. They have changed Congress so badly that today Members of Congress spend 70% of their time raising money rather then legislating or meeting with their constituents because of absurdly low campaign finance limits that have not been adequately raised to match inflation since those laws were enacted in the 1970's. The post-Watergate campaign finance laws were and always have been flagrantly unconstitutional in their totality….
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112748303991679169
.…“The opinion in Citizens United was written by former Justice, and liberal icon, Anthony M. Kennedy, and it was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Clarence Thomas, and Justice Samuel Alito all three of whom are still on the SC. Given the Court's current membership, it is highly likely that the outcome in Citizens Unitedwould prevail again today by a vote of 6 to 3. If Buckley v. Valeo was argued to be an obstacle to Trump prevailing, the SC would today, in 2024, and should today, in 2024, overrule the campaign finance contribution limits of federal election law as violations of the freedom of speech. Groups contributing to election campaigns can pay for advertising to promote candidates, and they can also pay hush money to keep bad or false stories out of the news. The effect either way is to help the candidate. You can contribute $ to generate good publicity. And, you can contribute $ to avoid bad publicity. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech in both cases….
“In 2010, in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310, the Supreme Court held 5 to 4 that the freedom of speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by closely allied corporations and groups like The Trump Organization. Under Citizens United, it was perfectly legal for The Trump Organization to pay Daniels $130,000 in hush money to conceal her alleged affair with Donald Trump….
….“In that case, campaign expenditure limits were ruled to be flatly unconstitutional as a violation of the First Amendment's protection of freedom of speech. Under Buckley v. Valeo, an individual like Donald Trump can spend an unlimited amount of his own money promoting his own campaign. But, the Supreme Court in Buckley did uphold contribution limits on how much an individual or a group could contribute to influence an election. Alvin Bragg argues that the Trump organization's contribution of $130,000 to pay Stormy Daniels hush money exceeded federal campaign finance limits on contributions. The federal government itself has adopted a policy of not prosecuting hush money payments as illegal campaign contributions in the wake of its embarrassing loss of such a prosecution brought against Democratic Vice Presidential contender John Edwards who had paid hush money to a mistress with who he had had a child out of wedlock….
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112748317468042131
“…No one ever said it would be easy to take America back from people who hate its foundational principles, and are willing to knife them not just for President Trump, but for anyone who has the audacity to support him. There is but one solace: such people may be able to temporarily force obeisance, but they have forever forfeited the right to respect. They may have power, but they have surrendered moral authority. They can make us pretend to take them seriously in public; they cannot stop us sniggering behind our hands. And we are. Because this is still a joke; a bad joke. A sinister joke. But a joke. And come November, we’re willing to bet, President Donald J. Trump will have the last laugh.”
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112748322358778365
….“Look, we would like to believe that the American justice system still has integrity. And in many states, perhaps it does. But clearly, not in New York. And ironically, the jury gave themselves away with their excessively and ridiculously consistent verdict. Had they found President Trump not guilty of even one tiny lesser offense, it would have been theoretically possible to believe that these jurors actually weighed the evidence. But guilty on all 34 counts? After only 2 days?….
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112748323688217882
….“Thirdly, Merchan allowed the prosecution to charge Trump with a misdemeanor crime which has long been considered dead due to its vague character. Fourthly, Merchan allowed the jury to convict Trump not because he specifically intended to defraud anyone, but rather because of a ‘general intent’ to defraud ‘any person or entity.’ In other words, even if he didn’t falsify anything in this case, if you think Donald Trump is a lying liarpants, you can still convict him because of his ‘general intent.” Is it any wonder that Trump was convicted on all 34 counts, on this basis?….
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112748324376875484
….“Then, when prosecutors showed similar disregard for his own rulings in their closing arguments, Merchan simply let it slide. But none of this, none of this can hold a candle to Merchan’s instructions to the jury before they began deliberations. Firstly, Merchan told the jury they did not have to agree on what crime Trump committed (or, indeed, whether he committed a crime at all). Even if four jurors believed Trump had committed one crime, four believed he had committed a second (but not the first), and four believed he committed a third (but not the first two), Merchan would treat that as a unanimous verdict. In other words, the jury were allowed to act like South Park’s underpants gnomes, and convict Trump under the following theory:
Point 1: Trump falsified his business records to commit a crime (specified in point 2)
Point 2: ?????????????
Point 3: GUILTY!….
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112748328104478125
….“For example, as Jonathan Turley argued, Merchan ‘continues to allow the jury to hear references to campaign-finance violations that do not exist.’ He refused to allow a legal expert to testify that these violations did not exist…He sustained every prosecutorial objection to defense witness Robert Costello repeatedly pointing out Michael Cohen’s record as a perjurer, and then screamed at Costello from the bench when he expressed his frustration and befuddlement. Costello, for the record, is both a former prosecutor and a far more decorated lawyer than Cohen, yet Merchan treated him with about as much respect as a convicted felon….
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112748329376159768
….“However, unlike the prosecutors in this case, we will not simply lob a charge and then expect friendly audiences to accept it unquestioningly. Unlike the prosecutors, we plan to prove our case; at least, as much as we can in an editorial. The evidence is so exhaustive it could fill a book. But we will try to summarize it as far as possible. Start with Judge Juan Merchan’s infamous ‘gag order,’ a blatant and arguably unconstitutional attack on President Trump’s free speech rights, and which Trump is suing Merchan over…In the course of the trial, Merchan has denied Trump the right to attend a Supreme Court hearing on his claims of presidential immunity and even initially denied him the right to attend his own son’s high school graduation. Gratuitous and nasty though these decisions were, however, they pale in comparison to Merchan’s more substantively dangerous rulings….
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112748330497167854
….“This is not because the charges were persuasive; they weren’t. This is not because the evidence presented was damning; if anything, it was damning for the prosecution who staked their case on a convicted perjurer’s word and sent a porn star who mistook a possum for a ghost to testify, even though she had no knowledge that was pertinent and contradicted her own public interviews in her testimony. The reason this case was rigged was simple: because this trial was less an American trial and more like a real-life repeat of the infamous Disney cartoon
‘Pluto’s Judgment Day,’
in which the titular dog dreams of being sent to Hell, where he is tried by a courtroom full of cats. Except that cats would probably give dogs a fairer hearing than this jury and (especially) this Judge gave Trump….
HUMAN EVENTS EDITORIAL BOARD: IT WAS RIGGED, LET US COUNT THE WAYS - “Before it was even over, it was obvious that this trial was a contemptible joke. Nevertheless, the fact that apparently, a jury in New York can convict a man for a crime whose existence befuddles even legal experts, on all counts of an indictment which is similarly impenetrable, is not funny. It is downright alarming. The Babylon Bee described the verdict as ‘Donald Trump found guilty of being Donald Trump,’ and we, for one, wish that a satire site would stop writing straight news. It’s weird, and also, that’s our job. Nevertheless, the Bee is correct. So, regrettably, was President Trump himself when he said that ‘Mother Theresa couldn’t beat these charges.’….
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112748338983490927
….“Secondly, Merchan declined to instruct the jury on what campaign finance law actually says, because what it actually says is that Trump’s actions did not constitute a campaign finance violation. This, after Merchan blocked the aforementioned defense witness, a former chair of the Federal Election Commission, from testifying that Trump’s actions did not fall afoul of campaign finance law for the simple reason that any reporting of the expense in question would have to take place after the election. In other words, it would have to be a conspiracy to influence the election, which somehow existed after the election already took place. Yeah, okay….
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112748325837900062
Anon remembers also.
https://x.com/TatsuyaIshida9/status/1810137589418217830
We all knew.
AI image
Caption this.