This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
After a two-day hearing, a federal judge tossed Ray Epps' defamation lawsuit against Fox News on Wednesday, saying he didn't provide enough facts to show that former host Tucker Carlson acted with "actual malice" when he insinuated that Epps may have been working with the government to provoke the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol Hill uprising.
The Hill reported Epps was "at the center of a conspiracy theory about what sparked" the events that day, when protesters objecting to what they perceived as unusual election procedures that gave the White House to Joe Biden eventually rioted.
Epps, a former U.S. Marine, sued Fox claiming the network "knowingly" promoted what his lawyers claimed were "destructive conspiracy theories."
Fox stated it was "pleased" with several decisions, including the Epps case, "from federal courts preserving the press freedoms of the First Amendment."
A report at HeadlineUSA said Epps was the "controversial figure" seen on camera during those events "urging protesters to enter the Capitol."
"He initially appeared on the FBI's wanted list in relation to the Capitol rioting, only to be removed in the summer of 2021 with no explanation … ," the report noted.
The dismissal was reported by Politico's Kyle Cheney.
Epps sued in 2023 when he had not yet been charged by the Department of Justice for anything during that time. Later, he was accused of one misdemeanor count of disorderly conduct.
He was not accused of inciting, "even though he's caught on video telling protestors to go 'into the Capitol'—and even though the DOJ described his behavior as 'felonious,'" the report said.
He was given probation.
The report noted, "According to journalist Christina Urso, who attended the sentencing, the government bizarrely went to bat for Epps during the hearing."
Urso revealed, "The prosecutor praised Epps 'de-escalation tactics' and had a whole slide show for it entitled 'Attempts to De-escalate.' Both Judge Boasberg and the prosecutor both claimed 'he never tried to go into the Capitol.'"
Multiple social media commenters had suggested Epps was working hand-in-glove with the federal government that day.
While it's known that there were many federal agents in the crowd that went from protest to riot, their numbers and identities have not been revealed.
Epps said the misdemeanor charge against him proved he was not in that group.
In his now-failed legal action, he stated, "In May 2023, the Department of Justice notified Epps that it would seek to charge him criminally for events on January 6, 2021—two-and-a-half years later. The relentless attacks by Fox and [Tucker] Carlson and the resulting political pressure likely resulted in the criminal charges."
Special Counsel Jack Smith is concluding the federal criminal cases against President-elect Donald Trump by seeking dismissals before they proceed to trial, Breitbart reported.
This landmark decision halts federal legal actions against Trump, although state cases continue.
On Monday, Special Counsel Jack Smith took significant legal steps, filing a motion in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to dismiss the election interference case against President-elect Trump. This decision was influenced by opinions from the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), which refer to the constitutional prohibition on indicting a sitting president.
Smith's filings not only encompassed the election interference case but also included a motion in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. This aimed to dismiss an appeal in the case of a document, reinforcing a district court's decision to dismiss the indictment without prejudice.
The comprehensive document detailing the reasons for these actions was filed on November 25, 2024. It outlines the basis for these legal conclusions and the application of the OLC's opinions.
The OLC's stance effectively precludes the possibility of federal charges against Trump as he prepares to re-enter the White House.
While these federal dismissals are definitive, Trump's legal challenges are not over. He still faces ongoing cases at the state level in both Georgia and New York.
In New York, the developments have influenced another case against Trump concerning business records. Judge Juan Merchan has set a December 2 deadline for Trump’s attorneys to file a motion to dismiss, considering the recent federal decisions.
This string of legal proceedings highlights the intricate balance between federal and state jurisdictions in matters involving election laws and presidential immunity.
David Bossie, a long-time supporter of Trump, commented on the developments, stating, “Now even Jack Smith admits the Left’s lawfare against President Trump has failed. When President Trump returns to the White House on January 20, the rule of law will return with him.”
Steven Cheung, another ally, emphasized the broader political implications, remarking, “The American People re-elected President Trump with an overwhelming mandate to Make America Great Again. Today’s decision by the DOJ ends the unconstitutional federal cases against President Trump, and is a major victory for the rule of law.”
Further extending the narrative of victory, Ken Klukowski described the dismissal as “a huge victory for President Trump and the rule of law. Jack Smith’s appointment as Special Counsel was unconstitutional from the outset, and Smith’s surrender here is long overdue.”
The cessation of these federal prosecutions marks a pivotal moment in U.S. legal history, particularly concerning the reach and limitations of presidential immunity.
As Trump prepares for his upcoming inauguration, the legal landscape adjusts to a new reality where federal indictments are no longer a threat, yet state cases loom on the horizon. The conclusion of these federal cases may also signal a shift in how future legal challenges against sitting or incoming presidents are handled, underscoring a delicate interplay between law and politics.
The attorneys general of 24 Republican states have urged the Supreme Court to stop allowing boys in girls' sports - just the latest shot in a culture war that appears to be finally breaking in the favor of conservatives.
The petition asks the Supreme Court to allow Arizona to enforce a law protecting women's sports that was frozen by a lower court.
The 9th Circuit Appeals court said the law may violate the Equal Protection Clause, which was ratified in the 1860s - a century and a half before the definition of a woman was ever a point of political contention.
A group of 24 Republican states, led by South Carolina, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the 9th Circuit's absurd ruling.
"Arizona’s law restricting girls’ sports teams to biological females is just common sense, and it protects girls from competing against bigger, stronger males who identify as females," they wrote.
"In sports, equal access means a level playing field," the attorneys general added in their brief.
"And a level playing field usually means sports teams divided by sex so that girls can compete against other girls."
The other states backing the petition are Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Wyoming.
It is just common sense that males have an unfair biological advantage against female athletes, but leftists have dismissed this simple reality - even after the Democrats' shellacking in this year's election made it clear Americans are ready to move on from woke craziness.
Public opinion on this subject is now clear - but the Supreme Court shouldn't keep males out of women's sports just because it's popular. There is a clear legal issue for them to address.
The Republican AGs are asking the court to "make it clear that the Constitution does not prohibit states from saving women’s sports from unfair competition and providing meaningful athletic opportunities for girls and women."
Indeed, the 14th Amendment was obviously not meant to allow men to dominate women in athletic competitions, and the mere suggestion that the Amendment's framers countenanced this scenario is completely deranged.
The Supreme Court has an opportunity to make it clear that novel attempts to stretch the 14th Amendment's meaning and purpose have a logical limit.
Enough of this insanity.
Joe Biden has pardoned a Thanksgiving turkey for the final time, marking another "last" for the lame duck as his presidency nears its sad end.
The New York Post noted the "unusually somber" tone of the event, which is traditionally known for levity, as Biden shared his gratitude for the time he served in office.
The 82-year-old president pardoned two Minnesota turkeys named Peach and Blossom, who will live out their days at Farmamerica — Minnesota Agricultural Interpretive Center.
Peach, Biden quipped, lives by the motto "keep calm and gobble on" while Blossom follows the mantra, "No foul play, just Minnesota Nice.”
"Based on your temperament and commitment to being productive members of society, I hereby pardon Peach and Blossom!” Biden said to applause.
While Biden came equipped with the usual jokes expected during the annual event, he struck a wistful note as he acknowledged the coming end of his time in office.
“Let me close on a more serious note,” Biden said.
“This event marks the official start of the holiday season here in Washington. It’s also my last time to speak here as your president during this season and give thanks and gratitude. So let me say to you, it’s been the honor of my life. I’m forever grateful.”
Many have questioned whether Biden will pardon his son, Hunter, who was convicted on felony gun charges this year and pled guilty to tax offenses in a case that touched on his family's influence peddling.
The White House has said that Biden will not give his son a break, which would likely be perceived as unethical - but Biden also doesn't have much to lose, at this point.
Biden's plans for re-election were upended in June when his performance in a presidential debate set off alarms in his own party about his cognitive health. After weeks of resistance, Biden gave in to pressure from Democrats to forgo a second term.
Since then, Biden has been blamed by many Democrats for sabotaging the party's efforts to defeat Donald Trump - who won a historic second term after beating vice president Kamala Harris in a landslide.
Despite his bitter rivalry with Biden, President-elect Trump has not ruled out pardoning Hunter Biden as a gesture of goodwill.
“There’s no question about it, he’s been a bad boy. All you had to do is see the laptop from hell. But I happen to think it’s very bad for our country,” Trump added.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The governor of New York has signed a measure that repeals a statutory ban on adultery in the state.
So, as legacy wire service AP documented, "Cheating on your spouse is no longer a crime…"
It was Gov. Kathy Hochul who just days ago signed a plan repealing the original 1907 law that made adultery a criminal offense, a Class B misdemeanor that carried a punishment of up to 90 days in jail.
"These matters should clearly be handled by these individuals and not our criminal justice system. Let's take this silly, outdated statute off the books, once and for all," she said.
The Gateway Pundit documented that more than a dozen people have been charged under the statute in recent decades, but only five convicted.
State assembly member Charles Lavine proposed the repeal.
Special counsel Jack Smith has moved to drop federal charges against President-elect Donald Trump, the UK Daily Mail reported. U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan granted Smith's request Thursday, marking another Trump legal victory.
Smith's charges involve Trump's alleged involvement in the riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, as well as separate charges for the classified documents case. Smith requested the judge grant a dismissal "without prejudice" for the former while dropping an appeal of the latter's dismissal.
The judge agreed to stop the prosecution while Trump is in office, but the government can pick them up again when Trump is no longer president. Chutkan agreed that was the best course of action given a prohibition on prosecuting a sitting president.
"Dismissal without prejudice is appropriate here," she wrote in her decision. Chutkan added that this "consistent with the Government’s understanding that the immunity afforded to a sitting President is temporary, expiring when they leave office."
Although Trump is out of the woods while in office, he could still face prosecution once his term is over. This comes after he's spent years defending himself against lawfare attacks since leaving office.
Not long after President Joe Biden was sworn in, the Department of Justice began pursuing every individual who participated in the demonstration on Jan. 6 in any way. That included Trump, who was the former president by then.
Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith to ascertain "whether any person or entity unlawfully interfered with the transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election or the certification of the Electoral College vote held on or about January 6, 2021." Smith was a war crimes prosecutor on a mission.
However, after spending $50 million of taxpayer money to prosecute Trump, all of that comes to an end for now. This comes as other lawfare against Trump begins falling apart as well.
Trump was convicted of 34 felonies in connection with a so-called hush money payment in New York. However, the judge has since moved to dismiss the case since the state cannot prosecute a sitting president. This all but negates the lawfare aimed at taking Trump out leading up to the election.
Steven Cheung, who will be Trump's White House communications director, championed the move as a return to justice. "The American People re-elected President Trump with an overwhelming mandate to Make America Great Again," he noted in a statement.
"Today’s decision by the DOJ ends the unconstitutional federal cases against President Trump, and is a major victory for the rule of law. The American People and President Trump want an immediate end to the political weaponization of our justice system and we look forward to uniting our country," he added.
Trump also posted about the decision to his Truth Social. "Over $100 Million Dollars of Taxpayer Dollars has been wasted in the Democrat Party’s fight against their Political Opponent, ME," Trump said following the decision.
"Nothing like this has ever happened in our Country before," he added. "It was a political hijacking, and a low point in the History of our Country that such a thing could have happened, and yet, I persevered, against all odds, and WON. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!" Trump concluded.
This is great news that Trump is off the hook for now. As the president-elect noted, these cases should have never seen the light of day but at least the threat of imprisonment is off the table until he leaves office.
As he prepares to take the oath of office for a second time, President-elect Donald Trump is being flooded with pardon requests from a long list of federal prisoners.
Some of those seeking clemency include reality stars like "Tiger King" Joe Exotic and right-wing activists who were involved in the January 6th riot.
A lawyer for Proud Boys leader Jason Biggs has confirmed that he is seeking Trump's pardon. Biggs received one of the longest January 6th sentences, 17 years for seditious conspiracy.
In a letter to Trump, Biggs' lawyer Norm Pattis compared pardoning January 6thers to the amnesty that the Confederates received after the Civil War.
“These are divisive times,” Pattis wrote. “The divisions were acute in 2020, when millions believed the election was stolen and turned out to make sure electoral integrity was preserved. Suspicions and bitterness about the election lingers to this day.”
“A pardon of Mr. Biggs will help close that wound and inspires confidence in the future."
Trump has also received pardon requests from former Oklahoma zookeeper Joe Exotic, who was notoriously convicted of a murder-for-hire plot chronicles in the show Tiger King, and Todd and Julie Chrisley, who were found guilty of fraud.
The rapper Boosie Badazz, charged with unlawful gun possession, is also hoping for a lucky break after Trump pardoned Lil Wayne and Kodak Black during his first term.
Trump has repeatedly pledged to pardon many, but not necessarily all, of the January 6th defendants. Several have moved to delay their cases in anticipation of a pardon.
"If they're innocent I would pardon them," Trump said in July. "They were convicted by a very tough system."
Trump has also shown sympathy to New York mayor Eric Adams, a Democrat who was indicted this year on federal bribery charges. Adams' defenders, including Trump, have cast him as the victim of political retribution from a weaponized justice system.
The president-elect took a victory lap on Monday as Special Counsel Jack Smith moved to drop Trump's "election interference" case - a stunning vindication for Trump, who faced prison before his shocking re-election essentially ended a lawfare campaign against him.
These cases, like all of the other cases I have been forced to go through, are empty and lawless, and should never have been brought. Over $100 Million Dollars of Taxpayer Dollars has been wasted in the Democrat Party’s fight against their Political Opponent, ME. Nothing like…
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 25, 2024
While Trump's critics cast him as an aspiring dictator, he has floated a pardon for Hunter Biden, the son of Trump's former rival Joe Biden, with Trump saying he's not taking it off the table "despite what they've done to me."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
For years, Jack Smith, appointed "special counsel" by officials in the Department of Justice to handle some of the Democrats' lawfare cases against President Trump, has tried to put the former, and incoming, president in jail.
He's now apparently giving up.
Just the News confirms Smith has filed a motion in court Monday to drop all four felony charges against Trump.
Trump reacted on Truth Social, stating: "These cases, like all of the other cases I have been forced to go through, are empty and lawless, and should never have been brought. Over $100 Million Dollars of Taxpayer Dollars has been wasted in the Democrat Party's fight against their Political Opponent, ME.
"Nothing like this has ever happened in our Country before. They have also used State Prosecutors and District Attorneys, such as Fani Willis and her lover, Nathan Wade (who had absolutely zero experience in cases such as this, but was paid MILLIONS, enough for them to take numerous trips and cruises around the globe!), Letitia James, who inappropriately, unethically, and probably illegally, campaigned on 'GETTING TRUMP' in order to win Political Office, and Alvin Bragg, who himself never wanted to bring this case against me, but was forced to do so by the Justice Department and the Democrat Party.
"It was a political hijacking, and a low point in the History of our Country that such a thing could have happened, and yet, I persevered, against all odds, and WON. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"
The counts related to Trump's challenges to the suspicious results from the 2020 presidential election, which was subjected to undue influences from several outside sources.
One of those was Mark Zuckerberg's decision to hand out $400 million plus to local elections officials who often used it to recruit voters in Democrat districts. The other was the FBI's decision to interfere by falsely labeling the true information about Biden family scandals found in Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop as Russian disinformation.
A later survey suggested that factor alone could have cost Trump that re-election bid.
The charges were "conspiracy to defraud the United States, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights," the report said.
CNN reported that Trump already had announced plans to fire Smith once he is inaugurated in January, describing Smith's work as among a number of "witch hunts" sponsored by Democrats against him.
Smith explained, "The (Justice) Department's position is that the Constitution requires that this case be dismissed before the defendant is inaugurated. This outcome is not based on the merits or strength of the case against the defendant."
Smith's campaign against Trump set a number of precedents, as never before has a former president faced federal criminal charges, and the agenda gave rise to discussion of the possibility that outgoing presidents now could face a number of charges leveled by their successors.
For example, still not fully investigated is what members of Congress already have confirmed as an influence peddling scheme operated by the Biden family.
The case against Trump involved a Supreme Court ruling that Trump enjoys great presidential immunity for official actions while in office, and some immunity for other actions.
Smith claimed that the "merits" of the prosecution still existed.
It was a leftist, anti-Trump judge in Washington, Tanya Chutkan, who verbally had criticized Trump's actions, who had been deciding how much of Trump's conduct on which the case was based was shielded by immunity.
When the Supreme Court ruling came out, the prosecutors adjusted their filings to claim that all of Trump's actions were as "an individual."
Chutkan followed later in the day with a ruling that dropped the case.
"The government has moved to dismiss the superseding Indictment without prejudice," Chutkan wrote in a decision. "Defendant does not oppose the Motion…and the court will grant it."
The filing, "without prejudice," means the charges theoretically could be resurrected at some point later.
Smith also has moved to drop his appeal in his classified records case against Trump – a case that was dismissed earlier.
Steven Cheung, a spokesman for the Trump campaign, said it is a "major victory for the rule of law.'
"The American People and President Trump want an immediate end to the political weaponization of our justice system and we look forward to uniting our country," he confirmed.
Smith's other claims, that Trump violated the law by having government documents with him after he left the presidency, most recently was pending at an appeals court.
Of course, this is the same issue for which Joe Biden was investigated, and the prosecutor there gave Biden a pass. Further, prosecutors found former Vice President Mike Pence also had government documents and gave him a pass.
Those circumstances supported the Trump team contention that the federal government was being weaponized against him, since the cases clearly were based on different standards.
Still in limbo, however, are state cases against Trump that were part of the Democrats' lawfare, a business records conviction in New York as well as the wild claim that he was guilty of fraud – even though the supposed victims testified in court none of them lost anything and his actions were standard for the business, and they would like to do business with him again.
Smith's claims essentially alleged that Trump's' opinions about the 2020 election constituted an attempt to overthrow the government.
Smith's complaint about Trump's possession of government papers had been dismissed by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon after she ruled Smith was improperly appointed to his role.
Smith appealed to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals trying to get the case reinstated.
Trump earlier said he would fire Smith and his entire team and then use the DOJ to investigate the 2020 election.
There are dozens of lawyers and staff members involved in Smith's campaign against Trump.
The Texas Supreme Court ruled on Friday that state Attorney General Ken Paxton did not have to testify in a whistleblower lawsuit brought by some of his employees, reversing a lower court decision.
Because Paxton's office does not dispute any of the issues in the suit, which is related to failed impeachment charges brought against him, and he agrees to any judgement in the case, there is not a compelling reason for his testimony.
“In a major win for the State of Texas, the state Supreme Court has sided with Attorney General Paxton against former OAG employees whose effort to prolong costly, politically-motivated litigation against the agency has wasted public resources for years,” a statement from Paxton’s office said.
The employees say they were improperly fired or forced out because they told the FBI that Paxton misused his office to protect a friend, who was also a campaign donor.
The donor was in turn helping Paxton hide an extramarital affair, they further allege.
Texas Governor and the legislature have said they want Paxton to testify before deciding on a settlement amount.
But the supreme court acknowledged that Paxton's testimony and that of others could be used improperly by the legislature.
A preliminary deal included an apology from Paxton to the employees for calling them "rogue employees" along with a $3.3 million settlement, but the sticking point was that Paxton wanted the state to pay the settlement.
The House balked at that plan, and started investigating him. Eventually, they impeached him, but he was acquitted in the Senate trial.
Paxton has consistently denied the charges against him and called them politically motivated.
The settlement, which Paxton agreed to in January, does not involve him admitting to any wrongdoing.
That should have been the end of the litigation, but the judge has let it drag on for almost a year.
Paxton's office slammed the lower court ruling that was overturned as an "effort to prolong costly, politically-motivated litigation against the Agency has wasted public resources for years."
The office characterized the judge's actions as an "apparent effort to prolong the political charade and interfere with the OAG’s day-to-day business."
Se. Eric Schmitt (R-MO) called on Sunday for all the DOJ employees who worked on Trump indictments to be fired in the interest of accountability for using government resources to try to keep President-elect Donald Trump off the ballot.
“You saw all these cases resurrected. They all fell apart under the weight of the law,” Shmitt said on NBC's "Meet the Press." “And so I do think there needs to be accountability. I think that getting it back to crime fighting is important, but there has to be accountability for these kinds of abuses.”
Schmitt was then asked whether he was referring to the removal of special prosecutor Jack Smith or something more.
“I think accountability means, first and foremost, the people involved with this should be fired immediately,” he said. “And anybody a part of this, this effort to keep President Trump off the ballot, and to throw him in jail for the rest of his life because they didn’t like his politics, and to continue to cast him as a ‘threat to democracy,’ was wrong, and so we’ll see where that goes.”
“But I just don’t think in this country, unless we want to be a banana republic, I don’t want to see that happen. You can’t have the Justice Department abused in this way,” Schmitt added.
As everyone should know at this point, Trump was indicted four separate times, and two of those prosecutions were by the DOJ under President Joe Biden.
All of the indictments against him have either been suspended or dismissed since he won the 2024 election.
The New York case that found him guilty of 34 counts of falsifying financial documents was scheduled for sentencing on November 18, but DA Alvin Bragg asked last week for sentencing to be postponed indefinitely.
Schmitt also praised Attorney General nominee Pam Bondi, who replaced Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) after he withdrew from contention following allegations that he had solicited sex from a minor (which he adamantly denies).
Bondi will end the "weaponization" of the DOJ, Schmitt said.
Trump has vowed to gut the unelected "deep state," and House Republicans have been working toward this goal with their select committee on the weaponization of government since gaining the majority two years ago.
Ending the ability of the deep state or any administration to use lawfare against an opponent would be a big step back from what many feel is the edge of banana republic status for the U.S.
Bondi was one of Trump's lawyers during his first impeachment trial and served as Florida attorney general until 2019.
She vowed last year to prosecute the prosecutors that indicted Trump.