Despite the claims of the media talking heads, former President Donald Trump came out ahead of Vice President Kamala Harris following the ABC presidential debate and he's killed any notion of a rematch.
While the media claimed that Harris crushed Trump, Harris knew she lost and this was illustrated by the fact that she immediately called on Trump to do another debate, although not on Fox News.
Trump originally wanted three debates with President Joe Biden with the third one set to take place on Fox News but Harris refused that plan.
Now Harris is desperate for a rematch especially as Americans have ruminated over the debate and processed the three vs. one travesty that the nation witnessed on ABC.
Trump stood tall even as both moderators openly supported Harris and "fact-checked" Trump while ignoring Harris's numerous blatant lies. Harris knows her performance will only age badly and wants another shot to boost her campaign and Democrat voters.
At this point, Trump has gotten everything he can get out of the debates and knows that another debate will only serve as a platform for Harris to motivate Democrat voters. In a post to Truth Social, Trump emphatically stated that “THERE WILL BE NO THIRD DEBATE!."
The debates serve the purpose of allowing candidates to compare and contrast themselves with their opponents in front of independent voters. Very few Democrat or Republican voters will switch votes based on debates making the real prize the independent voters.
Following Trump's debate on ABC, independent voters seemed to align more closely with Trump than Harris which makes sense considering Harris is the incumbent candidate responsible for the state of the nation today.
Harris's campaign has done everything in their power to portray Harris as a fresh face who can change things but that falls apart considering she has been in the White House for the past three years.
Trump is capturing independent voters who are angry with Harris and the Democrat Party's handling of foreign policy, the border, and the economy. Trump has nothing to gain by giving Harris further oxygen with independent voters.
All of this is terrible news for Harris who has scored big points with leftists and committed Democrat voters for her performance while turning off independents with the obvious collusion between her and ABC moderators.
While Harris lost with independents, the debate did boost Democrat enthusiasm, especially paired with an endorsement from billionaire pop star Taylor Swift. Before the debate, Harris was truly faltering and things were looking bad.
Democrats watched Harris do her typical smug schoolmarm act that they seem to love while Trump was verbally under siege from the moderators and it did wonders in boosting Democrat morale.
However, that morale is already ebbing and Democrats are coming back to the bitter reality that there are months left to go in this election and Harris has no answers for Trump's biggest weapons.
Harris has no answer for the economy, the border, and the multiple wars waging around the world. In fact, she bears responsibility for the issues she claims she can fix, and Trump pointed that out at the end of the debate.
Come November, it's unlikely that Harris's cheap "win" will help her when independent swing voters make their decision on who will lead the nation for the next four years.
A Georgia judge dropped two counts against former President Donald Trump in the Georgia 2020 election interference case on Thursday.
Fulton County Judge Scott McAfee said the two counts fall under federal jurisdiction which is a massive win for Trump's attorneys and could have big implications for Trump's other indictments in New York and Florida.
This decision brings up the total dropped charges against Trump in Georgia to five with eight more to go.
Trump's lawyers responded to Judge McAfee's decisions with a simple statement saying "President Trump and his legal team in Georgia have prevailed once again."
This decision is the latest defeat for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis who brought the indictment against Trump and declined to comment on Judge McAfee's decision to chip away at more of her charges.
The case against Trump brought by Fani Willis was always a politically motivated mess that conservative legal experts predicted would fail in a fair court.
Willis's case has been on pause for months thanks to a massive conflict of interest scandal involving Willis and her "ex-lover" prosecutor Nathan Wade who may not be Willis's ex-lover after all.
The Georgia Court of Appeals is currently reviewing an appeal from Trump on McAfee's ruling allowing Willis to continue prosecuting the case despite having Wade as her lead prosecutor while being in a relationship that created a massive financial conflict of interest.
Willis lied about the relationship when one of Trump's co-defendants sought to have her removed from the case.
Eventually, a mountain of evidence emerged showing that Willis was engaged in an illicit relationship and Willis was forced to choose between staying on the Trump case or Wade resigning as Judge McAfee made it clear both couldn't be on the case.
When Willis brought this indictment against Trump, the goal was to secure a conviction before the 2024 presidential election. However, thanks to her absolute bungling of this already long-shot case, this case won't be concluded until long after the election.
The Georgia Appeals Court will begin hearing arguments to remove Willis in December and must make a ruling by March 2025. This means that Trump will not face a trial until after the election and should he win the election, the case could be outright dismissed.
This indictment against Trump has revealed the power of leftist district attorneys to create dangerous political prosecutions. Willis assembled a grand jury of people who likely hated Trump, put together a legally dubious case that appealed to the jury's uninformed grievances, and got the jury's decision which allowed her to prosecute Trump.
This same method could be duplicated by Republican district attorneys against Democrats. The downside is these cases won't make it past an impartial judge who rules on the law like Judge McAfee has so far.
The New York Supreme Court ruled former President Donald Trump must remain under a gag order until Judge Juan Merchan sees fit to remove it, preventing Trump from speaking about some aspects of his felony conviction for falsifying business records even though there's an election in less than 60 days.
Trump was successful in delaying the sentencing on his 34 felony counts until after the election, but doing so may have prolonged the gag order he is currently under even as he looks to run a vigorous campaign in the runup to Election Day.
He was hoping the court would give him relief, but it did not.
“No substantial constitutional question is directly involved,” the court ruled.
Really? What about free and fair elections? How are elections supposed to be fair if one side is allowed to say whatever they want and the other side isn't?
But no, the big bad Orange Man is too dangerous and must be silenced, this thoroughly partisan court has ruled.
Whatever happens, Democrats feel they must prevent the "Threat to Democracy" (Trump) from getting back in office, even if they have to cheat and lie to do it.
Trump is not allowed to say anything about prosecutors in the case or their families because a tiny number of his supporters are insane and made death threats against them (or Democrats did so that Trump supporters would look bad).
Juan Merchan and DA Alvin Bragg are still fair game.
It seems reasonable, but constraining a major party candidate so close to an election could have very serious impacts on said election--and Democrats like those on the New York Supreme Court seem to be banking on that very eventuality.
The entire case was designed to bring Trump down, and when that didn't work, the gag order was the next step.
Maybe the U.S. Supreme Court can right this egregious wrong before the impact can be felt.
With early voting starting any day, though, it seems more and more unlikely.
Democrats managed to deny Trump a second term in 2020 by using media bias and censorship to his advantage. Will they do any less in 2024?
A family's right to speak about their daughter's horrific death was recently preserved after her very preventable death put them in an impossible situation.
A Texas judge blocked an attempt to keep the story of Jocelyn Nungaray’s killing out of the media spotlight as the two Venezuelan migrants accused of murdering her pushed for a gag order on officials and her family, as The Houston Chronicle reported.
Franklin Jose Peña Ramos, age 26, and Johan Jose Rangel Martinez, age 21, who both entered the country illegally at the southern border, have been charged with capital murder. This death and others have been seen as a direct result of the current administration's open border policy.
The charges stem from the fact that they allegedly lured Jocelyn, a 12-year-old girl, under a bridge in June and assaulted her for two hours before strangling her to death and dumping her bound and stripped body through a bayou in Houston.
In the midst of a series of high-profile crimes purportedly associated with illegal migrants, Jocelyn's story rapidly garnered national attention.
Consequently, Peña Ramos' attorney requested a protective order to prevent Houston officials from making "extrajudicial statements" regarding the case, as reported by Fox News, which obtained a copy of the filing.
However, Harris County Judge Josh Hill declined to issue the silence order during a hearing on Wednesday.
“All that we want is a fair trial for our client, we don’t want this process to be politicized, we want a fair jury and we can’t get that with people discussing the case when they don’t have any facts or evidence about it,” Mario Madrid, Martinez Rangel’s attorney, said at the courthouse Wednesday.
According to Fox News, Peña Ramos' legal team made a request for a gag order, in which they accused Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg of making "numerous statements about the case that went beyond the statements of the prosecutor during the probable cause hearing."
They referred to her previous statements, which included statements such as "[M]ake no mistake, this is a horrific crime" and "the immigration system is broken."
In spite of the fact that the case has been the focus of attention from the national media, her family has been vocal in their condemnation of the two individuals who are suspected of killing migrants.
Last month, former President Donald Trump and Jocelyn's family visited the southern border in Arizona.
Alexis, Jocelyn's mother, also testified at a House Judiciary Committee hearing where she denounced the migrant "monsters" who allegedly murdered her daughter.
“Because of the Biden-Harris administration open border policies, catch and release, they were enrolled in the Alternatives to Detention program,” Nungaray said of her daughter’s alleged killers. “This meant that they were released into the United States.”
Republican Senator Ted Cruz was also motivated by Jocelyn's death to introduce legislation that would restrict the release of illegal immigrants from federal detention.
Tragedy struck one of the world's most famous chefs, as one of his proteges came to an untimely and disturbing end at a recent event.
News broke earlier this week that the young chef's attacker has been taken in by police and given a murder charge, as the the New York Post reported.
The accused has made an appearance in court on charges of murdering the prominent chef. The chef was allegedly punched numerous times in the head near Notting Hill Carnival, which led to his ultimate death.
In the case that was brought before the Old Bailey on Monday, Omar Wilson, who is 31 years old, is accused of assaulting Mussie Imnetu outside of the Dr. Power restaurant in Queensway on August 26.
The Event
At approximately 11:22 local time, the 41-year-old man was discovered unconscious with a head injury. He received rapid medical assistance at the scene before being sent to the hospital, where he passed away on August 30 and was pronounced dead.
Following Imnetu's passing, the accusation against Wilson was modified from one of causing serious bodily harm to one of murder, according to the court's hearing.
The prosecutor, Julian Winship, provided an overview of the case's facts, including the allegation that Wilson "headbutted" Imnetu after the two individuals had interacted "in the area" of the carnival.
According to Winship's testimony before the court, Wilson allegedly "punched the deceased five times to his head" and continued "punching him to the head" after he fell to the ground.
The only thing that Wilson, who lives on Napier Road in Leytonstone, said throughout the brief hearing was to verify his name and date of birth.
A plea and trial preparation hearing was scheduled to take place at the same court on November 25. He was remanded into custody prior to the hearing.
Furthermore, a tentative trial date was established for the 3rd of February in the following year, with an estimated duration of two weeks.
The Metropolitan Police Department stated that Imnetu had been traveling to the United Kingdom for business purposes from Dubai, where he resided and worked as a chef.
A little after one o'clock on the 26th of August, he left The Arts Club, a private club in Mayfair that was only open to members, on his own. He was wearing a blue T-shirt and black pants.
After that time, it is stated that Imnetu purchased a white baseball cap before arriving at the Dr. Power restaurant by himself at approximately 11:30. The restaurant was crowded with people who were attending the carnival.
On the website of the Arts Club Dubai, it is stated that Imnetu had previously worked for notable chefs such as Alain Ducasse, Marcus Wareing, and Gordon Ramsay.
The Michigan Supreme Court on Monday reversed a lower court ruling requiring the state election board to remove Robert F. Kennedy's name from the ballot, meaning that voters will see his name as an option when they vote absentee or in person between September 21 and November 5.
The Democrat-majority court ruled 3-2 against Kennedy's request on the grounds that no specific law requires a name to be removed.
The proceeding only became necessary after Kennedy sued Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson (D) when she refused his request to be removed from the ballot. Kennedy suspended his campaign and endorsed former President Donald Trump, and he
Benson and the Supreme Court Democrats, of course, acted consistent with their partisan interests, whether or not it's what they really believe the law intends.
The Republican justices wrote a strong dissent to the majority ruling, however.
“The ballots printed as a result of the Court’s decision will have the potential to confuse the voters, distort their choices, and pervert the true popular will and affect the outcome of the election,” they wrote. “In short, the Court’s ruling will do nothing to rebuild the public’s trust in the fairness and accuracy of our elections.”
As Kennedy had argued, voters shouldn't be given a chance to vote for someone who isn't willing to serve, if he wins.
But Democrats believe that Kennedy's name being on the ballot will benefit their candidate and hurt Trump, so they want to keep his name on the ballot anyway.
Michigan is a swing state, which means the vote count could be very, very close. If even a small number of voters mark their ballots for Kennedy instead of Trump or Harris, it could change the outcome of a close election.
The state is now on a rushed schedule to print and mail absentee ballots to overseas military by the September 21 deadline.
Michigan is not the only state dealing with a decision about whether to remove Kenned's name from ballots.
The North Carolina Supreme Court ruled the opposite way from Michigan on Monday, ordering Kennedy's name removed from the ballot there.
Kennedy has focused his efforts on swing states where he can have the most effect in removing his name.
The battle is still going on in Wisconsin, where Kennedy has asked an appeals court to rule in his favor after the lower court ruled to keep his name on the ballot.
A new House GOP Foreign Affairs Committee report blamed President Joe Biden for the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal, including the deaths of 13 service members that occurred during the operation.
Panel Chair Michael McCaul (R-TX) said on Face the Nation about the withdrawal, "It could have been prevented if the State Department did its job by law and executed the plan of evacuation. They left these 13 service men and women hanging out to dry."
It has been a frequent criticism of the pullout by Republicans, and now it has been codified less than 60 days before the election.
Democrats, of course, disagreed with the finding.
Former President Donald Trump has directly blamed Democrat presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris for being involved in the disastrous pullout.
"Caused by Kamala Harris, Joe Biden, the humiliation in Afghanistan set off the collapse of American credibility and respect all around the world," he said.
Harris has said she was the last person in the room when decisions about Afghanistan were being made, but Democrats are trying to ignore this statement and claim she wasn't involved.
Some military officials have blamed Trump for the disaster, saying he "set up" the takeover of the country by the Taliban by giving too much ground during negotiations with them while he was in office.
Blaming Trump, however, doesn't exactly ring true.
After all, Biden had every ability to delay the pullout until they could get the Taliban out of power or at least get Americans out of the country instead of leaving thousands of them there to deal with the fallout alone.
Instead, Biden decided to force the pullout to meet an artificial deadline, the 20th anniversary of the September 11 attacks.
Chaos ensued, and Biden's poll numbers began to fall when 13 service members were killed in a suicide bombing at the tiny Kabul airport where U.S. and Afghan civilians and military personnel were being evacuated.
House Republicans are wielding what little power they have to influence voters with the report--a David against the Goliath mainstream media operation that has tried valiantly to transform an unpopular Harris into a viable presidential candidate.
The latest New York Times/Siena College poll shows that Harris's short-lived bump is all but gone, with Trump a point ahead in the general election and several swing states.
The Michigan Court of Appeals issued a ruling on Friday ordering the removal of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. from Michigan's ballot after he dropped out of the race and endorsed former President Donald Trump.
After RFK Jr. dropped out of the race, Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, attempted to keep him on November's ballot. The motive was clear as Democrats hoped that leaving him on the ballot would divert votes from Trump.
Benson's attempt to keep Kennedy on the ballot was an obvious ploy to manipulate voters and she nearly got away with it thanks to a lower court judge who endorsed the decision to keep Kennedy on the ballot.
The Michigan Court of Appeals thankfully wasted little time in smacking down this obviously political move that was indefensibly partisan.
However, the controversy isn't over yet as Benson and Michigan Democrats have sent an emergency appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court.
Democrats in multiple states fought for months to keep RFK Jr. off the ballot and then as soon as he endorsed Trump, swing-state Democrats are now fighting to keep him on the ballot in the hopes of helping Vice President Kamala Harris.
The Michigan Court of Appeals wrote in their decision that Benson "had no basis to deny [Kennedy's] request to withdraw his name from the ballot."
Benson had cited a Michigan state law on withdrawal requests but the appeals court found that those rules only applied to candidates running for state office, not presidential candidates.
Its worth noting that the judge that upheld Benson's claims was appointed by Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer. That judge, Christopher Yates, wrote "Elections are not just games, and the Secretary of State is not obligated to honor the whims of candidates for public office."
Bizarrely, it is Benson who is playing games by denying a candidate the right to withdraw from a presidential race. There is no reason to keep a candidate on a ballot who has no intention of accepting the office.
To add to evidence of Benson playing politics, Kennedy asked for his name to be withdrawn on August 23rd after dropping out. That request was left in limbo until he filed a lawsuit against Benson on August 30th.
Benson and Michigan Democrats understand the stakes in Michigan and are manipulating the rules in every way possible to achieve victory for Kamala Harris in November.
Trump and Harris are neck-and-neck in Michigan and the sluggish economy affecting the auto industry gives Trump an apparent advantage over Harris. However, Michigan is as purple as it gets and Benson's actions demonstrate that Democrats are using whatever dirty trick they can to win.
The Trump campaign and the GOP need to be watching Michigan closely as Governor Whitmer's administration cannot be trusted to be nonpartisan in administering the election there.
Judge Juan Merchan ruled on Friday to delay the sentencing of former President Donald Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business records until November 26, three weeks after the election in which Trump could become president.
Trump's legal team had asked for the sentencing to be delayed until after the election so that it wouldn't prejudice voters. The sentencing was originally scheduled for September 18.
"The public's confidence in the integrity of our judicial system demands a sentencing hearing that is entirely focused on the verdict of the jury and the weighing of aggravating and mitigating factors free from distraction or distortion," Merchan said in a letter Friday.
"Unfortunately, we are now at a place in time that is fraught with complexities rendering the requirements of a sentencing hearing, should one be necessary, difficult to execute. Thus, in accordance with certain of the grounds submitted by Defendant and the reasons for adjournment provided by the People coupled with the unique time frame this matter currently finds itself in, the decision on the [motion] and the imposition of sentence will be adjourned to avoid any appearance - however unwarranted - that the proceeding has been affected by or seeks to affect the approaching Presidential election in which the Defendant is a candidate," Merchan said.
The ruling prompted a swift response from Trump spokesman Steven Cheung, who told Fox Digital: "There should be no sentencing in the Manhattan DA’s Election Interference Witch Hunt. As mandated by the United States Supreme Court, this case, along with all of the other Harris-Biden Hoaxes, should be dismissed."
A motion to set aside the verdict is still under consideration, with a decision expected November 12. Trump is also appealing the verdict.
Trump attorney Todd Blanche pointed out that the trial included testimony about official acts by Trump, which the immunity ruling by the Supreme Court outlawed.
Former Trump Communications Director Hope Hicks and others were forced against their will to testify against Trump, and his immunity should at least force a do-over, if anything is left to prosecute.
But prosecutors are trying to force the case forward despite the clear grounds for mistrial.
The Manhattan District Attorney's office said, "A jury of 12 New Yorkers swiftly and unanimously convicted Donald Trump of 34 felony counts. The Manhattan D.A.’s Office stands ready for sentencing on the new date set by the court."
The location of the court is one of the most hostile to Trump in the whole country, so it may not even matter what evidence is presented if they retry the case there.
It may be a clear case where the jury is willing to indict a ham sandwich if its name is Donald J. Trump.
A different judge who denied Trump's request to move the trial to federal court said the alleged hush money payments were not official acts, and neither were Trump's so-called reimbursements to then-lawyer Michael Cohen.
Trump could get up to 4 years in jail for the conviction, but he could also get probation or community service instead of jail time.
On Wednesday, Republicans in the United States House of moved to subpoena Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Walz of Minnesota.
The shocking move came in an effort to gather details regarding his state's reaction to a huge fraud scam perpetrated by a nonprofit running a pandemic relief program, HuffPost said in their report.
A group based in Minnesota known as Feeding Our Future has been hit with hundreds of charges by federal prosecutors for the alleged theft of $250 million in food aid meant for children.
“You are well aware of the multi-million-dollar fraud that has occurred under your tenure as Governor,” House Education and Workforce Committee chair Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) said in a Wednesday letter accompanying the subpoena to Walz.
"The extent of your responsibilities and actions addressing the massive fraud that resulted in the abuse of taxpayer dollars intended for hungry children" is what Foxx said would be found in the subpoena, which wants any emails between Walz and the Minnesota agencies distributing the aid.
In November 2023 and again in June of the same year, Foxx asked the Minnesota Department of Education for details regarding the fraud plot. Walz became an even more juicy target for Republicans in August when she became Kamala Harris' running mate.
“This was an appalling abuse of a federal COVID-era program,” a spokeswoman for Walz said in an email on Wednesday.
“The state department of education worked diligently to stop the fraud and we’re grateful to the FBI for working with the department of education to arrest and charge the individuals involved.”
This comes on the heels of Vice President Kamala Harris facing the possibility that she still might be called to account for her actions, or rather inaction, as "Border Czar."
Though she is currently the candidate for one of the major political parties, Harris is facing increased scrutiny for how she addressed the flood of illegal immigrants coming over the southern border.
A subpoena was sent by the House Judiciary Committee to gather information regarding the actions taken Harris as "border czar" in response to concerns regarding migrant children crossing the border alone.
In response to claims that the Biden administration has lost track of thousands of children who crossed the border without their parents or legal guardians, Chairman Jim Jordan, a Republican from Ohio, subpoenaed Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra on Wednesday.
"According to new Committee estimates, ‘Border Czar’ Kamala Harris and HHS have LOST contact with 145,000+ unaccompanied alien children after placing them with sponsors, including ILLEGAL ALIENS," the committee posted on X.
"We’re subpoenaing more information from ‘Border Czar’ Harris and HHS about these UACs."
#SUBPOENAED: According to new Committee estimates, “Border Czar” Kamala Harris and HHS have LOST contact with 145,000+ unaccompanied alien children after placing them with sponsors, including ILLEGAL ALIENS.
We’re subpoenaing more information from “Border Czar” Harris and HHS… pic.twitter.com/ivaoEVjfm0
— House Judiciary GOP 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryGOP) September 4, 2024
This comes after years of inaction by Harris, who claims to have the border in hand, despite millions of illegal aliens flooding over the border, and even being lost by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Health and Human Services.