Archive for the ‘Donald Trump’ Category

Where is Donald Trump facing 14th Amendment challenges? – Yahoo News

Lawsuits challenging Donald Trumps eligibility to appear on the 2024 presidential primary ballots have sprung up in several states.

Individuals and left-wing organisations have claimed that Mr Trump violated Section Three of the 14th Amendment known as the insurrection clause citing his involvement in the January 6 attack on the US Capitol.

Section Three of the amendment prohibits those who take part in insurrections or aid enemies of the US government from taking office.

To date, such challenges have been brought in both federal district and state courts across at least 16 states.

So far only one state, Colorado, has removed Mr Trump from the ballot under the 14th Amendment. The states Supreme Court ruled on 19 December that the former president is ineligible to appear on the state ballot and cannot be considered an option for the White House.

While Mr Trump says he plans to appeal the Colorado decision, likely taking the case up to the US Supreme Court, he is also preparing for challenges, appeals and decisions in other states.

Heres a look at the other challenges to Mr Trumps eligibility for the 2024 race:

After a lawsuit was filed to remove Mr Trump from the race in Michigan, a state court judge ruled in November that Mr Trump could appear on the ballot.

The judge said that neither courts nor the Michigan Secretary of State have the authority to determine when someone is eligible to run for office.

The judge claimed Section Three of the 14th Amendment was a political question which is non-justiciable.

Free Speech For the People, a liberal group, appealed the decision but the states appeals court upheld the lower courts decision.

The Minnesota Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit in the state seeking to remove Mr Trump from the ballot in November.

After hearing oral arguments in the case, the justices said that neither election officials nor the court had the authority to stop the Republican Party from making Mr Trump the partys official nominee.

However, plaintiffs could re-challenge Mr Trumps ability to appear on the general election ballot.

Oregon Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade has said she would keep Mr Trumps name on the primary ballot, citing her lack of authority to determine the qualifications of candidates.

But at the beginning of December, Oregon voters and the organisation Free Speech for People filed a petition to the states Supreme Court challenging Mr Trumps eligibility under the 14th Amendment.

A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit brought by John Anthony Castro, an individual running as a 2024 Republican presidential candidate, claiming that Mr Castro did not have the standing to challenge Mr Trumps eligibility.

Mr Castro, who has little campaign presence or financial contributions, claimed he was suffering competitive injury against Mr Trump who should be disqualified under the 14th Amendment.

But a federal judge said Mr Castro was not legitimately competing with Mr Trump.

Other lawsuits brought forth by Mr Castro in New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Florida, California, Montana, Idaho, Kansas, Alaska, Oklahoma, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Utah and North Carolina were also dismissed.

Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows is expected to decide Mr Trumps primary ballot eligibility next week.

Ms Bellows held a hearing last week to further evaluate three separate complaints, brought by former Maine politicians and a lawyer, regarding Mr Trumps eligibility.

A resident of New Jersey filed a complaint to a state superior court claiming Mr Trump is ineligible under the 14th Amendment.

The attorney general of the state asked the court to dismiss the case citing its lack of ripeness and jurisdiction.

A Wyoming resident filed a lawsuit in a state district court in November seeking to remove Mr Trump as well as Senator Cynthia Lummis from appearing on the 2024 primary ballot.

Two residents of Virginia have filed federal lawsuits requesting Mr Trump be removed from the states primary ballot.

Mr Trump and the Republican Party of Virginia have made a motion to dismiss the case.

A New York Republican and attorney have filed a lawsuit in district court asking that neither Mr Trump, nor any of his 18 co-defendants in the Georgia election interference case, be permitted to participate or hold office in New York.

Read the original here:
Where is Donald Trump facing 14th Amendment challenges? - Yahoo News

December 25th, 2023
Comments off

Something Stinks: Why #TrumpSmells Is Trending On X – Yahoo Entertainment

Former President Donald Trump is currently trending on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, with the hashtag #TrumpSmells, along with the also trending, #TrumpStinks.

It seems as though the 77-year-old has some bad hygiene as Adam Kinzinger, a former Republican representative, allegedly told the public to "wear a mask" around the former President due to his distinct smell -- which he says is due to bad body odor.

Im genuinely surprised how people close to Trump havent talked about the odor, Kinzinger wrote on X earlier this week. Its truly something to behold. Wear a mask if you can."

Days after Kinzinger's post went viral, the hashtag #TrumpSmells began trending and is now the number one topic on the social media platform, as people cannot stop talking about Trump's B.O. (#TrumpStinks is also trending.)

One user shared a series of photos showing people near Donald Trump who are seemingly in discomfort due to a nasty smell.

And one user shared the same photo of Mike Pence, seen with former President Donald Trump, writing, "Pence knows better than most."

Plus, a podcast with comedian Kathy Griffin that aired earlier this year is now being re-shared for the comments she made about Trump regarding his distinct smell.

She explained that the former president smelled like body odor with kind of like scented makeup products.

As one user wrote, "I can't believe we didn't see it before. Everyone tried to warn us that #TrumpSmells," as they shared a video of the Japanese Prime Minister shaking hands with Donald Trump.

While one user accused the President of sitting like he is "on the toilet."

"Given what weve been hearing about #trumpFunk latelymaybe, just maybe, Donald Trump always sits like hes on a toilet is because hes always literally s---ing in his pants. #trumpSmells," they wrote along with a series of photos.

Another had some fun with the trending hashtag, using a cartoon of Donald Trump in court, writing, "#TrumpSmells Odor in the Court. Odor in the Court."

The former President is currently on trial in a$250 million civil lawsuit as he was questioned for intentionally inflating his property and assets in other words, committing fraud.

He, along with his sons, are accused of using "numerous acts of fraud and misrepresentation" to inflate Trump's net worth in order to get more favorable loan terms."

Plus, just days ago, the majority ruling came out banning Trumps name to be on Colorados ballot. A majority of the court holds that President Trump is disqualified from holding the office of President under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the majority ruling read.

It continued, Because he is disqualified, it would be a wrongful act under the Election Code for the Colorado Secretary of State to list him as a candidate on the presidential primary ballot.

Others are claiming that the reason #TrumpSmells is trending is because "he doesn't change his adult diaper."

"Apparently #TrumpSmells because he rarely changes his adult diapers! F---ing gross!!!" one user wrote.

Another said, "#TrumpSmells like pig s---."

A spokesperson for former President Donald Trump commented on the recent claims from Adam Kinzinger, telling The Independent that Adam Kinzinger farted on live TV and is an unemployed fraud. He has disgraced his country and disrespects everyone around him because he is a sad individual who is mad about how his miserable life has turned out.

Originally posted here:
Something Stinks: Why #TrumpSmells Is Trending On X - Yahoo Entertainment

December 25th, 2023
Comments off

GOP senators who voted to acquit Trump insist they dont regret it – The Hill

Republican senators who voted to acquit former President Trump during his second trial after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol largely say they don’t regret their votes years later, as Trump looks like he’ll be the party’s standard-bearer again in 2024.

One Republican senator who frequently criticizes Trump’s conduct but nevertheless voted to acquit Trump of inciting insurrection said they would have voted the same way if given a second chance after knowing the outcome.  

“The way I look at it is the standard is high because you’re undermining the will of the American people,” the senator said of Trump’s post-Jan. 6 impeachment trial. “If you can’t meet that threshold, it’s inappropriate to convict for the purposes for keeping out of office.” 

A second Republican senator often critical of Trump who voted to acquit and requested anonymity to look back in history to reconsider that choice said it was apparent at the time that whatever Republican voted to convict Trump would face a political backlash.  

The senator said that even if Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) at the time had wanted to rid his party of Trump, it could have cost him his leadership position if he voted to convict.  

“I don’t think so,” the senator said when asked whether McConnell would have voted differently had he known that Trump would come back to dominate the 2024 GOP presidential primary.  

“I think he would have made the calculated decision that he would not have been able to be leader of the caucus after that. He would have been deciding to be a senior committeeman for the next six years,” the senator speculated of his long-time colleague from Kentucky. 

Former Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said in a recent interview that he believes many Republicans on Capitol Hill would have voted differently on impeachment and barring Trump from future office if they had known he would resurrect himself politically to win a third nomination for president.  

“I think there are a lot of people in Congress, good friends of mine, who would take [their] vote back if they could because I think a lot of these members of Congress — like on the second impeachment — they thought Trump was dead. They thought after Jan. 6 he wasn’t going to have a comeback, he was dead,” he said.  

But GOP senators who spoke with The Hill didn’t lend credence to Ryan’s arguments, either on or off the record.

GOP senators who did vote to impeach Trump say they don’t regret their decision.

“I have no regrets,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), who was one of seven Republican senators who voted to convict Trump on the charge of inciting insurrection in 2021.  

Her thoughts align with Ryan’s in that Murkowski suspects some of her GOP colleagues do have regrets about their vote. She marveled at Trump’s comeback, noting that many Republicans thought Trump was finished politically after the awful spectacle of Jan. 6, 2021. 

“I think they’re looking at this and [think,] ‘It’s like a zombie coming back from the dead.’ He was political roadkill. Two impeachments and now these indictments — four indictments — and you’re telling me he’s the heir apparent?” 

But Murkowski said none of her colleagues who voted to acquit Trump is willing to admit making a mistake, even in private.  

“Nobody’s saying it out loud. But, again, I certainly have no regrets,” she said, noting that Ryan, the former Speaker, is “a smart guy” and “he was around a lot of people who kind of walked the plank for Donald Trump.”  

“The party would be in a lot better shape if he were not the prospective nominee and right now that’s the way it looks. Maybe Nikki Haley can do a miracle,” Murkowski said, referring to the former South Carolina governor who is narrowing Trump’s lead in New Hampshire ahead of its primary contest.

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who voted to convict and remove Trump from office after his first and second impeachment trials, chuckled about Ryan’s claim that many Republicans wish they had a do-over on their impeachment vote. 

“I love Paul, he has a source of information I don’t. I’m not going to confirm or deny. I don’t have any question about my vote. No one has come to me and said, ‘I wish I had a different vote,’” he said.  

Instead, Romney said colleagues have told him “they respect someone who votes their conscience.” 

“I wish everybody would have voted [as] I did on almost everything, including impeachment,” he said. “There’s no question the Republican Party would be better off without Donald Trump. We’re a populist party now which is fueled by resentment and anger, and that’s a dead-end street.” 

McConnell told colleagues a week after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol that he was open to convicting Trump.  

“I have not made a final decision on how I will vote and I intend to listen to the legal arguments when they are presented to the Senate after the House voted 232-197 to impeach Trump.  

In the end, he voted to acquit, though he gave a scathing floor address about Trump, and their relationship has never been friendly since Trump left the White House.

McConnell in the Feb. 13 address said there was “no question” that Trump was “practically and morally responsible” for the attack on the Capitol.  

The first GOP senator who spoke to The Hill about the vote to acquit acknowledged harboring serious concerns about Trump’s influence on the Republican Party but insisted it would have been inappropriate to take the question of Trump’s return to power out of voters’ hands.  

“A problem with today’s world is people want the result that they want and the process is irrelevant and that’s a problem because the process is what defends our freedoms and liberties,” the senator said.  

But the lawmaker acknowledged there was widespread discussion among GOP senators at the time of Trump’s second impeachment trial about the political benefit of banning Trump from federal office forever.  

“That pitch was made at the time of the vote: ‘We got to keep this guy from serving again,’” the senator recalled. “Are there people who would be wishing this would be different? Sure.”  

Flash forward to December 2023, and there are many Senate Republicans, including members of the leadership, who hold concerns about Trump’s viability as a general election candidate and his impact on Senate races, given his track record of alienating moderate Republican and college-educated women voters. 

With Trump crushing the rest of the Republican presidential primary field, Republican senators acknowledge he is likely to win the nomination but many of them think the party would have a better chance of defeating President Biden with another nominee, such as Haley, who polls better than Trump in a matchup against Biden. 

Trump created new political headaches for GOP leaders in Washington this month when he declared that immigrants are “poisoning the blood of our country” and approvingly quoted Russian President Vladimir Putin’s claim that the American political system is rotten. 

McConnell and Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) slapped down Trump’s comments about immigrants and were silent after the Colorado Supreme Court barred him from the 2024 ballot for supporting insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021.  

McConnell said after the 2022 midterm election that the GOP brand turned off centrists and moderate Republicans “who looked at us and concluded: Too much chaos, too much negativity.”

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a member of the Senate GOP leadership team, said in May that “Trump’s time has passed him by” and Republicans need “a candidate who can actually win.”  

The two other Republican senators still in Congress who voted to convict Trump and bar him from ever running again for president — Sens. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) — said they stand by their votes. 

Asked if the party would be better without Trump, Cassidy said: “What basically you’re asking me is did I think he should be impeached and I did. That speaks for itself.” 

Collins said she heard about Ryan’s comments but didn’t read what he said exactly. 

“I made my decision based on the evidence presented at the trial and that was the only basis for it. I’ve not heard anyone second guess his or her decision on this,” she said. “I have a lot of respect for Paul Ryan. In 2016, I wrote him in for president.”  

Read the original:
GOP senators who voted to acquit Trump insist they dont regret it - The Hill

December 25th, 2023
Comments off

Opinion | ‘Donald Trump Is No Moderate’ – The New York Times

To the Editor:

Re The Secret of Trumps Appeal Isnt Authoritarianism, by Matthew Schmitz (Opinion guest essay, nytimes.com, Dec. 18):

According to Mr. Schmitz, the key to understanding Donald Trumps electoral appeal is not his authoritarianism but his moderation. There may have been some truth to this eight years ago, when Mr. Trumps policy views were often poorly defined. However, it is clearly no longer true in 2023.

On a wide range of issues, including immigration, climate change, health care and gun control, Mr. Trump has endorsed policies supported by the right wing of the Republican Party. And when it comes to abortion, whatever his recent public statements, while he was in office, he consistently appointed anti-abortion judges committed to overturning Roe v. Wade.

As a result, Mr. Trump now appeals most strongly to the far right wing of the Republican Party. Donald Trump is no moderate.

Alan Abramowitz Atlanta The writer is professor emeritus of political science at Emory University.

To the Editor:

Matthew Schmitzs longwinded guest essay still misses the point: The bottom line of Donald Trumps appeal to his supporters is the permission to indulge their darkest impulses and harshest judgments of the other everyone in the world outside of MAGA Nation.

Rich Layton Portland, Ore.

To the Editor:

Matthew Schmitz could not be more wrong. There is no universe in which Donald Trump is a moderate. Moderates do not gut the system that they have sworn to uphold. Moderates do not consider calling in the military against American citizens, as Mr. Trump did during the Black Lives Matter demonstrations. Moderates do not start riots when they lose elections.

Trump voters are either fellow grifters or people who do not understand how government works and are taken in by his shtick: the incurious and the easily fooled. Its as simple and as dangerous as that. We have work to do to make sure he will not regain office.

Christine Potter Valley Cottage, N.Y.

To the Editor:

I was shocked to read a piece that wasnt the usual drone of lets count all the ways that Donald Trump is a disaster for the country. Im so grateful that you are actually inviting a broader variety of opinions. It is just as valuable to understand why Mr. Trump is loved as why he is hated.

I read the article twice, and it was compelling at times. Im still not a fan of Mr. Trump, but am grateful that finally your paper is respecting its readership to handle different perspectives.

T. Palser Calgary, Alberta

To the Editor:

Matthew Schmitz seems to think that he needs to explain to us that people are willing to overlook the clearly authoritarian tendencies of a candidate if they like some of his policies. Thanks, Mr. Schmitz, but were already well aware of this. Italians liked Mussolini because he made the trains run on time.

This is exactly our point. This is how dictatorships happen.

Robert Stillman Cohen New York

To the Editor:

When you have to argue that the secret to someones appeal isnt authoritarianism, the secret to their appeal is authoritarianism.

David D. Turner Clifton, N.J.

To the Editor:

The Biden administration is beginning to understand that while most Jewish Americans believe in Israels right to exist, this does not mean that American Jews overwhelmingly support the Israeli governments relentless killing of innocent Palestinian civilians at this point, more than 10,000 of them children.

Increasingly, as the traumatized Israeli pursuit of Hamas costs more death and destruction, cracks are appearing in Jewish community support for the Biden administrations military and political backing of the current Israeli government. President Biden is well advised to pay close attention to these cracks.

As the article points out, nearly three-quarters of Jews historically vote Democratic. Unless Mr. Biden takes a harder line against the continued killings and steps up more boldly for a cease-fire, Democrats could lose Jewish votes.

John Creger Berkeley, Calif.

To the Editor:

Re College Turmoil Reveals a New Politics of Power (news article, Dec. 15):

Having spent a lifetime working for and with nonprofits, I am disgusted by wealthy donors who expect money to buy a voice in university affairs. Donations are gifts, not transactions, and I have always objected to 1) listing names of donors, whether on buildings or in concert programs, and 2) tax deductions for charitable donations.

Yes, we will lose some ego-driven donors along the way, but we will eventually prevail by keeping it clean.

Michael Rooke-Ley San Francisco The writer is a former law professor.

To the Editor:

Re Soaring Rents Are Burdening Lower Incomes (front page, Dec. 12):

Congress should exempt the first $40,000 of income from the Social Security tax, which would immediately give lower-income families some relief.

The lost income to the government should not be seen as lost but as support to allow people to stay in their existing apartments.

This would also be the time to apply the Social Security tax to higher incomes that are currently exempt above $160,200. And to cap or reduce the excessive interest rate which currently averages 24 percent that many people pay on their credit card bills.

Read this article:
Opinion | 'Donald Trump Is No Moderate' - The New York Times

December 25th, 2023
Comments off

John Roberts, Donald Trump and the ghosts of Bush v. Gore – POLITICO

Two recent, intertwined moves have ensured it. The first is the request from special counsel Jack Smith, whos prosecuting former President Donald Trumps efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, that the court make an expedited ruling on Trumps claim that hes immune from being prosecuted for actions taken as president. If the court agrees with Smith, it would clear the way for Trump to stand trial on the election charges next year, potentially disrupting his bid to return to the White House.

The second development is the Colorado Supreme Courts 4-3 ruling this week that Trump is disqualified from the ballot in that Democratic-leaning swing state because of the 14th Amendments Civil War-era provision banning insurrectionists from holding office. The Colorado bombshell virtually guarantees that the nations highest court will have to resolve Trumps eligibility and in doing so, it will have to revisit and relitigate the trauma of Jan. 6, 2021.

The convergence of the two cases may prove to be the decisive chapter for the doubts about legitimacy that have haunted the court for nearly a quarter-century, even before Roberts joined. It was during Bush v. Gore in 2000 that the notion that the court could be driven not just by philosophical differences a constant in court history but by naked partisan calculations first took hold.

At the time, the circumstances seemed bizarre in an almost hallucinatory way: a presidential election so close that the coin flip landed on its side rather than heads or tails. Little did we all know that the events of the Trump years two presidential impeachments and a deadly riot at the Capitol might give memories of 2000 an aura of quaint Mayberry nostalgia.

But the underlying dynamics are strikingly similar. As in 2000, when the Supreme Court had to rule on procedural questions in Florida that held national consequences, the court now must rule on state actions in Colorado that shake the foundation of the presidential contest everywhere else.

Its a sign of the courts polarizing politics how quickly the received wisdom on what the justices will do has congealed. Most legal scholars believe the 6-3 conservative majority will not let the Colorado ruling stand, much less say that its logic should apply to the other 49 states and throw Trump off the ballot everywhere.

How the court reaches that likely result and whether it can do so along anything other than a partisan-line vote will be the newest test of Roberts desire to safeguard the institution. Its a quality that many including vocal detractors on the right saw on display when he split from his fellow conservatives in the politically explosive Obamacare case five months before the 2012 election and again in the seismic abortion case last year.

In the looming Colorado case, the high court has about a dozen different off-ramps, some of them highly technical, by which it could avoid the pandemonium of disqualifying a leading presidential candidate. Some of those off-ramps may even garner support from the courts three liberal justices they, too, will be sensitive to the optics here.

But however the court navigates the thicket its been thrust into, the Trump cases seem sure to strain Roberts effort to revive the courts standing with the public. The plain political implications of whatever the court decides will further debunk his old argument (from his 2005 confirmation hearing) that justices are like umpires calling balls and strikes not players on the field.

I would think this would be a nightmare for John Roberts, said Supreme Court historian Stephen Wermiel, a law professor at American University. The last thing I could imagine he would want is for the court to find itself pretty much deciding critical issues about the 2024 election.

One scenario, though, might appeal to Roberts, if he can manage to corral enough votes from the courts key coalitions: the hard-right flank, the more pragmatic-minded conservatives and the increasingly isolated liberals. As described by POLITICO legal editor James Romoser, it would have the court project its supposed independence by making two moves in swift succession: Strike down the Colorado decision and ensure that Trump can continue running for president, while also endorsing Smiths argument that Trump is not immune from prosecution and that a trial should take place before November 2024. The presumed logic: Let voters decide, with all the information they need about Trumps alleged criminal behavior before balloting begins.

At one level, they want to deliver a mixed bag, said David Garrow, another historian who closely follows the Supreme Court. So, Trump loses on immunity, but scores a narrow win on the 14th Amendment. If youre being calculating, reputationally calculating as were for the moment assuming Roberts very much is thats where you come down.

In other words: Faced with two Trump curveballs, the court could call one a ball and the other a strike. That may be the outcome that best preserves whatevers left of the courts institutional capital. Its also precisely the sort of middle-ground instinct that has left Roberts a lonely figure on an increasingly polarized court.

See the original post:
John Roberts, Donald Trump and the ghosts of Bush v. Gore - POLITICO

December 25th, 2023
Comments off
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »