Democratic lawmakers on Thursday weighed in on former President Trump’s indictment in connection with an investigation into his handling of classified documents, with many arguing that the news shows the former president and current 2024 candidate isn’t above the law.
“Trump’s apparent indictment on multiple charges arising from his retention of classified materials is another affirmation of the rule of law,” said Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who played a central role in Trump's first impeachment.
Trump, who is running for president in 2024, said on Thursday that his legal team had been told he was indicted and summoned to appear in federal court in Miami on Tuesday.
“For four years, he acted like he was above the law. But he should be treated like any other lawbreaker. And today, he has been,” Schiff said of Trump.
The California Democrat was also among the lawmakers who sat on the last congressional session’s House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, riots, which criminally referred Trump to the Justice Department.
“The former twice-impeached president is now twice-indicted,” said Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.).
“Twice impeached. Twice indicted. The only former president in history to face federal charges. This man is a national embarrassment,” wrote Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.)
Trump was also indicted by a grand jury in Manhattan earlier this year on criminal charges.
Democrats on Thursday took to Twitter to echo sentiments that the former president’s federal indictment proves the rule of law.
“No one is above the law,” wrote Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.).
“Never before has a former president been indicted for a federal crime," Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) tweeted. "By indicting Trump & holding him accountable for his actions, America’s justice system is once again showing its strength & reminding us all: No one is above the law in this country, not even former presidents."
Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said Trump will "have his day in court, in Miami and Manhattan and Atlanta too if it comes to it," celebrating the indictment from the Justice Department's special counsel.
He was referring to the latest federal indictment, the Manhattan indictment and a district attorney's probe in Georgia into 2020 election interference.
"But I am grateful to live in a nation where no man is above the law," he said.
Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) also called Trump "a con man who damaged our institutions, turned us against each other, and who will be finally held accountable by the country he tried to destroy."
Former President Trump is calling for the New York judge overseeing his hush money criminal case to recuse himself, arguing the judge cannot be impartial.
Trump’s lawyers noted in a new filing apparent political donations Judge Juan Merchan made to then-presidential candidate Joe Biden and liberal-leaning groups. They also referenced the judge’s participation in a previous case related to Trump and reports that Merchan’s daughter works at a progressive digital agency.
“This case before this Court is historic and it is important that the People of the State of New York and this nation have confidence that the jurist who presides over it is impartial,” Trump’s lawyers wrote. “Most respectfully, the foregoing facts compel the conclusion that Your Honor is not and thus should recuse.”
Trump faces 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection with reimbursements made to his then-fixer, Michael Cohen, for making a $130,000 hush payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election.
Trump has pleaded not guilty, while he also remains under multiple other criminal investigations.
A person named Juan Merchan who works for the New York court system donated $35 in July 2020 to political causes, according to Federal Election Commission records. The donations comprise a $15 donation to Biden’s presidential campaign, $10 to the Progressive Turnout Project and $10 to a group called “Stop Republicans.”
Trump’s lawyers demanded Merchan explain the contributions.
“The fact that Your Honor previously donated money to President Trump’s opponent in 2020 might suggest to the reasonable observer that the Court would rather another candidate be elected in 2024 over President Trump,” the attorneys wrote.
The Manhattan district attorney’s office declined to comment and indicated it will respond in court papers.
Trump’s legal team further took aim at media reports that Merchan’s daughter is the chief operating officer at a progressive digital agency, Authentic Strategies, which lists Biden’s campaign and other Democratic candidates as clients.
“Your Honor’s familial relationship with the President and COO of Authentic is particularly problematic given the role this very case may play in political campaigns and advertising in the 2024 presidential election,” Trump’s team wrote.
“It is likely that many of President Trump’s opponents, both political candidates and organizations, will attempt to use this case — and any rulings by the Court — to attack him,” they continued. “Indeed, virtually every client listed on Authentic’s website has been critical in the past of President Trump and fundraised on these criticisms.”
The Hill has reached out to Authentic Strategies for comment.
Trump’s filing further notes Merchan’s role overseeing the criminal prosecution of Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organization’s former chief financial officer. Weisselberg as part of a plea deal was sentenced to five months in jail for his participation in a tax-fraud scheme, and Trump’s lawyers are accusing Merchan of overstepping by attempting to induce Weisselberg to cooperate against Trump.
New York trial judges are not categorically barred from facilitating plea agreements, but they must abide by certain limits.
Susan Necheles, one of Trump’s attorneys who signed the recusal motion, represented the Trump Organization as the Manhattan district attorney’s office prosecuted the scheme. When the Trump Organization had its trial for tax fraud, Necheles squarely pinned the blame on Weisselberg.
“Your Honor’s prior conduct in attempting to induce cooperation against President Trump and his interests creates a perception that Your Honor is biased against President Trump and warrants recusal in this case,” Necheles and Todd Blanche, another Trump attorney, wrote in court filings on Friday.
“Surely, the Court would not have pushed Mr. Weisselberg to cooperate against President Trump and his interests unless it thought he was someone who was worthy of prosecution,” they continued. “That mindset reveals Your Honor as someone who has prejudged the defendant’s guilt and is biased against his interests.”
Trump's lawyers in recent weeks have separately attempted to move the former president's case to federal court, a move prosecutors are opposing. Merchan retains oversight of the case until the federal court rules on that attempt.
CNN anchor Erin Burnett and a former lawyer for Donald Trump spent time fantasizing about a scenario in which the ex-President is forced to pardon himself from a prison cell.
Ty Cobb, a hilariously-named former member of the Trump Administration legal team, has been very vociferous about his opinion that the Republican candidate is going to jail based on a Justice Department investigation into his possession of classified documents after leaving office.
Burnett pressed him on what the future might hold should that be the case, particularly if Trump wins the election.
“What happens, though, if this trial does not wrap up before the general election, Trump wins?” Burnett asked. “Does he just pardon himself and it all goes away?”
“Well, so those are all oddly–those are possibilities,” Cobb replied. “The sad thing is nobody knows. This is so unprecedented.”
Cobb proceeded to discuss the issue of Trump pardoning himself, something he believes is not permissible but admits there are other legal minds who disagree.
“The timing is, if there’s already been a verdict in the federal case… you would assume that that could be consequential during the election.”
BOOM.
Former Trump White House Lawyer Ty Cobb predicts Trump will go to jail over the classified documents case. pic.twitter.com/snWGSp2VDE
— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) May 22, 2023
CNN Discusses Possibility of Trump Pardoning Himself From Prison
Where the conversation veered to next is why it is so difficult to take CNN seriously when they try to portray themselves as less partisan under CEO Chris Licht.
Cobb discussed what might happen if the Trump trial wraps up, he is convicted and sentenced, and this all happens before the election.
“He doesn’t have the power to pardon himself until he’s actually inaugurated,” he said. “So, if there’s a verdict, say, before the election in November, sentencing could easily occur in advance of him taking office.”
At this point in the interview, you can see Burnett get eager about the prospect, mouth hanging slightly open, eyebrows raised, head shaking in disbelief.
“And he would have to report to jail,” Cobb added. “So he would be (pardoning) himself ostensibly under those circumstances from jail.”
Burnett found the scenario “absolutely incredible” but suggested, “It’s a reality we could be looking at.”
Erin Burnett and Trump White House Lawyer Game Out Scenario Where Trump Pardons Himself from Prison: ‘Absolutely Incredible’
Congressman Matt Gaetz, following the 2020 presidential election and before the transition to the Biden White House, advised Trump to pardon himself and key members of his administration prior to departing.
In retrospect, he probably should have listened to Gaetz’s advice.
Matt Gaetz: “President Trump should pardon Michael Flynn, he should pardon the Thanksgiving turkey, he should pardon everyone from himself to his administration officials, to Joe Exotic if he has to!” pic.twitter.com/mEEEqCl9rl
Trump insisted that a pardon would be unnecessary as he has “done nothing wrong.”
Self-pardons have been an issue of much debate in the Trump era.
Law scholar Jonathan Turley has argued that as President, he had the right to do so. Or will have the right should he be re-elected.
“There is no language specifying who may or may not be the subject of a pardon,” he wrote in a USA Today column. “The president is simply given the power to pardon any federal crime.”
“As a textual matter, there is nothing to prevent Trump from adding his own name to the list of pardoned individuals.”
As has been stated by numerous legal scholars, I have the absolute right to PARDON myself, but why would I do that when I have done nothing wrong? In the meantime, the never ending Witch Hunt, led by 13 very Angry and Conflicted Democrats (& others) continues into the mid-terms!
Interestingly, pardons even in such a scenario would only apply to federal law; they do not apply to civil, state, or local offenses.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg announced an indictment of the former President earlier this year.
Trump has been charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, low-level felonies in New York State but which carry a potential for a 4-year prison sentence each.
Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”
Republicans and Democrats battled during a tense hearing Thursday over three FBI agents who Republicans say were retaliated against for blowing the whistle on bias at the agency— and who Democrats argue the GOP is using to legitimize the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
GOP lawmakers accused the FBI of retaliating against “truth tellers” by revoking their security clearances because they espoused conservative views and took their concerns to Republicans on the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.
“Politics is driving the federal agencies,” said Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of both the Judiciary Committee and the subcommittee, alleging that the government targets citizens who are not politically correct.
“What’s just as frightening is if you’re one of the good employees who come forward to talk about the targeting, you become the target,” he added.
Democrats countered by arguing that the GOP, in the words of Rep. Linda Sánchez (D-Calif.), was using the hearing as “a vehicle to legitimize the events of Jan. 6 and the people who perpetrated it.”
They questioned the FBI agents’ credibility and whether they should be considered whistleblowers, sparred with Republicans over access to documents and materials, and accused the panel of being a tool for former President Trump.
“This select committee is a clearing house for testing conspiracy theories for Donald Trump to use in his 2024 presidential campaign,” said Del. Stacey Plaskett (V.I.), the panel’s ranking Democrat.
“You all have employment grievances. That doesn’t make you whistleblowers,” Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) said.
The hearing, which took place just days after special counsel John Durham released a report that offered stark criticism for the FBI’s opening of an investigation into Trump’s 2016 campaign ties to Russia, underscored GOP suspicions of the federal intelligence and law enforcement organizations.
Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-Wyo.) at one point referenced the piercing evil eye from J. R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" series to describe the FBI.
“The Eye of Sauron has turned inward, and it is operating with a white-hot intensity that seeks to destroy everything in its path,” she said.
The hearing accompanied the Thursday release of an interim staff report from the panel’s Republicans that detailed what it says are abuses by the FBI, as described by what Republicans say are dozens of whistleblowers.
Allegations both in the report and in the hearing range from the agents being directed to scribble down license plate numbers in a parking lot outside a school board meeting to being pressured to open cases on people who traveled to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021, but did not enter the Capitol.
Democrats had already preemptively countered the GOP’s “weaponization” investigation, writing in a 300-page report in March that some of the GOP witnesses were connected to committee Republicans through people with deep ties to former President Trump. Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) reiterated and established at the hearing that two of the witnesses had received donations from Kash Patel, a former top Department of Defense official who is a surrogate for Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign.
Jordan brushed off the financial connection between witnesses and Trump allies in a press conference Thursday.
“They’ve got a family. How are they supposed to pay their family?” he asked.
The FBI in a statement asserted that it does not retaliate against protected whistleblowers.
“The FBI’s mission is to uphold the Constitution and protect the American people. The FBI has not and will not retaliate against individuals who make protected whistleblower disclosures,” the agency said in a statement to The Hill in response to the subcommittee hearing.
Thursday’s hearing also came just one day after the FBI sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee that went into more detail about the reasons why the agency revoked the security clearances from three agents, including two of those who testified at the subcommittee hearing Thursday.
According to a copy of the FBI letter obtained by The Hill, agent Brett Gloss, who did not testify at the hearing and has not been charged with a crime, was in a restricted area of the U.S. Capitol grounds on Jan. 6, 2021, amounting to criminal trespass and “questionable judgment” that indicated he may not properly safeguard classified or sensitive information.
Agent Marcus Allen, one of the witnesses at Thursday’s hearing, had his security clearance revoked after the agency found he “espoused alternative theories to coworkers” about Jan. 6 “in apparent attempts to hinder investigative activity,” including sharing a theory that federal law enforcement had infiltrated the crowd.
“It appears I was retaliated against because I forwarded information to my superiors that questioned the official narrative of January 6th,” Allen said in the Thursday hearing. He also said the FBI’s assertion that his supervisor “admonished” him was inaccurate.
The FBI also found that one case related to Jan. 6 was closed after Allen said he did not find any relevant information about a subject — but that case was later reopened after another FBI employee found relevant information that was publicly available. That person assaulted a Capitol Police officer on Jan. 6, the agency said.
At one point in the hearing, Democrats stumbled in an attempt to push back on the witnesses’ credibility when Sánchez asked Allen to address a Twitter account with the name “Marcus Allen” that had retweeted a tweet asserting that former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) staged the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. Allen responded that it was not his Twitter account — and that he did not agree with the message, condemning the violence at the Capitol on that day.
The FBI said agent Stephen Friend had his security clearance revoked after he acknowledged that he “publicly released sensitive FBI information on his personal social media accounts without authorization,” participated in unapproved media interviews, and secretly recorded a meeting with FBI management.
Friend testified to the committee that after raising concerns to his superiors with how the FBI was handling investigations into Jan. 6 subjects, the FBI suspended him without pay.
Friend testified that he was assigned to attend a school board meeting and took down the information from attendees’ license plates in the parking lot. He also said that after he was suspended from the FBI, his investigations of child sexual exploitation material were handed off to local law enforcement rather than to another federal agent.
A third witness, Garrett O’Boyle, who had his security clearance suspended but not yet fully revoked, was suspended without pay after he raised concerns with his chain of command and then made disclosures to Congress. He had just made a move across the country for the job, and he choked up as he described the FBI holding his family’s belongings — including his children’s clothing — for six weeks before they could access them.
Jordan said that O’Boyle was the first whistleblower to tell the committee about the process the FBI was using to assess threats against school board members, which he said have resulted in zero prosecutions.
“When citizens in this country get to the point where they can call the most powerful law-enforcement agency in the world on their neighbor just because they disagree with them, that is chilling to the First Amendment rights of the people who are getting the FBI called on them,” O’Boyle said in the hearing.
House Republicans say the long-awaited report from special counsel John Durham bolsters their arguments that federal intelligence and law enforcement agencies have been “weaponized” against political enemies — a theme that has been a major defining belief of their new majority.
“The long-awaited Durham Report confirmed what the American people already know; that individuals at the highest levels of government attempted to overthrow democracy when they illegally weaponized the federal government against Donald J. Trump,” House Republican Conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) said in a statement.
The report found that federal authorities did not have sufficient information to open their “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation into the 2016 Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. Durham did not recommend any charges to the FBI in his report but said that the agency was “seriously deficient” in how it handled some aspects of the investigation, including relying on “raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence.”
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) quoted from the report in a press conference Tuesday, raising alarm about its assertion that “the FBI failed to uphold their mission of strict fidelity to the law” and that it identified an FBI agent who knowingly made misrepresentations to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
“Where’s the accountability for this? Who’s going to be held accountable? These are the questions we’re going to continue to ask,” Scalise said.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) invited Durham to speak to his panel’s select subcommittee on government weaponization — created at the request of the right flank ahead of the tumultuous election of House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) — at the end of the month.
Many House GOP members, including those serving on the Intelligence and Judiciary committees, said that they had not yet read the more than 300-page report released Monday, when many were focused on the debt ceiling negotiations.
Yet several Republicans said that the report essentially confirmed their own biases.
“We all already believed or knew what was in there,” said Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.). “It's like, ‘Yeah, see? We told you so.’”
McCarthy told The Hill that Republicans already knew about the things that were “so appalling.”
“They took the entire country through this, impeachment, everything else, when we knew the FBI never should have done this from the very beginning,” McCarthy said.
Democrats, for their part, criticized the report for not offering enough new information.
House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said in a statement that the report amounted to “a political rehashing of what the Justice Department Inspector General already made public in 2019.”
“Mr. Durham has, one last time, over promised and under delivered,” Nadler said before referencing special counsel Robert Mueller, who released a report in 2019 on his investigation of Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election.
“Nothing in this report changes the outcome of the Mueller investigation, which resulted in multiple convictions, found more than one hundred contacts between the 2016 Trump campaign and the Russian government, and substantial reason to believe that Donald Trump had committed obstruction of justice,” Nadler said.
The report from Durham is likely to affect how House Republicans legislate, and may also play a role in the GOP presidential primary.
“The report confirms that FBI personnel repeatedly disregarded critical protections established to protect the American people from unlawful surveillance,” House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner (R-Ohio) said in a statement. “Such actions should never have occurred, and it is essential that Congress codifies clear guardrails that prevent future FBI abuses and restores the public’s trust in our law enforcement institutions.”
The FBI is getting ahead of calls for change, releasing a five-page letter responding to Durham that details recent reforms.
“The conduct in 2016 and 2017 that Special Counsel Durham examined was the reason that current FBI leadership already implemented dozens of corrective actions, which have now been in place for some time,” the FBI said in a statement. “Had those reforms been in place in 2016, the missteps identified in the report could have been prevented. This report reinforces the importance of ensuring the FBI continues to do its work with the rigor, objectivity, and professionalism the American people deserve and rightly expect.”
One area likely to be affected by the politics of the Durham report is Congress’s reauthorization of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which allows for warrantless surveillance of foreigners outside the United States, even as they communicate with U.S. citizens within the U.S. — thus allowing intelligence agencies to pick up citizen communications without a warrant.
“I can assure you, 702 — that is not going to get rubber-stamped,” said Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), a member of the House Judiciary Committee. “We’ve got to have a serious reboot or elimination of what we're seeing through FISA 702.”
Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, also said that the Durham report will probably affect FISA reauthorization.
In a Twitter thread, Crenshaw said there “must be consequences” based on the findings of the report.
“This report demonstrates how unelected, subversive actors within the highest levels of our government sought to destroy a duly-elected president they hated. They weaponized a lie – knowing the media would breathlessly regurgitate that lie – in order to take Donald Trump out of the White House,” Crenshaw said.
For decades, former President Donald Trump has seemed to shake off allegations, investigations and even impeachments. Now his "Teflon Don" reputation is about to face a new test: a jury of average citizens in a lawsuit accusing him of rape.
Senate Republicans, including members of leadership and even Trump allies, say former President Trump should stay out of the 2024 Senate primaries, hoping to avoid a repeat of last year’s disappointing midterm elections.
They view Trump as becoming more of a political liability in next year’s Senate races as his legal problems mount.
The Manhattan district attorney charged the former president Tuesday with 34 felony counts related to payments to two women, and he could face additional charges from federal prosecutors and Georgia's Fulton County district attorney.
GOP lawmakers and strategists fear Trump will mire GOP candidates in debates over his pet issues such as election fraud and defunding the Department of Justice instead of issues that more voters care about, such as the economy, inflation and health care.
And they worry that Trump’s endorsements again will be more driven by how he perceives candidates’ loyalty to him and his agenda than on their electability in November.
Senate Republican Whip John Thune (S.D.), who has stood in for Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) while he recuperates from a concussion, said it would be better if Trump stays out of the way.
“Sure seems like that would be helpful based on our lack of success in 2022,” he said.
Even Trump’s strongest allies would like to see next year’s Senate races play out without Trump’s thumb on the scale.
“If I were him, I’d focus on his own election, but I doubt if he’ll take that advice,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).
Trump announced his presidential campaign in November.
He had a mixed record supporting gubernatorial, Senate and House candidates last year.
He had a losing record in the six states where his super PAC spent money on behalf of Republican candidates gubernatorial and Senate races in Arizona, Georgia, Ohio, Michigan, Nevada and Pennsylvania.
He compiled a 1-6 record in those states, where only Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), whom Trump endorsed in the primary, won.
And the candidates Trump endorsed in the five most competitive House races lost.
Many Senate Republicans think Trump hurt Republicans’ chances in Arizona, Georgia and Pennsylvania by endorsing candidates whom Republicans in Washington did not view as the candidates with the best chances of winning the general election.
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who voted twice to convict Trump on impeachment charges, said the consensus in the Senate Republican conference is that Trump would do more harm than good if he tries to play kingmaker in next year’s primaries.
“I hope he stays out because him getting involved last time led to us losing key Senate races we could have won,” he said. “I think it’s viewed [that way] by almost every single member of the caucus, if not all of them, but I think few will say it because they don’t want to get the wrath of Donald Trump.”
Ron Bonjean, a Republican strategist and former Senate leadership aide, said Trump didn’t have a good record picking winners in last year’s toughest races.
“Trump has a very poor track record of backing top-tier candidates that can get elected to the Senate. It’s no wonder that Senate Republicans want Trump to stay away from the primaries as much as possible because he’s been radioactive in the general elections.”
Some Senate Republicans thought Trump dragged down candidates in the general election by making it tougher for them to appeal to moderate and swing voters.
Retired Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), who twice won election statewide in Pennsylvania, blamed Trump for the loss of his seat.
“President Trump had to insert himself and that changed the nature of the race and that created just too much of an obstacle,” Toomey told CNN in November, explaining why he thought celebrity doctor Mehmet Oz, whom Trump backed in the primary, lost to now-Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.).
Toomey was one of seven Republican senators who voted to convict Trump on the impeachment charge of inciting the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Trump’s unsubstantiated claims that he lost the 2020 presidential election because of widespread fraud became a litmus test in some Senate Republican primaries and came back to haunt those candidates who embraced those claims in the general election.
In New Hampshire, where at the start of the 2022 election cycle Republicans thought they had a good chance of knocking off vulnerable Sen. Maggie Hassan (D), Republican candidate Don Bolduc won the primary after embracing Trump’s election fraud claims. That turned out to be a liability in the general election, and Bolduc tried to back away from that stance after winning the primary, telling Fox News in September that he concluded after doing research on the matter that the election was not stolen. He wound up losing to Hassan by 9 points.
Mark Weaver, a Republican strategist based in Ohio, where Republicans are hoping to defeat Sen. Sherrod Brown (D) next year, said Trump’s endorsement is a liability for GOP candidates in a general election.
“In the general election, a Trump endorsement is always going to hurt because he will always be a red cape to the Democratic bull, and I don’t see independents growing any fonder of Donald Trump,” he said, referring to the energizing effect Trump has on Democratic voters.
Some Republican strategists outside the Beltway, however, see Trump as an asset for Republican candidates in battleground states such as Ohio.
Mehek Cooke, a Republican strategist and attorney based in Columbus, Ohio, said Trump’s endorsement is “a very net positive” in a general election.
“I think there’s a lot of support for President Trump in the state of Ohio,” she said. “If the Senate Republicans in Washington really want to win against Sherrod Brown, they’re going to come together and work with Trump or any other candidate, rather than continuing the division we see in our country."
Trump carried Ohio in 2016 and 2020 with 51 percent and 53 percent of the vote, respectively.
Now, Trump is dividing Republicans over another controversy: his call to defund the Department of Justice and FBI in response to federal investigations of his role in the incitement of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and his handling of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida.
A Senate Republican aide told The Hill that idea won’t get any significant traction in the Senate GOP conference, while House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) says Congress should use its power of the purse to push back on federal investigations of Trump.
Jordan on Thursday subpoenaed Mark Pomerantz, who formerly worked in the Manhattan district attorney’s office, citing Congress’s interest “in preventing politically motivated prosecutions of current and former presidents by elected state and local prosecutors.”
Bonjean, the GOP strategist and former leadership aide, said that Trump shifts the debate in Senate races away from the topics that GOP leaders want to emphasize: inflation, gas prices, crime, the border and federal spending.
“When Trump injects himself into these primaries, then our candidates have to talk about Jan. 6, Stormy Daniels, stolen elections and those are not matters that Main Street voters really want to hear about,” he said.
“They want to know how you’re going to solve their problems and if you’re actually relatable as a politician, as an elected official, and those issues aren’t very relatable to general election voters,” he added.
Representative Thomas Massie, the libertarian Republican from Kentucky, is calling on Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to be disbarred and removed from office following the indictment of former President Donald Trump.
Trump is charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, low-level felonies in New York State but which carry a potential for a 4-year prison sentence each.
Bragg’s dogged pursuit of Trump comes as he’s made a career of allowing criminals guilty of far more egregious crimes to roam the streets of Manhattan.
Massie, it appears, has seen enough.
“Alvin Bragg should be disbarred and removed from office,” he tweeted. “This is an egregious abuse of the legal system for political purposes and threatens the fabric of our judicial system.”
Alvin Bragg should be disbarred and removed from office. This is an egregious abuse of the legal system for political purposes and threatens the fabric of our judicial system.
Massie doesn’t provide any specific details on why Alvin Bragg should be disbarred and removed from office, though he has defined the charges against Trump as “completely bogus.”
“Supposedly, Trump’s been indicted for failing to properly report hush payments as campaign expenditures,” Massie said.
“That’s completely bogus. In fact, they would have indicted him sooner for a crime of using campaign funds for personal benefit had he reported it as a campaign expenditure!”
Supposedly, Trump’s been indicted for failing to properly report hush payments as campaign expenditures.
That’s completely bogus.
In fact, they would have indicted him sooner for a crime of using campaign funds for personal benefit had he reported it as a campaign expenditure!
It’s not the first time critics have suggested Bragg be disbarred for his actions.
Conservative radio host Mark Levin stated the Manhattan DA “should be disbarred” in part because of the “way he campaigned” and added, “This is crap that a pre-law student shouldn’t even put in front of a damn judge.”
“Donald Trump is a historic figure or they wouldn’t be doing this,” Levin added. “There wouldn’t have been a January 6 committee. There wouldn’t have been a Mueller criminal investigation. There wouldn’t have been two phony impeachments.”
Mark Levin finally SNAPS
Rips up Trump Indictment LIVE On Air and calls for Alvin Bragg to be DISBARRED. “This is CRAP a pre-law student would not put in front of a Judge.”pic.twitter.com/pl0sVp6eEy
Massie Hammers Squad Member After They Throw Temper Tantrum
Representative Massie made headlines last week when he decided to attempt civilized debate with ‘Squad’ member Jamaal Bowman, who instead insisted on screaming about gun control.
“They’re cowards! They’re all cowards!” Bowman screeched. “They won’t do anything to save the lives of our children at all. Cowards!”
Massie happened upon the scene and interjected with facts, pointing to the effectiveness of armed security or teachers in our schools.
“You know, there’s never been a school shooting in a school that allows teachers to carry,” Massie pointed out.
He wanted to discuss solutions to school shootings, but when I offered a solution he began shouting. When he asked for data, I gave him data, but then he just shouted more. Bring facts. There’s never been a school shooting in the hundreds of schools that allow staff to carry. https://t.co/jInj4GHBDL
Bowman showed up at protests outside the courthouse where Trump was set to appear for his arraignment and couldn’t turn off the crazy.
This guy (a registered Democratic Socialist) has only one trick: shouting at other members of Congress in front of cameras. He hates when you try to talk to him though. pic.twitter.com/0rGSAwDnow
Massie also finds a way to be a thorn in the side of ‘Ukraine First’ Republicans, last year demanding a halt to all taxpayer funds being funneled to the country until “a thorough audit of the $60 billion that Joe Biden and Congress have already sent there” had been conducted.
We should immediately stop payments to Ukraine and begin a thorough audit of the $60 billion that Joe Biden and Congress have already sent there.
The GOP-led House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, on which Massie sits, has announced they will investigate Bragg’s potential use of federal funds.
President Donald Trump called the charges against him unprecedented election interference in a speech Tuesday night from his Mar-a-Lago home, just hours after pleading not guilty to nearly three dozen felony charges during his arraignment in New York City.
“I never thought anything like this could happen in America,” Trump told his supporters at his Florida residence. “The only crime that I have committed is to fearlessly defend our nation from those who seek to destroy it.”
Trump faces 34 charges related to allegations that he paid hush money to adult film star Stormy Daniels through a lawyer seven years ago and covered it up as a legal expense before being elected president. Trump offered his “not guilty” plea during his arraignment before Judge Juan Merchan in Manhattan Criminal Court.
Trump began his speech by pointing to the string of investigations and impediments that Democrats and federal law enforcement threw at him, drawing a comparison between the unfounded accusations like the debunked Russian dossier and the current legal prosecution.
“From the beginning, the Democrats spied on my campaign, remember that?” Trump said. “They attacked me with an onslaught of fraudulent investigations. Russia, Russia Russia. Ukraine… Impeachment hoax number one, impeachment hoax number two. The illegal and unconstitutional raid on Mar-a-Lago right here.”
Trump was impeached twice by the then Democrat-controlled U.S. House during his presidency, but was acquitted by the Republican-controlled Senate both times.
Trump also pointed to media reports that showed federal law enforcement working with social media companies to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story, which Trump said “exposes the Biden family as criminals” and would have swayed the election in his favor.
“And we remember the 51 intelligence agents who said Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation,” Trump said, pointing to an open letter signed by those agents making that assertion. “Russian disinformation, remember that? And that was all confirmed strongly by the FBI, when they all knew that it wasn’t Russian disinformation.”
The indictment was unsealed after Tuesday’s arraignment. It alleges Trump falsified business records related to the hush money scheme and can be read in full here.
Trump blasted New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg and Letisha James, attorney general for New York, both of whom promised to go after Trump while on the campaign trail.
“We have a Trump-hating judge with a Trump-hating wife whose daughter worked for Kamala Harris and now receives money from the Biden-Harris campaign, and a lot of it,” Trump said.
Trump’s speech hit political notes as well. He attacked President Joe Biden on the Afghanistan withdrawal, the border, the loss of energy independence, rising crime, and more.
Trump surrendered to New York Police before the arraignment after a grand jury voted to indict him last week, the first time a current or former president has been charged with a crime. Trump is also the 2024 Republican frontrunner for president.
During his speech, Trump also blasted the the investigation into his possession of classified documents from his time at president, arguing that he had the power as president to declassify them. He said Biden had classified documents as well from his time in the Obama administration but did not have the power to declassify as vice president.
Donald Trump again made history Thursday evening, this time by becoming the first former president of the United States to be indicted, stemming from charges related to illegal hush money payments made to a porn star in 2016.
And yet even while in legal jeopardy, blindsided by an indictment he hoped to avoid, Trump has tightened his grip on the GOP. His wrongful persecution has become the defining cause of the right. At least that’s how many Republicans see it.
“When our justice system is weaponized as a political tool, it endangers all of us,” said Ronna McDaniel, chairwoman of the Republican National Committee. “This is a blatant abuse of power from a DA focused on political vengeance instead of keeping people safe.”
Allies close to the former president previously cautioned him to avoid controversy and to move beyond personal politics to focus on the challenges facing the nation. If he could just do that, Sen. Lindsey Graham predicted in an interview last summer with RealClearPolitics, Trump had “a damn good chance of winning” not just the nomination but once again the White House.
“If it is a grievance campaign,” the South Carolina Republican almost sighed, “then he is gonna have a problem.” Less than a year later, Trump is a candidate again. And Trump is very much aggrieved. But this time, the grievance isn’t exactly by his own invitation. Graham now sees it central to his return to power.
“How does this end, Sean,” the senator told the host of Hannity on Fox News, “Trump wins in court. And he wins the election. That’s how this works.” A loyal surrogate for that presidential campaign, he urged viewers three different times to go donate to the former president because “he has spent more money on lawyers than most people spend on campaigns – they’re trying to bleed him dry.”
Graham isn’t wrong, not just about mounting legal expenses, but more broadly about Trump’s mounting lead in the polls since predicting nearly two weeks ago that he would soon be arrested. He was already the undisputed front runner in the polls before the indictment.
Now defense of the former president is the united cause of the Republican Party. It instantly shifted the 2024 landscape. The scope of the indictment is not known, though some early reporting suggests Trump could face more than 30 counts related to business fraud. Forthcoming legal details, however, were immediately eclipsed by political considerations Thursday evening.
The indictment was just more of the same, Trump said in a statement, likening it to “Russia, Russia, Russia; the Mueller Hoax; Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine; Impeachment Hoax 1; Impeachment Hoax 2; the illegal and unconstitutional Mar-a-Lago raid; and now this.”
For Republicans, it was muscle memory to rally to Trump’s defense like they have done so many times before. “Alvin Bragg has irreparably damaged our country in an attempt to interfere in our Presidential election,” House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said in a statement echoed across all corners of the right from old Trump rivals, like Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who said the indictment signaled “the death of the rule of law,” and new Trump allies, like Ohio Sen. JD Vance who called it “political persecution.”
Trump loyalists seem to have been caught off guard Thursday by leaked news that a grand jury voted to indict the former president. Given that federal prosecutors declined previously to take up the issue of hush payments made ahead of the 2016 election, they had hoped that Bragg wouldn’t ultimately follow through.
Alina Habba, Trump’s attorney, said in an interview with Bret Baier of Fox News that she was “shocked” by the news. She confirmed that a booking at the New York City courthouse, complete with fingerprinting and a mug shot, was soon expected.
If the coming legal wrangling is unprecedented, the political fallout was somewhat familiar. Although Trump’s 2024 rivals were quick to condemn the looming indictment, either by accident or design, the Manhattan district attorney has shifted the national political landscape just 10 months before the Iowa caucuses.
Former Vice President Mike Pence, who is expected to make his own bid for the White House, said the treatment of his old boss was an “outrage” that amounted to “political persecution.” A representative for the Nikki Haley campaign pointed RCP to previous comments the former ambassador made condemning the then still rumored indictment as motivated by “revenge.”
But perhaps the most significant development came from another Florida Republican, the only other potential candidate polling within striking distance of Trump.
That state’s governor, Ron DeSantis, earlier incurred the wrath of Trump and many in his orbit for not speaking out sooner when the former president prematurely predicted his indictment. When first addressing the controversy, DeSantis pledged to avoid “the circus” altogether. Worse in the eyes of MAGA? DeSantis made reference to the underlying facts of the case.
“I don’t know what goes into paying hush money to a porn star to secure silence over some type of alleged affair,” DeSantis said at a press conference. “I just, I can’t speak to that.”
But the governor did not take any shots, veiled or otherwise, at Trump Thursday evening. Instead, DeSantis condemned the indictment as “un-American.” DeSantis vowed that Florida, if it came to that, would not cooperate with forcing the former president from his estate in Mar-a-Lago to face charges in New York.
“Florida will not assist in an extradition request given the questionable circumstances at issue with this Soros-backed Manhattan prosecutor and his political agenda,” he said in a statement.
And just like that, with an assist from a local Democratic district attorney in a state no Republican has carried since 1984, it seems that rather than revisiting old grievances, a newly aggrieved Trump has moved one step closer to the Republican nomination. Lindsey Graham seemingly spoke for the GOP, while making little distinction between opposing an allegedly politicized prosecution, supporting Trump, and defending America itself.
“This is the most irresponsible and dangerous decision by a prosecutor in the history of the country,” the South Carolina Republican said. “He’s opened up a Pandora’s box against the presidency itself.”
