An historical court hearing in Washington this week put on display the dangerous new lengths to which Biden's Department of Justice and a Democratic federal judge will go to ruin Donald Trump.
Oct 18, 2023·edited Oct 18, 2023Liked by Julie Kelly
When I read David McCullough’s biography of John Adams, I was struck by how an otherwise great president was tainted by the Sedition Acts. McCullough says, “Their passage and his signature on them were to be rightly judged by history as the most reprehensible acts of his presidency." Those acts caused such an outcry and anger that they propelled Jefferson’s victory over Adams.
As we watch these deranged prosecutors and judges attack Trump, I’m hoping there will be such anger and such an outcry that Trump will be propelled into office over any Democrat opponent. Somehow his prosecutors haven’t needed a law such as the Sedition Act which made it a crime for American citizens to "print, utter, or publish...any false, scandalous, and malicious writing" about the government. Trump’s prosecutors just ignore the Constitution and twist and stretch existing laws to get the same effect.
With all due respect, Julie, I believe those decisions were made long ago. What we're witnessing is a bold attempt for the judge to appear "reasonable," which, of course, plays right into the hands of the Socialist-Activist-Jouranalists-Propagandists who inhabit the PR Department, also known as the Mainstream Media. However, it will be interesting, maybe even fascinating, to watch her attempt to pull that trick and, in the process, try to figure-out how to accommodate President Trump's Secret Service detail if she holds him in contempt and orders him to jail. Don't you think? Third World here we come if this is allowed to stand without being overturned on appeal.
"And anyone who thinks that’s a bridge too far (throwing Trump in jail) isn’t paying attention to the hellishly rigged and unaccountable judicial system in our nation’s capital." This corruption, likely operating for years, just couldn't contain itself when this one man showed up. These revelations may be Trump's gift to America. Now we know.
Thank you Julie, for your reporting on this matter. We'd be nearly completely in the dark without you. I also appreciate your explanations of how the judge has written it in order to trip President Trump up in the future.
It is Judge Chutkan, as a judge, who has no right to publicly make opinionated comments on this case, even if her opinions about Trump are 100% correct, because opinions by a judge, in or out of the courthouse, may shape the outcome more than the law itself which is fundamental to justice in America. If she were not presiding over the case she could publish a paper, or write an article, because she is entitled to her opinions, just as Donald Trump is, but not in her court where the law presides even over her. Donald Trump not only has the Constitution on his side, as originally ratified, but he also has the First Amendment on his side, which was ratified a year later, so as to double down on the concept of free speech, and especially political speech, directed against the government, so that agents within the government would not be confused over what the Constitution meant about free speech and, thus, not attempt to limit it.
The First Amendment, as part of the Bill of Rights, does not belong to the government, which includes Judge Chutkan, but to the people, which includes Donald Trump. And that also goes for the rest of the Bill of Rights which belongs to the People and the States. Since Judge Chutkan has made her incomprehension of the US Constitution publicly obvious she should not be on the bench, ruling on any case and, on this particular case, her decisions will be successfully appealed, even by the least Constitutional judges, on the appellate court.
Reading the transcript yesterday, I was struck by the Court completely ignored the electorate’s right to hear a candidate whom they may vote for. As Lauro argued about the former President’s First Amendment, and the Judge kept harping on his First Amendment rights being limited, she was essentially leaving out millions of people whose rights are not limited by the more important trial. The prosecution kept arguing that Mr. Trump can campaign as long as he says this but not that. These people are not strangers to Donald Trump. They have listened to him speak for nearly 20 years now, and also know a 77 year old does not change his style of speech unless it is curtailed by disease- or a court order. It is election interference to interfere with what a candidate can or can’t say.
Seriously, millions of Trump supporters will potentially act violently to Milley? Courtroom drama.
When I read David McCullough’s biography of John Adams, I was struck by how an otherwise great president was tainted by the Sedition Acts. McCullough says, “Their passage and his signature on them were to be rightly judged by history as the most reprehensible acts of his presidency." Those acts caused such an outcry and anger that they propelled Jefferson’s victory over Adams.
As we watch these deranged prosecutors and judges attack Trump, I’m hoping there will be such anger and such an outcry that Trump will be propelled into office over any Democrat opponent. Somehow his prosecutors haven’t needed a law such as the Sedition Act which made it a crime for American citizens to "print, utter, or publish...any false, scandalous, and malicious writing" about the government. Trump’s prosecutors just ignore the Constitution and twist and stretch existing laws to get the same effect.
With all due respect, Julie, I believe those decisions were made long ago. What we're witnessing is a bold attempt for the judge to appear "reasonable," which, of course, plays right into the hands of the Socialist-Activist-Jouranalists-Propagandists who inhabit the PR Department, also known as the Mainstream Media. However, it will be interesting, maybe even fascinating, to watch her attempt to pull that trick and, in the process, try to figure-out how to accommodate President Trump's Secret Service detail if she holds him in contempt and orders him to jail. Don't you think? Third World here we come if this is allowed to stand without being overturned on appeal.
The national republican party is disgusting for assisting in this attack on their former president.
Scandalous and shameful
"And anyone who thinks that’s a bridge too far (throwing Trump in jail) isn’t paying attention to the hellishly rigged and unaccountable judicial system in our nation’s capital." This corruption, likely operating for years, just couldn't contain itself when this one man showed up. These revelations may be Trump's gift to America. Now we know.
This gag order is unconstitutional and will not stand
Thank you Julie, for your reporting on this matter. We'd be nearly completely in the dark without you. I also appreciate your explanations of how the judge has written it in order to trip President Trump up in the future.
It is Judge Chutkan, as a judge, who has no right to publicly make opinionated comments on this case, even if her opinions about Trump are 100% correct, because opinions by a judge, in or out of the courthouse, may shape the outcome more than the law itself which is fundamental to justice in America. If she were not presiding over the case she could publish a paper, or write an article, because she is entitled to her opinions, just as Donald Trump is, but not in her court where the law presides even over her. Donald Trump not only has the Constitution on his side, as originally ratified, but he also has the First Amendment on his side, which was ratified a year later, so as to double down on the concept of free speech, and especially political speech, directed against the government, so that agents within the government would not be confused over what the Constitution meant about free speech and, thus, not attempt to limit it.
The First Amendment, as part of the Bill of Rights, does not belong to the government, which includes Judge Chutkan, but to the people, which includes Donald Trump. And that also goes for the rest of the Bill of Rights which belongs to the People and the States. Since Judge Chutkan has made her incomprehension of the US Constitution publicly obvious she should not be on the bench, ruling on any case and, on this particular case, her decisions will be successfully appealed, even by the least Constitutional judges, on the appellate court.
Is “Chutkan” a real name? Seems made up for a moron-token.
I think Judge Chutkan is being paid by Putin to get Trump re-elected.
Reading the transcript yesterday, I was struck by the Court completely ignored the electorate’s right to hear a candidate whom they may vote for. As Lauro argued about the former President’s First Amendment, and the Judge kept harping on his First Amendment rights being limited, she was essentially leaving out millions of people whose rights are not limited by the more important trial. The prosecution kept arguing that Mr. Trump can campaign as long as he says this but not that. These people are not strangers to Donald Trump. They have listened to him speak for nearly 20 years now, and also know a 77 year old does not change his style of speech unless it is curtailed by disease- or a court order. It is election interference to interfere with what a candidate can or can’t say.
Seriously, millions of Trump supporters will potentially act violently to Milley? Courtroom drama.
So this is allowed now?? https://thenationalpulse.com/2023/10/18/hamas-sympathizers-stage-insurrection-inside-us-capitol-assault-cops/
Is there anyway that Julie could get a Sammy Hagar AI voice to read the articles?