Tag: trump derangement syndrome

Federal Judge DISQUALIFIES President Trump’s Acting US Attorney in Nevada, Rules Her Appointment is Invalid

A federal judge on Tuesday disqualified President Trump’s Acting US Attorney in Nevada, Sigal Chattah, and ruled her appointment is invalid.

Earlier this year President Trump appointed Sigal Chattah as the Interim US Attorney in Nevada. Shortly before her 120 day interim appointment expired, she resigned from the position and was reappointed as the Acting US Attorney for the District of Nevada.

Anti-Trump prosecutors immediately filed motions to disqualify Chattah, claiming this maneuver to leapfrog to an “Acting US Attorney” role was unlawful.

On Tuesday, US District Judge David G. Campbell, a George W. Bush appointee, said in a 32-page ruling that Chattah is “improperly serving” in her role as Acting US Attorney.

“Ms. Chattah is disqualified from supervising these cases or any attorneys in the handling of these cases,” Judge Campbell wrote.

Judge Campbell did not dismiss the indictments.

“Defendants’ motions are denied to the extent they seek dismissal of their indictments,” the judge wrote.

The judge reassigned Sigal Chattah’s cases to the District Judges in Nevada.

“These cases shall be reassigned to the District Judges in Nevada to whom they were originally assigned. The undersigned judge will remain available to handle similar motions filed in other Nevada cases, if warranted,” the judge wrote.

This is the second time a federal district court judge has disqualified one of President Trump’s Acting US Attorneys.

As previously reported, last month, US District Judge Mathew Brann, an Obama appointee, said Alina Habba is “not lawfully holding the Office of US Attorney” of New Jersey.

The Pennsylvania-based federal judge oversaw a challenge to Alina Habba’s authority because the judges in New Jersey had a conflict of interest after they ousted her from her position as interim US Attorney last month.

A group of federal judges over the summer declined to extend Alina Habba’s term as interim US Attorney of New Jersey after Democrat Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries launched a pressure campaign to oust her.

Habba resigned as Interim US Attorney and became Acting US Attorney for New Jersey after the Trump DOJ outmaneuvered the judges before her term expired.

President Trump recently said he will be filing a lawsuit to prevent Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) from blocking Alina Habba’s confirmation for US Attorney of New Jersey with the unconstitutional ‘blue slip’ custom.

Keep reading

The Curious Tale Of Columbia Professor Daniel Richman

Just The News is reporting that “Person 3” in the Comey indictment is not former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe but rather Columbia Professor Daniel Richman. According to the outlet, Richman is the former FBI employee in the indictment who allegedly leaked information about “Person 1,” who is believed to be Hillary Clinton. The report continues the long uncertainty over Richman’s role in these controversies. Richman has described himself as a friend, an FBI special employee, and the lawyer representing Comey at different times. He has also been a columnist and commentator, including for the site Lawfare run by Comey’s friend Ben Wittes. What Richman was doing at any given time remains strikingly uncertain. Professor Richman is not himself charged with any crime.

Richman’s fluid and changing roles are reminiscent of the debate over the role of Hunter Biden’s friend/lawyer/patron Kevin Morris. There was an evolution in the roles that Richman played over the years that left some of us confused as to his specific status at certain times.

At various points in the investigation, Richman alludes to being Comey’s lawyer, as well as a former aide and a friend. Comey used Richman as a conduit to the press and admitted that he was the means by which Comey leaked the contents of a memo that Comey improperly removed from the FBI after being fired.

The respected veteran investigative reporter Catherine Herridge reported on a June 2017 memorandum that documented a phone call with Richman and the so-called “Comey memos,” which detailed his conversations with President Trump.

According to sources, five days earlier, on June 8, 2017, Comey “asked Professor Richman to disclose the content of at least one of those memoranda to the press…”

In interviews,  sources said that Richman was dismissive over the violation of federal rules stating  “something to the effect of, ‘You do things by your rules’ and ‘I do things by my rules.’” Richman seemed to claim that he was serving as counsel and allegedly insisted that “there is a substantial extent to which I would raise attorney-client issues.” The suggestion was that, after leaving his position as a Justice Department adviser to Comey, he may have assumed the role as private counsel to Comey.

Richman admitted to media contacts but reportedly said that he did not think that he confirmed classified material from Comey to New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt.

Comey designated Richman as a Special Government Employee (SGE) at the FBI and subsequently utilized him as a conduit to the media. He gave him access to top-secret information, and Richman seems to have floated between Comey and other offices, such as the FBI’s General Counsel’s office.

The FBI said that “Comey instructed the FBI to hire Richman as a Special Government Employee” in 2015 and “to grant him a Top Secret clearance with access to Sensitive Compartmented Information.” It also said its investigation “revealed Comey also hired Richman, so Comey could discuss sensitive matters, including classified information, with someone outside of the FBI’s regular leadership. Comey also used Richman as a liaison to the media.”

Keep reading

YouTube Bows to Trump in Censorship Lawsuit, Will Pay Millions to Avoid Court

And then there were none.

YouTube, a Google subsidiary, became the last of three tech titans to settle a lawsuit brought forth by President Donald Trump, according to a blistering report from The Wall Street Journal.

The video sharing platform agreed to pay a hefty $24.5 million to settle lawsuits brought forth by Trump in 2021.

At the time, the president’s YouTube account had been banned following the Jan. 6 incursion at the U.S. Capitol.

YouTube claimed that they had gone to those extraordinary lengths to remove Trump’s channel to nix potential videos that may incite violence.

(The channel was reinstated in March 2023.)

The YouTube settlement is the second-biggest of the lawsuits brought against various tech titans by Trump — and that appears to be intentional.

The biggest settlement Trump had was with Facebook parent company Meta Platforms, which was for $25 million.

“Google executives were eager to keep their settlement smaller than the one paid by rival Meta, according to people familiar with the matter,” The Wall Street Journal reported.

While $24.5 million does come in lower than the $25 million Meta paid, it’s more than double what X, formerly Twitter, paid Trump for a similar lawsuit, as the now-Elon Musk owned platform paid $10 million.

Interestingly, while Trump will “keep” most of this settlement money — $22 million — none of it will actually be going to him.

The Wall Street Journal noted that the money will be immediately rerouted to the nonprofit Trust for the National Mall, tasked with building a grand ballroom near the White House.

The other $2.5 million will be dispersed among various other plaintiffs. There is no mention of attorney fees.

This decision comes months after YouTube was apparently having “productive conversations” with the Trump administration in June, per The Hill.

Keep reading

Comey Faces Indictment, but His Real Crimes Remain Untouched

We have no idea whether the current DOJ indictments will lead to a conviction of James Comey, namely that he authorized FBI subordinates to leak to the media and then lied about it, obstructing Congress in the process.

It may come down to the word of Comey, a known fabricator, against the testimony of his former subordinate, Andrew McCabe, an admitted liar. Take your pick.

We know, however, that Comey is not facing a Trumpian $500 million in potential fines, nor 93 indictments, nor the scrutiny of five different local, state, and federal prosecutors. Nor, like some of the J6 arrested, will he be sent to solitary confinement to await a trial in a year or two or be charged with “illegal parading.”

We also know of the crimes or unethical conduct for which James Comey is not currently being indicted or investigated.

He is not being charged with pleading amnesia or ignorance in 2018—e.g., “I didn’t know,” “I couldn’t recall,” “I didn’t remember”—a reported 245 times while under oath to House investigators and misleading them.

He is not being charged with leaking in 2017 a confidential FBI memo of a conversation with then President Trump—which he improperly stored in his personal safe, in violation of FBI protocols—to the New York Times via a third-party Columbia professor.

He is not being charged for falsely assuring the President of the United States in 2017 that he was not the object of the current Crossfire Hurricane “Russian collusion” investigation—when, in fact, Trump, as the Mueller investigation revealed, was the real target of almost that entire ruse.

He is not being charged for deliberately leaking an FBI memo of a conversation with President Trump for the purpose of injuring him by prompting the appointment of his friend and predecessor, Robert Mueller, as a special counsel to investigate the supposed crimes of Donald Trump. Comey’s gambit resulted in a 22-month and $30 million administration hiatus, only to find no actionable wrongdoing by Trump.

He is not being investigated for usurping the role of the DOJ in 2016 when, as an FBI investigator, he served simultaneously as investigator and prosecutor, creating a conflict of interest.

He was tasked with both finding evidence of Hillary Clinton’s alleged wrongdoing and also making the federal prosecutorial decision whether to indict her for transmitting classified material over an unsecured email server. And after finding evidence of her culpability, he chose not to indict her on the grounds that her candidacy at the time meant no reasonable prosecutor (of which he was then not supposed to be one) would bring such a case against her.

He is not being investigated for improperly disclosing his newly reopened investigative case against Hillary Clinton on the eve of the 2016 election. Nor is he being investigated for predetermining that Hillary Clinton was innocent of the charges of unlawfully transmitting confidential material before his own FBI investigation was complete—and before Comey’s FBI had even interviewed her.

He is not being investigated for tasking Peter Strzok to alter his own original condemnation of Clinton’s conduct by replacing the initial and correct term “gross negligence,” a phrase that denotes a federal crime, with “extreme carelessness,” which involves no criminal liability.

He is not being investigated for, nor charged with, birthing the entire governmental role in the Russian collusion hoax that warped the 2016 presidential election and transition by his use of the discredited Christopher Steele as an FBI confidant/source.

He is not being investigated for using the fraudulent Steele dossier as a “central and essential” document to obtain a FISA court writ to improperly surveil Carter Page—an act that even he later admitted was wrong.

He is not being investigated for stumbling upon a rock mosaic on a beach arranged to read “8647” (“get rid of/remove Trump”) and then on social media nonchalantly posting that clear threat to injure/remove/eject the current president.

Keep reading

Look At NYT Coverage Of Comey, Trump Indictments To See How The Propaganda Machine Operates

On Thursday, disgraced former FBI Director James Comey was indicted by a grand jury on two counts: false statements within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch and obstruction of a congressional proceeding. In other words, Comey allegedly broke the law — and the evidence appears to support the charges. But you wouldn’t necessarily glean that if you read The New York Times’ editorial board meltdown about the indictment.

“The Comey Indictment Plunges the Country Into a Grave New Period,” the piece is headlined. The esteemed “opinion journalists” at The Times warn that Trump “is undermining a core promise of the American justice system: the fair and equal enforcement of the law.”

It matters naught to the board that Comey allegedly provided false testimony to Congress in September of 2020 about his handling of the Russia collusion hoax. Comey previously testified in 2017 that “he did not authorize leaking information regarding the FBI’s investigations into President Donald Trump or former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton,” as described by NBC News. Comey later told Sen. Ted Cruz he stood by the testimony.

Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe said Comey was made aware of the leak of information to the press and essentially gave it the stamp of approval after the fact, a 2018 Justice Department inspector general’s report found.

But no, according to The Times, Trump is apparently a “despot” who is “persecuting people he considers his enemies, with little justification other than raw political power.”

Although, however, the board even highlights that the grand jury that indicted Comey declined to bring a third false statement count.

“Grand juries typically file the indictments that federal prosecutors ask for,” the board writes, unwittingly undercutting its own hysteria. You see, by conceding that the grand jury — not Trump — declined to pursue the third charge (which according to The Times is atypical) it must mean the grand jury found credible evidence to indict Comey on the other two charges, but used their discretion and declined to bring the third charge. In other words, the charges stand on merits, not Trump’s alleged desire for retribution.

Nonetheless, according to the board, the “biggest law enforcement scandal of the past 50 years” is that Trump (according to the “experts”) ran on “promising to prosecute his enemies.” (Notably, the editorial board must have forgotten about New York Attorney General Letitia James’ campaign promise to nail Trump).

And yet here I was thinking the “biggest law enforcement scandal of the past 50 years” was the last administration trying to throw a former president in jail. But The Times disagrees with me there, you see.

In fact, the editorial board was quick to declare that “Donald Trump Is Not Above the Law,” in a 2022 piece that claimed the criminal investigation into the then-former president was “required.”

“Mr. Trump’s unprecedented assault on the integrity of American democracy requires a criminal investigation. The disturbing details of his postelection misfeasance, meticulously assembled by the Jan. 6 committee, leave little doubt that Mr. Trump sought to subvert the Constitution and overturn the will of the American people,” the board wrote.

Keep reading

RussiaGate was Treason. It was Part of Conspiracy to Steal Three Presidential Elections. Here are Top 10 Reasons Why Trump DOJ Must Appoint Special Prosecutor. Immediately.

The Trump DOJ needs to appoint a Special Prosecutor/Counselor to investigate RussiaGate. This is ‘The Conspiracy of the Century.” It is massive. It’s time to put it in the hands of a power pitbull Special Prosecutor.

Don’t wait another day- do it immediately.

This criminal conspiracy started while Obama was president. Either you assume Obama is a moron, and/or a helpless puppet, who stood by, unaware his DOJ, FBI, CIA and other intelligence agencies were targeting President Trump; or you understand the truth- Obama ordered it all, approved of it all, and coordinated it all.

Obama was (and still is) the head of the snake.

This massive conspiracy connects all the dots- from 2016 to today. Obama and his crew of criminal conspirators and communist comrades tried to rig and steal not one, not two, but three presidential elections.

And to make it all work, they had to eliminate President Trump. So, they conspired to frame him, indict him, convict him with rigged judges and juries; demonize him with a massive fraudulent sting operation on January 6th; and when all of that failed, they ordered two assassination attempts.

The only way to get to the bottom of this “Conspiracy of the Century” is to hire a team of legal pitbull prosectors to go after all the participants- Comey, McCabe, Brennan, Clapper, Hillary, etc- and then threaten them all with life in prison…preferably at Gitmo…and then offer immunity if they finger “the capo di tutti” who gave them the orders- Barack Obama.

Keep reading

The Conspiracy Theorists Who Claim Kamala Harris Really Won in 2024

Election denial has lately come to be viewed as a feature of the political right, reflected by the lawsuits, conspiratorial documentaries, and “Stop the Steal” protests that followed Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 presidential election. But in the months since 2024, a similar—albeit much quieter—form of election denial has emerged in parts of the progressive left.

These theories range from claims that Elon Musk used Starlink satellites to hack the election to a the quasi-mystical TikTok subculture known as the “4 A.M. Club,” whose members believe the timeline glitched and Kamala Harris won in a parallel reality. But the most prominent claims have been rooted in data-heavy spreadsheets and statistical jargon.

One of the most popular of these theories suggests that a 2024 National Security Agency audit confirmed that Kamala Harris won the election, a claim which gained notoriety after it appeared in This Will Hold, an anonymously published Substack. The post alleges that one of the audit’s supposed participants, an ex-CIA officer named Adam Zarnowski, possessed insider information about a global cabal of corrupt actors, international criminals, foreign operatives, billionaires, and political insiders who conspired together to manipulate the election’s outcome.

As The Atlantic recently reported, there is no independent verification of Zarnowski’s background beyond his own claims. A LinkedIn profile describes him as a “former CIA paramilitary operations officer” but provides no evidence that he is an expert in election security or statistics. Snopes has been unable to “independently verify Zarnowski’s employment with the CIA or his alleged involvement in [the] NSA audit.”

The Election Truth Alliance (ETA), a self-described nonpartisan watchdog group, has used statistical models to push claims that Harris won the election. In Rockland County, New York, for example, Harris received fewer votes for president than incumbent Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D–N.Y.) did for Senate. The ETA suggests that possible election tampering can be inferred from this discrepancy.

But Charles Stewart, a political scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, points out that this apparent discrepancy isn’t unusual and can easily be explained. Stewart attributes Harris’ weaker performance to her unpopularity among the county’s Orthodox Jewish voters relative to Gillibrand, as well as the broader trend of voters skipping races or voting split-ticket.

The organization’s claims go further. In a recent interview with the progressive commentator David Pakman, the ETA’s Nathan Taylor claimed that vote patterns in Nevada, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania illustrate a series of unusual relationships between candidate support and voter turnout. Using color-coded heat maps, Taylor asserts that his group has discovered statistical distortions similar to those seen in countries with a reputation for fraudulent election practices, such as Russia and Uganda. Using these maps, Taylor alleges that up to 190,000 votes cast in Pennsylvania may have been algorithmically shifted, which would be more than enough to flip the state.

To lend credibility to these claims, the ETA circulated a working paper by the University of Michigan political scientist Walter Mebane that used statistical techniques to examine Pennsylvania’s 2024 election results. Mebane told The Atlantic that while he was aware the group had used his public methodology and data models, he had not reviewed their findings and did not endorse their conclusions. 

Keep reading

Trump Derangement Syndrome comes for heralded off-label autism treatment after president endorses

he medical establishment and mainstream media are uniting against the Trump administration’s re-purposing of an inexpensive drug to treat an epidemic, calling it “unproven,” not “backed by science,” “not a cure” and “shocking” to endorse, with The New York Times emphasizing no profit-driven drug company suggested it.

In President Trump’s first term, it was ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19. In his second, it’s prescription leucovorin to treat autism spectrum disorder.

Long used to treat chemotherapy side effects, leucovorin calcium tablets got approved last week by the Food and Drug Administration to treat “cerebral folate deficiency” (CFD), whose clinical symptoms include “global developmental delays with autistic features,” following its own “systematic analysis of literature” from 2009 through last year.

“Published case reports provided patient-level data on over 40 patients,” adult and child, with most of those given leucovorin treatment showing “substantial improvement of symptoms of CFD that would not be expected when compared to the natural history of CFD due to FOLR1 gene variants,” the Federal Register notice says.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. touted leucovorin to treat autism Monday with Trump and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz, but it was quickly overshadowed by the other autism-related recommendation that pregnant women limit their use of Tylenol, which prompted a new TikTok challenge.

Keep reading

SHOCKER: Here’s a Detailed List of Over 40 Lies Made By Jim Comey in Private Memos Re: Trump

Notes from Former FBI Head James Comey related to his discussions with President Trump were finally released by the DOJ and FBI last night.

These damning notes follow the release of the DOJ’s IG report less than a week prior that provided evidence that former FBI Head Andrew McCabe lied multiple times, including under oath.  The McCabe report exposed President Obama’s FBI and DOJ as corrupt, dishonest, coordinated and conspiring.  Comey’s notes provide additional support of a very dishonest, conniving and corrupt FBI led by Comey, who set the tone.

L- stands for outright lies

PL – stands for probable lies

Less than a week since the DOJ IG’s report about fired former FBI Head Andrew McCabe, the DOJ and FBI finally released James Comey’s notes as requested by Congress. These notes show a very corrupt, manipulative, conniving and dishonest FBI Director.

Keep reading

Alleged Mormon Church Shooter Identified — 42 Yr-Old Military Vet — Reportedly Has “ANTI-Trump/Pence” Sign on Fence Attached to His Garage

This morning, only moments after the violent attack on churchgoers in Grand Blanc, MI, the Gateway Pundit reported about the incident.

At the time of the incident, very little was known about the gunman who opened fire at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on McCandlish Road.

Early reports claimed that 6-8 victims of the gunman had been taken to the hospital, although the exact toll was not confirmed. Later, it was discovered that one person was killed by the alleged shooter and an additional 8 individuals were taken to the hospital. The church caught fire during the incident, triggering a massive four-alarm emergency response.

At a recent press conference, Grand Blanc Township Police Chief William Renye did not name the shooter, but did say that the suspect of the mass shooting inside the Mormon Church was a 40-year-old man from Burton, MI, a neighboring city just outside Grand Blanc, roughly 60 miles north of Detroit.

Now, it’s been confirmed that the alleged shooter, who was killed by law enforcement, is Thomas Jacob Sandford, a 40-year-old former U.S. Marine who fought in Iraq.

Law enforcement sources confirmed that investigators were stationed outside Sanford’s home on Atherton Road, which has been cordoned off as a crime scene. Property records list Sanford as the owner of both the residence and a 2008 GMC Sierra pickup truck, the same vehicle used to ram into the church during the attack.

The New York Post claims an old Facebook post by Sanford’s mother says the gunman — who died at the scene in a shootout with cops — served in Iraq from 2004-2008.

Law enforcement sources confirmed that Sanford, from nearby Burton, Michigan, is the shooting suspect. Sources told the Post that authorities also found several improvised explosive devices on church property, which a bomb squad was investigating.

The Gateway Pundit looked up the alleged shooter’s home address and found a Trump-Vance sign wedged behind a STOP sign on what appears to be his property, according to records. We verified his address on SmartBackgroundCheck.com and CheckMyVote.org, where we were able to view his voting record. It appears that the alleged shooter registered to vote in the 2018 midterms following Trump’s first presidential election victory in 2016.

Keep reading