Tag: trump derangement syndrome

Propaganda Press Rediscovers Its Outrage Over Presidential Pardons

Apparently, the propaganda press has rediscovered its outrage over presidential pardons — now that President Donald Trump is issuing them. After watching then-President Joe Biden hand out pardons, clemency, and commutations like they were candy, the left-wing media have finally found their missing pearls to clutch.

Trump pardoned reality TV stars Todd and Julie Chrisley, who had a combined sentence of 19 years for what pardon czar Alice Marie Johnson called a “first-time nonviolent offense.” The duo was found “guilty of eight counts of financial fraud and two counts of tax evasion in 2022,” Fox News reported. Trump also issued a pardon to former New York Congressman Michael Grimm, who served seven months in prison after he pled guilty “to underreporting taxable revenue from his Manhattan restaurant Healthalicious,” according to the New York Post. Trump also pardoned rapper “NBA YoungBoy” and former Connecticut Gov. John Rowland.


ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl said in a post on X: “Donald Trump is using his pardon power early and often — And there’s a clear trend: many of his pardons are going to his supporters and political allies.”

CNN’s Aaron Blake wrote: “‘No MAGA left behind’: Trump’s pardons get even more political.”

Blake continued: “If you look closely at how Trump’s used his pardon power — which he has exercised dramatically this week, with a slew of new pardons and commutations on Wednesday alone — it’s virtually impossible to miss the political overtones. Many of Trump’s acts of clemency have rewarded an ally or someone tied to an ally, or they have served a clear and not terribly subtle political purpose.”

MSNBC’s Frank Figliuzzi wrote that “Trump’s pardons show he is becoming more brazenly corrupt.” Figliuzzi appealed to the precedent of giving pardons “as a president [is] leaving office,” citing a “legal expert” who said that pardons can be “costly.”

“Not anymore,” Figliuzzi wrote, apparently angered that Trump issued a pardon while president instead of doing it “quietly” on his way out the door.

Politico’s Gregory Svirnovskiy claimed that Trump was on a “clemency spree.”

But a cursory Google search seemingly reveals that for all the hand-wringing about Trump exercising his executive authority to grant pardons and clemency, media figures like Svirnovskiy and Figliuzzi were nowhere to be found when Biden was issuing his preemptive pardons — or pardons he issued to his family members before leaving office. (Notably, Biden didn’t just issue political and family allies, either. He also quietly commuted the sentences of Chinese spies and a Chinese national convicted of child pornography.) Blake gently questioned the scope of the Hunter Biden pardon, but he made sure to include critiques of Trump’s first term grants of clemency.

Keep reading

New Docs Reveal How FBI Insiders Buried Evidence Of Spygate Crimes

Nellie Ohr isn’t a new name in the Russiagate saga, but newly released documents from Sen. Chuck Grassley’s office shatter the fiction that she was just a low-level researcher and reveal her as a key conduit between Clinton operatives, the DOJ, and the FBI. The documents also pull back the curtain on a darker truth: an internal black hole FBI system designed not just to restrict access to sensitive Russiagate documents, but to bury them so completely that even FBI agents tasked with finding them wouldn’t know they existed.

What was already known about Nellie Ohr is that she worked for Fusion GPS — an opposition research firm led by former Wall Street Journal reporters Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch — who were hired by the Clinton campaign in April 2016 to manufacture the Trump-Russia collusion hoax. At the same time, her husband, Bruce Ohr, was a senior official at the Department of Justice. It was also known that Nellie Ohr gathered open-source information on various figures, including Trump campaign advisor Carter Page, which was then twisted to fit the collusion narrative. What was not known — until now — is just how deeply involved she was in the Trump-Russia collusion smear, how brazenly she lied to cover it up, and how the FBI actively aided in the cover-up.

According to the newly released document from Sen. Grassley’s office, a previously unseen 43-page FBI analysis from 2019, Nellie Ohr was involved in many aspects of the Russia collusion hoax, including in the drafting of the Steele Dossier. The FBI analysis was initiated after then-Congressman Mark Meadows filed a criminal referral, alleging that Ohr had lied to Congress during her 2018 testimony about her role in producing supposed research that helped trigger the Trump-Russia investigation. Meadows had good reason to be suspicious.

As the analysis concluded, Nellie Ohr repeatedly lied under oath. The FBI found that despite her denials, she contributed directly to the writing of the Steele Dossier. One telling clue was an identical analytical error that appeared both in her research and in the dossier itself. Even more damning, the FBI recovered a deleted “FSB report” from a thumb drive which Fusion owner Simpson had given to Bruce Ohr to give to the FBI in December 2016. That same fictitious report had already appeared as part of the dossier given to the FBI by Steele two months earlier, in October 2016. The FSB report bore all the hallmarks of Nellie Ohr’s work, which likely explains why Simpson, or whoever created the thumb drive, deleted the report just four minutes after uploading it, before eventually giving it to Bruce Ohr to pass to the FBI. What they didn’t realize was that what they tried to hide was still recoverable.

It’s long been suspected that former British intelligence agent turned Clinton operative Christopher Steele’s role wasn’t to generate the dossier’s content himself but to act as a cutout, lending British intelligence credibility to stories manufactured by Fusion GPS operatives and Clinton campaign affiliates. That part of the operation was wildly successful. To this day, many still believe it was Steele who wrote the dossier’s stories, when in reality, he was just the frontman.

Keep reading

FBI Releases Bombshell Crossfire Hurricane Documents

True to his word, FBI Director Kash Patel on Wednesday released a bombshell series of documents detailing, for the first time, many of the lengths to which agents went to investigate baseless collusion between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russian officials to influence the election.

The batch, released by Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-IA) on Wednesday, contains exhaustive requests by the FBI’s Washington office sent to the Office of the Special Counsel for information about testimony by Nellie Ohr, a Russian specialist who is believed to have played a formative role in creating the false Steele dossier.

Dated Sep. 18, 2019, the office headed by former Director Christopher Wray wrote Special Counsel Robert Mueller asking for materials to determine whether to open a criminal investigation into Ohr, the wife of former Justice Department official Bruce Ohr who President Donald Trump has long accused of disseminating information to the political firm which created the Steele dossier.

Previous Republican-led investigations into Nellie Ohr concluded that she may have provided false testimony while describing her work with Christopher Steele, a former British spy who was hired by a Clinton campaign sub-vendor named Fusion GPS.

The new documents state that members of the FBI were initially rebuffed by Mueller’s special counsel office, hindering their ability to prosecute Nellie Ohr at the time.

“On May 31, 2019, D5-POST SCO TEAM advised that some but not all of the cases related to Trump/Russian-collusion had been migrated from Prohibited status to Restricted Access status so that investigators might have the opportunity to identify potentially relevant Restricted Access serials,” the Washington office wrote summarizing the interaction.

However, the sheer volume of searches needed to complete the investigation, combined with the lack of FBI manpower or help from the Special Counsel’s Office, left the FBI in a lurch and without evidence to carry on a prosecution.

Agents “remain incapable of identifying potentially relevant serials in those cases that remained in ‘Prohibited Access’ status,” authors added.

Ohr in 2016 was employed by Fusion GPS, which was hired by the Clinton campaign to explore connections between candidate Trump and Russia. Her marriage to Bruce Ohr, who was currently serving in the Obama Justice Department at the time, became the subject of scrutiny following Trump’s successful election.

Wray, a Trump appointee, later fell out of favor after the president accused him of doing too little to bring charges in the Russiagate case. He resigned shortly before President Trump took office again in 2025.

Evidence in the documents reportedly show that Nellie Ohr shared some of her political research with associates of her husband, contradicting her sworn testimony.

Keep reading

Documents Show DC Bar Skirted Its Own Rules And Due Process To Target Jeff Clark

The D.C. Bar skirted its rules dictating how to fairly open a disciplinary investigation to target and potentially disbar Trump-era Department of Justice official Jeffrey Clark, new documents obtained by The Federalist reveal.

During his brief tenure as U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Ed Martin sought information about the D.C. Bar’s weaponization of its punishment process against Republican lawyers. His letters to the D.C. Bar’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) and the bombshell replies he received not only confirm the legal licensing association’s lawfare against Clark was inspired by a sitting Democrat senator, but also expose the D.C. Bar for trying to cover up its partisan motives.

In a February 7 letter to the D.C. Bar’s Disciplinary Counsel Hamilton P. Fox III, Martin asked the association to produce proof by February 21 that “you are even-handed in your policies” and explain how the Bar handles “clearly politically motivated attacks that come from certain ‘public interest’ groups.”

“This would include something that explains how you limit the targeting of individuals who you may disagree,” Martin noted.

Martin was referring to Clark, who was charged by the legal licensing association in in July 2022 with “attempted … conduct involving dishonesty” and “attempted … conduct that would seriously interfere with the administration of justice.” Clark was also named as one of the 19 “co-conspirator” targets in Democrats’ wide-ranging election indictment in Georgia and even had his house raided by the FBI.

The investigation into Clark appeared to be inspired by a report forwarded to Hamilton’s office on October 7, 2021 by the chief counsel for oversight on the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee. The 394-page document alleged Clark played a key role in a plot to “wield [the] DOJ’s power to override the already-certified popular vote.”

The Trump-era DOJ official did not commit a crime when he drafted a letter to Georgia officials noting the DOJ “identified significant concerns that may have impacted the outcome of the [2020] election in multiple States, including the State of Georgia.” In fact, Clark chose not to send the letter after facing objections from his DOJ superiors and a pivot from then-President Donald Trump.

Keep reading

Mexican Illegal Alien Arrested For Threatening to Shoot President Trump in the Head at a Rally

ICE arrested a Mexican illegal alien in Wisconsin who threatened to assassinate President Trump.

According to Fox News reporter Bill Melugin, in a mailed handwritten letter to an ICE agent, 54-year-old Ramon Morales Reyes said he was angry about the deportations of his family members and said he would use his gun to shoot President Trump in the head at a rally.

“DHS says Reyes illegally re-entered the US at least 9 times between 1998-2005, and has criminal convictions for felony hit and run, criminal damage to property, and disorderly conduct with domestic abuse,” Bill Melugin reported.

This threat to shoot President Trump in the head at a rally comes less than a year after Thomas Crooks shout President Trump in the ear at a Butler rally in July 2024.

Keep reading

American Backlash: Why the Letitia James Mortgage Fraud Investigation Resonates with Americans

“We’re going to definitely sue him. We’re going to be a real pain in the ass. He’s going to know my name personally,” Letitia James said during her 2018 campaign for New York attorney general.

James campaigned openly on her intention to target President Donald Trump, describing him as an “illegitimate president” and an “embarrassment,” while pledging to pursue all legal avenues to scrutinize his finances and real estate transactions. After being elected, she said, “I look forward to seeing him in court when I assume my new position.”

Upon taking office in 2019, James promptly followed through, filing a lawsuit that ultimately led to a $454 million civil judgment against Trump and his organization for allegedly “overvaluing assets” on mortgage applications – despite industry-standard disclaimers advising lenders to conduct their own valuations.

But despite all of James’ efforts to harm him politically, Donald Trump won the presidency in a landslide in 2024. What happened?

Keep reading

Liberal Outlet Politico Urges Democrats to Create a ‘Shadow Cabinet’ to Counter Trump – Suggestions Include John Fetterman’s Wife

The progressive outlet Politico is urging Democrats to create a ‘shadow cabinet’ to fight Trump. Perhaps they haven’t heard, but the chair of the DNC announced that they’re already doing that. He said so back in April.

Remember when Democrats and the media claimed to care about saving our precious norms? What do they call this?

The only difference between Politico’s plan and the one the DNC chair already announced is who will be featured in this unconstitutional body.

From Politico:

As Democrats cast about for a strategy to thwart President Donald Trump’s agenda, rebrand their party and take back power, Sen. Elissa Slotkin recently offered one intriguing idea: Build a shadow Cabinet.

The shadow Cabinet, as envisioned by the Michigan Democrat in an interview with POLITICO, could be composed of the ranking members of congressional committees who could then take the lead in challenging the Trump administration. It’s a common feature of opposition politics abroad and could be a way for Democrats to flood the media zone and deliver a coordinated response to Trump’s most wild maneuvers. But … ranking members?

Ranking members have their uses. They’re good at reclaiming their time and making motions to recommit. But they are not the fresh faces who can give the Democratic Party a sleek new look.

Nor are the thirsty crop of presidential wannabes right for a shadow Cabinet. Everything they say would be parsed for self-serving motivation, distracting from the party’s broader task at hand.

Here are some of the names they float:

Samantha Power – SHADOW SECRETARY OF STATE

Letitia James – SHADOW ATTORNEY GENERAL

Jon Stewart – SHADOW SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Gisele Fetterman – SHADOW SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Bill Nye – SHADOW ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ADMINISTRATOR

Didn’t we just go through this?

Keep reading

Only SCOTUS Can Rein In The Judicial Coup

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on May 15 on what has become a debilitating, critical crisis: the issuance of nationwide injunctions en masse by federal district court judges.

Notably, the overwhelming majority of those judges are Democrat appointees who seek to prevent President Donald Trump from doing what he was elected to do: govern. According to a lawsuit tracker by the Associated Press, more than 200 lawsuits have been filed against Trump’s executive orders.

In three consolidated cases from Washington, Maryland, and Massachusetts, federal district court judges issued nationwide injunctions (sometimes called universal injunctions or, to quote Justice Neil Gorsuch, “cosmic injunctions”) against the implementation of a Trump executive order ending universal birthright citizenship. The plaintiffs in those cases claim the order violates the 14th Amendment.

Those injunctions reflect a broader pattern. In less than four months, roughly 40 nationwide injunctions have been entered against the Trump administration — almost double the number entered during all four years of the Biden administration. As Solicitor General John Sauer pointed out, 35 have come “from the same five judicial districts.”

One could reasonably argue that the judges entering these orders are essentially attempting to undo the results of the last election by keeping in place Biden administration policies — policies that more than 77 million voters roundly rejected last November. These judges apparently believe they have more authority than the president to make decisions on everything from domestic and foreign policy to matters affecting national security and the military.

The Supreme Court should vigorously enforce its prior precedents (including its 1984 decision in U.S. v. Mendoza), which strictly limit the ability of a single unelected district court judge (of whom there are nearly 700) to keep the administration from achieving its policy objectives by ruling not just for those who filed a lawsuit but also for everyone who didn’t.

The court must also end the blatant judge-shopping and what amounts to a collective wholesale interference in the president’s constitutional authority as head of the executive branch.

The May 15 session was itself unusual — hopefully a sign that Chief Justice John Roberts finally recognizes the judicial crisis these lower court judges are causing. Typically, oral arguments end in April, and emergency requests for stays are usually decided on the pleadings without oral argument.

We have to wonder whether the chief justice was prompted to act in part by Justice Samuel Alito’s rather stinging March 5 dissent in Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition (a dissent joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh).

Keep reading

‘60 Minutes’ anchor Scott Pelley ripped for ‘angry, unhinged’ commencement speech criticizing Trump

Outraged critics blasted longtime “60 Minutes” anchor Scott Pelley as “angry” and “unhinged” after he delivered a fear-laced tirade against President Trump during a commencement speech in North Carolina.

The CBS newscaster warned Wake Forest University’s graduating class on May 19 that “insidious fear” has infiltrated schools, businesses, and homes across the nation — leaving America in a state of “peril.”

“Your country needs you — the country that has given you so much is calling you, the class of 2025, your country needs you and it needs you today,” Pelley said during his grandiose sermon-like speech.

“This morning our sacred rule of law is under attack. Journalism is under attack, universities are under attack, freedom of speech is under attack and insidious fear is reaching throughout schools, our businesses, our homes and into our private thoughts,” he continued.

“The fear to speak in America. If our government is, in Lincoln’s phrase ‘of the people, by the people, for the people,’ then why are we afraid to speak? Ignorance works for power. Power can change the definition of the words we used to describe reality. This is an old playbook, my friends. There is nothing new in this.”

Keep reading

Biden Aide Admits Liberal Admin Did ‘Undemocratic Things’ to Try and Stop Trump

In a candid admission, a longtime aide to former President Joe Biden reportedly revealed that White House staff felt justified in taking “undemocratic” actions during his administration, believing that President Donald Trump posed an existential threat to American democracy.

This revelation emerged during an appearance by Axios reporter Alex Thompson on Fox News Sunday, where he discussed insights from his reporting on the former Biden administration.

Thompson described a prevailing mindset among unelected aides, who saw themselves as the true decision-makers, often shielding Biden from scrutiny and managing the presidency behind the scenes.

“If you believe — and I think a lot of these people do sincerely believe — that Donald Trump was and is an existential threat to democracy, you can rationalize anything, including sometimes doing undemocratic things,” Thompson stated.

The aide’s remarks suggest a troubling rationale for actions taken in the name of protecting democracy.

In one notable comment, the aide remarked that Biden “just had to win, and then he could disappear for four years,” implying that the president could step back while his staff handled the day-to-day operations.

“He’d only have to show proof of life every once in a while,” the aide added, emphasizing the tight control exercised by an inner circle of staff members over Biden’s schedule and public interactions.

This admission raises important questions about the nature of governance in a democracy and the lengths to which individuals might go when they perceive a significant threat.

Critics have long pointed to the tensions between security and democratic principles, and this incident illustrates the challenges faced by those in power when navigating such dilemmas.

Keep reading