While Biden vacations and overlooks the Maui fires and the southern border's security risks, his administration is discreetly selling off parts of the unused border wall.

As reported by The Daily Wire, the Biden administration has been silently auctioning components meant for the southern border wall extension.

Online auction house sells border wall parts

An online auction platform, GovPlanet, has reportedly sold over 80 steel parts that were initially designated for the border wall. These sales have generated approximately $2 million since April. Furthermore, more parts are set to be auctioned off later this month.

There's speculation that the Biden administration is hastening the sale of these unused parts to prevent House Republicans from passing legislation that would mandate their use for border wall extension.

Previously, the Senate, under Democrat control, approved a defense appropriations package. This package contained a Republican-backed bill pushing the Biden administration to address the border crisis by extending the wall.

Republican senators express concerns

Republican senators have voiced their concerns about the administration's decision to sell the border wall parts. They highlight the ongoing issue of illegal immigrants entering the U.S. through the southern border.

Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) commented on the matter, stating:

The pennies made from selling the border wall will not be enough to pay the families who suffer from a criminal act committed by someone who crossed our open borders during the Biden administration.

Additionally, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), who co-sponsored the "Finish It Act," described the administration's actions as "outrageous, behind-the-scenes maneuvering."

Increased auction activity post "Finish It Act"

The New York Post noted a significant increase in GovPlanet's auction activities in May, right after Sen. Wicker introduced the Finish It Act. This activity surged again shortly after the Senate approved the defense package.

House Republicans now face the challenge of passing a version of the bill that matches the Senate's before it can become law.

Republican sources estimate that around $300 million worth of taxpayer-funded border wall components have been left unused since Biden's presidency began. The proceeds from the sale of these parts are believed to be redirected to the Pentagon.

GovPlanet's discreet sales

Earlier this month, a source from GovPlanet informed The Daily Upside about the nature of the materials being auctioned. The source stated:

We are legally not allowed to mention these are the border wall materials, or we could lose our jobs. But that’s what they are – 110 percent.

Since President Joe Biden assumed office, there has been a record influx of illegal immigrants into the U.S., with numbers surpassing five million. Data from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection reveals that there have been nearly two million southwest land border encounters in the fiscal year 2023 alone.

Conclusion and implications

The decision to auction off unused border wall parts raises several questions about the Biden administration's stance on border security and its long-term implications.

Please consider sharing this article on Twitter and Facebook to spread awareness.

During his appearance in Iowa, Donald Trump faced questions about the possibility of accepting a plea deal related to the Georgia allegations. His response was unwavering, emphasizing his conviction in his innocence, "we don't ever take a plea deal."

Amidst swirling allegations of election interference in Georgia, Trump remains unyielding, asserting his innocence.

Over the weekend, Trump was vocal about his belief that he has been wrongly accused in the Georgia election interference case. Mediaite reported.

Trump's unwavering belief in his innocence

Confronted with the plea deal question, Trump's rebuttal was clear-cut. He remarked, "We did nothing wrong. We don’t ever take a plea deal. We don’t take plea deals. It’s a wise guy question. You’re just a wise guy."

He further clarified his position, labeling the charges against him as "election interference." Throughout the conversation, Trump's belief in his innocence was evident, as he repeatedly dismissed the idea of a plea deal.

These comments come in light of the news that Fulton County, GA District Attorney Fani Willis is set to present her case against Trump to a grand jury. If an indictment is issued, it would be the fourth legal challenge Trump faces.

Pointing fingers at Biden and the inquisitive reporter

Trump didn't merely defend himself. He insinuated that President Joe Biden might be orchestrating the indictments to bolster his chances in the 2024 elections. He critiqued Biden's eloquence, stating, "Who can’t even put two sentences together. This is Joe Biden."

Additionally, he ridiculed the recent appointment of a special counsel in the Hunter Biden investigation, describing it as laughable on an international scale.

Throughout the discussion, Trump's annoyance with the reporter's line of questioning was palpable, as he repeatedly referred to him as a "wise guy."

Trump's aspirations for a brighter American future

Despite the controversies and legal challenges surrounding him, Trump's optimism about America's trajectory remains undiminished. He voiced his concerns, noting, "The fact is that we have a country that’s in serious trouble. We have a country that’s in major decline. "

Yet, he also conveyed a sense of hope and determination, asserting his commitment to rejuvenating America and restoring its greatness.

Trump's remarks were made during his visit to the Iowa State Fair, a pivotal event in the 2024 campaign trail. His presence was marked by enthusiastic chants from his supporters and endorsements from congressional allies.

Public sentiment and the road ahead

As the legal proceedings progress, the nation remains polarized. While Trump's base continues to rally behind him, others are keenly awaiting the grand jury's verdict.

For now, Trump's message resonates loud and clear: he is confident in his innocence and remains steadfast in the face of challenges.

How this stance will impact his upcoming legal battles is yet to be seen.

Anticipation builds as the case progresses

The upcoming weeks promise to be eventful as the grand jury reviews the allegations against Trump. The nation's attention is fixed, waiting to witness the next chapter in this political saga.

Trump's unwavering confidence and his prowess in rallying his supporters are undeniable. His legacy in American politics, whether celebrated or criticized, is enduring.

As this narrative continues to evolve, it underscores the intricacies and challenges inherent in the American political arena.

Reflecting on the unfolding events

If you found this article insightful, we encourage you to share it on Twitter and Facebook.

Rep. Greg Steube, a Republican from Florida, has initiated the impeachment process against the President as reported by Breitbart.

Amidst the whirlwind of speculations about Biden's 2024 re-election, another storm brews as he faces impeachment articles.

President Joe Biden, already under the microscope for various reasons, now confronts a formal challenge.

Steube's Bold Move

Without waiting for party consensus, Rep. Greg Steube has taken matters into his own hands. He's presented articles of impeachment against President Biden, who's currently navigating through allegations of bribery and corruption. His statement has quickly gone viral, and in it, he said:

He has undermined the integrity of his office, brought disrepute on the presidency, betrayed his trust as president, and acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice at the expense of America’s citizens. The evidence continues to mount by the day — the Biden Crime Family has personally profited off Joe’s government positions through bribery, threats, and fraud. Joe Biden must not be allowed to continue to sit in the White House, selling out our country.

This decisive action by Steube is anticipated to increase pressure on the GOP House leaders, who've shown reluctance in initiating an impeachment inquiry.

Unraveling the Charges

The articles of impeachment draw attention to purported interactions between Hunter Biden, James Biden, and Joe Biden during his vice-presidential tenure. It insinuates that Hunter and James offered privileged access to Joe Biden, seeking financial benefits and business prospects from diverse partners, both domestic and international.

The subsequent impeachment article introduces claims of justice obstruction. It references IRS whistleblower testimonies, suggesting that Biden's campaign team collaborated unlawfully with Justice Department representatives.

This alleged collaboration is believed to have meddled with tax-related investigations targeting Hunter Biden.

The last set of articles cast aspersions on President Biden, accusing him of fraudulence and financial associations with illicit activities, notably drugs and prostitution.

Steube's Public Outreach

Not one to hold back, Rep. Steube has been forthcoming about his reservations. During a segment on Newsmax TV, he elucidated the nuances of his resolution.

Additionally, he unveiled the Helping Understand Narcotics Traces at the Executive Residence, colloquially termed the Hunter Act. This legislation seeks clarity on the Secret Service's probe into the cocaine incident at the White House.

Articulating his concerns, Rep. Steube remarked on the Secret Service's inability to pinpoint the cocaine culprit at the White House. He stressed that the nation deserves transparency and that his bill aims to ensure stringent oversight to thwart future illicit incidents at the White House.

Public Sentiment and Future Implications

Steube's actions have undeniably ruffled feathers in the political arena. While some perceive it as a stride towards transparency, others dismiss it as a political gambit.

The repercussions of this move on the Biden administration and the broader political canvas remain to be seen. As the 2024 elections loom, such events could significantly mold public sentiment.

Staying abreast of these developments is crucial to comprehend the potential ramifications on the nation's trajectory.

Wrapping Up

We encourage readers to share this article on Twitter and Facebook to promote informed discussions.

The state of Pennsylvania mourns the loss of a significant figure, Ellen Casey, who once graced the Governor's mansion as its first lady.

Amidst a legacy of remarkable accomplishments, a somber moment emerges as she tragically died at the age of 91, WGAL reported.

Ellen Casey: More than a title

While many remember Ellen Casey as Pennsylvania's first lady from 1987 to 1995, her identity was multifaceted. She stood beside Governor Bob Casey during his tenure, but her influence extended far beyond ceremonial duties.

Ellen was also the proud mother of present U.S. Sen. Bob Casey. The Casey family's dedication to public service has left an indelible mark on Pennsylvania's political landscape.

In a touching tribute to her contributions, Governor Josh Shapiro decreed that all U.S. and Commonwealth flags be lowered to half-staff across Pennsylvania.

Expressions of respect and memory

Lori Shapiro, the state's current first lady, shared her sentiments, reflecting on the profound impact Ellen Casey had on Pennsylvania's residents, saying:

We are grateful for her dedication to the people of Pennsylvania. May her memory be a blessing for her family and all of us who benefited from her service.

But Ellen's legacy wasn't confined to her official role. She championed causes close to her heart, notably breast cancer awareness and literacy, making a lasting difference in many lives.

A journey of commitment and passion

Ellen Casey's unwavering commitment to Pennsylvania's welfare was evident in her numerous endeavors. Her advocacy for breast cancer awareness has been instrumental in bringing attention to this critical health challenge.

Moreover, her drive to promote literacy underscored her belief in education's transformative power. Through her efforts, she aspired to equip individuals with the knowledge and skills to thrive.

Her departure is a profound loss for her family and Pennsylvania. Yet, her legacy of service and advocacy will undoubtedly resonate with future generations.

Reflecting on a life of significance

The narrative of Ellen Casey's life underscores the profound impact a single individual can have on a community. Her unwavering commitment to public service and her zeal for advocacy have carved a niche in Pennsylvania's annals.

As Pennsylvania grapples with this loss, it's vital to draw inspiration from her life's lessons and the principles she championed. Ellen Casey's journey serves as a beacon, highlighting the virtues of dedication, altruism, and the relentless pursuit of the common good.

While her physical presence will be missed, her ideals and contributions will continue to guide and inspire. Pennsylvania will forever cherish the memories of Ellen Casey with deep reverence and gratitude.

Final thoughts

If this article resonated with you, kindly share it on Twitter and Facebook.

In a recent development, the Department of Justice (DOJ) under President Joe Biden has made moves to shift Hunter Biden's case from a federal court in Delaware to another location.

This decision comes after a plea deal, which many criticized as being too lenient, was rejected by a Trump-appointed judge, Conservative Brief reported.

The DOJ's announcement to voluntarily dismiss two tax charges against Hunter Biden has raised eyebrows.

DOJ's controversial decision

Their intention is to refile these charges either in the Central District of California or Washington, D.C., instead of Delaware. This move is perceived by some, including Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), as an attempt to find a more sympathetic judge for a favorable legal outcome.

The backdrop to this decision is the rejection of a plea deal by U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika in July.

Many critics had labeled this deal as a "joke" and a "sweetheart" arrangement. Sen. Cotton expressed his concerns on Twitter, suggesting that the Biden administration and Hunter's legal team are not negotiating in good faith but are rather conspiring.

Charges against Hunter Biden

Hunter Biden is accused of underreporting his income during the 2010s, which allegedly allowed him to evade paying at least $1.2 million in income taxes.

This information was brought to light by IRS whistleblowers Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, who testified about the alleged obstruction in the DOJ’s Hunter Biden investigation.

Furthermore, E. Martin Estrada, the Biden-appointed U.S. attorney for the Central District of California, reportedly declined to press charges against Hunter Biden in 2022.

It's worth noting that Estrada has previously made donations to the campaigns of both Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris.

Special counsel appointment raises questions

Attorney General Merrick Garland's decision to appoint U.S. Attorney David Weiss of Delaware as a special counsel to continue the Hunter Biden investigation has been met with skepticism.

Legal experts have pointed out that this appointment might be in violation of the DOJ's own rules regarding the selection of special counsels.

Fox News’ legal analyst, Andrew McCarthy, criticized this decision.

He emphasized that the essence of a special counsel is to bring in an external lawyer, not affiliated with the government. Contrary to this principle, Weiss remains a significant figure within the Biden Justice Department.

Concerns over the investigation's progress

McCarthy further highlighted that there isn't any genuine special counsel investigation into Biden.

He expressed concerns about the Biden Justice Department's handling of the investigation, suggesting that they are intentionally allowing the statute of limitations to run its course.

This would mean that most of the alleged misconduct, which accounts for a significant portion of the $21 million highlighted in a congressional investigation report, would become time-barred.

Conclusion

These questions remain unanswered, and only time will tell how this case unfolds. If you found this article informative, please consider sharing it on Twitter and Facebook.

In a recent revelation, a former U.S. senator claimed he warned then-Vice President Joe Biden against inappropriate behavior with his wife.

This adds to the growing concerns about Biden's potential run in the 2024 elections.

Recent polls have shown a decline in Biden's popularity, The Daily Wire reported.

Biden's declining popularity

Recent polls have shown a decline in Biden's popularity.

Tom Shattuck, during his segment, pointed out that Biden's behavior, especially the alleged "hair sniffing", has been a cause of concern for many.

Shattuck mentioned that many women find such actions unsettling. He further commented on Biden's character, questioning his integrity.

Health concerns surrounding Biden

Former U.S. Senator Scott Brown, who was also the U.S. Ambassador to New Zealand under the Trump administration, spoke about Biden's health.

Brown expressed concerns about Biden's health, hinting at potential signs of dementia.

He described some of the symptoms he observed in Biden, such as his walk, mumbling speech, and sudden outbursts of anger. Brown lamented the lack of better leadership options in the country.

Allegations of inappropriate behavior

Shattuck recalled a story Brown had shared with him years ago. It was about an incident when Biden allegedly behaved inappropriately with Brown's wife, Gail, during Brown's swearing-in as a senator.

When asked about the incident, Brown confirmed it. He said he had warned Biden to stop his inappropriate behavior towards his wife.

Brown emphasized that he confronted Biden immediately when the incident occurred. He made it clear that such behavior was unacceptable.

Public reactions and implications

This revelation could have significant implications for Biden's political career.

It adds to the list of controversies surrounding him, especially as the 2024 elections approach.

Public figures, especially those in positions of power, are under constant scrutiny.

Any allegations of inappropriate behavior can severely damage their reputation and public trust.

Looking ahead

It remains to be seen how this revelation will impact Biden's political journey.

With the 2024 elections on the horizon, such controversies could play a crucial role in shaping public opinion.

Leaders are expected to uphold the highest standards of conduct. Any deviation from these standards can lead to a loss of public trust and support.

Conclusion

As the 2024 elections approach, Biden faces multiple challenges. From declining popularity to health concerns and now allegations of inappropriate behavior, his journey to the elections seems fraught with obstacles.

We urge our readers to share this article on Twitter and Facebook to keep the public informed.

Donald Trump was cautioned about making public remarks that could be seen as "inflammatory" regarding his ongoing case.

Former President Donald Trump found himself at the receiving end of a stern advisory from U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan.

She emphasized the gravity of the situation and the need for discretion, Conservative Brief reported.

Integrity of the proceedings at stake

Judge Chutkan's message was unequivocal. She urged both Trump and his counsel, John Lauro, to tread carefully when discussing the case in public forums.

The overarching aim was to preserve the sanctity of the judicial process.

The hearing was convened to iron out differences between the prosecution, spearheaded by special counsel Jack Smith, and Trump's defense team. The bone of contention was the handling of evidence pertinent to the case.

Decisions on evidence access

A pivotal moment in the hearing was the introduction of a "protective order" related to evidence.

Post this decision, the prosecution signaled their intent to grant Trump's defense access to a vast array of documents. This gesture is anticipated to expedite the case's trajectory.

However, Judge Chutkan opined that not every piece of information in the case should be under wraps. She advocated for the protection of only "sensitive" data.

Contentions over evidence limitations

The courtroom bore witness to a spirited debate on the constraints imposed on evidence. The prosecution's stance was to enforce expansive rules, restricting Trump's legal team from divulging specific materials to their client. These encompassed testimonies from witnesses and recorded interactions of Trump's associates.

Conversely, Trump's legal representatives contended that the government's demands were excessive.

They felt it encroached upon Trump's First Amendment privileges. In her deliberation, Judge Chutkan underscored that while free speech is a right, it isn't without boundaries.

Prosecutorial apprehensions

Thomas Windom, a member of Smith's prosecutorial brigade, articulated apprehensions about potential evidence misuse.

He accentuated the imperative to thwart the "indiscriminate distribution of materials" to the masses. Windom also insinuated that the defense's game plan was transparent, hinting at their reluctance to contest the case within the courtroom's confines.

While Judge Chutkan concurred with certain aspects of Windom's arguments, she was reticent about endorsing a comprehensive directive.

Navigating unfamiliar territory

John Lauro, representing Trump, drew attention to the unprecedented nature of the proceedings.

He remarked on the novelty of a presidential candidate simultaneously grappling with legal indictments. In response, Judge Chutkan underscored the primacy of systematic judicial administration.

She further elaborated that the defendant's inclination to counter political adversaries must be curtailed. She was emphatic about the criminal nature of the proceedings and the consequent curbs on Trump's public discourse.

Repercussions of contentious remarks

Judge Chutkan voiced her trepidations regarding the ramifications of contentious public statements on the trial. She postulated that such utterances could potentially skew the perceptions of the jury. The judge also hinted at the possibility of hastening the trial if such pronouncements persisted.

The hearing underscored the intricate dynamics and sensitivities enveloping Trump's legal battle. Judge Chutkan's advisory serves as a testament to the sacrosanct nature of the judicial process.

We encourage our readers to share this article on Twitter and Facebook.

A federal judge has approved a secret subpoena related to a case against Donald Trump, raising eyebrows due to its implications about the former president.

In a recent development, a federal judge has given the green light to a "secret subpoena" in a case against former President Donald Trump.

This move has sparked discussions and debates among legal experts. The case, filed by special counsel Jack Smith, has been described by some as making a "facially absurd" claim about Trump, as reported by Conservative Brief.

Georgetown professor expresses surprise

Jonathan Turley, a law professor at Georgetown University, expressed his astonishment at the disclosure of the subpoena. He highlighted the significant $350,000 fine imposed on Twitter by U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell.

However, what caught his attention even more was the secrecy surrounding the subpoena and the justification provided for it.

The court's justification for the secrecy was based on the belief that revealing the warrant to Trump might jeopardize the ongoing investigation. The concern was that Trump might have the chance to destroy evidence, alter his behavior, or inform his associates.

Flight risk claim raises eyebrows

One of the most debated aspects of this case is the claim that Trump might be a flight risk.

Turley found this assertion particularly baseless, stating, "Judge Howell actually agreed that the former President was a flight risk. Process that for a second." He emphasized the implausibility of such a claim, given Trump's high-profile status and constant security detail.

Turley further elaborated on the absurdity of the claim, questioning where Trump could possibly flee to without being recognized. He rhetorically asked if Trump would go to a place like Cuba or even Mars to live incognito.

In his view, the flight risk claim undermines the credibility of the court's order.

Trump's response to the case

Earlier this week, Trump seemed prepared to challenge a court order sought by Smith. This order aimed to limit what Trump could publicly say about his involvement in the events of January 6th.

NBC News reported that Trump is determined to speak out about the criminal charges he faces. He believes that federal prosecutors are infringing on his First Amendment rights. Trump stated, "They’re not taking away my First Amendment rights."

Special Counsel Jack Smith had previously requested a protective order to prevent Trump from disclosing evidence. However, Trump's legal team did not object to this order. Instead, they asked for a version that would be "less restrictive."

Trump's political battles continue

Amidst these legal challenges, Trump remains active in the political arena. At a recent rally in Windham, N.H., he criticized prosecutors and President Joe Biden.

He expressed his belief that Biden wants to silence him and infringe upon his First Amendment rights.

Trump emphasized his intention to discuss the case publicly, stating, "I will talk about it, I will." He believes that not addressing questions from the media about the case could be detrimental to his political aspirations.

Conclusion

We encourage our readers to share this article on Twitter and Facebook to spread awareness and foster discussion.

House Oversight Chairman James Comer reveals plans to subpoena members of President Joe Biden's family as part of a corruption investigation.

In a recent development, members of President Joe Biden's family are set to be subpoenaed in connection with a corruption investigation. This revelation was made by House Oversight Chairman James Comer, Daily Wire reported.

During an interview on Fox Business, Comer shared that his committee is diligently working on building a robust case. This case, based on financial records and testimonies, aims to investigate the flow of millions of dollars to the First Family from foreign nationals. The ultimate goal of this investigation might be an impeachment inquiry.

Comer's statement on the investigation

Comer expressed his determination to bring the Bidens before the committee.

He stated, "We are going to subpoena the family." He further emphasized the committee's commitment to building a case strong enough to win in court. Given the current resistance from the Biden attorneys, Comer anticipates a legal battle once the subpoenas are issued.

Internal memos from the GOP-led oversight panel have highlighted payments exceeding $20 million to the Bidens. These payments, sourced from various foreign countries like China, Russia, Ukraine, Romania, and Kazakhstan, were funneled through over 20 companies. Such transactions have raised alarms about potential influence peddling. Comer has even suggested that numerous members of Joe Biden's family might have been involved in this scheme.

Focus on legislative solutions

The Oversight Committee has clarified its primary objective: to devise "legislative solutions" that strengthen ethics laws and financial disclosure rules. However, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has indicated that the investigation into the Biden family's finances might soon escalate to an impeachment inquiry. Speculations are rife that this inquiry could commence this fall, especially with the 2024 presidential election on the horizon.

Notably, Hunter Biden, the president's son, is at the epicenter of this investigation. He is also under the scanner of a federal criminal inquiry. Devon Archer, Hunter's former business associate, recently provided insights to the House Oversight Committee. He revealed that the Biden family's reputation significantly aided their business endeavors during Joe Biden's vice-presidential tenure.

Details from Devon Archer's testimony

Archer disclosed that Hunter frequently used speakerphone to communicate with his father during business meetings. Although these conversations were casual, they sent a powerful message to business associates. Archer also confirmed that Joe Biden attended several dinners with his son's foreign business partners.

However, the investigation has faced criticism from Democrats in Congress. Rep. Jamie Raskin, a key member of the panel, accused his GOP colleagues of reiterating old information about Hunter Biden's business activities. He emphasized that these dealings had been identified by Congressional Republicans years ago.

President Joe Biden's response

For years, Joe Biden maintained that he never discussed business with Hunter. But as more evidence surfaced, the narrative shifted. The president now asserts that he never engaged in business with his son. Recently, when questioned about his calls with Hunter's business associates, the president firmly responded, "I never talked business with anybody."

Comer, on the other hand, believes that the president has been caught in multiple falsehoods. He confidently stated, "Bank records don't lie." Before issuing subpoenas to the Biden family, the committee plans to interview a few more associates. This step might also necessitate additional subpoenas.

Challenges faced by the investigation

Comer highlighted the numerous obstacles the investigation has encountered. Agencies like the Department of Justice, FBI, Secret Service, IRS, and even the Biden family attorneys have posed challenges. Despite these hurdles, Comer affirmed, "We continue to produce evidence about every two weeks."

Please consider sharing this article on Twitter and Facebook to spread awareness.

Recent revelations indicate that special counsel Jack Smith's team may have made multiple errors in their investigation against former President Donald Trump.

Conservative Brief reported that the investigative approach of special counsel Jack Smith towards former President Donald Trump might have been more aggressive than warranted. The team had managed to get a federal judge in Washington to sanction a search warrant for Trump's X account, previously known as Twitter. The intriguing part? Trump was kept in the dark about it.

Unraveling the search warrant saga

The decision to unseal the warrant came from U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell. Alongside this, she also sanctioned a nondisclosure order. This move was later validated by an appeals court, as referenced in The Epoch Times' report.

Judge Howell, as quoted by the higher court, was of the opinion that informing Trump about the warrant could potentially compromise the investigation. She speculated that Trump might tamper with evidence, modify his actions, or alert his allies.

Another surprising element was Judge Howell's assertion that Trump could potentially evade the law. This claim was met with skepticism from several legal pundits.

Smith's team: A series of oversights?

However, the narrative took a twist when Smith's team conceded to having made a mistake in one of the entries that influenced the order. The appeals court underscored that the government had mistakenly cited "flight from prosecution" as a rationale in its application for the nondisclosure order.

Clarifications from The Epoch Times suggested that Judge Howell's final decision wasn't anchored on the alleged flight risk. Even though X expressed a wish to share parts of the warrant with Trump, U.S. Circuit Judge Florence Pan, a nominee of President Joe Biden, articulated in the unsealed ruling that such an action would compromise the investigation.

Adding to the list of oversights, Smith's team had to face another challenge. They had to come clean to a federal court about not furnishing all evidence to Trump's defense team, contrary to their prior assertions.

Further complications in the probe

A Newsweek article highlighted that Smith's team, on July 31, confessed they hadn't made available video footage from an FBI operation at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate from a year prior on an online platform. This platform was designated for Trump's defense team to scrutinize, as per legal stipulations.

The motive behind this FBI operation was to retrieve certain classified documents, which Trump professed he had declassified before his presidency concluded. The government's affirmation during the July 18 hearing, which stated that all pre-indictment surveillance footage had been shared, was subsequently debunked.

Renowned Georgetown University law professor Jonathan Turley voiced his apprehensions in a column. He was particularly taken aback by the covert nature of the subpoena and Judge Howell's justification based on Trump's potential flight risk.

Legal community's perspective

Turley underscored the improbability of Trump, given his omnipresent security detail, managing to elude them and go incognito.

He emphasized that Trump, being one of the most identifiable figures on the planet, would find it near impossible to remain undetected.

“Judge Howell actually agreed that the former President was a flight risk. Process that for a second,” Turley wrote. “Trump has 24/7 security. So Howell agreed that he might shake his sizable security detail, evade them, and go on the lam. He is one of the most recognized figures in the world. He would have to go to Mars to live incognito.”

Reflecting on the investigation's trajectory

The sequence of events encompassing the probe into former President Trump by special counsel Jack Smith's team has become a topic of intense debate. The team's recent admissions of lapses have amplified the scrutiny and discourse surrounding the investigation.

We urge our readers to disseminate this article on Twitter and Facebook, fostering a broader dialogue on this pivotal issue.

Newsletter

Get news from American Digest in your inbox.

    By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: American Digest, 3000 S. Hulen Street, Ste 124 #1064, Fort Worth, TX, 76109, US, http://americandigest.com. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact.
    Christian News Alerts is a conservative Christian publication. Share our articles to help spread the word.
    © 2024 - CHRISTIAN NEWS ALERTS - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
    magnifier