Why Are Hamas's Crimes Ignored by Western Media? - Bassam Tawil

 

​ by Bassam Tawil

Hamas, apparently, does not want food or medication to reach the Palestinian population in the Gaza Strip, particularly not via Israeli border crossings. This situation is most likely caused by Hamas's desire to prolong and aggravate the suffering of the Palestinians and create a "famine" so it can place the blame on Israel.

• The Palestinian Authority and other Arab governments have been reminded in recent days of the reasons why entering the Gaza Strip after the war would be risky, if not impossible...

• According to reports from the Gaza Strip, Hamas has murdered a number of Palestinians who it believed had indicated willingness to be part of a new government that would replace the terrorist group after the war.

• Hamas, apparently, does not want food or medication to reach the Palestinian population in the Gaza Strip, particularly not via Israeli border crossings. This situation is most likely caused by Hamas's desire to prolong and aggravate the suffering of the Palestinians and create a "famine" so it can place the blame on Israel.

• "Why is the media ignoring what is going on in central and southern Gaza? Hamas is assassinating Gazans, particularly tribe leaders, in order to deter anyone other than Hamas from delivering humanitarian relief and participating in Gaza." — Hamza Howidy, Palestinian social media influencer from the Gaza Strip, x.com, June 26, 2024.

• Until the international community – and particularly the Biden administration – fully support Israel's efforts to destroy Hamas, unfortunately there can be no real discussion of "the day after" in the Gaza Strip.

• Israel... will not be the only party to benefit from Hamas's demise. A large number of Arabs and Muslims who oppose Hamas and other Iran-backed Islamist groups will also benefit, even though it is "politically incorrect" and immensely dangerous to say so.

• In reality, those advocating for a "ceasefire" are asking for Hamas to be allowed to continue ruling the Gaza Strip, rearming, and gearing up to attack Israel -- in their words, "again and again."

• A ceasefire will only ignite an immediate increase in terrorist attacks against Israel. Worse, Islamists worldwide will be incentivized to launch attacks not only against Israel but also against Europe. Islamists have already attacked US troops in the Middle East more than 150 times in the region since Oct 7.

• By exposing the crimes of Hamas against its own people and raising awareness of these threats -- instead of helping the terrorists cover them up -- the international media can actually help to protect their own countries against steadily increasing terrorism. At the moment, terrorists over the world can only see their efforts as victorious, glorified and rewarded.

According to reports from the Gaza Strip, Hamas has murdered a number of Palestinians who it believed had indicated willingness to be part of a new government that would replace the terrorist group after the war. Pictured: Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorists share a moment of friendship for the crowds in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip, on November 28, 2023. (Photo by AFP via Getty Images)

If you think that the Palestinian Authority (PA) or any Arab state would agree to take control of the Gaza Strip as long as the Iran-backed terrorist group Hamas has not been totally destroyed and removed from power, you would be wrong.

Removing the military and governing capabilities of Hamas, however, unfortunately cannot be achieved as long as the Biden administration and Western countries keep exerting pressure on Israel to halt the war, which erupted after the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack that resulted in the murder of 1,200 Israelis and the abduction of more than 240 others as hostages.

The Palestinian Authority and other Arab governments have been reminded in recent days of the reasons why entering the Gaza Strip after the war would be risky, if not impossible, unless Hamas's military capabilities are first destroyed and the terrorist group is completely ousted from power.

According to reports from the Gaza Strip, Hamas has murdered a number of Palestinians who it believed had indicated willingness to be part of a new government that would replace the terrorist group after the war.

The most recent victim of Hamas's measures to prevent the emergence of new leaders in the Gaza Strip is a prominent member of the Abu Amra clan. Earlier this week, Hamas terrorists shot and killed him in the Al-Zawaida neighborhood in the center of the Gaza Strip. The man was reportedly accused of expressing readiness to "collaborate" with Israel and other countries in distributing humanitarian aid to the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

The Abu Amra clan retaliated by killing two Hamas terrorists. The feud between the Abu Amra clan and Hamas included shooting, and burning property, houses and cars.

Because Hamas and the PA have reportedly been stealing most of the food and medicine for their own members, it opposes other Palestinians getting engaged in the humanitarian aid distribution process. Several Palestinians, as well as aid workers, who nevertheless defied Hamas and took part in the distribution of food and medicine in the Gaza Strip were murdered or wounded by the group's terrorists.

Hamas, apparently, does not want food or medication to reach the Palestinian population in the Gaza Strip, particularly not via Israeli border crossings. This situation is most likely caused by Hamas's desire to prolong and aggravate the suffering of the Palestinians and create a "famine" so it can place the blame on Israel. This plan, in fact, seems to be why Hamas terrorists have been firing rockets at the Kerem Shalom border crossing between the Gaza Strip and Israel.

The assassination of the Abu Amra clan member and the theft of humanitarian aid are only a few of the Hamas atrocities that are often "overlooked" by the mainstream media and those in the West who describe themselves as "pro-Palestinian."

Additionally, there is almost no discussion in the media or among "pro-Palestinian" individuals and groups of Hamas's use of Palestinians as human shields in its Jihad (holy war) against Israel. Since the beginning of the war, Hamas terrorists have been firing at Israeli troops from Palestinians' rooftops, bedrooms, kitchens, backyards, balconies, schools, hospitals, kindergartens and even the displaced families' tent camps.

"Why is the media ignoring what is going on in central and southern Gaza?" asked Hamza Howidy, a Palestinian social media influencer from the Gaza Strip. "Hamas is assassinating Gazans, particularly tribe leaders, in order to deter anyone other than Hamas from delivering humanitarian relief and participating in Gaza."

Howidy's question has an easy answer: When Israel is not involved, the media turns a blind eye. Foreign journalists apparently do not care when Hamas drags Palestinians into the streets and executes them in cold blood. These journalists, it appears, do not think it is worth covering such stories because Israel is not at fault.

The most recent murder of the clan member was not the first incident of its kind. Earlier this year, Hamas terrorists beheaded the leader of the powerful Doghmush clan in the northern Gaza Strip after reports claimed that he had expressed a desire to get his family to oversee the distinction of aid to the Palestinians.

Hamas has also murdered, wounded and arrested PA security officers from the West Bank who allegedly tried to enter the Gaza Strip under cover of securing aid trucks. A senior Hamas official said that the officers belonged to the PA's General Intelligence Service, headed by Major General Majed Faraj.

Another recent Hamas crime that has gone virtually unnoticed by the international media: Hamas terrorists fired a projectile at a UNICEF humanitarian aid convoy. The aid convoy was coordinated with Israeli authorities to reunite children from the northern Gaza Strip with their families in the south. "During the coordinated activity, the Hamas terrorist organization fired a projectile at the humanitarian route near the UNICEF aid convoy and [Israeli] soldiers securing the area," the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said. "There were no injuries to international aid workers or IDF soldiers in the attack."

"[The attack on the] UN aid workers and the assassination of the Abu Amra tribe leader by members of Al-Qassam [Hamas's armed wing] demonstrate that Hamas is determined to destroy the humanitarian situation in Gaza and is willing to sacrifice thousands of lives in order to pressure Israel to end the war so they can survive," remarked Howidy.

Until the international community – and particularly the Biden administration – fully support Israel's efforts to destroy Hamas, unfortunately there can be no real discussion of "the day after" in the Gaza Strip.

Israel, however, will not be the only party to benefit from Hamas's demise. A large number of Arabs and Muslims who oppose Hamas and other Iran-backed Islamist groups will also benefit, even though it is "politically incorrect" and immensely dangerous to say so.

In reality, those advocating for a "ceasefire" are asking for Hamas to be allowed to continue ruling the Gaza Strip, rearming, and gearing up to attack Israel -- in their words, "again and again."

A ceasefire will only ignite an immediate increase in terrorist attacks against Israel. Worse, Islamists worldwide will be incentivized to launch attacks not only against Israel but also against Europe (see here, here and here). Islamists have already attacked US troops in the Middle East more than 150 times in the region since Oct 7.

By exposing the crimes of Hamas against its own people and raising awareness of these threats -- instead of helping the terrorists cover them up -- the international media can actually help to protect their own countries against steadily increasing terrorism. At the moment, terrorists over the world can only see their efforts as victorious, glorified and rewarded.

Bassam Tawil is a Muslim Arab based in the Middle East. The work of Bassam Tawil is made possible through the generous donation of a couple of donors who wished to remain anonymous. Gatestone is most grateful.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20738/hamas-crimes-western-media

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

What’s worse: A diminished president or failed policies? - Jonathan S. Tobin

 

​ by Jonathan S. Tobin

The presidential debate raised questions about Joe Biden’s competence. Still, the perception of America’s weakness is about more than cognitive decline.

 

For some observers worried about the widespread perception of American weakness abroad, President Joe Biden’s shocking performance in last week’s debate with former President Donald Trump provided an easy explanation for the country’s problems. The disasters on his watch—from the disgraceful rout of the Afghanistan withdrawal to the war in Ukraine and the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel facilitated by American appeasement of Iran—have left American foreign policy in ruins and a world in chaos. Thus, the evidence of Biden’s diminished capacity on display during the 90-minute verbal wrangle can be seen as a reason why the nation’s enemies have been emboldened during the last three-and-a-half years.

But even if Biden is a liability, to the United States as well as the Democratic Party, the problem goes deeper than the president’s apparent decline.

No matter how sharp the current commander-in-chief may be, the crises abroad are as much a function of flawed policies that the Biden foreign-policy team has been pursuing as the president’s lack of acuity. A weak leader is a standing invitation for provocations they believe will not generate a robust response. But if the aim of American policy is diplomacy for its own sake and a desire to appease the most dangerous foes, then even a great leader might not avert disaster.

A 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. president?

As for Biden’s problems, an explanation for what might be described as the most disastrous public appearance for a president, let alone at a presidential debate, the attempts to spin the fiasco from inside the White House raised more questions than they answered.

Related Articles

Woke education leads to attacks on JewsJune 27, 2024

Why are we failing to respond to ‘1,000 Charlottesvilles?’June 28, 2024

Midway through the debate, the president’s aides let it be known that he had a cold. Yet realizing that they were dealing with a disaster, in the coming days they came up with a different explanation. According to Axios, which, along with The New York Times, is the best place to go to read administration leaks generally intended to flatter President Joe Biden, the problem was the time of day. The online publication reported that White House staffers said that there were basically two Bidens:

“From 10 am to 4 pm, Biden is dependably engaged—and many of his public events in front of cameras are held within those hours. Outside of that time range or while traveling abroad, Biden is more likely to have verbal miscues and become fatigued, aides told Axios.”

That is, one supposes, possibly closer to the truth than the spin the president’s allies were floating in public the weekend following the debate, which more or less amounted to a demand that Americans ignore what they saw and heard on Thursday night. Given the bifurcated and essentially tribal nature of U.S. politics these days, social media and online commenting showed that was good enough for many Democrats, if not too many others.

While perhaps we’d all like to work what used to be called “bankers’ hours,” that’s a problem for someone who is always accompanied by a military aide who carries the so-called “nuclear football” with the launch codes for the nation’s nuclear weapons. A president may be called upon to make decisions of national or international importance at any time of day or night, and not just because, as Ronald Reagan put it, they “live above the store.” In the 2008 Democratic primary campaign, Hillary Clinton famously ran what became known as the “3 a.m. phone call ad,” in which she touted herself as ready and able to answer the phone during a crisis that didn’t come during regular office hours.

If the best the White House can do is to say that Biden is ready to answer the call only six hours a day, that’s not terribly reassuring. As Americans sift through the implications of the post-debate spin and the fact that Biden staffers and their media echo chamber have been lying about the president’s acuity, that is not the nation’s main problem. Nor is the key question to be answered right now whether Biden can be prevailed upon to pull out of the race—a move that the Times reports that his wife Jill, son Hunter and the rest of his family adamantly oppose—to be replaced with the equally unpopular Vice President Kamala Harris or another Democrat. It’s who is in charge of the decision-making process right now, no matter what time of day one is needed, and what is it that they are trying to achieve?

Obama replay

Biden’s foreign policy has from its first day in office been essentially a replay of that pursued during the presidency of Barack Obama. With much of the same personnel in place at the National Security Council and the U.S. State Department, they were primarily focused on turning the clock back to January 2017 and rolling back everything that Trump did in his four years.

To speak of the Obama influence inevitably raises claims that the 44th president is the puppet master and Biden merely a stand-in for him. While Obama has enormous influence on the current administration, it would be misleading to say he is merely pulling the strings on a Biden marionette. While his former staffers still look up to him in a way they have never done with Biden, running a country or even its foreign policy is too complex a matter to be handled by someone who is no longer in the rooms where things happen. Not to mention the fact that Biden’s inner circle still resent Obama’s high-handed treatment of him while he was vice president, as well as the way he pushed him aside to ease the way for Clinton’s failed presidential run in 2016.

Still, it is true that Obama’s ideas and policies are more or less identical to those of the current administration. At the top of its “To Do” list was an attempt to revive Obama’s disastrous Iran nuclear deal by lifting most of the sanctions Trump imposed and unfreezing Iranian assets. But the Iranians were having none of it. Though they benefited enormously from Biden’s decisions, they refused to seriously negotiate even for a weaker nuclear pact than the one Obama trumpeted as his foreign-policy legacy in 2015. They pocketed the money that rolled into their coffers from the switch in policy and invested it in their main goals: spreading terror and getting closer to achieving their nuclear ambitions.

Even worse, the Biden team then proceeded to precipitously pull out of Afghanistan. While Trump had also planned to end the American presence in that country after nearly two decades of the war there, he had held off doing so until the Afghan government could properly prepare. Biden, however, wished to boast that there were no U.S. troops there on the 20th anniversary of the war, and acting with impatience and a lack of foresight, wound up presiding over a complete collapse of the country and an easy triumph for the Taliban. American personnel died in the chaos (giving the lie to Biden’s false debate claim that no American forces died on his watch) with others left behind, as well as billions of dollars in equipment left for the terrorists to seize.

That was the beginning of a spiral of bad foreign news for the United States. With America’s enemies convinced that Biden wasn’t to be feared and utterly feckless, it was only a matter of time before they would strike. Six months later, following a series of rather confusing Biden pronouncements on the issue, Russia invaded Ukraine. In the following two years, the United States has helped prop up the Ukrainians with an unprecedented amount of aid. With the war now stalemated, the administration is stuck with a policy supposedly dedicated to the defeat of Russia but lacks a plan that would explain how that might be achieved, no matter how many hundreds of billions are sent to Kyiv.

In the fall of 2023, the cost of Washington’s commitment to appeasing Iran led to another catastrophe. The Oct. 7 Hamas assault on Israel was facilitated by Iranian aid, as well as the justified perception that the administration was more interested in toppling the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu than in bolstering Israel’s security. Biden initially responded to the largest mass slaughter of Jews since World War II and the Holocaust with a pledge of support for Israel and the goal of eliminating Hamas.

However, the Biden team of Obama alumni is, at its core, hostile to Netanyahu and Israeli security, and committed to the goal of Palestinian statehood with an almost religious fervor. So, it was little surprise that almost within days of Biden’s first praiseworthy statements concerning Oct. 7, that the administration began talking out of both sides of its mouth about the war. Since then, it has continued to aid Israel but has slow-walked arms deliveries, recycled Palestinian propaganda, and sought to stall and second-guess Israel’s efforts to defeat Hamas.

A fatal combination

Has a president who is, at best, a part-time leader or at worst, no longer capable of facing the enormous challenges of the presidency, played a role in exacerbating these problems? That seems obvious. As The Wall Street Journal reported, European leaders were shocked by Biden’s diminished capacity at the recent G-7 Summit. Indeed, the president skipped the part of the proceedings where the allied heads of government meet informally for candid discussions where there would be no teleprompter telling him what to say, as is reportedly the case for all Biden appearances these days, including small fundraising gatherings.

The president has seemed to lack the ability to anticipate and forestall crises by either effective policies or making foes fear the consequences of crossing the United States, as was almost certainly the case when Trump was in charge. Yet by seeking to recycle Obama’s policies towards Iran, Russia and Israel that had already been shown to have failed, Biden was on course for trouble even if he had been at his best.

The president’s visible decline is not so much a reason to replace him on the Democratic ticket as it is to question whether he ought to still be running things until January. What has unfolded on his watch has been a string of disasters that are not merely the result of his personal failings but of an administration dedicated to ideas about multilateralism, the importance of failing international organizations like the United Nations and an attempt to befriend nations that see themselves as at war with the West. Though it is apparent to all except those who are blinded by partisanship, the combination of these two factors has been a recipe for a world in crisis.

Jonathan S. Tobin is editor-in-chief of JNS (Jewish News Syndicate). Follow him @jonathans_tobin.

Source: https://www.jns.org/whats-worse-a-diminished-president-or-failed-policies/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump moves to reverse verdict in New York case after historic Supreme Court ruling - John Solomon

 

​ by John Solomon

The letter asked for permission to file the motion and laid out a timetable for trying to resolve the issues before the court.

 

Former President Donald Trump's lawyers moved quickly Monday night to take advantage of the Supreme Court ruling that he enjoyed immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts, sending a letter notifying the judge in his New York hush money case that they intend to ask to set aside the verdict reached by a jury last month, according to multiple sources.

The sources, speaking to Just the News on condition of anonymity, asked Judge Juan Merchan to give them until July 10 to file arguments supporting a motion to vacate the verdict. 

The letter asked for permission to file the motion and laid out a timetable for trying to resolve the issues before the court.

Trump signaled he planned to move aggressively to challenge the verdict in light of the 6-3 ruling by the Supreme Court that presidents enjoy immunity for their official acts.

Earlier in the day, he posted on Truth Social that the ruling "should end all of Crooked Joe Biden's Witch Hunts against me, including the New York Hoaxes - The Manhattan SCAM cooked up by Soros backed D.A., Alvin Bragg, Racist New York Attorney General Tish James’ shameless ATTACK on the amazing business that I have built, and the FAKE Bergdorf’s 'case.' PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!"

John Solomon

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/trump-moves-reverse-verdict-new-york-case-after-historic-supreme

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Biden slams SCOTUS presidential immunity ruling, ignores questions about dropping out - Stepheny Price

 

​ by Stepheny Price

Biden's address lasted four minutes and forty seconds before he bolted and dodged questions from reporters

 

President Biden slammed the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity in Trump v. United States, saying it means there are virtually no limits on what a president can do, in a speedy address Monday evening.

The president spoke for less than five minutes – four minutes and 40 seconds to be exact – before turning his back to the press and walking away. 

"This is a fundamentally new principle, and it's a dangerous precedent, because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law, even including the Supreme Court of the United States," Biden said.

The Supreme Court ruled that a former president has substantial immunity from prosecution for official acts committed while in office, but not for unofficial acts.

TRUMP IMMUNITY CASE: SUPREME COURT RULES EX-PRESIDENTS HAVE SUBSTANTIAL PROTECTION FROM PROSECUTION

Trump and Biden squared off in their high-stakes 2024 election debate rematch last week.  (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images, left, )

In a 6-3 decision, the Court sent the matter back down to a lower court, as the justices did not apply the ruling to whether or not former President Trump is immune from prosecution regarding actions related to efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

Biden continued his address, saying that the American people must decide whether Donald Trump's assault on democracy on January 6th makes him "unfit" for public office and the highest office in the land.

"The American people must decide if Trump's embrace of violence to preserve his power is acceptable. Perhaps most importantly, the American people must decide if they want to entrust the presidency to Donald Trump once again. Now knowing, he'll be even more emboldened to do whatever he pleases, whenever he wants to do it," Biden said.

Biden also spoke about the character of the nation's first president, George Washington, and how he believed power was limited, not absolute.

Biden wrapped his speech and dodged questions from reporters as he left abruptly. 

Reporters shouted questions at Biden, asking him if he plans to drop out of the presidential race following his debate with Trump. 

TRUMP TOUTS SUPREME COURT'S PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY RULING AS 'BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND FOR DEMOCRACY'

US President Joe Biden speaks during a Memorial Day address at Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Virginia, US, on Monday, May 27, 2024.  (Bonnie Cash/UPI/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Biden has not taken questions from the press and has used teleprompters at his events, including a fundraiser in the Hamptons, following his disastrous debate performance against Trump last week.

"Today’s Historic Decision by the Supreme Court should end all of Crooked Joe Biden’s Witch Hunts against me, including the New York Hoaxes - The Manhattan SCAM cooked up by Soros backed D.A., Alvin Bragg, Racist New York Attorney General Tish James’ shameless ATTACK on the amazing business that I have built, and the FAKE Bergdorf’s "case." PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!," Trump wrote in a post on his social media site Truth Social. 

BIDEN CAMP DISMISSES TRUMP IMMUNITY RULING: 'DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACTS'

Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges and argued he should be immune from prosecution from official acts done as president of the U.S.  (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

The former president was charged in August 2023 by Special Counsel Jack Smith with conspiring to overturn the results of his election loss to President Biden in the run-up to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. 

Trump has denied doing anything wrong and has said this prosecution and three others are politically motivated to try to keep him from returning to the White House.

Trump shared his reaction to the Supreme Court's ruling on his presidential immunity case, saying it's a "big win for our constitution and democracy," according to his Truth Social page.

"THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IS A MUCH MORE POWERFUL ONE THAN SOME HAD EXPECTED IT TO BE. IT IS BRILLIANTLY WRITTEN AND WISE, AND CLEARS THE STENCH FROM THE BIDEN TRIALS AND HOAXES, ALL OF THEM, THAT HAVE BEEN USED AS AN UNFAIR ATTACK ON CROOKED JOE BIDEN’S POLITICAL OPPONENT, ME. MANY OF THESE FAKE CASES WILL NOW DISAPPEAR, OR WITHER INTO OBSCURITY. GOD BLESS AMERICA!" Trump posted. 

Fox News Digital's Brooke Singman and Brianna Herlihy contributed to this report.

 

Stepheny Price

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-slams-scotus-presidential-immunity-ruling-ignores-questions-about-dropping-out

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Defiant Biden camp rebuffs calls to drop out, plots recovery from debate disaster - Ben Whedon

 

​ by Ben Whedon

"One Bad Night?" Speaking to Vogue over the weekend, the first lady said the family “will not let those 90 minutes define the four years he’s been president. We will continue to fight.”

 

Despite a widely panned debate performance against former President Donald Trump on Thursday, President Joe Biden – and his wife – appear poised to ignore calls to drop out of the race and instead double down on his reelection bid.

The CNN presidential debate saw Biden draw considerable scrutiny from both sides of the aisle over his frequent mumblings, lengthy stares, and often vacant expressions, which collectively renewed concerns over his physical and mental fitness for office. Major news outlets pronounced doom upon his campaign even during the event, with Politico running the headline “Biden is toast” barely halfway into the debacle.

Despite such grim assessments of his debate performance, however, the campaign swiftly rejected speculation that he would drop out of the race. Such statements, however, have done nothing to curb theories that the Democratic Party may opt to replace him as the nominee via behind-the-scenes dealings.

Speaking on the Furthermore with Amanda Head podcast on Friday, former Trump spokeswoman Liz Harrington insisted that the Republican would not face the incumbent president in the election.

"We're not running against Joe Biden," she said. "This is part of the whole show … like, we're beating Joe Biden? No. They're putting someone else in, and they're going to continue to lie about President Trump."

But thus far, the campaign has given little indication that Biden could decline reelection in a manner reminiscent of President Lyndon Johnson’s 1968 announcement, and few opportunities exist for the party to remove him without his consent in light of the essentially completed primary election. Instead, the first family has begun pushing back on claims of Biden’s mental frailty and seems to be gearing up for the long haul.

Biden’s family is all-in on his reelection

In the wake of the debate, the first family met at Camp David and reportedly excoriated the president’s campaign advisors and urged Biden to clean house. Reportedly in the crosshairs were political veterans former White House chief of staff Ron Klain, senior advisor Anita Dunn, and her husband Bob Bauer, according to Politico. All three played crucial roles in Biden’s debate preparations. An advisor to Biden pushed back on claims that the trio were the focus of the first family’s ire.

Among those present were Biden’s wife Jill, as well as Hunter Biden, his other children, and grandchildren. Hunter and Jill, for their part, have reportedly emerged as the strongest proponents of Biden remaining in the race, the Guardian reported.

Speaking to Vogue over the weekend, the first lady said the family “will not let those 90 minutes define the four years he’s been president. We will continue to fight.”

“I know”

The campaign appears poised to concede on Biden’s age to some degree and has instead opted to present Biden as the superior option in light of Trump’s own conduct. A recent campaign ad, titled “I know” includes an acknowledgement by Biden of his age, after which he goes on to assert that it had not impacted his sense of morality or duty.

“I know I’m not a young man. But I know how to do this job. I know right from wrong,” Biden says in the one-minute segment. “I know how to tell the truth. And I know, like millions of Americans know, when you get knocked down you get back up.”

In contrast to Biden’s statements, was footage of Trump on Jan. 6, 2021, in which he spoke to supporters who would later travel to the U.S. Capitol. Members of the crowd that gathered outside the Capitol ultimately entered unlawfully in an incident that Trump’s critics have attempted to paint as an “insurrection.” Trump denies that characterization of events.

Polling data of other candidates

Apart from insisting that Biden can remain in his post, the campaign has further taken to highlighting the adverse consequences of his withdrawal, namely the likely chaos of nominating another candidate last-minute and the loss of existing funds.

“[I]f he were to drop out, it would lead to weeks of chaos, internal foodfighting, and a bunch of candidates who limp into a brutal floor fight at the convention, all while Donald Trump has time to speak to American voters uncontested,” the campaign declared in a fundraising email. “All of that would be in service of a nominee who would go into a general election in the weakest possible position with zero dollars in their bank account. You want a highway to losing? It’s that.”

Accompanying that message was polling data from Data for Progress showing that Biden fared as well or better against Trump than any of his prospective Democratic alternatives. In that poll, conducted exclusively on June 28, among 1,011 likely U.S. voters, Trump led Biden 48% to 45%, with 7% unsure.

Among the alternative candidates were Vice President Kamala Harris, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, New Jersey Sen. Corey Booker, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, and Illinois Gov. J. B. Pritzker, all of whom polled similarly against Trump.

"I can tell you, you know, the polling and the numbers in the conversation suggests Kamala Harris and Gavin Newsom are top of the list," pollster Scott Rasmussen told the "Just the News, No Noise" television show on Monday. "But the activist base of the Democratic Party dominates that process. If this were to be thrown open, all of a sudden, it would be a brutal, brutal fight among Democrats, those who want to get rid of Kamala Harris, because they think she's a weak candidate... it would be, you know, just the difficulty of replacing President Biden on the as the nominee would be staggering."

Democratic heavyweights: "One bad night"

Signaling that the party elite are unlikely to turn on Biden are the bevy of supportive statements from Democratic lawmakers attempting to brush off the president’s debate performance and move on to the next stage of the campaign.

“Bad debate nights happen. Trust me, I know. But this election is still a choice between someone who has fought for ordinary folks his entire life and someone who only cares about himself,”  former President Barack Obama posted on X. “Between someone who tells the truth; who knows right from wrong and will give it to the American people straight — and someone who lies through his teeth for his own benefit. Last night didn’t change that, and it’s why so much is at stake in November.”

“I refuse to join the Democratic vultures on Biden’s shoulder after the debate. No one knows more than me that a rough debate is not the sum total of the person and their record,” posted Sen. John Fetterman, D-Penn. The Pennsylvania senator notably won his own seat after a widely panned debate against then-Republican Senate candidate Dr. Mehmet Oz.

Other lawmakers, including Sens. Ben Cardin, D-Md.; Raphael Warnock, D-Ga.; Chris Murphy, D-Conn.; and Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.; all issued statements either expressing support for Biden, defending his performance in the debate, or urging him to remain in the race, The Hill reported.

Nonetheless, social media has been set ablaze with videos mocking Biden's blank stares, confused demeanor and rambling answers.

The primary has mostly concluded

“Joe Biden is going to be the Democratic nominee, period. End of story. Voters voted. He won overwhelmingly,” the campaign said in the same fundraising email that featured the polling data.

Biden is currently the presumptive party nominee, having earned 3,894 delegates across the myriad primary contests, with a further 36 uncommitted, and seven delegates pledged to other candidates. He needed 1,976 to lock up the nomination.

Beginning in January, Biden stood as a candidate in contests across the country and beat back nominal primary challenges from Rep. Dean Phillips, D-Minn., and Hollywood guru Marianne Williamson. Local entrepreneur Jason Palmer managed to win American Samoa.

Planned virtual roll call

Complicating any effort to potentially swap Biden for another nominee at the convention is the deadline for the party to certify its nominee to appear on the ballot in all 50 states.

Democrats announced in May that they would hold a virtual roll call to formally certify Biden as the nominee in order to make Ohio’s Aug. 7 deadline to appear on the ballot. The Democratic National Convention is set for Aug. 19-22.

“Through a virtual roll call, we will ensure that Republicans can’t chip away at our democracy through incompetence or partisan tricks and that Ohioans can exercise their right to vote for the presidential candidate of their choice,” DNC Chairman Jaime Harrison said at the time.

Barring a substantive change in plans, an alternative nominee chosen at the convention would likely not be able to appear on the ballot in at least Ohio.

"The legal logistics of replacing Joe Biden are enormously complex. First of all, he's already on the ballot and a number of states that will probably have to be lawsuits to replace him on the ballot," Rasmussen also said. "Secondly, there is a convention that all of the delegates have already been or majority, the delegates have been pledged to President Biden, they have to find a way to change the rules. Now, that's happened before 1980s Ted Kennedy tried to unbind Jimmy Carter's delegates, it didn't work."

Just the News sought comment from the White House, but received no response.

Ben Whedon is an editor and reporter for Just the News. Follow him on X.

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/wkddefiant-biden-camp-rebuffs-calls-drop-out-plots-recovery-post-debate

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

John Solomon, Alan Dershowitz talk through SCOTUS ruling on Trump immunity swiping down Jack Smith’s case - Just The News

 

​ by Just The News

An informative discussion

 

John Solomon and Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz talk through the Supreme Courts decision this week establishing that President’s have presumptive criminal immunity for official acts, delivering a massive blow to Jack Smith’s election interference case against former President Donald Trump. Though, the court did not go so far to give absolute immunity and granted only “some” not all. Additional interviews with Rep. Scott Perry and Mike Benz. 

Just The News

Source:https://justthenews.com/podcasts/john-solomon-reports/john-solomon-alan-dershowitz-talk-through-scotus-ruling-trump

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

ADL launches $4b lawsuit on behalf of US Oct. 7 victims - JNS

 

​ by JNS

“Iran is the world’s leading state sponsor of antisemitism and terror—along with Syria and North Korea, they must be held responsible."

 

A boy views a memorial in Newton, Mass., honoring those who were kidnapped and taken into the Gaza Strip by Hamas on Oct. 7, after it was vandalized on April 7, 2024. Photo by Arthur Mansavage/Shutterstock.

The Anti-Defamation League, together with Washington, D.C.-based law firm Crowell & Moring LLP, filed suit on Monday in U.S. federal court against Iran, Syria and North Korea on behalf of American victims of Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre.

The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, states that the three countries provided material support—including military, tactical and financial—to Hamas that enabled it to commit atrocities in Israel on Oct. 7. 

“Iran is the world’s leading state sponsor of antisemitism and terror—along with Syria and North Korea, they must be held responsible for their roles in the largest antisemitic attack since the Holocaust,” said ADL CEO and National Director Jonathan Greenblatt.

The plaintiffs are requesting compensatory damages against the defendants of no less than $1 billion and punitive damages no less than $3 billion.

Compensation would be drawn from the U.S. Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism Fund, a fund Congress created in 2015 to allow Americans “who were injured in acts of international state-sponsored terrorism” to gain some measure of relief.

Related Articles

Oct. 7 ‘deeply personal,’ says US actor Michael RapaportJuly 2, 2024

Blinken: Israel has ‘lost sovereignty’ in the northJuly 2, 2024

Influencers unite against antisemitism in New YorkJuly 1, 2024

The case will “set the record straight” about the truth of the attack given the wave of “10/7 denialism” that followed it, according to the ADL.

More than 125 U.S. victims and their family members will be represented.

Crowell & Moring has decades of experience in litigating and winning terrorism cases, including in connection with the bombing of UTA flight 772 in 1989, the bombings of the U.S. embassy in Beirut in 1983 and 1984 and the bombing of the U.S. embassy in Nairobi in 1998.

Crowell & Moring’s Terrorism Litigation Team is led by Aryeh Portnoy and John Murino.

“It is imperative to combat terrorism using whatever tools are available,” said Portnoy. “One of those tools is the courts, and another is the U.S. Victims of State-Sponsored Terrorism Fund. We are committed to fighting for the victims and families so that they are never forgotten, and so that they may find some measure of justice for the horrors they have endured.”

JNS

Source: https://www.jns.org/adl-brings-suit-against-iran-on-behalf-of-us-victims-of-oct-7/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Jewish prosecutors in blue city blow whistle on alleged antisemitism in DA's office - Michael Ruiz

 

​ by Michael Ruiz

Deputy DAs in Los Angeles raise concerns of office antisemitism under boss George Gascon

 

A growing number of deputy district attorneys in Los Angeles says they have concerns about antisemitism in the office after months of silence on the issue from their boss, which culminated in clashes between anti-Israel agitators and counterprotesters outside a synagogue in a heavily Jewish neighborhood in the city.

Violence erupted outside the Adas Torah synagogue on Pico Boulevard last week, prompting condemnations from a range of prominent Democrats, including President Biden, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass.

But according to a number of Los Angeles prosecutors, there was notable silence from the district attorney tasked with prosecuting criminal acts in connection to the clashes: George Gascon.

VIOLENCE BREAKS OUT AFTER ANTI-ISRAEL AGITATORS SURROUND LA SYNAGOGUE, CLASH WITH ISRAEL SUPPORTERS

LAPD officers clash with anti-Israel protesters outside the Adas Torah synagogue in Los Angeles on June 23, 2024. (DAVID SWANSON/AFP via Getty Images)

"I hate going to work and entering a building where I feel like my boss will treat me differently simply because I'm Jewish, and that’s how I feel and many others feel," said Brian Schirn, a veteran prosecutor helming the DA's narcotics division.

Key issues Schirn and other deputy district attorneys brought up were Gascon's slow response to Hamas' Oct. 7 terror attack on Israel; his endorsements from local political groups accused of antisemitism, including the People's City Council, a group dubbed "blatantly antisemitic" by the American Jewish Council's Los Angeles chapter; and the fact that between a third and half of the nearly two dozen whistleblower retaliation lawsuits filed by fellow deputy district attorneys come from Jewish plaintiffs.

BIDEN ‘APPALLED’ BY VIOLENCE AT LA SYNAGOGUGE, BUT DOJ WON'T SAY IF IT'S SEEKING CHARGES

They say he took an aggressive posture after pro-Israel counterprotesters joined the Adas Torah clashes, but not against the antisemitic mob that kicked things off. They say Jewish prosecutors have been passed over for more than a dozen promotions to prominent head deputy positions. And they say Gascon only addressed Hamas' bloody Oct. 7 rampage in Israel after a letter from more than 130 employees asked him to do so.

Israel supporters clash with anti-Israel protesters blocking access to the Adas Torah synagogue in Los Angeles on June 23, 2024. (DAVID SWANSON/AFP via Getty Images)

In his response to the petition, he did not mention Hamas or use the term "antisemitism," but in a statement to Fox News Digital, Gascon's office condemned antisemitism by name and "all forms of hatred."

"The District Attorney’s Office condemns all forms of hatred, including antisemitism and takes allegations of discrimination seriously," a spokesperson told Fox News Digital. "Any suggestion that the DA’s Office is sympathetic to organizations that promote hatred, discrimination, violence, or terrorism is unfounded. Our approach to prosecuting demonstrations and counterprotests is driven solely by the principles of law and justice, without any bias toward any group."

WATCH: Biden DOJ pressured to prosecute violent LA synagogue attackers

Video

 

 

According to one of the retaliation lawsuits, Deputy District Attorney Amy Pentz, who is Jewish, was invited to join the office's "Equity Action Team." After just one meeting, in which she thanked the panel for including her and said she was concerned about antisemitism, she was kicked out of the group "under the pretext that there were too many lawyers" on the panel, according to court documents.

Another deputy DA suing over alleged retaliation is John Lewin, a veteran cold case prosecutor who recently came home from leave early to help with a murder trial.

LA INTERNAL AFFAIRS WATCHDOG ACCUSES LEFTIST BOSS OF HIDING FACTS TO THWART SHERIFF'S REELECTION

Pro-Israel and anti-Israel protesters argue opposing views near the Adas Torah synagogue on June 23, 2024, in Los Angeles. (Zoe Cranfill / Los Angeles Times via AP)

"I have no idea what George Gascon personally believes, but from what I can tell, he doesn’t personally believe anything other than what will further his political ambition," said Lewin, who is Jewish. "Whether he is antisemitic in his heart, I have no idea. But the people around him and the groups that support him absolutely are."

He said he takes issue with Gascon seeming to dismiss allegations against anti-Israel protesters who camped out at UCLA before allegedly saying he'd go after counterprotesters "to the fullest extent of the law."

Video of the synagogue standoff shows anti-Israel protesters and counterprotesters brawling. At one point, a woman could be seen on the ground curled up in a fetal position as a mob kicks her while she's down.

George Gascón stands next to Tiffiny Blacknell. (Los Angeles District Attorney's Office)

"The fact that he would outwardly say that he would treat cases with Jewish suspects with the full force of the law, and on the other hand talk about how he wasn't going to do anything to protesters, is shameful and an overt sign of antisemitism," Schirn said. "And everything he's done from the endorsements he's accepted with people that are so vocally full of Jewish hate through his actions as district attorney are appalling, and the public needs to know so that when they vote, they're informed as to what this district attorney will and will not do." 

Gascon's challenger in the upcoming election, Nathan Hochman, argued that the incumbent's silence on antisemitic protests on college campuses and outside the Adas Torah synagogue sends the wrong signal to people behind them.

I'm here at the Adas Torah Synagogue, where last Sunday over 150 pro-Hamas supporters engaged in violent and anti-Semitic actions against the Jews that were here. President Biden has weighed in, Mayor Bass has weighed in, Governor Newsom has weighed in, calling these actions… pic.twitter.com/Ag41O1IoY0

— Nathan Hochman (@NathanHochmanDA) June 28, 2024

"Vile and reprehensible" speech is protected by the First Amendment, he said, but rioting, violence and hate crimes are not.

And when words transition into illegal conduct, it's the DA's responsibility to do something about it, he added.

"You had President Biden weighing in on the Adas Torah synagogue Sunday, Gov. Newsom calling it appalling, Mayor Bass calling it abhorrent," Hochman told Fox News Digital. "But one person was missing, the person in charge of all prosecutions, all felony prosecutions – the district attorney. His staying silent in the background, not just in connection with this incident, emboldens criminals," Hochman said.

Joseph Iniguez, George Gascon, Richard Ceballos and Rachel Rossi attend Reform L.A. Jails Summit + Day Party: Mental Health Matters on Nov. 9, 2019 in Pasadena, California. (Jesse Grant/Getty Images for Patrisse Cullors)

Gascon's office denied allegations of antisemitism and said it was working to expand the Equity Action Team once again.

"Regarding promotions and representation within our office, we are dedicated to a fair and transparent process that values the qualifications and contributions of all our employees," the statement continued. "We are actively working to ensure that our equity and diversity panel reflects the broad spectrum of our community, including Jewish representation."

Hochman countered that the highest levels of the DA's office are filled with unqualified personnel.

Police in riot gear are seen trying to restore order at the scene of a violent altercation between supporters and opponents of Israel outside the Adas Torah synagogue in Los Angeles. (Getty Images)

Gascon's No. 2 is Chief Deputy DA Joseph Iniguez, who can be seen in recently released video footage arguing with police as they tried to conduct a field sobriety test on this then-fiance. His former No. 3, Diana Teran, is facing 11 felony charges. And his chief of staff, Tiffiny Blacknell, is a former public defender who has been criticized for calling for an end to prisons, calling police "barbarians" and claiming to have been a looter during the 1992 Rodney King riots while bashing "Westside White liberals."

"The fact that these three people who lead the DA's office under Gascon are either unqualified, underqualified or right now being charged with criminal conduct is an indication of the catastrophic incompetence by which Gascon has run that office," Hochman told Fox News Digital. "And if you add in the 20-plus lawsuits of people he has retaliated against, it just helps cement the truth that Gascon does not deserve to be the DA and can't actually function as an effective DA."

Fox News' Bradford Betz contributed to this report.

 

Michael Ruiz

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/us/jewish-prosecutors-big-blue-city-blow-whistle-alleged-antisemitism-das-office

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Scott Rasmussen says polling shows elites do not understand the rest of the country - Misty Severi

 

​ by Misty Severi

Rasmussen, who created the polling company Rasmussen Reports, said the majority of Americans care more about sports and baseball season than presidential debates and politics.

 

Polling powerhouse Scott Rasmussen claimed Monday that recent polls show a major disconnect between the elite one percent of the country, and voters when it comes to priorities. 

Rasmussen, who created the polling company Rasmussen Reports, said the majority of Americans care more about sports and baseball season than presidential debates and politics. Viewership for the first presidential debate last week, saw lower numbers than the first debate for the 2020 and 2016 presidential elections, according to CBS News.

"What it suggests first is that the elites don't understand the country they want to rule over, even on something as simple as who's going to watch the debate," Rasmussen said on the "Just The News, No Noise" TV show. "We start talking about particular issues and the gap has enormous implications ... One of them is that a majority of people in this elite world, the elite one percent, believe that the federal government should have the power to censor social media posts. Only 16% of voters agree."

Rasmussen said another example of the disconnect between voters and elite Democrats is that when it comes to gun laws, most Americans do not agree that private handgun ownership should be banned. 

"You have this group that is going to try and implement policies and actions, that they think are right and natural, and they are running right into this tremendous amount of opposition that they don't see coming," Rasmussen said. "So the elite bubble breeds problems for the people right now, in President [Joe] Biden's orbit, because they are misunderstanding how the American people are."

The pollster also commented on the viewership of the first presidential debate, and the impact it could have on voter turnout. Rasmussen claimed the debate would probably harm Democrats more because of a lower voter turnout, but that voters were not likely to switch parties.

He also predicted that 2024 could be like the 1980 election between former Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, where a third party candidate, John Anderson, took a notable percent of the vote that helped Reagan win the presidency. 

"It may be that if nothing changes, a lot of people will say 'I can't vote for Joe Biden, I'm not gonna vote for Trump, I'm gonna stay home or I'm gonna vote for [Robert F. Kennedy Jr.]'" Rasmussen said.

Misty Severi

Source: https://justthenews.com/accountability/media/scott-rasmussen-says-polling-shows-elites-do-not-understand-rest-country

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump immunity case: Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have substantial protection from prosecution - Brooke Singman , Brianna Herlihy

 

​ by Brooke Singman , Brianna Herlihy

The issue before the Supreme Court stemmed from Special Counsel Jack Smith's election interference case against former President Trump

 

 

 

The Supreme Court ruled Monday in Trump v. United States that a former president has substantial immunity from prosecution for official acts committed while in office, but not for unofficial acts.

In a 6-3 decision, the Court sent the matter back down to a lower court, as the justices did not apply the ruling to whether or not former President Trump is immune from prosecution regarding actions related to efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

"The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority. 

"The President is not above the law. But Congress may not criminalize the President’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the Executive Branch under the Constitution. And the system of separated powers designed by the Framers has always demanded an energetic, independent Executive," he said. 

Members of the Supreme Court (L-R) Associate Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil M. Gorsuch, Sonia Sotomayor, and Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Associate Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Elena Kagan, and Brett M. Kavanaugh pose in the Justices Conference Room prior to the formal investiture ceremony of Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson September 30, 2022 in Washington, D.C. (Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States via Getty Images)

SCOTUS WEIGHS MONUMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL FIGHT OVER TRUMP IMMUNITY CLAIM

"The President therefore may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled, at a minimum, to a presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. That immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office, regardless of politics, policy, or party," he continued. 

READ THE SUPREME COURT OPINION — APP USERS, CLICK HERE:

The question stemmed from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s federal election interference case in which he charged Trump with conspiracy to defraud the United States; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding; and conspiracy against rights. 

Those charges stem from Smith’s months-long investigation into whether Trump was involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot and any alleged interference in the 2020 election result.

Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges and argued he should be immune from prosecution from official acts done as president of the U.S. 

Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump boards his plane after speaking at a campaign rally in Freeland, Mich., Wednesday, May 1, 2024. (AP Photo/Paul Sancya) (AP Photo/Paul Sancya)

JUSTICE ALITO QUESTIONS WHETHER PRESIDENTS WILL HAVE TO FEAR 'BITTER POLITICAL OPPONENT' THROWING THEM IN JAIL

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented, saying the decision "makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law."

"Relying on little more than its own misguided wisdom about the need for ‘bold and unhesitating action’ by the President … the Court gives former President Trump all the immunity he asked for and more. Because our Constitution does not shield a former President from answering for criminal and treasonous acts, I dissent," she said. 

Justice Clarence Thomas penned a separate concurrence "to highlight another way in which this prosecution may violate our constitutional structure" – the appointment of Jack Smith as special counsel. 

"In this case, the Attorney General purported to appoint a private citizen as Special Counsel to prosecute a former President on behalf of the United States. But, I am not sure that any office for the Special Counsel has been ‘established by Law,’ as the Constitution requires. By requiring that Congress create federal offices ‘by Law,’ the Constitution imposes an important check against the President—he cannot create offices at his pleasure."

"If there is no law establishing the office that the Special Counsel occupies, then he cannot proceed with this prosecution. A private citizen cannot criminally prosecute anyone, let alone a former President," he said.

"[T]here are serious questions whether the Attorney General has violated that structure by creating an office of the Special Counsel that has not been established by law. Those questions must be answered before this prosecution can proceed. We must respect the Constitution’s separation of powers in all its forms, else we risk rendering its protection of liberty a parchment guarantee," he concluded.

Smith’s case against the former president and its trial have been pending amid the high court’s consideration of the issue. 

In an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital, former President Trump said, "I have been harassed by the Democrat Party, Joe Biden, Obama and their thugs, fascists and communists for years, and now the courts have spoken." 

"This is a big win for our Constitution and for democracy. Now I am free to campaign like anyone else. We are leading in every poll—by a lot—and we will make America great again," he said.

The justices heard arguments from Trump attorney John Sauer and Michael Dreeben, a Justice Department attorney representing Special Counsel Jack Smith, on April 25 on whether presidents should have "absolute immunity."

During those arguments, both liberal and conservative justices focused on the broader implications of the question for future presidents but raised sharply different concerns.

Justice Samuel Alito questioned the repercussions of charging a former president. 

"Now if an incumbent who loses a very close, hotly contested election knows that a real possible nullity after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go off into a peaceful retirement, but that the president may be criminally prosecuted by a bitter political opponent," Alito asked, "will that not lead us into a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a democracy? And we can look around the world and find countries where we have seen this process, where the loser gets thrown in jail," he said. 

Donald Trump and Jack Smith (Getty Images)

Meanwhile, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, appointed by President Biden, asked if the "potential for criminal liability is taken off the table, wouldn't there be a significant risk that future presidents would be emboldened to commit crimes with abandon while they're in office?" 

TRUMP ATTORNEY, SUPREME COURT JUSTICE CLASH ON WHETHER A PRESIDENT WHO 'ORDERED' A 'COUP' COULD BE PROSECUTED

"If someone with those kinds of powers, the most powerful person in the world with the greatest amount of authority, could go into office knowing that there would be no potential full penalty for committing crimes. I'm trying to understand what the disincentive is from turning the Oval Office into, you know, the seat of criminal activity in this country," she said.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh summed up the stakes for the court's decision: "This will have huge implications for the presidency."

TRUMP WARNS THAT IF HE LOSES PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY, SO WILL 'CROOKED' JOE BIDEN

"I’m not talking about the present, so I'm talking about the future," Kavanaugh said. 

And Justice Neil Gorsuch stressed during questioning: "We're writing a rule for, yes, for the ages."

As for Alito's question, the former president has repeatedly claimed that he is being prosecuted by his political opponents, warning Americans and voters that all cases against him, in all jurisdictions, are being brought by his opponent — President Biden — and being done in coordination with the White House. 

Meanwhile, the ruling comes after a New York jury found Trump guilty on all counts of falsifying business records in the first degree stemming from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's investigation.

 

Brooke Singman is a political correspondent and reporter for Fox News Digital, Fox News Channel and FOX Business.

Brooke Singman , Brianna Herlihy

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-immunity-case-supreme-court-rules-ex-presidents-substantial-protection-prosecution

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter