Vigilant News

Eternal Vigilance is the price of liberty.

Law

Vote to Remove Trump From Ballot in Maine Raises Stakes for U.S. Supreme Court

By ,

The decision by Maine to join other states in disqualifying Donald Trump from the ballot increases the urgency for the U.S. Supreme Court to promptly intervene. According to experts, this case may also determine whether states have the authority to enforce a power that Congress expressly granted to itself.

As Colorado’s all-Democrat Supreme Court ruled last week and Maine’s Democrat Secretary of State Shenna Bellows declared Thursday, much of the debate over whether Trump can be disqualified under the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution has centered on whether the former president’s conduct and speech on January 6, 2021, met the amendment’s definition of “engaging in insurrection or rebellion.”

However, due to the language in the final clause of the post-Civil War amendment, legal analysts assert that the high court might have a rather straightforward endeavor.

“The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article,” The amendment specifies, for further clarity, that a candidate convicted of insurrection could also be permitted to appear on a ballot by a two-thirds vote of both the House and Senate.

“I think the Supreme Court will focus on the fact that there is no authority in the 14th Amendment for application by state courts. There is no application by courts at all,” Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz said in a video he posted on the X social media platform.

Dershowitz told John Solomon’s Just the News separately that he expects Maine’s declaration and Colorado’s decision to both be overturned.

Mike Davis, a former attorney for the Senate Judiciary Committee and the originator of the Article III Project think tank, asserts that the 14th Amendment is not subject to state enforcement. “It must be done by Congress.”

He noted that after the 14th amendment, Congress enacted a law for criminal prosecution of insurrection, and he believes a candidate would have to be convicted under that law for the disqualification clause to apply.

The Colorado State Republican Party’s appeal of the state Supreme Court’s decision on Wednesday evening also relies on this interpretation of the amendment. It partially requested the nine justices to ascertain “whether Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment is self-executing to the extent of allowing states to remove candidates from the ballot in the absence of any Congressional action authorizing such process.”

Although legal ramifications continue to accumulate, the response to Maine’s ruling was prompt.

Republican Senate candidate in Arizona Kari Lake defended Trump, claiming that she believed voter suppression had occurred.

“Democrats fear they can’t beat President Donald J. Trump at the ballot box, so they’re trying to take him off the ballot altogether and deprive American citizens of their sacred right to choose their next President,” Lake wrote in a statement. “A politician unilaterally booting a presidential candidate off the ballot is voter suppression of the highest level.”

Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy characterized the current situation as a “threat to democracy.”

“The system is hellbent on taking this man out, the Constitution be damned,” Ramaswamy wrote. “I stand by my prior pledge to *withdraw* from any state’s ballot that ultimately removes Trump from its ballot. I call on DeSantis, Christie, and Haley to do the same – or else they are tacitly endorsing this illegal and brazen election interference in the GOP primary. This cancer in American politics isn’t limited to the Democrats.”

For her part, and despite being viewed with suspicion by the greater MAGA contingent, Chairwoman of the Republican National Committee Ronna McDaniel stated that the organization is eager to assist in the courtroom challenge to the ruling.

“Democrat election interference, just like we saw in Colorado,” McDaniel wrote. “State officials do not get to decide who the American people cast their vote for. We look forward to helping fight this legal battle in the US Supreme Court.”

 

 

Presidential Immunity Case: The Supreme Court Will Not Hear Immediately Despite Jack Smith’s Speed Plea
A ruling in favor of former President Donald Trump has prevented the Supreme Court of the United States from hearing his case for presidential immunity immediately.

By ,

On Friday, the high court denied Smith’s request for an expedited review. Consequently, the case will proceed through the customary proceedings in the appeals court and will likely ultimately reach the SCOTUS.

This outcome represents a triumph for Trump and a substantial setback for Smith, who is pressed for time to present Trump to a preponderantly Democratic jury prior to the election.

According to polling, a conviction could cost Trump millions of votes, and if he fails to appeal the conviction by November, there is a possibility that it will harm his campaign on Election Day. The timing of Smith’s prosecution has been characterized by Trump as “election interference,” an effort to manipulate the forthcoming presidential election.

The SCOTUS denied an immediate review of Trump’s presidential immunity claims less than two weeks after Smith initially requested that the justices ascertain expeditiously whether Trump could be legally prosecuted on the charges pertaining to January 6. Those charges allege that Trump allegedly attempted to tamper with the results of the 2020 presidential election.

“Despite having lost, the Defendant was determined to stay in power,” the indictment claims. “So for more than two months following Election Day on November 3, 2020, the Defendant spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election that he actually won. These claims were false, and the Defendant knew they were false.”

In that particular case, Trump was indicted on four counts. “One of obstruction and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding; one of conspiracy to defraud the United States; one of conspiracy against rights; and one on obstruction and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding.”

Smith, attempting to stick to his ideal trial date of March 4, 2024, is requesting an expeditious review of the case out of concern that it may be postponed until 2025, following the presidential election.

Image

“It is of imperative public importance that respondent’s claims of immunity be resolved by this Court and that respondent’s trial proceed as promptly as possible if his claim of immunity is rejected,” the prosecutors implored.

However, Trump’s attorneys pushed back on Smith’s request:

Importance does not automatically necessitate speed. If anything, the opposite is usually true. Novel, complex, sensitive, and historic issues — such as the existence of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts — call for more careful deliberation, not less.

They argued that SCOTUS adoption of the case is unnecessary “before the lower courts complete their review.”

 

House Republicans Blow It, Reward the FBI by Renewing FISA Process

By ,

The U.S. Senate last Wednesday approved an annual defense policy measure that incorporated a temporary extension of a warrantless government surveillance authority, bringing its expiration date further into the distance by at least a few months.

Without congressional action, the controversial Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) will expire at the end of the year. However, a vote of 87-13 by senators to approve a $886 billion defense authorization measure with a short-term renewal attached would extend its validity until April 19. It is anticipated that the House will now consider the measure tomorrow.

You might be wondering what Section 702 is, and that is likely due to the media’s unwillingness to report on any technicalities the Intelligence Community exploits to spy on American citizens. Given how intertwined the corporate media is with the Intel community, it’s not a huge surprise that these things go unreported.

Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) authorizes the United States government to conduct warrantless, mass surveillance of electronic communications, including phone calls, text messages, emails, and other correspondence, of both Americans and foreigners. Information obtained in violation of the law without a warrant may be utilized to indict and incarcerate individuals, even in cases unrelated to national security. In light of the nation’s documented history of surveillance authority abuse and the opaque nature of the program, it is reasonable to be apprehensive that Section 702 may be exploited to selectively target disadvantaged groups, including journalists, minority communities, and political activists.

Last week, 147 ineffectual Republicans cast a vote in favor of reauthorizing the FISA program, which had been exploited by the FBI for the duration of candidate and then President Donald Trump’s administration.

This morning, Attorney Alan Dershowitz and former Defense Department Chief of Staff Kash Patel joined Maria Bartiromo to discuss political assassin Jack Smith and his strategic maneuvers to depose Donald Trump.

Kash Patel reminded the FOX News audience that Republicans had just voted to reauthorize the FISA Program, which the FBI used to eavesdrop on President Trump from 2016 onwards, through the 2024 election.

Kash Patel: Yeah, it’s great to be with you, Maria. Look, the biggest concern I have going forward is the politicization and weaponization and creation of a two tier system of justice as a result. Back when Devin Nunes and I ran the Russia gate investigation and exposed the FISA corruption, we recommended a slew of fixes. So it never happened again. Unfortunately, Congress chose to allow 702 FISA to basically be reauthorized.

What does that mean? What is 702? It’s fancy for foreign intelligence surveillance. It means me, as a former national security prosecutor and intelligence operative, would go overseas and manhunt terrorists. That’s what it’s for. But the FISA court, in April of 2022, publicized an opinion that said the FBI used it illegally 275,000 times domestically against Americans, 16 different occasions against those affiliated with, January 6, 19,000 times domestically against donors to a congressional campaign, and, wait for it, 24,000 separate times against Americans and groups in and around January 6.

That FISA process has been turned on its head, redirected inwards. And anyone who says, oh, that’s just a Republican conspiracy speak, that’s the FISA court that rescinded Rod Rosenstein’s illegal surveillance of Donald Trump twice based on our investigation. And now they do it again, and they prove the FBI and DOJ have weaponized justice. And the Republican leadership in Congress allowed it to be reauthorized, essentially through the next election cycle…

…What Chris Ray has now done is weaken American national security and redirected one of the most sensitive intelligence apparatuses against elections and those protesting their free speech right within America. And every time the FISA court asked the FBI, why did you allow your agents to do this? Their answer was, I could not recall. And they gave them a get out of jail free card.

And the Republican majority, I know this is harsh, rewarded them for breaking the law and allowing this election interference to continue through 2024, mainly against Donald Trump.

To be fair, not all Republicans supported the bill.

Rep. Eli Crane, for his part, said that “FISA 702 is a violation of the 4th Amendment. Additionally, this bill continues to entangle us in forever wars abroad and even managed to abandon heroes from Northern Arizona, including the Navajo Nation, that sacrificed for our country during WWII.”

According to Rep. Matt Rosendale, “FISA Section 702 has allowed the FBI to spy on U.S. citizens more than 278,000 times without a warrant! FISA should not be combined with our national defense, and it is UNACCEPTABLE that the D.C. Cartel is bypassing regular order to jam Members by forcing them to vote on two unrelated bills in one vote.”

Additionally, we saw Reps Chip Roy, Andy Biggs, Randy Webber and Andrew Clyde make statements against the bill. Below is a list of Republicans who voted to renew the FBI’s right to spy on you and your families.

Image

Surveillance “Reform” Legislation Pulled by GOP Leadership
Last week we reported on two bills that would reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)

By ,

Two bills seeking reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act were withdrawn from the floor by the Republican leadership of the House of Representatives. This action was taken in response to the criticism directed at Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., for permitting the introduction of the bills.

RELATED: Surveillance “Reform” Legislation Proposed by the House Intelligence Committee Is Deceptive at Best, Destructive at Worst

Late Monday evening, Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, a member of the House Rules Committee, verified to the Washington Examiner that neither of the Section 702 reform bills would be brought to the floor for a vote this week.

Republicans have been divided regarding the extension of Section 702 of FISA; therefore, Johnson had planned to introduce both bills on Tuesday and have the one that receives the most votes proceed to the Senate. The House Judiciary Committee introduced the Protect Liberty and End Warrantless Surveillance Act, whereas the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence introduced the FISA Reform and Reauthorization Act of 2023.

Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, a member of the Judiciary Committee, allegedly accused Mike Turner, R-Ohio, chairman of the Intelligence Committee, of “f***ing lying” regarding the judiciary measure.

In the end, several members voiced their discontent with what they referred to as the “queen of the hill” strategy, in which a single measure would prevail, and they urged Johnson to choose and support one.

For now, the bills have been pulled.

 

 

Surveillance “Reform” Legislation Proposed by the House Intelligence Committee Is Deceptive at Best, Destructive at Worst

By ,

Both the House Committee on the Judiciary (HJC) and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) marked up two bills that would reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)—but in very different ways. The bills in question were H.R. 6570, the Protect Liberty and End Warrantless Surveillance Act, in HJC, and HR 6611, the FISA Reform and Reauthorization Act of 2023, in HPSCI). Under a procedural rule known as “Queen of the Hill,” both measures will be presented on the House floor the following week. The bill that receives the most votes will be forwarded to the Senate for further deliberation.

Renewing any surveillance authority remains a convoluted and intricate matter; however, this decision is unambiguous: we strongly urge all Members to vote NO on H.R.6611, the FISA Reform and Reauthorization Act of 2023, the bill introduced by the Intelligence Committee.

A report published by HPSCI on November 16 advocated for the reauthorization of Section 702, stressing the need for only minimal reforms. The following legislation, H.R. 6611, was as disastrous as anticipated. It would extend for an additional eight years Section 702, which authorizes mass surveillance. It would establish new authorities that have been denied by the courts despite years of pursuit by the intelligence community. It would sustain the unrestricted gathering of communications from American citizens engaged in conversations with individuals located overseas, to provide such information to domestic law enforcement. This was not the intent of this national security program, and due to a vulnerability, communications of individuals on U.S. soil should not be collected without a warrant.

If the last decade is any indication, FISA is due for reform.

To reiterate, the purpose of Section 702 was to authorize warrantless surveillance of non-U.S. citizens overseas to gather foreign intelligence. Domestic law enforcement agencies are progressively surveilling this portion of digital communications that occur within the United States, without producing a warrant. Millions of intrusive searches for American communications, including those of dissidents, racial justice activists, 19,000 donors to a congressional campaign, journalists, and even members of Congress, have been conducted by FBI agents using the Section 702 databases.

This is not a partisan initiative, these resolutions affect us all while bolstering the surveillance state.

The HPSCI bill also includes a call “to define Electronic Communication Service Provider to include equipment.” Earlier this year, the FISA Court of Review released a highly redacted opinion documenting a fight over the government’s attempt to subject an unknown company to Section 702 surveillance. However, the court agreed that under the circumstances the company did not qualify as an “electronic communication service provider” under the law. Now, the HPSCI bill would expand that definition to include a much broader range of providers, including those who merely provide hardware through which people communicate on the Internet. Even without knowing the details of the secret court fight, this represents an ominous expansion of 702’s scope, which the committee introduced without any explanation or debate of its necessity.

In contrast, H.R. 6570, the Protect Liberty and End Warrantless Surveillance Act, a measure from the House Judiciary Committee, would prohibit warrantless backdoor searches of Section 702 databases containing communications of Americans, thereby addressing a significant issue with that legislation. In addition, this legislation would forbid law enforcement from acquiring data on Americans that would otherwise require a warrant, thus bypassing fundamental constitutional safeguards. Significantly, this legislation would additionally reestablish this authority for a limited duration of three years, affording Congress an additional chance to reassess the implementation of the reforms and propose additional modifications should the government continue to exploit the program.