by | Jan 30, 2024 | Aggregate
Credit: X /@Profchayes
Americans are livid at the Biden regime after it has been confirmed they are letting illegal aliens board flights in droves unimpeded even as the Regime warns of terror attacks.
As the New York Post reported, conservative political commentator Dave Rubin noticed earlier this month while traveling from Miami International Airport a damning sign proving the Biden regime is letting illegal aliens board flights without any acceptable identification.
Specifically, it states that the Transport Security Administration (TSA) is working with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to “validate adult non-US citizen travel documentation when the traveler does not otherwise have an acceptable form of identification.” Moreover, the non-U.S. citizens don’t even have to get their picture taken.
Since illegals are not American citizens, that means they can waltz right through security. At the same time, Americans traveling domestically must show an ID card or a passport to board an airline.
Just snapped this pic. This is the state of absolute insanity happening at our airports. I’m in the Pre-TSA line, where migrants don’t have to have an ID to get through security and it’s their choice whether they want their picture taken.
There is a plan to destroy America.
Just snapped this pic.
This is the state of absolute insanity happening at our airports. I’m in the Pre-TSA line, where migrants don’t have to have an ID to get through security and it’s their choice whether they want their picture taken.
There is a plan to destroy America. pic.twitter.com/VQubxLgY9E
— Dave Rubin (@RubinReport) January 18, 2024
Here is a better look:
Credit: Dave Rubin Twitter
Upon learning this information, conservative travelers took turns echoing Rubin’s righteous outrage.
This is a joke. American citizens last
— Steve Ferguson (@lsferguson) January 18, 2024
Just saw a sign in an airport saying illegals do not need to show id to get on a plane! Have we forgotten 9/11 so soon? We don’t even know who is coming into our country across the wide open border.
— Lynda Haworth (@lshdph) January 23, 2024
Do they have a special suicide bomber line?
— Too Stupid For Politics (@TooStupidForPol) January 18, 2024
Evil!
— Bryan Beatty (@BryanB8) January 18, 2024
There ya go folks! Get the cheapest ticket possible, ‘lose’ your ID, tell the TSA ‘I am a migrant’ and boom! Rags to riches!
— It is too late, you should have listened (@eX_ers) January 18, 2024
Treason
— JKash MAGA Queen (@JKash000) January 18, 2024
Last month, Breanna Morello reported the TSA openly admitted to her that illegal aliens looking to fly commercial “without a standard form of identification may instead present certain DHS-issued forms to a TSA officer.”
This is all happening even as the Regime warns of potential terrorist attacks.
TSA openly admitted to me that illegal migrants looking to fly commercial, “without a standard form of identification may instead present certain DHS-issued forms to a TSA officer.”
This is all happening as the FBI & DHS warn about potential terrorist attacks.@LaboscoSonya… pic.twitter.com/PdvI0KvQAa
— Breanna Morello (@BreannaMorello) December 15, 2023
The post Damning Airport Sign Proves the Biden Regime is Letting Illegal Aliens Fly Without Acceptable Identification Even as Regime Warns of Terror Attacks – Airline Travelers Are Enraged (PHOTO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
by | Jan 30, 2024 | Aggregate
Manhattan federal Judge Lewis Kaplan and Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan.
Former President Donald Trump’s defense team is considering the possibility of requesting a new trial.
This development comes in the wake of revelations concerning the presiding judge’s past connections to Carroll’s legal team, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest.
The controversy centers on Bill Clinton-appointed Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who has been overseeing the defamation case brought by Carroll against Trump.
The Gateway Pundit previously reported that Trump’s attorney, Alina Habba, expressed shock upon learning that both Judge Kaplan and Roberta Kaplan, who are not related, previously worked together at the same prestigious law firm in the early 1990s.
This connection was uncovered by The New York Post columnist Charles Gasparino, following a tip that Judge Kaplan was once a mentor to Roberta Kaplan.
From 1992 until 2016, Roberta Kaplan was associated with the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkin, Wharton & Garrison. During this time, Judge Lewis Kaplan also held a position as a partner at the same firm.
Judge Kaplan served as a partner until his appointment to the federal bench in 1994, while Roberta Kaplan worked there until 2016 before founding her own firm, Kaplan Hecker & Fink.
Habba criticized the lack of disclosure of this past professional relationship, calling it “insane” and “incestuous” and a potential violation of judicial ethics rules.
“As a result of a story published in the New York Post, defense counsel learned for the first time of allegations that Your Honor, while a partner at the Paul Weiss firm, had a “mentor” type relationship with Plaintiff’s lead counsel, Roberta Kaplan,” Trump’s attorney Alina Habba wrote in a letter address to Judge Kaplan on Monday.
“Most concerning, is that the article was brought to the New York Post’s attention by an unnamed partner at Paul Weiss, who was aware of the close relationship between you and Ms. Kaplan and stated that “Lew was like her mentor.””
“The underlying defamation case tried last year, and the damages trial completed last week, were both litigations in which there were many clashes between Your Honor and defense counsel. We believe, and will argue on appeal, that the Court was overtly hostile towards defense counsel and President Trump, and displayed preferential treatment towards Plaintiff’s counsel. Indeed, the rulings, tone, and demeanor of the bench raised significant concerns even before the New York Post’s investigative journalism unearthed these new facts.”
“If Your Honor truly worked with Ms. Kaplan in any capacity—especially if there was a mentor/mentee relationship—that fact should have been disclosed before any case involving these parties was permitted to proceed forward,” said Habba.
On Tuesday, Roberta Kaplan denied allegations of having a mentor-mentee relationship with Judge Lewis Kaplan.
Kaplan, who joined the firm as a junior litigation associate in October 1992, pointed out that their time at the firm coincided for less than two years, with Judge Kaplan leaving in August 1994 upon his confirmation as a federal district judge.
Kaplan claimed that she does not recall any direct involvement with Judge Kaplan on cases, client meetings, or court proceedings during that period.
“During that relatively brief period more than thirty years ago, I do remember the Paul, Weiss partners with whom I worked and none of them was Your Honor. More specifically, I have no recollection from that time period of ever interacting with Your Honor on a case, participating with Your Honor in a client or case related meeting, or attending a court proceeding with Your Honor. In fact, I remember no direct interaction from that time period with Your Honor at all… Given the above, there was nothing for Your Honor to disclose,” said Roberta Kaplan.
Robert Kaplan then attacked the New York Post and questioned the source of the information, suggesting a need for scrutiny regarding the origin of such claims.
Shawn Crowley (Source: Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLP)
Adding to the controversy, it was revealed that Shawn Crowley, one of Carroll’s lead counsels, is reported to have served previously as a law clerk for Judge Kaplan. Furthermore, it has been disclosed that the judge co-officiated Crowley’s wedding.
“This issue is particularly concerning since Plaintiff’s other lead counsel, Shawn Crowley, served as Your Honor’s law clerk, and we were previously advised that Your Honor co-officiated her wedding,” said Habba.
These revelations have prompted Trump’s lawyers to reference 28 U.S.C. Section 455(a), which mandates that a judge must disqualify themselves from any proceeding where their impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
Under Canon 3 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, circumstances that require a judge’s disqualification include scenarios where the judge possesses personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or has personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts.
28 U.S.C. Section 455(a) states that “[a]ny… judge … of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Additionally, Canon 3 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges provides that:
“A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances in which:
(a) the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;
(b) the judge served as lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom the judge previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or such lawyer has been a material witness;”
Code of Conduct for United States Judges, 175 F.R.D. 363, 368 (1998) (emphasis added).
While not every mere friendship between a judge and a lawyer warrants disclosure and possible recusal by a judge, as the Fifth Circuit recently explained, recusal and disqualification issues based on possible bias or prejudice require “a highly fact-intensive inquiry.”
Trump’s defense team is concerned that this connection could give rise to an appearance of partiality. While not every friendship between a judge and a lawyer automatically warrants recusal, Trump’s lawyers argue that the nature of the relationship should at least be disclosed, invoking recent case law that emphasizes the importance of maintaining the appearance of impartiality.
The defense has yet to decide on the specific relief they will seek, admitting that without further information—or a statement from the judge denying a mentor-mentee relationship with Ms. Kaplan—they cannot fully develop their position.
However, they suggest that the information could be pivotal to President Trump’s anticipated Rule 59 motion, which allows a party to ask for a new trial or to alter or amend a judgment.
The post Trump’s Defense Team Investigates Potential for New Trial Following Discovery of Judge’s Connections to Carroll’s Attorney — Further Details Reveal Carroll’s Other Lead Counsel Previously Served as Judge’s Clerk, and Judge Kaplan Co-officiated Her Wedding appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
by | Jan 30, 2024 | Aggregate
The legal challenge seeking to bar Trump from the 2024 primary ballot in Illinois failed.
This comes one day after the Massachusetts Supreme Court denied a petition to bar Trump from the 2024 ballot.
In a unanimous vote, the State Board of Elections said they lacked the authority to bar Trump from the ballot.
The legal challenge, brought by a group of Illinois voters, cited the 14th Amendment in their lawsuit seeking to bar Trump from the ballot.
The legal theories are based on Section 3 of the US Constitution’s 14th Amendment which states public officials who have “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the US may be disqualified from public office.
Trump has not been charged with engaging in insurrection or rebellion against the United States.
ABC News reported:
Donald Trump can remain on Illinois’ presidential primary ballot, the State Board of Elections voted on Tuesday, dismissing another challenge to the former president’s eligibility under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
The eight-person, bipartisan board voted unanimously against a lawsuit brought by a group of Illinois voters represented by national watchdog group Free Speech for the People and Illinois elections lawyers.
The body said it lacked the authority to decide on the challenge.
President Trump is currently battling similar challenges in other states. Legal challenges have notably escalated in Maine and Colorado.
The Maine Superior Court recently ordered Trump back on the ballot pending a decision from the US Supreme Court.
President Trump appealed Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows’ 2024 ballot ban to the state superior court last Tuesday.
Last month Maine’s psychotic Democrat Secretary of State Shenna Bellows unilaterally barred Trump from the 2024 ballot because she decided the former president is an insurrectionist.
Earlier this month President Trump asked the US Supreme Court to overturn the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to bar him from the 2024 ballot.
The Colorado Supreme Court last month disqualified Trump from the 2024 ballot.
The US Constitution has three requirements to be president:
Be a natural-born citizen of the United States.
Be at least 35 years old.
Have been a resident of the United States for 14 years.
The post JUST IN: Legal Challenge Seeking to Bar Trump From Illinois Ballot Fails appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
