Connect with us

News

Opinion: New Jan. 6 court filing shouldn’t scare voters. Trump would never do that again!

Published

on

Opinion: New Jan. 6 court filing shouldn’t scare voters. Trump would never do that again!


If you need proof that President Trump and his running mate will honor the result of November’s election, just listen to how peacefully they have accepted the result of the last presidential election.

play

Dear voters who don’t only watch Fox News:

Advertisement

We here at the Donald Trump presidential campaign realize some of you may have heard or read about a new court filing by federal DEEP STATE prosecutors in the Jan. 6 WITCH HUNT case that oh-so-wrongly accuses your favorite president of trying to overturn the 2020 election. 

We want to let you know, from the always-honest mouth of President Trump, that the allegations in this 165-page document are TOTALLY FALSE, and the so-called voluminous evidence presented is not something you should pay attention to or read. And even if it were true – which it DEFINITELY IS NOT – we here at the Trump campaign promise we would never do anything like that a second time around.

Donald Trump would never try to overturn another election – we promise

Does the filing from special counsel Jack Smith accuse President Trump of pursuing “multiple criminal means to disrupt, through fraud and deceit, the government function by which votes are collected and counted”? Yes, it does. But those are lies – the president used, at most, one criminal means – and the whole thing is ELECTION INTERFERENCE.

Since when do court cases move forward in a way that might be detrimental to the accused’s hopes of becoming president again and shutting down the court case? That seems un-American.

Advertisement

New Jan. 6 court filing reveals details about the plan to deny election results

Does the document detail specifics of this “alleged” plan to overthrow the government? I suppose if that’s what you call this, then sure:

“When the defendant lost the 2020 presidential election, he resorted to crimes to try to stay in office. With private co-conspirators, the defendant launched a series of increasingly desperate plans to overturn the legitimate election results in seven states that he had lost—Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin (the ‘targeted states’). His efforts included lying to state officials in order to induce them to ignore true vote counts; manufacturing fraudulent electoral votes in the targeted states; attempting to enlist Vice President Michael R. Pence, in his role as President of the Senate, to obstruct Congress’s certification of the election by using the defendant’s fraudulent electoral votes; and when all else had failed, on January 6, 2021, directing an angry crowd of supporters to the United States Capitol to obstruct the congressional certification.”

But you know what those are? Those are a bunch of words strung together into what the liberals want you to believe are “sentences.” And are you really going to trust these so-called sentences to deliver factual information? Of course not.

Those could be migrant sentences Democrats let into this country to steal your way of life.

Advertisement

Did Trump supporters want to hang Mike Pence? Who can really say?

Some in the FAKE NEWS media have focused on one part of the document that details how on that Jan. 6, one of President Trump’s aides “rushed to the dining room” to tell the president that Pence had been taken to a secure location after rioters breached the U.S. Capitol. The aide apparently hoped the president would do something to ensure Pence’s safety.

The document says that President Trump responded: “So what?”

Opinion: Fat Bear Week debuted with a violent death. It’s time to give the bears guns.

First off … TOTAL LIES. But even if that detail about President Trump not caring whether the coward Mike Pence was safe happened to be true, you, the voter, needn’t worry about it.

The only person who should worry is current Republican vice presidential nominee JD Vance. (Don’t worry, JD, President Trump would NEVER treat you that way, as long as you do exactly what he says. By the way, what is your noose size?)

Advertisement

Trump is saying the same things he said before the last election

Finally, this probably unconstitutional court filing claims President Trump told advisers before the Election Day in 2020 that he planned to “simply declare victory before all the ballots were counted and any winner was projected.”

The dirty, lying document goes on: “Publicly, the defendant began to plant the seeds for that false declaration. In the months leading up to the election, he refused to say whether he would accept the election results, insisted that he could lose the election only because of fraud, falsely claimed that mail-in ballots were inherently fraudulent, and asserted that only votes counted by election day were valid.”

Opinion: Vance and Walz had civil debate. Trump flung career-damning insults at soldiers.

Advertisement

That is complete nonsense, and the fact that as a reelection candidate President Trump has again been saying those exact things in the months leading up to this year’s election is a strange coincidence you should in no way think is odd or devious.

Just relax, already. You’re being hysterical.

It’s not like Trump and Vance continue to deny the 2020 election results

If you need proof that President Trump and his running mate will honor the result of November’s election, just listen to how peacefully they have accepted the result of the last presidential election.

When Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, was asked by Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz – LOSER! – at this week’s vice presidential debate whether Trump lost the 2020 election, Vance said: “Tim, I’m focused on the future.”

Advertisement

Asked on Thursday by comedian Jason Selvig if Trump won the 2020 election, Vance replied: “Yes.” And when asked again, Vance said: “Yep.”

President Trump himself, during his debate against Vice President Kamala Harris, was asked by the moderator: “Are you now acknowledging that you lost in 2020?”

“No, I don’t acknowledge that at all,” he said.

You see? Both men at the top of the GOP ticket have clearly and forcefully accepted the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, and the outcome they accept is that President Trump won.

Trust us, America, you have nothing to worry about as long as Trump wins

Faced with such unparalleled honesty and firm grounding in reality and common sense, how can anyone look at Lyin’ Jack Smith’s Jan. 6 court filing – with all its stupid evidence and long string of dumb witnesses willing to testify under oath – and think the Trump campaign would ever try to do something dishonest?

Advertisement

It makes no sense. And it makes even less sense if you don’t read the document, which we at the Trump campaign strongly encourage. Spend your time browsing our online Trump merchandise store. Maybe get yourself a watch or a hat or something.

Just please don’t read that document.

Make America Great Again!

Follow USA TODAY columnist Rex Huppke on X, formerly Twitter, @RexHuppke and Facebook facebook.com/RexIsAJerk

Advertisement

News

Lawmakers threaten Attorney General Bondi with contempt over incomplete Epstein files

Published

on

Lawmakers threaten Attorney General Bondi with contempt over incomplete Epstein files

Attorney General Pam Bondi, accompanied by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche (L) and FBI Director Kash Patel (R), speaks during a news conference at the Justice Department on Nov. 19. Some lawmakers said the department’s release of files relating to Jeffrey Epstein had too many redactions as well as missing information.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Two lawmakers are threatening a seldom-used congressional sanction against the Department of Justice over what they say is a failure to release all of its files on convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein by a deadline set in law.

Reps. Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie spearheaded the effort to force the Epstein files’ release by co-sponsoring the Epstein Files Transparency Act, but both have said the release had too many redactions as well as missing information.

“I think the most expeditious way to get justice for these victims is to bring inherent contempt against Pam Bondi,” Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, told CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday. “Basically Ro Khanna and I are talking about and drafting that right now.”

Advertisement

Inherent contempt refers to Congress’ authority to fine or arrest and then bring to trial officers who are obstructing legislative functions. It was last successfully used in the 1930s, according to the American Bar Association.

Khanna, a California Democrat, noted that the House would not need the Senate’s approval to take such action, which he said would result in a fine for Attorney General Pam Bondi.

“I believe we’re going to get bipartisan support in holding her accountable,” he told Face the Nation.

Justice Department defends partial release

The Justice Department on Sunday defended its initial, partial release of documents, some of which were heavily redacted.

“The material that we released on Friday, or the material that we’re going to release over the next a couple of weeks, is exactly what the statute requires us to release,” said Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche on NBC’s Meet the Press, referring to the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Advertisement

Blanche said the administration has hundreds of lawyers going through the remaining documents to ensure that victims’ information is protected. Still, lawmakers from both parties remain unsatisfied.

“Any evidence or any kind of indication that there’s not a full reveal on this, this will just plague them for months and months more,” said Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky on ABC’s This Week. “My suggestion would be — give up all the information, release it.”

Blanche told NBC he was not taking the threats of contempt seriously.

“Not even a little bit. Bring it on,” he said, adding that lawmakers who have spoken negatively about Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel “have no idea what they’re talking about.”

Back and forth over Trump photo

The trove of documents released Friday contained little new information about Epstein, prompting accusations that the department wasn’t complying with the law. There was a photograph included in Friday’s release that showed a desk full of photos, including at least one of President Trump. It was among more than a dozen photographs no longer available in the Justice Department’s “Epstein Library” by Saturday, NPR found.

Advertisement

On Sunday, the Justice Department re-uploaded the photo of the desk, and provided an explanation on X.

“The Southern District of New York flagged an image of President Trump for potential further action to protect victims,” the post read. “Out of an abundance of caution, the Department of Justice temporarily removed the image for further review. After the review, it was determined there is no evidence that any Epstein victims are depicted in the photograph, and it has been reposted without any alteration or redaction.”

The Justice Department did not offer an explanation for the other photos whose access had been removed.

Blanche told NBC the Justice Department was not redacting information around Trump or any other individual involved with Epstein. He said the Justice Department had removed photos from the public files “because a judge in New York has ordered us to listen to any victim or victim rights group, if they have any concerns about the material that we’re putting up.

“And so when we hear concerns, whether it’s photographs of women that we do not believe are victims, or we didn’t have information to show that they were victims, but we learned that there are concerns, of course, we’re taking that photograph down and we’re going to address it,” he said.

Advertisement

Earlier Sunday, the Justice Department also posted to X a new version of the 119-page transcript of grand jury proceedings in the case of Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell. The original version had been entirely redacted.

“Here is the document now with minimal redactions. Documents and photos will continue to be reviewed consistent with the law and with an abundance of caution for victims and their families,” the Justice Department wrote in its post.

Continue Reading

News

Russia says talks on US peace plan for Ukraine ‘are proceeding constructively’

Published

on

Russia says talks on US peace plan for Ukraine ‘are proceeding constructively’

FILE – Russian Presidential foreign policy adviser Yuri Ushakov, left, U.S. President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, center, U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff, foreground right, and Russian Direct Investment Fund CEO Special Presidential Representative for Investment and Economic Cooperation with Foreign Countries Kirill Dmitriev, behind Witkoff, arrive to attend talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the Senate Palace of the Kremlin in Moscow, Russia, Dec. 2, 2025. (Alexander Kazakov, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP, File)

The Associated Press

Continue Reading

News

Video: First Batch of Epstein Files Provides Few Revelations

Published

on

Video: First Batch of Epstein Files Provides Few Revelations

new video loaded: First Batch of Epstein Files Provides Few Revelations

transcript

transcript

First Batch of Epstein Files Provides Few Revelations

The Justice Department, under pressure from Congress to comply with a law signed by President Trump, released more than 13,000 files on Friday arising from investigations into Jeffrey Epstein.

Put out the files and stop redacting names that don’t need to be redacted. It’s just — who are we trying to protect? Are we protecting the survivors? Or are we protecting these elite men that need to be put out there?

Advertisement
The Justice Department, under pressure from Congress to comply with a law signed by President Trump, released more than 13,000 files on Friday arising from investigations into Jeffrey Epstein.

By McKinnon de Kuyper

December 20, 2025

Continue Reading

Trending