Connect with us

Politics

Opinion: Trump's attempt to intimidate a federal appeals court could ensure his defeat

Published

on

Opinion: Trump's attempt to intimidate a federal appeals court could ensure his defeat

During arguments Tuesday, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit expressed appropriate skepticism about Donald Trump’s claim of immunity from charges that he attempted to overturn the 2020 election. But what happened afterward may have been even worse for Trump than the hearing itself: The former president refused to rule out violence if the appeals court’s decision goes against him, as he appears to think it will.

“It’ll be bedlam in the country,” Trump told reporters. “It’s the opening of a Pandora’s box.”

To many, that sounded like encouraging lawlessness.

Because such dangerous behavior has become almost commonplace with Trump, some of us have come to tune it out. But it’s a safe bet that the courts won’t.

It’s hard to imagine anything more damaging to one’s prospects in a case than attempting to intimidate the judges considering it.

Advertisement

In this case, it’s even worse. In real time, Trump was reenacting what special counsel Jack Smith’s indictment accused him of doing on Jan. 6, 2021: fomenting violence against the rule of law. And he was targeting the judges entrusted with his case just down the street from their courthouse.

Perhaps it was a knee-jerk retaliatory response from a man who can’t stand the thought of being a loser, whether in court or an election. Trump seems unable to tolerate the concept of being constrained by law.

Or it may be the deliberate strategy that we’ve seen throughout this presidential campaign: drumming up his base to return him to office and give him a get-out-of-jail card.

But polls show that if Trump is convicted of a crime before the election, his prospects of returning to the White House will drop to Earth like the meteor said to have extinguished the dinosaurs. And if he is tried, he is virtually certain to be convicted. The evidence Smith’s team has compiled against him is beyond overwhelming.

What he therefore wants to avoid in the coming months is a trial. To do that, he needs the circuit court, and more importantly the Supreme Court, to buy his untenable immunity claim or his even weaker argument that impeaching and criminally trying him for the same offenses would violate the Constitution.

Advertisement

His goal of getting the Supreme Court to consider his claim and delay the trial is not likely to be helped by statements like the one he just made outside the courthouse. Judges do not take kindly to defendants who threaten the rule of law, and a barely disguised call for violence is sure to offend every jurist who takes their constitutional role seriously.

Trump probably hurt himself in another way beyond the courtroom: by bolstering one of President Biden’s central arguments against him. Just a few days earlier in Valley Forge, Pa., Biden drew a defining contrast with his rival in his first campaign speech of the year.

“Trump won’t do what an American president must do,” Biden said. “He refuses to denounce political violence. … I will say what Donald Trump won’t: Political violence is never acceptable in the United States — never, never, never. It has no place in the democracy. None.”

We can expect Trump to repeat his calls for violence in the months ahead. And if one thing could dissuade independent and undecided voters from casting their ballots for the former president, it may be encouraging law-breaking and threatening public safety. Trump’s mouth could prove to be the Biden campaign’s most powerful weapon.

Dennis Aftergut is a former federal prosecutor who is of counsel to Lawyers Defending American Democracy.

Advertisement

Politics

Susie Wiles Acknowledges Trump’s ‘Score Settling’ Behind Prosecutions

Published

on

In interviews with Vanity Fair, Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, said Trump “has an alcoholic’s personality,” called JD Vance a “conspiracy theorist” and concluded that Pam Bondi “completely whiffed” the early handling of the Epstein files.

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump admin defends White House ballroom as national security matter

Published

on

Trump admin defends White House ballroom as national security matter

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The Trump administration argued in a court filing on Monday that pausing construction on the new White House ballroom would undermine national security, citing a Secret Service declaration warning that halting work would leave the site unable to meet “safety and security requirements” needed to protect the president. 

The declaration says the White House’s East Wing, demolished in October and now undergoing below-grade work, cannot be left unfinished without compromising essential security measures.

“Accordingly, any pause in construction, even temporarily, would leave the contractor’s obligation unfulfilled in this regard and consequently hamper the Secret Service’s ability to meet its statutory obligations and protective mission,” reads the filing in part.

The government’s memorandum was in response to a lawsuit filed last week in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, a nonprofit that says it advocates for preserving historic sites of national importance and protecting the public’s role in that process.

Advertisement

WALZ REPEATS DEBUNKED CLAIM THAT TRUMP CONSIDERS WHITE HOUSE BALLROOM ‘TOP PRIORITY’

An excavator works to clear rubble after the East Wing of the White House was demolished on October 23, 2025, in Washington, D.C.  (Eric Lee/Getty Images)

The National Trust lawsuit targets key government officials responsible for overseeing the White House grounds and the agencies managing the construction project, including the National Park Service and the Department of the Interior.

It argues that pausing the Trump administration’s ballroom project is essential to prevent irreversible changes while the required oversight and public involvement procedures are carried out.

“Submitting the project to the National Capital Planning Commission for review protects the iconic historic features of the White House campus as it evolves. Inviting comments from the American people signals respect and helps ensure a lasting legacy that befits a government of the people, by the people, for the people,” said Carol Quillen, the president and CEO of the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

Advertisement

TRUMP UNVEILS VISION FOR EISENHOWER EXECUTIVE OFFICE BUILDING MAKEOVER

A McCrery Architects rendering provided by the White House of the exterior of the new ballroom. (White House)

The White House announced President Donald Trump’s plans in July to move forward with a 90,000-square-foot state ballroom that would cost an estimated $200 million. That figure has now risen to at least $300 million, and while the project is backed by some private donors, Trump has also insisted it will be funded “100% by me and some friends of mine.”

In its filing, the administration emphasized that key regulatory reviews are forthcoming, saying it plans to submit draft architectural drawings and materials to the National Capital Planning Commission and the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts in the coming weeks. 

The government argued the lawsuit is premature because above-grade construction is not scheduled to begin until April 2026.

Advertisement

A McCrery Architects rendering provided by the White House of the new ballroom. (The White House)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The National Trust, however, counters that the scale of the project makes early intervention necessary. In its lawsuit, the group argues that the 90,000-square-foot addition would dwarf the Executive Residence and permanently upset the classical balance of the White House’s design. 

The complaint also cites an October statement from the Society of Architectural Historians, which warned that the proposed ballroom would represent the most significant exterior change to the building in more than 80 years.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Commentary: Trump’s callous political attack on Rob Reiner shows a shameful moral failure

Published

on

Commentary: Trump’s callous political attack on Rob Reiner shows a shameful moral failure

Hours after Rob Reiner and his wife, Michele, were found dead in their home in what is shaping up to be a heartbreaking family tragedy, our president blamed Reiner for his own death.

“A very sad thing happened last night in Hollywood. Rob Reiner, a tortured and struggling, but once very talented movie director and comedy star, has passed away, together with his wife, Michele, reportedly due to the anger he caused others through his massive, unyielding, and incurable affliction with a mind crippling disease known as TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME, sometimes referred to as TDS,” President Trump wrote on his social media platform. “He was known to have driven people CRAZY by his raging obsession of President Donald J. Trump, with his obvious paranoia reaching new heights as the Trump Administration surpassed all goals and expectations of greatness, and with the Golden Age of America upon us, perhaps like never before. May Rob and Michele rest in peace!”

Then, in the Oval Office, Trump doubled down on Reiner.

“He was a deranged person,” Trump said in response to a reporter’s question about his social media post. “I was not a fan of Rob Reiner at all, in any way, shape or form. I thought he was very bad for our country.”

Advertisement

Rest in peace, indeed.

It’s a message steeped in cruelty and delusion, unbelievable and despicable even by the low, buried-in-the-dirt bar by which we have collectively come to judge Trump. In a town — and a time — of selfishness and self-serving, Reiner was one of the good guys, always fighting, both through his films and his politics, to make the world kinder and closer. And yes, that meant fighting against Trump and his increasingly erratic and authoritarian rule.

For years, Reiner made the politics of inclusion and decency central to his life. He was a key player in overturning California’s ban on same-sex marriage and fought to expand early childhood education.

For the last few months, he was laser-focused on the upcoming midterms as the last and best chance of protecting American democracy — which clearly enraged Trump.

“Make no mistake, we have a year before this country becomes a full on autocracy,” Reiner told MSNBC host Ali Velshi in October. “People care about their pocketbook issues, the price of eggs. They care about their healthcare, and they should. Those are the things that directly affect them. But if they lose their democracy, all of these rights, the freedom of speech, the freedom to pray the way you want, the freedom to protest and not go to jail, not be sent out of the country with no due process, all these things will be taken away from them.”

Advertisement

The Reiners’ son, Nick Reiner, has been arrested on suspicion of murder. Nick Reiner has struggled with addiction, and been in and out of rehab. But Trump seems to be saying that if Nick is indeed the perpetrator, he acted for pro-Trump political reasons — which obviously is highly unlikely and, well, just a weird and unhinged thing to claim.

But also, deeply hypocritical.

It was only a few months ago, in September, that Charlie Kirk was killed and Trump and his MAGA regime went nuts over anyone who dared whisper a critical word about Kirk. Trump called it “sick” and “deranged” that anyone could celebrate Kirk’s death, and blamed the “radical left” for violence-inciting rhetoric.

Vice President JD Vance, channeling his inner Scarlett O’Hara, vowed “with God as my witness,” he would use the full power of the state to crack down on political “networks” deemed terrorist. In reality, he’s largely just using the state to target people who oppose Trump out loud.

And just in case you thought maybe, maybe our president somehow really does have the good of all Americans at heart, recall that in speaking of Kirk, Trump said that he had one point of disagreement. Kirk, he claimed, forgave his enemies.

Advertisement

“That’s where I disagreed with Charlie,” Trump said. “I hate my opponent and I don’t want the best for them.”

There’s a malevolence so deep in Trump’s remarks about Reiner that even Marjorie Taylor Greene objected. She was once Trump’s staunchest supporter before he called her a traitor, empowering his goon squad to terrorize her with death threats.

“This is a family tragedy, not about politics or political enemies,” Greene wrote on social media. “Many families deal with a family member with drug addiction and mental health issues. It’s incredibly difficult and should be met with empathy especially when it ends in murder.”

But Trump has made cruelty the point. His need to dehumanize everyone who opposes him, including Reiner and even Greene, is exactly what Reiner was warning us about.

Because when you allow people to be dehumanized, you stop caring about them — and Reiner was not about to let us stop caring.

Advertisement

He saw the world with an artist’s eye and a warrior’s heart, a mighty combination reflected in his films. He challenged us to believe in true love, to set aside our cynicism, to be both silly and brave, knowing both were crucial to a successful life.

This clarity from a man who commanded not just our attention and our respect, but our hearts, is what drove Trump crazy — and what made Reiner such a powerful threat to him. Republican or Democrat, his movies reminded us of what we hold in common.

But it might be Michael Douglas’ speech in 1995’s “The American President” that is most relevant in this moment. Douglas’ character, President Andrew Shepherd, says that “America is advanced citizenship. You’ve got to want it bad, because it’s going to put up a fight.”

Shepard’s rival, a man pursuing power over purpose, “is interested in two things and two things only — making you afraid of ‘it’ and telling you who’s to blame for ‘it.’ ”

Sound familiar?

Advertisement

That our president felt the need to trash Reiner before his body is even buried would be a badge of honor to Reiner, an acknowledgment that Reiner’s warnings carried weight, and that Reiner was a messenger to be reckoned with.

Reiner knew what advanced citizenship meant, and he wanted badly for democracy to survive.

If Trump’s eulogy sickens you the way it sickens me, then here’s what you can do about it: Vote in November in Reiner’s memory.

Your ballot is the rebuke Trump fears most.

And your vote is the most powerful way to honor a man who dedicated his life to reminding us that bravery is having the audacity to care.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending