Category: Uncategorized

Washington didn’t just witness a hearing today — it witnessed a reckoning.

As former special counsel Jack Smith testified before the House Judiciary Committee, the real drama erupted behind him, where retired D.C. police officer Michael Fanone came face-to-face with MAGA provocateur Ivan Raiklin — a man who has openly styled himself as Trump’s so-called “secretary of retribution.”

What followed was raw, furious, and unforgettable.

Raiklin, smirking for his own camera, tried to initiate a handshake. Fanone — who nearly died defending the Capitol on January 6 — responded with the clarity of someone who knows exactly who his enemies are: “Go f— yourself. You’re a traitor to this country.”

Raiklin whined about “professionalism.” Fanone wasn’t playing that game.

“You threatened my family. You threatened my wife,” Fanone said, as fellow Jan. 6 hero Harry Dunn tried to hold him back. Then came the line that froze the room: Raiklin, Fanone said, had threatened his children — including rape threats. Capitol Police moved in as the MAGA agitator continued to mug for the camera, declaring he was “totally dominating” the moment.

Dominating? Please.

Fanone is a man who bled for democracy. Raiklin is a professional troll who thrives on intimidation and spectacle. One stood the line on January 6. The other cheers from the cheap seats.

As House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan banged his gavel, it was Rep. Jamie Raskin who said what everyone was thinking — calling Raiklin a “deranged observer” and thanking Fanone as the room erupted in applause.

This wasn’t a loss of control. This was moral clarity colliding with MAGA depravity.

And if this is how Raiklin behaves in a hearing room, imagine what he was cheering on when the Capitol was under siege.

Please like and share if you stand with Michael Fanone!

Something unusual is happening in American politics, and it’s serious enough that retired four-star generals are breaking decades of silence. These are not activists or politicians. They are career military leaders trained to stay neutral and protect the Constitution above all else. When people like this speak out, it signals real concern.

Former top officials who worked directly with Donald Trump — including Generals John Kelly, Mark Milley, and Jim Mattis — have warned that Trump shows authoritarian and fascist tendencies. Their concern isn’t personal dislike. It’s that Trump repeatedly demanded loyalty to himself rather than to the Constitution, which directly violates the foundation of the U.S. military oath.

The military is required to follow lawful orders and refuse unlawful ones. These generals fear Trump wants that safeguard removed by replacing independent officers with loyalists. That’s how democracies slowly erode — not through a sudden coup, but through quiet purges and loyalty tests.

More than 300 former intelligence and national security officials share this warning. Their message is simple: the guardrails of democracy are under strain. This isn’t partisan politics — it’s a constitutional alarm, and it deserves to be taken seriously.

Donald Trump is showing clear signs of insecurity and fear toward California Governor Gavin Newsom after Newsom appeared at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Newsom’s presence projected what many saw as a “shadow presidency,” highlighting an alternative vision of American leadership in contrast to Trump’s increasingly authoritarian behavior.

Trump reacted by posting an angry and personal rant on social media, attacking Newsom with false claims about California fires, crime, water policy, and infrastructure—claims that experts and officials say are untrue. At the same time, Trump reportedly used the State Department to shut down a scheduled Newsom speech at the USA House in Davos, an act Newsom described as censorship and authoritarian intimidation.

Despite this, Newsom moved his speech elsewhere and openly criticized Trump for attacking democracy, pardoning January 6 participants, suppressing free speech, and aligning with authoritarian leaders. Newsom mocked Trump online, saying he is “living rent-free” in Trump’s head, while emphasizing California’s economic strength, democratic values, and moral leadership.

The Davos episode exposed Trump’s weakness, isolation from democratic allies, and fear of strong opposition—while Newsom positioned himself as a confident, unapologetic counter to Trump’s politics.Donald Trump is showing clear signs of insecurity and fear toward California Governor Gavin Newsom after Newsom appeared at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Newsom’s presence projected what many saw as a “shadow presidency,” highlighting an alternative vision of American leadership in contrast to Trump’s increasingly authoritarian behavior.

Trump reacted by posting an angry and personal rant on social media, attacking Newsom with false claims about California fires, crime, water policy, and infrastructure—claims that experts and officials say are untrue. At the same time, Trump reportedly used the State Department to shut down a scheduled Newsom speech at the USA House in Davos, an act Newsom described as censorship and authoritarian intimidation.

Despite this, Newsom moved his speech elsewhere and openly criticized Trump for attacking democracy, pardoning January 6 participants, suppressing free speech, and aligning with authoritarian leaders. Newsom mocked Trump online, saying he is “living rent-free” in Trump’s head, while emphasizing California’s economic strength, democratic values, and moral leadership.

The Davos episode exposed Trump’s weakness, isolation from democratic allies, and fear of strong opposition—while Newsom positioned himself as a confident, unapologetic counter to Trump’s politics.

Donald Trump is showing clear signs of insecurity and fear toward California Governor Gavin Newsom after Newsom appeared at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Newsom’s presence projected what many saw as a “shadow presidency,” highlighting an alternative vision of American leadership in contrast to Trump’s increasingly authoritarian behavior.

Trump reacted by posting an angry and personal rant on social media, attacking Newsom with false claims about California fires, crime, water policy, and infrastructure—claims that experts and officials say are untrue. At the same time, Trump reportedly used the State Department to shut down a scheduled Newsom speech at the USA House in Davos, an act Newsom described as censorship and authoritarian intimidation.

Despite this, Newsom moved his speech elsewhere and openly criticized Trump for attacking democracy, pardoning January 6 participants, suppressing free speech, and aligning with authoritarian leaders. Newsom mocked Trump online, saying he is “living rent-free” in Trump’s head, while emphasizing California’s economic strength, democratic values, and moral leadership.

The Davos episode exposed Trump’s weakness, isolation from democratic allies, and fear of strong opposition—while Newsom positioned himself as a confident, unapologetic counter to Trump’s politics.

Jack Smith’s testimony before Congress was a direct blow to Donald Trump’s claim of “total exoneration.” Under oath, Smith made it clear that Trump was charged because the evidence showed he willfully broke the law, not because of politics. He said his investigation produced proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump committed crimes related to election interference and the mishandling of classified documents, and that he would prosecute any president—Republican or Democrat—on the same facts.

Smith explained that Trump caused January 6th, knew the election lies were false, and tried to exploit the violence to stay in power. He emphasized that grand juries in two districts agreed the evidence justified indictments. The cases ended not because Trump was innocent, but because of technical rulings and DOJ policy that prevents prosecuting a sitting president.

Smith rejected claims of a First Amendment defense, stating clearly that speech used to commit crimes is not protected. He also condemned attacks and threats against prosecutors and FBI agents, warning that intimidation undermines the rule of law.

The key takeaway: Trump avoided trial due to power and procedure—not lack of evidence. Smith locked that conclusion into the official record under oath, and the evidence remains.

Donald Trump is spiraling on the world stage as democratic allies openly turn away from the United States and rally around Canada, Denmark, Greenland, and Ukraine. At Davos, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney emerged as the clear leader of the democratic world, delivering a powerful speech on multilateralism, shared values, and cooperation—directly contrasting Trump’s authoritarian, isolationist rhetoric. Trump couldn’t handle it. He lashed out on social media, absurdly claiming to revoke Carney’s invitation to a so-called “Board of Peace,” a body made up largely of authoritarian regimes and Putin allies.

Carney responded not with insults, but with strength, declaring that Canada thrives because of its people and values—not because of the United States. Greenland’s leadership also shut down Trump’s false claims of a sovereignty deal, reaffirming that territorial integrity and international law are red lines. Ukraine’s President Zelensky went further, warning Europe that Trump’s weakness toward Putin endangers global security and urging Europe to act as a real power.

Meanwhile, Trump mocked NATO, falsely claiming the U.S. never needed it—despite NATO invoking Article 5 only once, after 9/11, to defend America. As Trump cozies up to authoritarians and undermines allies, the world is moving on. Davos made one thing clear: Trump is isolated, and democratic leadership is emerging elsewhere.

witnessed in that hearing wasn’t justice being examined — it was history being challenged in real time. Republicans claim this is all “theater,” yet the facts are unshakable. Donald Trump was impeached for January 6th. Ten Republicans voted to impeach him. Fifty-seven senators — including seven Republicans — voted to convict him. That was the most bipartisan conviction vote in U.S. history.

Trump never conceded the election. Not after the media called it. Not after the Electoral College voted. Not after the courts threw out his final case. And according to the evidence, only Donald Trump had the power to summon that mob on January 6th, knew the violence was foreseeable, and then tried to exploit it.

Jack Smith didn’t weaponize the justice system — he followed the facts and the law. A grand jury returned indictments because the evidence demanded it. Trump’s public threats against Smith are not strength; they are intimidation. And history won’t be rewritten, no matter how loudly it’s shouted away.witnessed in that hearing wasn’t justice being examined — it was history being challenged in real time. Republicans claim this is all “theater,” yet the facts are unshakable. Donald Trump was impeached for January 6th. Ten Republicans voted to impeach him. Fifty-seven senators — including seven Republicans — voted to convict him. That was the most bipartisan conviction vote in U.S. history.

Trump never conceded the election. Not after the media called it. Not after the Electoral College voted. Not after the courts threw out his final case. And according to the evidence, only Donald Trump had the power to summon that mob on January 6th, knew the violence was foreseeable, and then tried to exploit it.

Jack Smith didn’t weaponize the justice system — he followed the facts and the law. A grand jury returned indictments because the evidence demanded it. Trump’s public threats against Smith are not strength; they are intimidation. And history won’t be rewritten, no matter how loudly it’s shouted away.

Jack Smith’s case against Donald Trump is not collapsing—it’s actually getting more dangerous for him. This week, Smith testified under oath before Congress and made one thing crystal clear: he stands by his decision to prosecute Trump and says the evidence was strong enough to convict beyond a reasonable doubt. Two separate grand juries agreed and approved the indictments.

The cases didn’t end because the evidence failed. They ended because of politics and technical rulings—one judge tossed the documents case over how Smith was appointed, and the Justice Department dropped the rest once Trump returned to power. Smith told Congress he would bring the same charges again on the same facts, no matter the president’s party.

That matters because the evidence still exists. The witnesses still exist. And Smith has now put on public record that Trump didn’t beat the case—he simply ran out the clock. If Trump ever loses power, that legal threat comes right back.

BREAKING! Jack Smith CONFIRMS Trump WAS GOING to JAIL,,. Former Special Counsel Jack Smith is testifying behind closed doors before a Republican-led House committee investigating his prosecution of Donald Trump. In prepared remarks obtained by CNN, Smith firmly rejected Trump’s claims that the case was politically motivated, stating that the charges “rest entirely with President Trump and his actions.”

Notably, Smith is answering questions and has not invoked the Fifth Amendment, despite intense political pressure and public attacks from Trump, who has called him “deranged” and a “criminal.” The stakes are high: refusing to answer could trigger an obstruction referral, while saying too much risks accusations of false statements or violations of grand jury secrecy.

Smith has made clear—both in his final report and under oath—that Trump was not exonerated. He says his team had sufficient evidence to secure a conviction for crimes related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election, including obstruction and conspiracy. The case was closed solely because of longstanding Justice Department policy barring prosecution of a sitting president after Trump won reelection.

Smith maintains he would make the same charging decisions again, regardless of politics, emphasizing that grand juries—not partisan actors—approved the indictments.

Breaking news from Capitol Hill: former Special Counsel Jack Smith will testify publicly before the House Judiciary Committee, reopening national focus on Donald Trump’s past legal exposure. This is not a new criminal case—Trump is protected from federal prosecution while serving as president—but it is politically explosive.

Newly released Georgia special grand jury transcripts show that top Republicans like Governor Brian Kemp and Senator Lindsey Graham privately admitted Trump lost the 2020 election and that fraud claims were baseless, even as they publicly supported Trump’s narrative. This exposes a deliberate misinformation campaign, not confusion or good-faith belief.

Jack Smith is expected to testify under oath that he had enough evidence to convict Trump beyond a reasonable doubt for attempting to overturn the 2020 election and for mishandling classified documents. The cases were dropped only because of presidential immunity, not because Trump was cleared.

Smith’s testimony will place detailed evidence permanently into the public record, creating a roadmap for future prosecution once Trump leaves office. As the midterms approach, this testimony threatens to dominate headlines, undermine Trump’s claims of exoneration, and force Republicans to defend actions they privately knew were false—deepening political and democratic fallout.