Dec. 7, 2023 - Epoch Times
11:50
| 
| Time | Text |
|---|---|
| Good evening, and right before we dive into the main story, I'd like to offer a quick correction. | |
| In our previous episode, the one that we published on Monday, December the 4th, we discussed President Trump's RICO case over in the state of Georgia. | |
| And at the end of the episode, I mentioned that because it was a state-level case, if Trump were to be found guilty, only the Georgia governor would be able to issue a pardon. | |
| Meaning that in the episode, I said that Governor Brian Kemp would have to issue a pardon to Trump if he were to be found guilty. | |
| However, after we published the episode, I learned that over in Georgia, that's not actually the case. | |
| Because while most states in the US, they do give the authority to the governor in terms of offering pardons, Georgia is one of the few states that's a little bit different. | |
| In Georgia, they have something called the State Board of Pardons and Paroles. | |
| And it's this board. | |
| It's not the governor. | |
| It's this board consisting of five members who would be in charge of offering clemency to President Trump. | |
| Although, in a certain sense, the governor retains some, you can say, sort of indirect influence on the pardon process, given the fact that it's the governor who appoints members to this board, although those members do then have to be confirmed by the state senate. | |
| And so, in theory, the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles is technically independent of the governor. | |
| And so, in our previous episode, when I said that it was the governor of Georgia with the authority to pardon President Trump, I was flat out wrong, and I apologize for that. | |
| And I hope you will forgive me and still smash those like and subscribe buttons so that this content can reach ever more people. | |
| Now, with that bit of housekeeping out of the way, let's dive into some other updates regarding the many lawsuits aimed at President Trump, starting over in the state of Florida. | |
| In the classified documents case, there has been a battle raging between President Trump's legal team and Jack Smith's prosecution team regarding which documents Trump will have access to while building his defense. | |
| And while Trump's legal team has been trying to gain access to as many documents as possible in order to build a solid defense, Jack Smith, on the other hand, has been making the attempt to hide certain documents. | |
| Specifically, a newly unsealed court filing shows that Jack Smith's team of prosecutors, they were trying to stop the defense from getting access to certain files, even though those particular files were not actually classified. | |
| And their reasoning for doing this was because it would give Trump's lawyers too much information when building a solid defense. | |
| Mr. | |
| Smith's team also revealed in the newly unsealed court filing that prosecutors initially opposed unsealing court documents number 223 and 224 because it would have revealed to the defense counsel information, albeit unclassified, about the contours of the government's planned SIPA Section 4 motion, meaning that a risk giving President Trump's legal team an opportunity to more effectively counter Mr. | |
| Smith's moves. | |
| Meaning that they were attempting to hide these files so as to prevent Trump's legal team from being able to mount an effective defense. | |
| Now, for your reference, CIPA, as mentioned in that statement, stands for Classified Information Procedures Act. | |
| And this is the law which governs how classified documents can be used in a courtroom. | |
| Because classified documents, they cannot just be thrown out willy-nilly. | |
| And so CIPA lays out a fairly complex set of rules on how exactly these classified documents can be presented in a court of law. | |
| And Jack Smith and his team were attempting to hide what's known as a CIPA Section 4 motion. | |
| Quote, In plain English, it means that the prosecution was trying to hide their game plan by obfuscating these motions by it means that the prosecution was trying to hide their game plan by obfuscating However, the judge in the case, who for your reference is Judge Eileen Cannon, she was appointed to the bench by President Trump himself, well, she wasn't really having it. | |
| And instead, two days ago, she rejected Jack Smith's motion to keep these documents hidden from Trump's legal defense team. | |
| She ordered the clerk to unseal multiple documents that the prosecution was trying to keep under wraps. | |
| Here was part of what her court order said. | |
| In light of the special counsel's response to defendant's motion to unseal 230, and mindful of the strong presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents, the clerk is directed to unseal docket entries 223, 224, and 230. | |
| And so, in the ongoing battle over what will and what will not be handed over, the latest decision from the judge was a win for the defendants, who can now look at the contours of the prosecution's plan and lay out their defense accordingly. | |
| If you'd like to read any of the documents related to this back and forth, I'll throw all those links down into the description box below this video. | |
| And now, let's move on over to Arizona, where another judge had just handed another victory to President Trump. | |
| Because you see, unbeknownst to most people, Fifteen states across the country right now have lawsuits being waged against President Trump asking the courts to take his name off the ballot. | |
| The rationale behind all these different lawsuits is that since President Trump allegedly engaged in an insurrection on January the 6th, he should therefore be disqualified from holding office as per the 14th Amendment. | |
| If you'd like to know the greater details of this legal argument, we actually did a much deeper dive into the whole topic on a previous episode. | |
| I'll throw the link to that previous episode down into the description box below. | |
| Regardless, though, the short of it is that these different 14th Amendment lawsuits seeking to keep Trump off the ballot are failing one after the other, which brings us right over to Arizona. | |
| The case in Arizona was brought forth by a man named John Anthony Castro. | |
| He is a Republican presidential candidate out of Texas with very little support. | |
| Quote... | |
| John Anthony Castro, a little-known Republican presidential candidate, filed a lawsuit in September alleging that Trump is ineligible for office under the 14th Amendment because he provided aid and comfort to January 6th insurrectionists. | |
| Castro had claimed that Trump's candidacy would harm him by drawing away votes and fundraising. | |
| However, the judge in this case did not buy that argument, the argument that Mr. | |
| Castro will be injured by having Trump on the ballot. | |
| Specifically, Judge Douglas Reyes, who, free reference, was appointed to the bench by Barack Obama, he ruled just two days ago that Mr. | |
| Castro does not have standing to bring forth this lawsuit. | |
| Quote,"...although this evidence shows that Castro's name likely will appear on the Republican ballot in Arizona's presidential preference election, it does not convince the court that Castro is genuinely competing with Trump for votes or contributions or that he has any chance or intent to prevail in that election." Meaning that the judge in this particular case ruled that Mr. | |
| Castro does not have standing because, well, whether or not Trump is on the ballot has no discernible effect on Mr. | |
| Castro's electability in Arizona, which is effectively none. | |
| Now, for your reference, Mr. | |
| Castro has filed 27 of these different lawsuits across the whole country, with all of them getting tossed one after the other. | |
| If you'd like to read the lawsuit out in Arizona, including the ruling from the judge, I'll throw that down into the description box below. | |
| And now, right before we head on over to the state of Georgia and discuss how Ms. | |
| Fannie Willis has just gotten some rather bad news, let's take a super quick moment to introduce today's sponsor. | |
| Alright, you know what's happening in this country right now. | |
| You have civil unrest, protests in the street, the price of gold just hit an all-time high, and with the election right around the corner, who knows how much more crazy it'll actually get. | |
| And so the time to become self-reliant and secure your family's food supply is right now. | |
| Do not wait until things really hit the fan. | |
| Instead, check out My Patriot Supply, America's largest preparedness company and the sponsor of today's episode. | |
| They sell these awesome three-month emergency food kits, which provide delicious breakfasts, lunches, dinners, as well as snacks, which not only give you 2,000 calories per day right when you need it the most, but these food kits can last in storage for up to 25 years. | |
| And best of all, right now, they're offering our viewers $200 off the price, meaning that now is a great time to stock up for every single member of your family. | |
| And so, head on over to preparewithroman.com, where you can save $200 off of each three-month emergency food kit that you buy. | |
| Also, if you place your order before 3 p.m., they ship your order for free on that very same day. | |
| And so again, the website is preparewithroman.com. | |
| I'll also throw the link. | |
| It'll be down in the description box below. | |
| And now, let's head on over to Georgia, where Trump is currently facing a RICO case accusing him of leading a conspiracy to overturn the state's 2020 election. | |
| And while, naturally, Trump and his other co-defendants have been on the back foot for the last several months, it appears that things have actually shifted a bit. | |
| That's because, just yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee launched an official investigation into Ms. | |
| Fannie Willis. | |
| Specifically, according to the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, who is Congressman Jim Jordan, this investigation, it was opened after they allegedly found evidence that Ms. | |
| Fannie Willis was actually coordinating her prosecution of President Trump with Democrats in Congress. | |
| Here's part of what was written in a letter from the House Judiciary Committee addressed to Ms. | |
| Ms. Fannie Willis. | |
| "The Committee on the Judiciary continues to conduct oversight of politically motivated prosecutions by state and local officials. | |
| Although we were aware that your office had coordinated its politically motivated prosecutions with the Office of the Special Counsel, Jack Smith, we recently learned that your office also coordinated its investigation actions with the partisan January 6 Select Committee." Now in terms of the actual evidence that they uncovered, Mr. | |
| Jim Jordan goes on to mention a letter that was uncovered between Ms. | |
| Ms. Fannie Willis and Congressman Benny Thompson, who was at the time the chairman of the January 6th Select Committee. | |
| Quote, Recently, the House Judiciary Committee became aware of cooperation between your office and the partisan January 6th Select Committee. | |
| We are in possession of a letter dated December 17, 2021, from you to Congressman Benny G. Thompson, chairman of the partisan January 6th Select Committee, requesting access to congressional records that may be relevant to our criminal investigation. | |
| Specifically, you asked Congressman Thompson for access to records including, but not limited to, recordings and transcripts of witness interviews and depositions, electronic and print records of communications, and records of travel. | |
| You even offered that you and your staff were eager to travel to Washington, D.C. to meet with investigators in person and to receive these records anytime between January 31st of 2022 and February 25th of 2022. | |
| Although it is not clear what records, if any, you obtained from your coordination with the partisan January 6th Select Committee, this new information raises additional questions relevant to the House Judiciary Committee's oversight of your politically motivated prosecution of a former president of the United States and several former senior federal officials. | |
| Essentially, the accusation here is that the Democrat-led January 6th Select Committee was working alongside Ms. | |
| Fannie Willis in order to build the case against President Trump, which, according to Congressman Jim Jordan, might qualify as collusion between a state prosecutor and congressional Democrats and could therefore be technically evidence of a politically motivated prosecution. | |
| And as such, Ms. | |
| Fannie Willis was asked to turn over all relevant communications between her office and the January 6 committee, including copies of their back-and-forth communications, a list of people who were interviewed, copies of all the transcripts and depositions from those interviews, any video recordings that the January 6 committee sent over to Georgia, and so on and so forth. | |
| Miss Fannie Willis has until December the 11th, which is this upcoming Tuesday, to hand over all this information to the House Judiciary Committee. | |
| If you'd like to read this letter for yourself, I'll throw that into the description box below this video if you're the type of person that likes to dig into the weeds. | |
| And then, lastly, if you enjoyed this episode of Facts Matter and you're just thinking to yourself, man, I wish Roman published more episodes every single week. | |
| Well, you're in luck, because I do. | |
| Over on EpicTV, which is our awesome no-sensorship video platform, I publish somewhere between one to three exclusive episodes of Facts Matter every single week, usually on topics which are unfortunately too spicy for here on YouTube. | |
| And so, if you've been on the fence about trying the Epic Times, you know you're looking for a source of honest news, but maybe you're not sure about whether you're ready to subscribe or not, well take the sale as an opportunity because well for a dollar a month you really can't go wrong The sale link will be right there at the top of the description box below. | |
| Just click on that link, and it'll take you to the sale page where you can try the Epoch Times for just a single dollar a month. | |
| You can even cancel any time, but I'm sure that you won't. | |
| I'm sure that you'll fall in love with it and be a subscriber for a long, long time to come. | |
| Again, the link is right there at the top of the description box below. | |
| I hope you're clicking it, and I hope that you join us over on the Epic Times website. | |
| And then, until next time, I'm your host, Roman, from the Epic Times. |
Export Selection