Jan. 20, 2024 - Epoch Times
09:41
| 
| Time | Text |
|---|---|
| Unlike a typical election cycle, where we would discuss campaign speeches, different endorsements, policy differences between the candidates, and so on, well, this year's presidential race is a bit different. | |
| Covering the 2024 election mainly involves keeping up to date on the many legal cases that have been lobbied against President Trump. | |
| And indeed, over the last several days, there have been quite big developments in two of the ongoing legal battles facing President Trump. | |
| So let's go through them together, starting over in the state of Georgia. | |
| As we already discussed in a previous episode, the District Attorney of Fulton County, Ms. | |
| Fannie Willis, she currently stands accused of hiring the man for whom she was allegedly a mistress to in order to be the lead prosecutor in the Trump case. | |
| That man had little to no experience in working on felony RICO cases, but somehow he wound up billing the county upwards of $650,000 before then turning around and buying Miss Fannie Willis lavish vacations to places like Napa Valley, Florida, as well as the Caribbean. | |
| And while in our previous episode, we already discussed how Congress, at the federal level, is investigating the matter, well, Ms. | |
| Fannie Willis' problems are now hitting closer to home. | |
| That's because, just yesterday, the actual presiding judge who's overseeing Trump's RICO case, well, he gave Ms. | |
| Fannie Willis a hard deadline for when she must respond to these allegations in writing. | |
| Quote, Judge Scott McAfee on Thursday ordered Fannie Willis to respond to the allegations in writing by February 2nd and has scheduled a hearing on the matter for February 15th. | |
| Meaning that exactly two weeks from today, she has to submit her written response to these allegations and then two weeks after that, there will be an actual live hearing where she has to explain herself to the judge about this alleged misuse of funds as well as the alleged affair with the lead prosecutor. | |
| And this hearing will actually be very consequential to the real case. | |
| That's because if Ms. | |
| Fannie Willis is found to have engaged in improper behavior by the court, well, then very likely the case will be handed off to a different prosecutor within Fulton County who might then just turn around and choose to drop the charges altogether against both President Trump as well as his co-defendants. | |
| Regardless, let's wait two weeks to see what Ms. | |
| Fannie Willis comes up with in her written response that she again has to submit by February 2nd. | |
| For your reference, the only response that she has given thus far was during a speech at a church last Sunday wherein she chalked up all the allegations against her. | |
| To racism. | |
| Let's see if that argument will stick in court. | |
| And now, let's take a super quick moment to smash those like and subscribe buttons and head on over to the state of Maine. | |
| As you are likely well aware, Maine became the second state in the nation to decide to drop President Trump's name from the 2024 ballot. | |
| That was a decision that was made by Maine's Secretary of State, Ms. | |
| Shanna Bellows, who believes that Trump is not actually qualified to remain on the ballot due to her interpretation of the 14th Amendment. | |
| Essentially, her belief that President Trump quote-unquote engaged in an insurrection on January 6th of 2021. | |
| And so, in order to save democracy, she decided to not allow the one million voters in her state to have the option of voting for President Trump. | |
| However, just like over in Colorado, her decision has been put on hold. | |
| That's because just two days ago, a superior court over in Maine has put a stay on the secretary's directive. | |
| Here's specifically what the court wrote in their order, which just for your reference was issued on January 17th. | |
| Quote, The secretary is ordered to await the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. | |
| Anderson, which is the Colorado case, and no later than 30 days after Anderson's issuance to issue a new ruling modifying, withdrawing, or confirming her prior ruling. | |
| Legally speaking, a stay of an administrative ruling is a rare event in Maine, but the court agrees that under these circumstances, it is appropriate. | |
| And so, essentially, what happened was that the main superior court, they put a hold on removing Trump from the ballot in the state until after the U.S. Supreme Court issues a ruling in the Colorado case. | |
| Because whatever the Supreme Court decides in the Colorado case will actually then be applicable to the rest of the nation. | |
| And as such, quote, the main court ordered that President Trump would remain on the main ballot unless the Supreme Court found him disqualified to hold the office of president by March 5th. | |
| In other words, they fully defer the decision over to the US Supreme Court. | |
| Now, in the US Supreme Court, in that particular case, President Trump's legal team has just submitted their legal brief. | |
| You can see it up on screen for yourself, laying out their argument as to why he should be able to remain on the ballot. | |
| And frankly, Trump's legal team did not mince words in their legal briefing, writing that, quote, The court should put a swift and decisive end to these ballot disqualification efforts which threaten to disenfranchise tens of millions of Americans and which promise to unleash chaos and bedlam if other state courts and state officials follow Colorado's lead and exclude the likely Republican presidential nominee from their ballots. | |
| And then, in terms of their actual legal rationale, Trump's lawyers went on to write in their legal brief that, quote, The court should reverse the Colorado decision because President Trump is not even subject to Section 3, as the president is not an officer of the United States under the Constitution. | |
| And even if President Trump were subject to Section 3, he did not engage in anything that qualifies as an insurrection. | |
| The court should reverse on these grounds and end these unconstitutional disqualification efforts once and for all. | |
| Now, notably, President Trump's lawyers, they did not argue whether or not what took place on January 6th of 2021 amounted to an insurrection, but instead, their contention was that President Trump did not take any actions that would, of their own accord, amount to an insurrection. | |
| Quote, Raising concerns about the integrity of the recent federal election and pointing to reports of fraud and irregularity is not an act of violence or a threat of force. | |
| Trump's lawyers then go on to throw a bit of a curveball by writing that even if Trump is guilty of insurrection, he could still technically run for office, it's just that he wouldn't be able to serve in office. | |
| In addition, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment cannot be used to deny President Trump or anyone else access to the ballot as Section 3 prohibits individuals only from holding office, not from seeking or winning election to office. | |
| Furthermore, aside from the legal briefs submitted by President Trump's lawyers, the U.S. Supreme Court also received supporting briefs from individuals as well as groups who support President Trump's position that he should be on the ballot throughout the whole nation. | |
| And notably, among the so-called Friend of the Court briefs, you had one that was signed by nearly 200 Republican members of Congress. | |
| You had another that came from nearly two, actually over two dozen Republican states, as well as another that was signed by the Republican National Committee. | |
| And in terms of their decision, well, the U.S. Supreme Court is working on a bit of an expedited timetable, with February 8th being the date that the court is scheduled to actually hear this case in person, meaning that oral arguments at the U.S. Supreme Court will be taking place about exactly three weeks from today. | |
| However, until the U.S. Supreme Court makes that determination one way or the other, well, the U.S. citizens over in those two states, over in Maine and Colorado, will be able to vote for President Trump this upcoming Super Tuesday. | |
| If you would like to read either the legal brief that was submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court by Trump's legal team or the main superior court decision, I'll throw all those documents down into the description box below this video for you to peruse at your own leisure. | |
| All right, just to pause here for a super quick moment. | |
| Listen, you've probably heard of a lot of people getting off-label prescriptions for a drug known as Ozempic in order to lose weight. | |
| It's a big celebrity trend right now. | |
| However, what a lot of people don't know is that about 50% of this type of weight loss actually comes from the loss of muscle, rather than the loss of fat. | |
| And so while people are losing weight, they're actually losing muscle. | |
| And typically, when they stop Ozempic, their weight rebounds. | |
| And so, perhaps before you pull the trigger on trying Ozempic, consider an alternative. | |
| Through his research, today's sponsor, Dr. | |
| Stephen Gundry, has gained deep insight into what it really takes to lose weight and to actually keep it off. | |
| He himself has lost 70 pounds using his research and has been able to keep it off for well over 20 years and counting. | |
| He calls this method caloric bypass, and according to him, it allows people to lose weight, get a lot more energy, improve their digestion, have their joints feel stronger and better, and just generally lead to an overall healthier life. | |
| And Dr. | |
| Gundry has put together a video Laying out his research, which you can watch over at gutcleanseprotocol.com forward slash Roman. | |
| That video, by the way, is watched by over 20 million people thus far. | |
| And so check it out. | |
| I'll throw a link to that video. | |
| It'll be down in the description box below. | |
| Check it out. | |
| And then lastly, if you enjoyed today's episode and you're just thinking to yourself, man, I love this content. | |
| I just wish Roman would put out more episodes every single week. | |
| Well, you're in luck, because I do. | |
| Over on EpicTV, our awesome no-sensorship video platform, I publish anywhere between 1 to 3 exclusive episodes of Facts Matter every single week, usually on topics that are, quite frankly, too spicy for here on YouTube. | |
| Even though those episodes are 100% fact-based and everything is properly sourced, well, it doesn't matter. | |
| The algorithm here on this platform just picks up certain keywords and then it... | |
| We can delete the episode without any human input. | |
| And so if you'd like access to those awesome episodes every single week, including a huge backlog from the last three years, well, now's a great chance to check it out because the Epoch Times is running a phenomenal promotional sale. | |
| 25 cents a week, and if you do the math, that works itself out to just be a single dollar a month. | |
| It's a great opportunity to test out whether you like the Epoch Times. | |
| Single dollar a month would pretty much make absolutely no money on it. | |
| The idea is just to get you in the door, get you watching the videos, reading the articles, the analysis pieces, looking at the infographics, basically just getting hooked on the content, and then hopefully being a subscriber for a long, long time to come. | |
| Years, perhaps even decades. | |
| And so I hope you check it out. | |
| If you want to take advantage of that sale, the link is right there at the top of the description box below. | |
| You just click on that link, it'll take you to the sale page where you can try the Epoch Times for just, again, a single dollar a month. | |
| You absolutely cannot go wrong with that price. | |
| Link is right there at the top of the description box below. | |
| Hope you check it out. | |
| And then, until next time, I'm your host, Roman from the Epoch Times. | |
| Stay informed. |
Export Selection