Raw Story

On Friday, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) amplified a baseless, debunked claim that President Joe Biden was experiencing a medical episode on board Air Force One. Now, the senator is getting roasted for his tweet by both journalists and commentators.

At 7:41 PM Eastern Time yesterday, far-right activist Laura Loomer tweeted: "Joe Biden is reportedly having a medical emergency on Air Force One right now" and that "press access has been removed." However, this was quickly debunked by X/Twitter's Community Notes function, which read that Biden "did NOT have a medical emergency on Air Force One following the Wisconsin rally and was perfectly fine throughout...and exited on his own after touching down in Delaware."

In response, Lee tweeted: "If Biden is having a medical emergency at this moment — on board Air Force One or otherwise — that raises ... a lot of questions." That tweet, which was posted at 8:09 PM Eastern Time last night, is still currently up on his official account.

White House pool reporter Sophie Hills of the Christian Science Monitor shed additional light on the president's health at the time of Loomer's initial tweet, writing that he stepped off of Air Force One at 7:34 PM and left with his motorcade afterward, before stopping at his home in Wilmington, Delaware at 7:50. This means Biden was already at home roughly 20 minutes before Lee sent his tweet.

Former Trump administration official Monica Crowley also tweeted Loomer's lie, only to backtrack and later tweet that there were "conflicting reports about Biden on AF1 but appears to be untrue."

Lee's amplification of Loomer's fictitious "medical emergency" resulted in harsh pushback on social media. Civil rights lawyer Leslie Proll called the Utah Republican's tweet "unconscionable." Biden campaign advisor James Singer accused him of "s—posting lies." And Joe Perticone – a contributor to never-Trump conservative website the Bulwark, noted the absurdity of a sitting U.S. senator relying on disinformation artists for news.

"The most concerning thing about a US senator’s judgment and intelligence is that he believes he’d first be hearing something as important as this from… Monica Crowley and Laura Loomer," Perticone wrote.

Former WGN reporter Jennifer Schulze also sharply criticized Lee and urged news outlets to "take a moment to cover this story about a sitting US Senator spreading malicious lies about the President."

"I know it's business as usual for republicans but it's still newsworthy," she tweeted.

Journalist Jamie Dupree noted the time difference between Lee's tweet and the time in the pool report when Biden was picked up by the presidential motorcade and driven home.

"Sen. Mike Lee R-UT tweeting out baseless medical rumors about Biden tonight. In fact, Biden was already back home (lid at 7:56 pm) by the time Lee was pressing the send button," Dupree posted.

Former President Donald Trump is now aiming to use the Supreme Court's recent immunity decision to justify tossing his classified documents case in the Southern District of Florida. But at least one legal expert isn't sure his gambit will succeed.

According to the 6-3 decision in Trump v. United States, a president is afforded absolute broad immunity from criminal prosecution, so long as any possible violation of laws is done as an "official act." Trump's attorneys may now attempt to have the Mar-a-Lago case thrown out by claiming that the former president's decision to store classified documents at his Florida home was done before he left his office as an official act. And given the fact that U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon — who is presiding over the case — was appointed to the federal bench by Trump, some in the legal world told NBC News that she may side with him and grant the presumption of immunity.

"The outcome will depend on whether Judge Cannon characterizes Trump’s decision at the end of his Presidency to transport the documents to Mar-a-Lago as an official act of designating the documents as personal, and whether she views that act as an essential premise on which the criminal charges depend," Pepperdine University law professor Joel Johnson told NBC.

But one Florida-based prosecutor isn't so sure that Trump will be able to convince even his own appointed judge. Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Aronberg told the network that Cannon's colleagues in the federal judiciary likely won't see eye to eye with her interpretation and application of the immunity ruling should she take the former president's side.

"If Judge Cannon wishes to adopt his reasoning, I expect she will be reversed by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals," he said.

Cannon has already been overruled by the 11th Circuit in past decisions pertaining to the Mar-a-Lago case. When she appointed a special master to review the FBI's seizure of documents following its 2022 raid on the former president's home, the 11th Circuit vacated that ruling, saying she "improperly exercised equitable jurisdiction."

"The law is clear. We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant," an 11th Circuit panel wrote at the time. "Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so."

Regardless of how Cannon applies the immunity ruling to the classified documents case, Loyola Marymount University law professor Justin Leavitt argued that the Supreme Court's recent decision will mean even more delays before the actual trial.

"I have no doubt that there will be another set of motions filed and that Judge Cannon will need ample time to work through those motions," Leavitt told NBC. "The primary impact of today’s decision on the classified documents cases is just to reconfirm that it’s extremely unlikely to be heard before November."

Click here to read NBC's report in full.

Reacting to the Supreme Court's presidential ruling that will hand Donald Trump unfettered power to do as pleases under the cover of presidential immunity should he be re-elected, a former FBI official warned the agency could become an agent of terror under the revenge-minded ex-president.

Appearing on MSNBC on Saturday, former assistant director for counterintelligence at the FBI, Frank Figliuzzi was candid about the agency's history of trampling on Americans' civil rights and claimed it would pale in comparison to what Trump would order it to do.

"I think we have to look at the intelligence community and federal law enforcement and here is why," the ex-FBI agent began. "[Supreme Court Justice] Samuel Alito has responded to the dissenters in this position and saying, 'Oh come on, you guys are bringing up extreme hypotheticals,' is what he called them as if we will have a good man in place who will always do the right thing despite having the presumption of immunity."

"Well, guess what/" he continued. "It is not extreme because all we have to do is look back in history to the early and mid-1970s when the American people began to find out that their FBI and their DOJ and their CIA were spying unlawfully without court authorization on American people. And who were those American people? Anybody J. Edgar Hoover and the administration felt was a threat."

Continuing in that vein he added, "This is what happens when the executive branch literally has no rules they need to follow and, I am telling you, we will see it again because Trump has said he will seek revenge on those he deems a threat."

Watch below or at the link.

MSNBC 07 06 2024 09 04 44 youtu.be

Newly-minted Prime Minister Dick Schoof faced a baptism of fire at the opening of the Dutch parliament over remarks by two cabinet ministers about a conspiracy theory with neo-Nazi roots.

Schoof was inaugurated on Tuesday with pomp and fanfare to head a coalition government dominated by far-right leader Geert Wilders and his anti-immigration Freedom Party, the PVV.

Two days later, the new Dutch premier's first lower house debate spiralled into chaos when not only the opposition, but Wilders himself aimed his arrows at Schoof, his own choice for the top job.

No amount of preparation could ready Schoof, a veteran career civil servant, for his first appearance within the bear pit of Dutch parliamentary politics, marked by interruptions and sniping on X, formally known as Twitter.

At the centre of the controversy are two cabinet ministers from Wilders's PVV: new Asylum and Migration Minister Marjolein Faber and Foreign Trade and Development Aid Minister Reinette Klever.

Both have in the past spoken about the so-called "omvolking" -- the Dutch term for the "great replacement" theory that supposes that Europe's white population is being deliberately replaced by immigrants.

While both ministers have "distanced themselves" from the term, they maintained that there was a "worrying demographic development" in the Netherlands, where the ruling coalition now wants to implement the "strictest immigration policy ever."

Isolated

But Schoof reiterated during the debate: "I repeat, this government is against discrimination, racism and exclusion."

The Dutch left-wing opposition accused Schoof of tolerating those who have made "conspiratorial" and "racist" remarks -- which also included criticizing the wearing of veils -- within his ministerial team.

Wilders himself then launched a virulent attack on Schoof for not defending his ministers for "being made out as racists", calling Schoof's response "weak."

Schoof, not aligned to any party and who has been appointed by a four-party coalition of the PVV, the Liberal VVD, the farmer-friendly BBB and the new centre-right NSC, appeared isolated on all sides.

Yet on Friday at his first weekly press conference, Schoof denied there was discord within cabinet relationships.

"I repeat what I said. This government is for all Dutch people. It's against racism, discrimination or any conspiracy theories."

At the same time, Schoof reiterated he had "full confidence in his ministers."

Leiden politics professor Ruud Koole told AFP the first debate was a litmus test to see how far the PVV's junior coalition parties would go to normalize extreme views within Wilders' party.

"It turns out very far," he said.

"The statements made in the past by PVV ministers about the 'great replacement' have been swept under the carpet," Koole said.

"All three the other coalition parties have accepted to have the 'great replacement' rephrased as a 'demographic phenomenon'," he said.

'Disgusting'

Wilders, who claimed a stunning victory in last year's parliamentary elections, continues to lead his party as an MP.

He gave up on ambitions to become Dutch prime minister after other coalition parties threatened to withdraw because of his anti-Islam and eurosceptic views.

Wilders said he wanted to limit immigration to the Netherlands "as much as possible", but he has indeed called the "great replacement" theory "disgusting".

But during the debate, he aimed his barbs at Schoof for not defending his party's ministers.

Wilders's outburst was immediately criticized by the junior coalition partner leaders of the VVD and the NSC on X.

"I was particularly struck by how defensive Wilders was and how he tried in a frantic and authoritarian way to deny the racism that his party clearly propagates in various ways," said Sarah Bracke, sociology professor at the University of Amsterdam.

"It is intellectually and politically untenable to continue to deny that the ideas at the heart of the PVV, and also of this government, are not racist, or that it would be enough to no longer mention the term 'great replacement' to make extremist and racist ideas disappear," she told AFP.

"If Mr Wilders continues to criticise his prime minister, this could lead to Schoof's resignation," added Leiden University's Koole.

"But we are not there yet," he said.

© 2024 AFP

A former attorney for Donald Trump says it might be best for the country if an "addled" and "out-of-it" President Joe Biden drops out of the presidential race, but that swapping Biden with someone else could end up hurting the party's chances at retaking the White House.

Former prosecutor Jim Trusty was asked Friday on Newsmax's "Newsline" about a recently aired clip in which Biden appears to flub a sentence and call himself a "black woman." Responding to the clip, Trusty called Biden "addled" and said he has appeared that way for several years.

"It's not just slips of the tongue, it's dramatic, complete, you know, falling down incompetence," said Trusty. "We've seen that for a long time and we know it must be much worse like after sun-down, when he's sitting at home with Dr. Jill."

Trusty said it was shameful that the people who continue to support the president are "all about power, and not about country."

Biden staying in the Oval Office invites, he said, "all sorts of mischief" from America's adversaries and pseudo-enemies, who could be eyeing his appearance and saying "now's our chance."

"They could do that realistically knowing he's just not up to the task," said Trusty.

All this, he said, warrants a conversation about invoking the 25th Amendment.

Read also: Morning Joe battles Axios founder over N.Y. Times' treatment of Joe Biden

"People should be doing it out of love of country and concern for the safety of this country, not out of some political calculation," he said.

In fact, doing so could end up hurting Trump's chances of regaining the White House.

"For Donald Trump, it's probably best if Biden stays in," he said.

Trusty joins Republicans including MAGA Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) in calling for Vice President Kamala Harris to invoke the 25th amendment to remove Biden.

Roy on Wednesday told Fox News that Biden is surrounded by a "cadre" of ventriloquist-esque progressives who are manipulating his moves like a "puppet."

Roy said the Biden camp has hidden his "lack of competency and ability." And while he believes former President Donald Trump will beat either Biden or Harris in the election, he called it an "issue of the constitution, straight-up," to remove Biden.

"The president, frankly, isn't all there. Everybody knows it. It is telling that the media, the mainstream media, so-called, is all in a tizzy because of the political ramifications," he said, adding that he believes the media has been "propping up a Manchurian Candidate."

Under the amendment, the vice president and a majority of the cabinet can notify the president pro tempore of the Senate and the House Speaker that the president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office. Doing so would allow the vice president to become acting president.

Watch the clip below or at this link.

A Romanian court on Friday eased travel restrictions on controversial influencer Andrew Tate and his brother, allowing them to travel within the European Union while awaiting trial over human trafficking and rape charges.

U.S.-born Briton Tate and his brother Tristan, who say they are innocent, are accused of having formed an organised criminal network in early 2021 in Romania and in Britain.

The former professional kickboxer and his brother face charges of human trafficking, rape and forming a criminal group to sexually exploit women.

The Bucharest court on Friday said it "orders the replacement of the obligation of the (two) defendants... not to leave the territory of Romania with the obligation of the defendants not to leave the territorial limit of the European Union".

They can leave the EU zone only "with the prior authorisation of the judge of the preliminary chamber or the court," it said.

The brothers would still be subject to judicial supervision, which requires them to appear before authorities regularly.

The Tates' spokeswoman Mateea Petrescu welcomed the ruling, saying her clients could now "pursue professional opportunities without restriction".

At the end of 2022, the Tates were arrested in Romania and spent three months in detention before they were indicted in June 2023.

Prosecutors allege that 37-year-old Tate, his brother and two women set up a criminal organisation and sexually exploited several victims.

The victims were allegedly forced to engage in pornographic acts.

The Tates also face rape and assault allegations in separate cases in Britain, where authorities issued a European arrest warrant.

In March, a Romanian judge ordered the brothers to be extradited to the UK to face the accusations, but only once after a separate Romanian criminal case against them is finished.

A trial date in Romania has not yet been set.

Tate moved to Romania years ago after first starting a webcam business in the UK.

In 2016, Tate appeared on the "Big Brother" reality television show in Britain but was removed after a video emerged showing him attacking a woman.

He then turned to social media platforms to promote his divisive views.

Giving tips on how to be successful, along with misogynistic and sometimes violent maxims, his videos have made him one of the world's best-known influencers.

© Agence France-Presse