Special counsel Jack Smith seems to be running out of patience in his lawsuit against former President Donald Trump regarding classified documents discovered at his Mar-a-Lago estate.

Smith is reportedly contemplating drastic action in seeking the removal of U.S. District Court Judge Aileen M. Cannon from the case she currently oversees, according to NBC News. In a recent court filing, the special counsel’s legal team raised concerns about Cannon’s receptiveness to suggestions from Trump’s legal team to dismiss the case.

Trump’s legal team argued that the Department of Justice has no authority to transform the issue of presidential records into a criminal matter. However, Cannon rejected this argument on Thursday, opting not to issue a separate court order on the matter. In her three-page decision, she allowed Trump to continue challenging the legitimacy of the case but ultimately denied the request for now.

This ruling has mixed implications for both sides of the case. For Smith, the judge’s refusal to dismiss the case is undoubtedly a positive development as the legal pursuit of Trump will proceed.

However, it also weakens the court filing aimed at removing Cannon from the case, making it highly unlikely for the special counsel’s legal team to achieve that goal.

Special counsel Jack Smith's blistering response this week to a request by Judge Aileen Cannon was one of several instances over the last 10 months challenging her competency or impartiality in a case involving Trump's handling of classified secrets.https://t.co/DlHGHIlsqW

— Axios (@axios) April 5, 2024

For Trump, the denial of his argument to dismiss the case is undoubtedly a setback, as a dismissal would have been highly beneficial for him. However, the fact that Judge Cannon, who has been described as “MAGA-friendly” by The Daily Beast, will remain on the case is likely to work in his favor in the future.

Furthermore, the ongoing debate regarding the potential impact of The Presidential Records Act on the case allows Trump’s team to continue their arguments and keeps the possibility of dismissal alive. While Smith vehemently denies that the act has any relevance to the ongoing case, the fact that Cannon is keeping it open undoubtedly frustrates the special counsel.

Smith’s desperation to take any measures to ensure Trump faces punishment highlights the reality of the case. He is not interested in engaging in legal arguments surrounding the classified documents; his sole focus is seeing Trump face consequences. It is equally evident that whenever President Joe Biden is subjected to a similar investigation conducted by Special Counsel Robert Hur, who concludes that Biden also retained classified documents after leaving office, no charges are brought against him.

Although Hur and Smith are separate individuals with independent decision-making powers, this situation highlights the existence of a double standard that is being perpetuated. The Democrats continue to demonstrate their willingness to prosecute the former president, regardless of whether their actions are right or wrong.

In a significant development, the campaign of former President Donald Trump and the Republican National Committee (RNC) have announced that a Trump fundraiser held in Palm Beach, Florida, has achieved a remarkable feat by setting a new record for a presidential campaign. This event managed to raise over $50 million in a single night. It is noteworthy that this achievement comes shortly after Democrat President Joe Biden, accompanied by former Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, set a record of $26 million during an event in New York City.

Trump’s fundraiser on Saturday evening nearly doubled that amount, indicating a substantial shift among Republican donors who are now rallying behind Trump. This surge in support can be attributed to the fact that last month, the former president surpassed the required number of delegates to secure the presumptive GOP nomination for president in a third consecutive election.

“Tonight will be an incredible night for President Trump and the Republican Party, raising an astounding $50.5 million,” Trump’s senior advisers announced:

“Meanwhile, after locking up the nomination in one of the fastest primaries in modern political history, Donald J. Trump is winning poll after poll and proving that the enthusiasm is on his side. It’s clearer than ever that we have the message, the operation, and the money to propel President Trump to victory on November 5.”

Michael Whatley, the newly appointed RNC chairman, along with co-chair Lara Trump, who is the daughter-in-law of Trump, emphasized that the fundraiser signifies the GOP’s unity in support of Trump and their preparedness for the upcoming battle against Biden.

“The success of tonight’s event is proving what we already know: Americans are fed up with Biden’s record of failure, from the open southern border and sky-high inflation to the migrant crime crisis that has made everyone less safe,” Whatley and Lara Trump said. “The Republican Party is united behind the effort to elect President Donald J. Trump, and Americans are lining up to join our movement and retire Crooked Joe Biden once and for all.”

🚨DONALD TRUMP AND ALIGNED GROUPS SMASH RECORDS AT PALM BEACH DINNER, RAISE $50.5 MILLIONhttps://t.co/UDw8rbkmho pic.twitter.com/FqkE8Ka8q2

— Karoline Leavitt (@kleavittnh) April 6, 2024

Hedge fund billionaire John Paulson, who has been mentioned as a potential candidate for Secretary of the Treasury if Trump wins again in November, organized a fundraiser at his Palm Beach mansion. The event, named the “Inaugural Leadership Dinner,” saw several donors contributing up to $824,600—the maximum donation for a “Chairman level” treatment, which included the opportunity to dine with Trump. The fundraiser was attended by former first lady Melania Trump, as well as three of Trump’s previous 2024 intra-party rivals: businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, and Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC).

A published copy of the fundraising invitation by the New York Post revealed a list of prominent GOP donors, such as Robert Bigelow, Harold Hamm, Steve Wynn, Robert Mercer, Todd Ricketts, Scott Bessent, John Catsimatidis, former Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R-GA) and her husband Jeffrey Sprecher, among others. This fundraising event on Saturday evening for Trump set a new record, following the announcement earlier in the week by the Trump campaign and RNC that they had already raised $65.6 million in March and had $93.1 million in cash reserves.

In contrast, the Biden campaign and Democratic National Committee (DNC) disclosed that they had raised $90 million collectively by the end of March and had $192 million in cash reserves. Trump’s successful fundraiser on Saturday is expected to narrow this financial gap, especially as big GOP donors shift their support towards him now that the primary elections are over.

The ability of the surety company responsible for the $175 million bond of former President Donald Trump is being questioned by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

On April 1, Trump submitted the $175 million bond to prevent James from seizing his assets, following an appeals court decision that allowed him to post the bond amount to cover a civil fraud judgment of $464 million. The appeals court ruling ensured that Trump could appeal the judgment.

The bond was underwritten by Knight Specialty Insurance Company, which essentially made a promise to cover the $175 million bond if Trump’s appeal is unsuccessful and he fails to make the payment. Trump paid a fee to Knight Specialty Insurance Company and provided cash as collateral in order to obtain their coverage.

According to a court filing on Thursday, James has raised doubts about the company’s capacity to pay the bond amount. Judge Arthur Engoron, who presided over Trump’s civil judgment, has tentatively set a hearing for April 22 to address James’ concerns.

The NYT reports:

“In a court filing on Thursday, Ms. James noted that Knight was not registered to issue appeal bonds in New York, and so she demanded that the company or Mr. Trump’s lawyers file paperwork to “justify” the bond within 10 days. Ms. James is seeking to clarify whether Knight, which had never posted a similar court bond before aiding Mr. Trump, is financially capable of fulfilling its obligation to pay the $175 million if Mr. Trump defaults.

“Even if Knight lacks the funds itself, the company should be able to tap the collateral Mr. Trump pledged.

“In a statement on Thursday, a lawyer for Mr. Trump, Christopher M. Kise, slammed Ms. James, calling her case a “baseless and vindictive political crusade” and her objections to the bond an effort “to stir up some equally baseless public quarrel in a desperate effort to regain relevance.”’

In February, Judge Engoron imposed a hefty penalty of over $350 million on Trump and the Trump Organization, while also prohibiting him from holding any position as an officer or director in a New York corporation for a duration of three years. James aimed to financially cripple Trump by subjecting him to a staggering $464 million fine and a permanent exclusion from the real estate sector within the state of New York.

Vice President Kamala Harris faced additional ridicule and mockery on Thursday following her inaccurate statement regarding women’s college basketball.

“Harris mistakenly claimed that women’s college basketball players had not enjoyed the benefits of tournament brackets until just last year, 2022,” Mediaite reported. “Tournament brackets have long been a fixture of the NCAA women’s basketball postseason, but the ‘March Madness’ copyright was only extended to the women in 2022.”

During a conversation on lighter subjects, Harris engaged in a discussion with Spectrum News’ Tim Boyum in Charlotte, N.C., on Thursday. In addition, she provided an explanation of the candid and straightforward conversation between President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The substantial television ratings achieved during the Iowa and LSU game on Monday evening served as concrete proof of the growing public interest in women’s college basketball. However, Harris erroneously attributed this surge in popularity to the absence of brackets.

Harris went on to state:

“Do you know? Okay, a bit of a history lesson. Do you know that women were not. The women’s teams were not allowed to have brackets until 2022. Think about that. And what? That. Talk about progress. You know better late than never, but progress and what that has done. Because of course, when, you know, I had a bracket and it’s not broken completely, but I won’t talk about my bracket. But you know, just how we love we love March Madness. And even just now allowing the women to have brackets and what that does to encourage people to talk more about the women’s teams, to watch them now they’re being covered, you know, and and this is the reality people used to say are women’s sports. Who’s interested? Well, if you can’t see it, you won’t be. But when you see it, you realize, oh.”

WATCH:

Resident idiot Kamala Harris gives a sports history lesson, claims there were no brackets for the women’s NCAA Tournament until 2022. Legit, who is advising her? And how did they think it was determined who played who before then? pic.twitter.com/NToD1WyiH3

— Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) April 5, 2024

Mediaite added: “The thing is that Vice President Harris knows that the NCAA women’s tournament existed — with brackets — in 2021, evidenced by a bracket she filled out herself and posted on the social media platform then known as Twitter.”

So you went with #1 seeds. I thought you were a fan of #2s! https://t.co/lYGnY4lT9B

— Vice President Kamala Harris (@VP) March 18, 2021

Fox News White House correspondent Peter Doocy engaged in a heated debate with White House national security spokesperson John Kirby regarding President Joe Biden’s recent declaration of “unwavering support” for Israel.

President Biden reaffirmed his support for Israel in the wake of a brutal terror attack by Hamas on October 7, which resulted in the tragic deaths of over 1,160 individuals. The president’s stance has sparked criticism from within his own party, with some members calling for a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and raising concerns about potential repercussions for Biden in the 2024 election.

During the exchange, Doocy challenged Kirby’s assertion that the president’s position on Israel remains unchanged.

“On October 7, President Biden said ‘My administration’s support for Israel’s security is rock solid and unwavering.’ That is not true anymore, correct?” Doocy asked.

“No, that is true,” Kirby answered. “Still true today.”

“How is his support unwavering, but you’re also reconsidering policy choices?” Doocy pressed.]

Watch:

First Lady Jill Biden displayed a firm response towards a morning show co-host on Wednesday when he brought up a new survey indicating President Joe Biden trailing former President Donald Trump in six out of seven swing states.

In an appearance on “CBS Mornings,” Jill Biden was questioned about the status of her husband’s re-election campaign, with a focus on the findings of a recent Wall Street Journal survey. The survey revealed that the Democratic incumbent is currently lagging behind Trump in six of the seven 2024 swing states.

As CBS host Tony Dokoupil delved into the polling results, the first lady interjected by stating, “No, he’s not losing.”.

“No, he’s not losing in all the battleground states. He’s coming up,” she blurted out before Dokoupil could finish his question.

“He’s even or doing better,” Jill added. “You know what, once people start to focus in, and they see their two choices, it’s obvious that Joe will win this election.”

Watch:

The Biden administration has made the decision to reduce base payments for Medicare Advantage plans by an average of .16 percent, despite facing opposition from Republicans and healthcare experts. This action follows Biden’s controversial adjustments to the risk adjusting coding system in order to supposedly improve the accuracy of Medicare Advantage payments.

The impact of Biden’s decision will be felt by over half of Medicare enrollees, particularly American seniors who rely on Medicare Advantage for their healthcare needs. Experts predict that seniors enrolled in Medicare Advantage may experience reductions in their supplemental benefits or an increase in cost-sharing by $33 per month by 2025. Analyst Chris Meekins commented, “President Biden’s administration is taking a risk by assuming that Medicare Advantage beneficiaries won’t realize the benefits they are losing until January 2025.”

This move by Biden to cut Medicare Advantage contrasts with Trump’s statement to Breitbart News that he will not make any changes to Social Security or Medicare. This contradicts claims made by Biden and Democrats that Trump would reduce entitlement programs.

“I will never do anything that will jeopardize or hurt Social Security or Medicare,” Trump explained. “We’ll have to do it elsewhere. But we’re not going to do anything to hurt them.”

According to a recent study conducted by the Commonwealth Fund in 2021, it was discovered that 90 percent of individuals enrolled in Medicare Advantage expressed satisfaction with the healthcare services they received. This level of satisfaction is comparable to that of traditional Medicare. Furthermore, extensive research has demonstrated that Medicare Advantage surpasses Medicare in terms of 16 distinct clinical quality measures.

Republicans are furious over Biden’s decision to eliminate Medicare Advantage:

🚨 BREAKING: Biden just cut Medicare benefits AGAIN.

2.8 MILLION Florida seniors use Medicare Advantage & Biden's cuts will cost them an extra $400 per year. Biden's war on seniors is devastating & I’m fighting like hell to reverse this terrible decision.https://t.co/Q3YIajBXG1

— Rick Scott (@SenRickScott) April 3, 2024

The Biden White House attacks me for wanting to fix and save Medicare, meanwhile @JoeBiden is actively cutting Medicare for 33 million seniors. https://t.co/V5izi2MKbv

— Congressman Kevin Hern (@repkevinhern) April 2, 2024

Biden is cutting Medicare Advantage benefits for 33 million Americans—and hoping they don’t notice until after the November election.

Here’s how benefits for seniors are being cut.⬇https://t.co/zdhtmRid1E

— Heritage Action (@Heritage_Action) April 2, 2024

Special Counsel Jack Smith and Judge Aileen Cannon, appointed by Trump to oversee the case involving the former president’s classified documents in Florida, seem to be heading towards a clash.

In a bold move, Smith has filed an appeal urging Judge Cannon to make a decision on jury instructions related to the President Records Act (PRA).

Former President Donald Trump has argued that the PRA grants him the authority to declassify any documents found at Mar-a-Lago, even those containing sensitive national security information. Smith contends that Judge Cannon’s request for conflicting jury instructions is based on a “fundamentally flawed legal premise.”

According to Smith, if Judge Cannon agrees with Trump that the PRA does not differentiate between official records and personal property, he will seek an appeal and request an immediate review. He further argues that such instructions would “pervert the trial” if it proceeds to court.

“The PRA’s distinction between personal and presidential records has no bearing on whether a former President’s possession of documents containing national defense information is authorized under the Espionage Act, and the PRA should play no role in the jury instructions,” Smith said in the filing. “Indeed, based on the current record, the PRA should not play any role at trial at all.”

“Furthermore, Trump’s entire effort to rely on the PRA is not based on any facts,” Smith continues. “Instead he has attempted to fashion out of whole cloth a legal presumption that would operate untethered to any facts — without regard to his actual decisions, his actual intent, the unambiguous definition of what continues personal records under the PRA, or the plainly non-personal content of the highly classified documents he retained.”

“There is no basis in law or fact for that legal presumption, and the Court should reject Trump’s effort to invent one as a vehicle to inject the PRA into this case,” he concludes.

JUST IN: An extraordinary filing from Jack Smith tonight that is almost incredulous at how legally incorrect Judge Cannon's jury instruction scenarios are re: Trump's claim that he designted reams of classified info as "personal" on the way out of the WH.https://t.co/lmmI1dvWDb pic.twitter.com/grnmBsGwJC

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) April 3, 2024

Legal professionals have emphasized that Smith’s argument was a pivotal juncture that had the potential to either solidify or undermine the special counsel’s case.

“Jack Smith just threw down the gauntlet,” wrote former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti. By asking Judge Cannon to rule now, he wrote on X, Smith cautions her to “avoid a miscarriage of justice at trial.”

Jack Smith just threw down the gauntlet, threatening to *immediately appeal* if Judge Aileen Cannon rules that the Presidential Records Act gave Trump the right to remove and keep classified material.

He asks her to rule *now* to avoid a miscarriage of justice at trial. https://t.co/Ymku55OFMs

— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) April 3, 2024

More context:

Cannon’s order asking the parties for jury instructions that erroneously stated the law suggested she was contemplating telling the jury that the PRA gave Trump the right to take and keep whatever he wanted.

— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) April 3, 2024

“To make this crystal clear, if trial begins and Judge Cannon makes a ruling that is legally erroneous *in the middle of the trial*, resulting in a not guilty verdict, prosecutors *cannot* appeal the verdict,” he explained. “That’s why Jack Smith wants a ruling before trial, so he can appeal.”

Bradley Moss, a national security attorney, stated that the Smith filing serves as a warning to Cannon that he has reached his limit.

“The PRA angle is a question of law, not fact, and if she believes Trump’s PRA defense she should grant his motion and let Smith take this to the 11th circuit already,” he wrote.

Jack Smith puts Cannon on notice that he has had enough with his weird game. The PRA angle is a question of law, not fact, and if she believes Trump’s PRA defense she should grant his motion and let Smith take this to the 11th circuit already.

Oh, and they make clear Tom Fitton https://t.co/sULQndnM2T

— Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) April 3, 2024

According to the Daily Beast, Smith encountered a humiliating obstacle recently when Judge Cannon warned of dismissing the case unless he surrendered all classified materials to the defense team.

Smith is essentially at risk of Trump being acquitted by the jury because of a lack of evidence proving the classified nature of the materials, or else a group of regular citizens will have the chance to review the documents.

“Although there is no formal means in the PRA by which a president is to make that categorization, an outgoing president’s decision to exclude what he/she considers to be personal records from presidential records transmitted to the National Archives and Records Administration constitutes a president’s categorization of those records as personal under the PRA,” Judge Cannon wrote in March.

At the White House’s Easter Egg Roll event this year, a young participant experienced an unforeseen emotional response upon being greeted by President Joe Biden. The Easter Egg Roll, a tradition dating back to 1878, witnessed the girl becoming visibly upset and shedding tears after the President interacted with her.

WATCH:

Social media users were quick to call Biden out:

kids know.

— BlackRobeRegiment (@BlkRobeRegiment) April 1, 2024

Always straight for the kids.

— ShadowB (@tonelocxx) April 1, 2024

Kids have a 6th sense about creepy men

— Florida Gigi (@clairelarson54) April 1, 2024

Children naturally sense pedos and are frightened by their sight.

— Zak McNaughton (@Ayubi2020) April 1, 2024

Former President Donald Trump wasted no time in celebrating the recent decision by an appeals court to reduce the bond imposed in his New York fraud case. The original bond of $454 million has now been lowered to $175 million, much to the dismay of his detractors. This means that New York Attorney General Letitia James will no longer be able to fulfill her desire to confiscate Trump’s property and sell it off to benefit the state government.

Trump’s legal team had argued that the original bond amount was simply unattainable. In a post on his new social media platform, Truth Social, Trump expressed his joy over the court’s decision and the reduced payment.

“Thank you to professor Jonathan Turley for exposing the horrendous decision made by a corrupt New York State Judge, Arthur Engoron, on the “I will get Trump” worst in the Nation A.G., Letitia James, unfair case against me,” Trump wrote. “I just posted a $175,000,000 Bond just for the right to Appeal this travesty of a case, which I won at the Appellate Division, but this Judge refuses to accept- A FIRST.”

“He is a whacked out nut job who just made up a number out of thin air, just like he did on the value of Mar-a-Lago. Businesses won’t enter New York because of this decision, and many are fleeing. Think of it – I had to pay an enormous sum for the right to Appeal the ridiculous decision of a CROOKED Judge and A.G.

“This is Election Interference, and it all comes directly from Joe Biden and the White House,” he argued. “An attack, along with ALL OF THE OTHERS, on his political opponent, ME!”

It is difficult to fathom the disappointment and frustration experienced by liberal news publishers such as CNN and The New York Times. Both of these publications had previously reveled in the prospect of Trump’s assets being confiscated. In a recent article, The New York Times joyfully declared that Trump was rapidly approaching a point of no return in preventing a financial catastrophe. This was due to the uncertainty surrounding his ability to secure the original bond.

The publication highlighted that James, the individual responsible for the potential seizure of Trump’s real estate properties, could have chosen to proceed with caution. However, there was a glimmer of hope that she would not hold back in her actions.

“But if she wanted to take a more aggressive stance, Ms. James could freeze some of Mr. Trump’s bank accounts, which might send the Trump family business into a tailspin,” Kate Christobek and Ben Protess wrote for the Times.

“She could also seek to seize some of his New York properties, and public records show that Ms. James has formally posted the judgment in Westchester County, a preliminary step toward staking a claim to Mr. Trump’s private estate and golf club there,” the two added.

CNN guided its audience – a mere nine individuals – on the process that, in their wildest fantasies, would lead to the freezing of Trump’s bank accounts followed by the seizure of his other assets.

“Assets, such as buildings, houses, cars, helicopters and his plane, are in play,” CNN’s “law enforcement reporter” Mark Morales drooled around the same time.

“The main focus could be on his bank accounts, which experts say will be easier to take hold of, and properties, which would be more difficult,” he added.