Connect with us


Biden Administration is ‘the most anti-American presidency’: Newt Gingrich



Screen Shot 2020 11 06 at 9.33.21 AM scaled

Following the reaction to the Derek Chauvin verdict, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich called out the Biden Administration, saying on Sunday it is “the most anti-American presidency in our country’s history.”

Former Minneapolis cop Derek Chauvin’s guilty murder conviction comes almost a year since the death of George Floyd shocked the nation. Yet the responses from President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris left Gingrich wanting more. He appeared on the Cats Roundtable radio show to say that he is “appalled at the kind of hostility that we are getting” from Biden and Harris.

“[They] had an opportunity to come out and say, ‘look, the system works, here’s a policeman who’s now been convicted on all three counts. We can feel good about how America deals with these kinds of issues,’” Gingrich said. “Instead they came out and went on a rant about institutional racism. They could not have done a better job of tearing down America if they were Chinese communist propagandists.”

The former House Speaker pointed out that the two received great opportunities to make things better for the country. For instance, Biden served two terms as Vice President to the country’s first Black president. Harris, hailing from a mixed African and Asian background, also served in some of the country’s highest offices.

“Instead of them celebrating the fact that this is proof that America is working…. they are both propagandists for this institutional racist lie…. and tearing down the country,” Gingrich said.

Continue Reading


BREAKING: Trump ordered to pay over $350M, barred from operating his business in NY in civil fraud case ruling



Former President Donald Trump and his business empire faced a significant setback as a New York judge ruled against them in a civil fraud case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. The 92-page ruling, handed down by Judge Arthur Engoron, barred Trump from operating his business in New York for three years and imposed over $350 million in damages.

The case, which unfolded over months of trial proceedings, stemmed from allegations that Trump inflated his assets and engaged in fraudulent practices. Engoron’s ruling cited a litany of charges, including persistent fraud, falsifying records, issuing false financial statements, and conspiracy to commit fraud.

Moreover, the judge imposed restrictions on key figures within the Trump Organization, including Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, barring them from serving in certain corporate roles in New York for a specified period.

Engoron’s scathing assessment of Trump’s testimony during the trial further undermined the former president’s credibility. The judge criticized Trump for evasive responses and irrelevant digressions, highlighting the detrimental effect on his credibility.

In response to the ruling, Trump’s attorney, Christopher Kise, lambasted the court’s decision, alleging political bias and a disregard for established legal principles. Kise argued that the evidence presented during the trial failed to support the allegations of fraud and emphasized Trump’s substantial net worth.

Kise’s assertions were echoed by Alina Habba, another attorney representing Trump, who denounced the verdict as a “manifest injustice” resulting from a politically motivated witch hunt.

Throughout the proceedings, Trump consistently dismissed the trial as politically motivated, accusing both Engoron and James of partisan bias. His legal team also criticized the absence of a jury in the trial, questioning the fairness of the proceedings.

Attorney General Letitia James, who spearheaded the lawsuit against Trump and his organization, portrayed the ruling as a victory for accountability and transparency in business practices. The lawsuit alleged fraudulent conduct and sought substantial financial penalties, a portion of which would contribute to the state treasury.

The fallout from the case extends beyond Trump and his business interests, with implications for the broader business community and the rule of law. The contentious nature of the trial and its outcome underscored deep divisions and raised questions about the integrity of the legal system.

Trump vows to appeal the decision.

Continue Reading