Good morning, and welcome to the Epoch Times News Brief for Saturday, March 23, 2024. I’m Bill Thomas.
1. Congresswoman Moves to Disbar Fani Willis in Georgia
Our top story today revolves around Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who’s filed a complaint seeking the disbarment of Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis over her relationship with a former special counsel.Ms. Greene wrote on social media that Ms. Willis “should’ve been removed from her political persecution of President Trump after it was revealed she went on lavish vacations with her lover Nathan Wade,” adding that Mr. Wade was “paid hundreds of thousands of dollars.”
This complaint follows allegations that accused Ms. Willis of financially benefitting from her relationship with the former special counsel, Mr. Wade, whom she hired. Both Mr. Wade and Ms. Willis have denied these allegations but confirmed their relationship.
In response, Ms. Greene has requested an investigation of Ms. Willis as well as her suspension and disbarment. The complaint also mentions that Judge Scott McAfee, who’s handling both the Willis disqualification issue and the Trump case, made a mistake last week. He didn’t disqualify her then, nor did he find that she lied on the witness stand about her relationship.
Former President Donald Trump, reacting to Mr. Wade’s resignation, claimed that the case was an effort to harm his campaign. The judge allowed President Trump and the other defendants to appeal his ruling and continue preparing the case for trial. While the judge didn’t find that the Willis–Wade relationship created a conflict of interest that should force her off the case, he stressed that it created an appearance of impropriety.
Attorneys for President Trump and the other defendants said in court papers on Monday that Mr. Wade’s resignation was not enough to correct the appearance of impropriety the judge found. Defense lawyers say a failure to remove the district attorney could imperil any convictions and force a retrial if an appeals court later finds it was warranted.
Meanwhile, Ms. Willis reportedly plans to ask Judge McAfee to schedule a trial in the Trump case as soon as this summer.
Sources “close to” Ms. Willis’s office reportedly said that Judge McAfee is not prevented from setting a trial date amid a possible appeal. They are looking to respond after the U.S. Supreme Court issues a decision on whether President Trump is immune from prosecution.
“Now we’re back to where we never should have left, which is these people were under felony indictment. Let’s get a trial date,” a person described as a “Willis ally” told CNN Thursday.
2. Trump Says He Has $500 Million Cash as Bond Deadline Looms
President Trump claims he has nearly $500 million in cash, crucial as he faces a bond exceeding $454 million to prevent seizure of his properties during his civil fraud case appeal.President Trump has criticized the involved judge and attorney general, contending the high bond amount and challenging the judgment’s basis.
The total judgment amount is $363 million, with $355 million applying specifically to President Trump. The bond with 9 percent interest comes out to over $464 million.
President Trump’s attorneys estimated they would need about $577 million in cash to obtain the bond, not accounting for operating expenses needed to sustain the Trump Organization in the meantime. After negotiating with 30-plus of the world’s largest sureties for the past “several weeks,” Trump attorneys said they had come to the conclusion that the bond was an impossibility because these companies don’t take real estate as collateral.
The attorney general responded that President Trump may not have as much cash as he claimed. The judge found that several deals the Trump Organization made had resulted in inflated profits due to fraudulent statements on the organization’s annual statements of financial condition, totaling $363 million.
In filings to the appeals division, Trump attorneys have argued that disgorgement is an inaccurate characterization because they contend there was no fraud.
They also argued the figure was an arbitrary one, because even if the deals cited required divestment of profits, the judge had double and triple counted several deals and confused profits with proceeds.
3. Trump Gave Shocking Warning to Pence
President Trump warned Vice President Mike Pence that certifying the election would be detrimental to his career, urging him to “do the right thing,” a White House valet recalled President Trump saying.According to a newly released transcript, President Trump wanted Vice President Pence, as he presided over a joint session of Congress to certify electoral votes from states, to rule against some of the states. However, Mr. Pence stated that he could not unilaterally determine which votes should be counted based on his oath to support and defend the Constitution.
President Trump later wrote on Twitter that the vice president “didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our country and our constitution, giving states a chance to certify a corrected set of facts.”
The pair spoke by phone that day.
Portions of the call have been recounted by other witnesses who testified to the U.S. House of Representatives committee that investigated Jan. 6.
The valet offered other comments about the situation, but they were redacted. Large portions of the version of the transcript that was released were blocked out.
Julie Radford, who served as chief of staff to President Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump, said Ms. Trump told her that President Trump called Mr. Pence “an expletive” during the call. Ms. Trump told the panel she stayed with her father to try to calm him down after the call.
Transcripts of the interviews with Ms. Radford and Ms. Trump were made public by the committee, which was dominated by Democrats, shortly before it disbanded around the end of 2022. But the committee held back some transcripts, including the one with the White House valet.
The House Administration Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight, which has been disclosing files not disclosed by the Jan. 6 panel, released the valet’s transcript.
“This first-hand account of President Trump’s actions while at the White House on January 6 provides the American people with important, relevant information about the events of that day. I care about getting the truth out there, instead of only releasing parts that support a partisan narrative like the select committee did,” Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), chairman of the subcommittee, said in a statement. “My goal is complete transparency so Americans can decide the truth about January 6 for themselves.”
4. Judge Tosses Challenge, Upholds Law Allowing ‘Noncitizens’ to Vote in Washington
A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit challenging a District of Columbia law that permits “noncitizen residents” to vote in local elections, ruling the plaintiffs lacked standing.The law in question, known as the Noncitizen Voting Act, removed the prior citizenship requirement for voting in municipal elections, allowing all residents over 18 who have lived in the district for 30 days, regardless of immigration status, to vote in local elections only.
Those who qualify can vote in district races for mayor, council, attorney general, and advisory neighborhood commissioners. They can also vote on local initiatives, referenda, recalls, or charter amendment measures.
The law also permits illegal immigrants to serve as D.C. mayor, to serve on the D.C. Council, and to serve on the D.C. Board of Elections.
A group of seven citizen plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the D.C. Board of Elections on March 14, aiming to block the 2022 law passed by the Council of the District of Columbia.
The plaintiffs argued that noncitizens do not have a constitutional right to vote in the United States and that allowing them to do so dilutes the votes of U.S. citizens. They also contended that the 14th Amendment equal protection clause applies to residents of the District of Columbia.
However, Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an appointee of President Barack Obama, found that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the legislation.
In an opinion issued Thursday, Judge Jackson determined that the seven plaintiffs failed to demonstrate “that they have personally been subjected to any sort of disadvantage as individual voters by virtue of the fact that noncitizens are permitted to vote, too.”
The judge concluded: “At bottom, they are simply raising a generalized grievance which is insufficient to confer standing.”
Christopher Hajec, director of litigation of the D.C.-based Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI), represented the plaintiffs. He said the law “is a direct attack on American self-government.”
“This law doesn’t just give foreign citizens a voice in our country’s affairs, it gives them voting power that politicians inevitably will have to respond to. That transfer of power flies in the face of the clear right of the American people to govern themselves,” he said.
The IRLI’s executive director, Dale Wilcox, said in a statement on March 14 that when the voting power of citizens is eroded, “our nation begins to lose its independence.”
Efforts to overturn the law through legislative means have stalled in the U.S. Senate. This prompted the group of seven citizens to bring their lawsuit.
5. FDA Settles Ivermectin Case, Agrees to Remove Controversial ‘Stop It’ Post
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has agreed to remove social media posts and webpages that urged people to stop taking ivermectin to treat COVID-19, according to a settlement dated March 21.The FDA will remove pages titled “Should I take ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19? No” and “why you should not use ivermectin to treat or prevent COVID-19.”
The FDA states that it has not authorized or approved ivermectin for use in preventing or treating COVID-19, and that data do not show it is effective against the illness.
The FDA also agrees to delete social media posts against ivermectin. In exchange, doctors who sued the agency are dismissing their claims. The settlement is seen as a victory for doctors and patients.
“This landmark case sets an important precedent in limiting FDA overreach into the doctor-patient relationship,” said Dr. Mary Talley Bowden in a statement.
“We are extremely pleased with the outcome of the settlement as it is a victory for every doctor and patient in the United States,” added Dr. Paul Marik, chief scientific officer of the FLCCC Alliance and another plaintiff. “The FDA interfered in the practice of medicine with their irresponsible language and posts about ivermectin. We will never know how many lives were affected because patients were denied access to a lifesaving treatment because their doctor was ‘just following the FDA.’”
The FDA spokesperson stated that the agency has not admitted any violation of law or wrongdoing and maintains its position that “currently available clinical trial data do not demonstrate that ivermectin is effective against COVID-19.”
Ivermectin was approved by the FDA in 1996 for other conditions.
The case was initially dismissed, but an appeals court ruled in favor of the doctors, stating that the FDA exceeded its authority.
That’s our final story on today’s News Brief, and even though we’re running out of time, we do want to take just a moment to celebrate you, if today is the day you were born.
Other notables celebrating birthdays today include movie director Mark Rydell (“On Golden Pond”), who is 95. Singer Chaka Khan is 71, and actor Catherine Keener is 65 years young today!
Thanks for tuning in and for all of us here at the Epoch Times News Brief, I’m Bill Thomas, and have a great weekend.
