1-21-24 On Friday, January 19, 2024, Donald Trump claims that Nikki Haley could not be president because her parents were not United States citizens at the time of her birth. (1) Nikki Haley’s parents moved to the United States in 1969 to accepted a position at a Voorhees College in South Carolina. At that time and since, neither of Nikki Haley's parents were working for any government at the time nor were they ambassadors for any country. The parents were domiciled in the United States at the time of Nikki Haley’s birth in 1972. In accordance to The Constitution of the United States and a Supreme Court ruling on the subject, she is a natural born citizen and eligible to be president. Nikki Haley in reference to the material presented here has every right to run for president. Donald Trump’s statement here is either ill-informed, made in error, a restatement of a conspiracy theory or a lie. Associated Press Report (1) Trump mocks Nikki Haley’s first name. It...
Posts
Trump’s ‘Hush Money’ Payment
- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
Trump’s ‘Hush Money’ Payment Isn’t Illegal In Itself—Here’s Why He’s Actually On Trial By Alison Durkee, Forbes, April 12, 2024 View Original hush money trump hush money Apr 12, 2024,10:26am EDT Topline Former President Donald Trump will go on trial next week for felony charges stemming from a $130,000 payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during his 2016 campaign—but while the “hush money” payment may be at the center of Trump’s alleged misdeeds, the act of paying Daniels to keep quiet isn’t actually what’s under legal scrutiny. Key Facts Trump’s indictment stems from the $130,000 payment, which Trump’s ex-attorney Michael Cohen made to Daniels in October 2016 to cover up her allegations of having an affair with Trump in 2006. Trump then allegedly reimbursed Cohen $420,000—consisting of the Daniels payment, a separate expense, a $60,000 bonus and enough to cover taxes on the payment—which were made through the Trump Organization, though many c...
Independent Legislative Theory before the Supreme Court
- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
The Supreme Court will decide this Spring in the case Moore v. Harper (21-1271) from North Carolina that could change the way federal elections are conducted in the United States dramatically. The question in the case is, can the legislature of a state dictate the rules and laws for voting in federal election without review from the courts or the executive branch of the state? Even if the rules and laws are partisan and unconstitutional as it applies to the state constitution, as is the situation in this case. The North Carolina Republican Party is using the theory of the Independent State Legislature as a defense for drawing openly stated partisan federal districts. If successful, it would give the legislature of each state the sole responsibility to set guidelines and laws that regulate federal elections. The theory suggests that state legislatures have this sole responsibility because of wording of Article 1 Section 4 Clause 1 of the constitution. It states in part,...