If the GOP pushes the bill through without Democratic input, it will face a tough battle in the Senate. Democrats must decide whether to filibuster and risk blame for shutting down the government or allow the bill to pass, potentially appearing weak in resisting Trump’s agenda.

Potential Fallout of a Government Shutdown

The funding deadline looms on Friday, and failure to pass a resolution could have serious consequences for millions of Americans:

• Essential workers could go unpaid.
• Airport security, border crossings, and national parks could face disruptions.
• Trump’s economic policies and Elon Musk’s government restructuring are already causing instability.

Adding to the uncertainty, Trump, in a recent Fox News interview, refused to rule out a possible recession while continuing to defend his trade war policies, despite market downturns.

Speaker Johnson’s Test and the Republican Strategy

The funding battle is also a crucial test for House Speaker Mike Johnson as he tries to push Trump’s agenda with a thin GOP majority. The proposed bill:

• Freezes spending levels but increases funding for defense and border security.
• Serves as a temporary fix to avoid internal GOP divisions over deeper spending cuts.
• Does not address the debt ceiling crisis, which remains an economic threat.

Trump has commanded GOP lawmakers to back the bill, warning against dissent. His push appears effective, with conservative holdouts like Rep. Chip Roy and Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris now supporting the measure to keep the government open while Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) continues federal cuts.

Democrats Resist, Call It a “Power Grab” for Musk

Democrats strongly oppose the bill, calling it a dangerous transfer of power to Trump and Musk.

• Rep. Rosa DeLauro, top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, called it a “power grab” that hands control of taxpayer money to an unelected billionaire.
• Sen. Patty Murray slammed it as a “slush fund”, giving Musk unchecked control over federal spending.

With Musk consulting GOP leaders on further government job cuts, the bill’s passage would solidify his influence. However, Republicans have not yet codified Musk’s restructuring into law, leaving room for political and legal battles.

A Senate Showdown and Democratic Dilemma

If the bill reaches the Senate, Democrats must choose between blocking it or allowing it to pass:

• Blocking it could shift blame for a shutdown onto them.
• Allowing it may demoralize Democratic supporters and signal weakness in opposing Trump.

Some Democrats argue that stopping the bill is irrelevant, as Trump and Musk are already making unilateral budget decisions that defy congressional authority. Others, like Sen. Elissa Slotkin, warn that the power of the purse belongs to Congress, not the White House or Musk.

The uncertainty has left Democratic leaders scrambling for an effective response, highlighting their struggles to counter Trump’s aggressive executive actions. With the funding deadline approaching, the showdown will define the early months of Trump’s second term—and determine whether Democrats can effectively push back against his policies.

What Comes Next?

If the House bill succeeds, Senate Democrats must decide whether to fight or concede. Their next moves could shape public perception of Trump’s leadership, the Republican Congress, and Democratic resistance moving forward.

Source

The post Trump’s Government Funding Battle: A High-Stakes Showdown in Congress appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Donald Trump’s latest move to assert executive power – temporarily halting federal aid – has triggered widespread confusion and alarm across the nation. The decision, which affected vital programs like Meals on Wheels and low-income housing assistance, marked a dramatic shift from the structured early days of his second presidency to a chaotic reality, reminiscent of the turmoil that characterized his first term. More than just a political misstep, this action ignited a pivotal legal battle over the limits of presidential authority, one that is poised to reach the Supreme Court.

While Trump has long cultivated an image as a disruptive force against Washington’s establishment, his push for near-unlimited presidential power is becoming increasingly evident. The funding freeze, along with other controversial early moves such as firing DOJ prosecutors and challenging birthright citizenship, has sparked fears that Trump’s view of presidential power could dangerously overshadow the Constitution.

A Memo That Sparked Chaos

The storm began when the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a memo on Monday night, calling for a temporary suspension of “all activities related to obligation or disbursement of federal financial assistance.” While Medicare benefits were exempt, the memo left many wondering whether essential programs, from Pentagon funding to local community assistance, were at risk. This created a wave of uncertainty, leaving lawmakers, state governments, and non-governmental organizations scrambling for clarity.

Trump’s team struggled to contain the fallout. Despite attempts to reassure the public that the freeze was intended to target only certain programs, the lack of clear answers made the situation worse. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, initially unclear on whether Medicaid was impacted, later clarified that it was not, though many states experienced disruptions. By the end of the day, a federal judge imposed a temporary halt on the freeze, underscoring the confusion and urgency surrounding the decision.

The Fallout: Confusion, Political Damage, and Constitutional Concerns

The day’s events had immediate political ramifications, overshadowing the early, carefully crafted agenda of Trump’s second term. The administration’s shock-and-awe approach, characterized by a flurry of presidential orders and directives, has made it difficult for critics to focus on individual policies, let alone their implications. But the haste with which these actions were implemented seems to have caught the OMB off guard, with disastrous consequences.

Though Trump’s core support remains strong, particularly following his victory in all seven swing states, the chaos raises questions about the sustainability of his approach. Despite his desire for dramatic changes, Trump’s political capital is not unlimited. The uncertainty caused by the funding freeze only highlighted the crucial role many government programs play in American society – a reminder that slashing federal spending could have far-reaching impacts.

A Direct Challenge to Congressional Power

At the heart of the funding freeze lies a fundamental challenge to the Constitution’s separation of powers. By seeking to freeze and redirect funds already approved by Congress, Trump is effectively asserting that the executive branch has the authority to override the legislative process. This move directly undermines Congress’s constitutional “power of the purse” – its exclusive right to allocate government spending.

White House officials defended the freeze, claiming it was necessary to prevent bureaucrats from distributing funds for what they called “wicked and pernicious” policies. Stephen Miller, White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, argued that this move was aligned with the will of the American people. However, winning an election does not grant a president the right to ignore the law, particularly when it comes to federal spending approved by Congress.

This disregard for legal and constitutional boundaries is not limited to the funding freeze. Trump has repeatedly shown a willingness to challenge established laws and norms, from firing career prosecutors to proposing drastic changes to immigration policy that contradict constitutional principles. His recent dismissal of over a dozen government watchdogs without following the required 30-day notice to Congress further reflects his tendency to act unilaterally, dismissing legal requirements he deems inconvenient.

A Growing Threat to Democracy

The growing pattern of constitutional overreach raises deep concerns about Trump’s vision for the presidency. According to constitutional law experts, the president’s actions are increasingly pushing the limits of executive power, with potentially authoritarian consequences. Corey Brettschneider, a political science professor at Brown University, argues that democracy cannot function if presidents believe they can simply override laws that were passed by previous administrations or Congress.

“What democracy requires isn’t that as soon as the president comes into power, they could wipe away everything that came before,” Brettschneider explains. “The idea of a democracy is that when laws are passed – whether it’s the 1964 Civil Rights Act or environmental protections – those laws bind not just citizens, but even the president.”

Looking Ahead: Trump’s Unchecked Ambition

Tuesday’s events signal that Trump is just beginning to test the limits of his presidential power. There are growing concerns that his administration is deliberately engaging in political battles and legal fights to expand the scope of the presidency, particularly with the backing of a conservative-leaning Supreme Court. The current political environment, where checks on presidential authority have weakened, may give Trump the opportunity to achieve his goal of consolidating power.

Republican support in Congress and the growing influence of Trump’s Supreme Court appointees could provide him with the leverage needed to reshape the balance of power in the executive branch. However, as constitutional experts warn, this vision of an unchecked presidency poses a grave threat to democratic governance.

“The presidency is supposed to be limited by the law and by the Constitution,” says Brettschneider. “But Trump sees it quite differently – that he is empowered to do whatever he wants. And that really is a vision of authoritarian control.”

As his presidency unfolds, the stakes are high: the struggle over the proper scope of executive power will not only define Trump’s second term but could reshape the very foundations of American democracy.

Source

The post The Chaos Behind Trump’s Power Play: Is He Overstepping His Bounds? appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Day Four: Trump’s Global Ambitions Take Center Stage

On his fourth day in office, President Donald Trump shifted his focus beyond U.S. borders, asserting his vision for a new world order. In a dramatic virtual appearance at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump captivated and unnerved global elites. From a towering screen, he addressed a crowd of bankers, business leaders, diplomats, and policymakers with his hallmark confidence, making it clear that his presidency would challenge the norms of international relations.

This Davos speech was the culmination of a whirlwind week of executive actions and bold public statements, including threats of tariffs on European exports, a challenge to NATO spending commitments, and continued provocations aimed at global powers like Russia and China. More than just rhetoric, the speech offered Trump’s clearest articulation yet of his “America First” foreign policy.

A Vision for America’s Place in the World

Trump’s message to Davos was uncompromising: the United States would act solely in its national interest, prioritizing sovereignty and rejecting multilateralism. He dismissed post-World War II global frameworks, such as Bretton Woods institutions, as outdated and unfair to America. Trump declared that every foreign policy decision would be evaluated based on its direct benefit to Americans, leaving other nations to adjust—or face the consequences.

Trump’s disdain for dependency was evident as he singled out Canada, claiming, “We don’t need them to make our cars… We don’t need their lumber… We don’t need their oil and gas. We have more than anybody.” His rhetoric extended to Europe, where he railed against regulatory practices that, he argued, stifled growth and unfairly targeted American tech giants like Google, Apple, and Meta. “These are American companies,” he said, hinting that they served as extensions of U.S. power.

NATO and Defense Spending: A Transactional Approach

Trump’s remarks about NATO underscored his transactional worldview. He formalized a demand for member nations to increase defense spending to 5% of GDP—an extraordinary figure that many European economies would struggle to meet without dismantling their social welfare systems. “We are protecting them; they are not protecting us,” Trump declared, brushing aside NATO’s historical context, including allies’ solidarity after 9/11.

This approach highlighted Trump’s broader desire to redefine the U.S.’s role in global alliances. Rather than acting as a cooperative partner, he envisioned America as a dominant force, working with other nations only when it served U.S. interests. Secretary of State Marco Rubio reinforced this stance, stating, “Our job is to ensure that we have a foreign policy that advances the national interest of the United States.”

Resurrecting 19th-Century Policies: Tariffs and Expansionism

Trump’s commitment to tariffs marked a return to protectionist policies reminiscent of the 19th century. Speaking to business leaders in Davos, he warned, “If you don’t make your product in America, then you will have to pay a tariff.” He touted tariffs as a tool to redirect wealth into the U.S. Treasury and revitalize the domestic economy.

This approach drew inspiration from Trump’s newfound admiration for President William McKinley, who used tariffs to foster industrial growth and pursued territorial expansion. Trump has repeatedly cited McKinley’s policies as a model for his own administration, even restoring the name of Denali in Alaska to Mount McKinley in his honor.

However, Trump’s tariff strategy goes beyond short-term leverage in trade negotiations. His comments suggested a long-term commitment to using tariffs as an economic weapon. Critics have warned that such policies could backfire, raising prices for American consumers and disrupting global markets. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s cautionary words from 1932—when he decried retaliatory tariffs under Herbert Hoover as harmful to American farmers and the economy—remain relevant today.

Redefining Sovereignty and Territorial Ambitions

Trump’s rhetoric about territorial expansion, including comments about Canada and Greenland, further signaled a shift toward a 19th-century view of American power. His suggestion that Canada could “always become a state” was a provocative departure from the principle of national sovereignty enshrined in the United Nations charter.

This philosophy of spheres of influence and selective engagement reflects Trump’s broader foreign policy vision. America would assert dominance in its hemisphere while engaging globally only when advantageous. His focus on unilateralism and territorial ambitions marks a stark contrast to the post-World War II U.S.-led global order that emphasized cooperation and shared prosperity.

Conclusion: A Bold, Controversial Vision

In his first week as president, Donald Trump set the stage for a dramatic reshaping of America’s role on the global stage. His policies and rhetoric—centered on sovereignty, tariffs, and a transactional approach to alliances—signal a sharp departure from decades of U.S. foreign policy. While supporters see his vision as a necessary disruption, critics warn of the potential for economic instability and the erosion of international norms. As Trump continues to redefine the U.S.’s relationship with the world, his presidency promises to remain as controversial as it is transformative.

Source

The post Trump’s First Week: Redefining America’s Role in the World appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

On his first day in office, President Donald Trump is set to sign a series of executive orders aimed at reshaping U.S. policy in several key areas. These actions will address issues like immigration, the economy, energy production, and social policies. Here’s a closer look at some of the most significant plans for Trump’s first day in office:

America First: Renaming and Symbolic Actions

• Renaming Landmarks: Trump plans to sign an executive order renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America.” He will also restore the name of North America’s highest peak, reverting Denali back to Mount McKinley, its original name until President Obama changed it. These actions are framed as honoring “American greatness,” according to Trump’s press secretary.
• Flag Protocol: Trump will also sign an order requiring flags to be flown at full height on every future Inauguration Day. This comes after the death of former President Jimmy Carter, during which flags were flown at half-staff. Trump wants flags returned to full height immediately.

Immigration: A Return to Tough Border Policies

• National Emergency Declaration: Trump plans to declare a national emergency at the U.S.-Mexico border, reinforcing his tough stance on immigration from his first term. This will include sending U.S. troops to assist immigration agents.
• Asylum Restrictions: Trump will reintroduce the “Remain in Mexico” policy, which forces asylum seekers to wait on the Mexican side of the border. However, the specifics of whether Mexico will agree to accept migrants again remain unclear.
• Birthright Citizenship: One of Trump’s most controversial pledges is to end birthright citizenship, though how he will achieve this is uncertain, as the policy is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.
• Ending CBP One App: Trump will also discontinue the Biden-era CBP One app, which provided legal entry to nearly 1 million migrants.

The Economy: Deregulation and Trade Moves

• Energy Production: Trump will sign orders aimed at easing regulations on oil and natural gas production, with a particular focus on Alaska.
• Inflation Reduction: Trump will issue a memorandum to address inflation, taking a broad-based approach to help reduce prices. While he has spoken about issuing tariffs on countries like China, Mexico, and Canada, it appears that move is currently on hold.
• Study of Trade Issues: Trump is also expected to sign a memorandum instructing federal agencies to study trade issues rather than imposing immediate tariffs or higher taxes on imports.

Social Policies: Rollbacks on DEI and Transgender Rights

• Transgender Rights: Trump plans to roll back protections for transgender individuals, including an order that defines sex as either male or female based on birth biology (sperm or eggs). This order would affect federal prisons, shelters for migrants, and rape victims, where facilities would be segregated by sex as defined in the order.
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI): Trump is set to terminate DEI programs within the federal government, as part of his broader effort to eliminate what he views as wasteful and politically driven initiatives. A separate order will direct the White House to identify and end these programs.

Pardons for January 6 Capitol Attack Participants

Trump has indicated that he will issue pardons for those convicted in connection with the January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol attack. While he did not mention this in his inaugural speech, he has expressed his intent to take action on this issue.

Energy: Declaring an Energy Emergency

In line with his “drill, baby, drill” slogan, Trump will declare an energy emergency and work to undo policies he views as restrictive to energy production. He has also pledged to eliminate the electric vehicle mandate set by the Biden administration.

Conclusion: A Day of Bold Actions

President Trump’s first day is set to be marked by sweeping executive actions that aim to undo many of the policies enacted by previous administrations. Whether these promises will be fully realized remains to be seen, but the focus on immigration, energy, and social policy is clear. Trump’s early actions will set the tone for his presidency and likely spark significant debate across the nation.

Source

The post What to Expect from Trump’s Executive Orders on Day 1 appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

‘Ridiculous Fees’ and U.S. Generosity

“The fees being charged by Panama are ridiculous, especially given the extraordinary generosity the U.S. has shown to Panama,” Trump declared. Referring to the tolls as a “complete rip-off,” he vowed to put an end to the situation immediately.

Trump further described the canal as a “vital national asset” for the U.S., emphasizing its importance for commerce and national security. He also warned against allowing the canal to fall into the “wrong hands,” a veiled reference to China’s growing influence in the region.

Historical Context: U.S.-Panama Relations and the Canal’s Control

The Panama Canal, completed by the U.S. in 1914, remains a key shipping route between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The U.S. relinquished full control of the 51-mile canal to Panama in 1999 under the Torrijos-Carter Treaties, which had been negotiated in 1977 by President Jimmy Carter. The treaties included provisions allowing the U.S. to defend the canal’s neutrality.

Today, the canal is administered by the Panama Canal Authority. The U.S. is its largest customer, accounting for about 75% of the cargo passing through annually, with China as the second-largest user. A Hong Kong-based Chinese company also operates two of the five ports adjacent to the canal, one on each end.

Drought-Driven Challenges

Severe drought conditions have severely impacted the canal’s operations. From October 2023 to September 2024, the number of ships transiting the canal dropped by 29%, falling from 14,080 vessels the previous fiscal year to 9,944. The disruption has added to global supply chain pressures, according to U.S. National Economic Council Director Lael Brainard.

Rising Geopolitical Tensions

Trump’s remarks reflect a likely shift in U.S. diplomacy, especially regarding China. In his post, Trump asserted that the canal “was not given for the benefit of others,” warning that if Panama failed to adhere to what he described as the moral and legal principles of the treaties, the U.S. would demand the canal’s return.

“This is not China’s to manage,” Trump said, adding that the canal must remain aligned with U.S. and Panamanian interests. “To the officials of Panama, please be guided accordingly!”

Potential Competitor: Nicaragua’s Canal Proposal

Adding to the complexities, Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega recently announced plans for a new interoceanic canal, spanning 276.5 miles (445 km). Ortega pitched the project to Chinese investors at a regional summit, citing frustrations with Panama’s waterway. The proposal rekindles an idea dating back to 1854 when the U.S. first considered constructing a canal through Nicaragua.

Panama’s Response Pending

An official from Panama’s government acknowledged Trump’s statements and promised a formal response in the coming days. Meanwhile, the geopolitical implications of Trump’s rhetoric and the competition posed by Nicaragua’s canal proposal underscore growing tensions in Central America’s strategic waterways.

Source

The post Trump Demands Panama Canal Return, Calls Fees ‘Ridiculous’ appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

While much of the nation’s attention focuses on the first 100 days of a potential Trump 2.0 presidency, there is growing concern about the final days of Joe Biden’s term and the risks they could bring.

As we approach the transition, there are several hostile forces with vested interests in disrupting the peaceful transfer of power. These include foreign adversaries like the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), international globalists, extremist groups, and homegrown terrorists. Their combined influence and potential for chaos in the U.S. should not be underestimated.

Foreign and Domestic Threats to a Smooth Transition

The Chinese Communist Party has been preparing for conflict with the U.S. for years. Since May 2019, China has claimed that it is in a state of war with America. Additionally, the CCP has been sending military personnel into the U.S. under the guise of various missions. Their true objective could involve cyberattacks on critical infrastructure like power grids, transportation, and water resources. Although it remains unclear when Chinese President Xi Jinping will act, his decisions may be influenced by his domestic challenges and the impending political shift in the U.S.

In the financial realm, large American investment firms continue to fund Chinese companies, many of which are tied to the CCP. These corporations may be helping build weapons aimed at harming the U.S. Trump, if re-elected, is likely to curb this practice, which would certainly anger the Chinese regime and its supporters in U.S. financial markets.

Globalists’ Push for Control

Another key group that stands to lose from a Trump presidency is the globalist agenda. With treaties that empower international organizations like the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations (UN), globalists are working to establish greater control over national policies regarding pandemics, climate change, migration, and more. These accords, which bypass U.S. sovereignty and have yet to be ratified by the Senate, give bureaucrats the authority to enforce emergency measures in response to various crises.

Globalists fear that Trump’s return to office would derail their plans. If a global crisis were to be declared, it could provide a pretext to implement policies that destabilize the U.S. and delay the peaceful transfer of power.

Sharia-Supremacists and Domestic Extremists

Alongside foreign threats, domestic extremists also pose a significant danger to U.S. stability. Sharia-supremacists, seeking to establish a global caliphate, are active in regions like Syria, Iran, and Egypt. Their efforts to disrupt Western nations, including through rising jihadist violence in Europe, could spill over into the U.S. with devastating consequences.

The U.S. has also seen the rise of Marxist/Maoist groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter, which have previously engaged in violent protests and riots. These groups have the potential to reignite chaos, especially in the politically charged atmosphere leading up to the inauguration. If such violence were to coincide with actions from foreign enemies, it could severely impact the smooth transfer of power.

Preparing for the Worst: How to Protect the Transition

While it’s not certain that any of these threats will materialize, it’s vital for Americans to be aware of the potential for disruption. The peaceful transfer of power may face challenges in the coming weeks, and it’s important to recognize the risks.

To mitigate these dangers, several steps should be taken at the state and local levels:

1. Raise awareness of potential threats and ensure communities are prepared.
2. Crowdsource intelligence about hostile activities and identify potential risks.
3. Enhance personal and community preparedness in case of emergencies.
4. Strengthen law enforcement readiness, including local police, National Guard, and constitutional sheriffs.
5. Protect critical infrastructure and vulnerable targets from attack.
6. Prepare for contingencies, including the possibility of martial law or attempts to delay the inauguration.

These actions should be taken seriously by both local governments and concerned citizens. By increasing “situational awareness” and vigilance, Americans can help safeguard the peaceful transition of power and ensure that the will of the majority, as expressed in the November elections, is respected.

Conclusion: Ensuring a Peaceful Transition of Power

While the risks outlined above are concerning, they do not have to become reality. By remaining vigilant and prepared, Americans can prevent these forces from creating chaos during the final days of the Biden administration. Collectively, we can ensure that the transition to a new government happens smoothly, and that democracy is upheld in the face of potential threats. The peaceful transfer of power is crucial to the stability of the nation, and it’s in the hands of every patriot to help preserve it.

Source

The post Potential Threats to U.S. Transition Before Inauguration Day appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President-elect Donald Trump has selected attorney Todd Blanche, a prominent figure on his legal defense team, as the new Deputy Attorney General, the second-highest position in the Justice Department. Blanche, a former federal prosecutor, played a critical role in defending Trump in both his hush money trial in New York and the federal cases led by Special Counsel Jack Smith.

“Todd is an outstanding attorney who will help restore integrity to a justice system that has been broken for far too long,” Trump announced in a statement on Thursday.

If confirmed by the Republican-led Senate, Blanche will oversee the Justice Department’s day-to-day operations, a responsibility that aligns with Trump’s plans to overhaul the department.

Key Appointments: Gaetz and Sauer Join DOJ Team

Blanche’s appointment comes shortly after Trump named Florida Representative Matt Gaetz, a close ally, as Attorney General. Gaetz previously faced a Justice Department investigation for sex trafficking, which ended without charges. Trump has also appointed another member of his legal team, D. John Sauer, as Solicitor General. Sauer, formerly Missouri’s Solicitor General, represented Trump’s defense in his presidential immunity case before the U.S. Supreme Court and clerked for the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

Blanche’s Defense Record with Trump

Blanche has represented Trump in several high-profile cases, including the 2020 election interference case in Washington and the classified documents case involving Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. His team successfully delayed both cases, with U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissing the classified documents case last summer after ruling that Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of Jack Smith was unlawful. The 2020 election case also faced delays as Trump’s claims of presidential immunity were argued up to the Supreme Court.

Justice Department Policy and Potential Case Closures

With Trump’s incoming presidency, the Justice Department is now considering how to close both prosecutions in alignment with a policy preventing the indictment or prosecution of sitting presidents.

Additional Legal Successes and Manafort Case

Blanche has previously represented Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, successfully arguing for the dismissal of a mortgage fraud case brought by the Manhattan District Attorney’s office. He contended that the case amounted to double jeopardy due to its similarity to previous federal charges against Manafort.

Blanche joined Trump’s legal team shortly before his April 2023 arraignment in New York, where Trump was accused of attempting to influence the 2016 election through hush money payments. Although Trump was convicted of 34 felony counts, his attorneys are actively seeking to overturn the verdict.

This reshaped DOJ leadership represents Trump’s latest steps in aligning his administration’s legal strategy and reshaping the Justice Department to his vision.

Source

The post Justice Department Overhaul: Trump Names Todd Blanche as Second-in-Command appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.