Key Takeaways:

• Court upholds Croft and Fox’s convictions in the Whitmer kidnapping plot.
• Conservative activist Ed Martin Jr. calls for their pardons, citing loyalty to Trump.
• The case highlights debates over government involvement and pardon powers.

Introduction: The convictions of Adam Fox and Barry Croft Jr., accused of plotting to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, were upheld by a federal court. This decision comes amid calls from conservative figures for their pardons, reigniting debates over justice and loyalty.

Conservative Activist Calls for Pardons: Ed Martin Jr., a conservative activist, recently urged the Trump administration to pardon Fox and Croft. Speaking on a podcast, Martin emphasized their loyalty to Trump, suggesting they should not be abandoned. His comments reflect ongoing discussions among conservatives regarding loyalty and justice.

The Plot Against Michigan’s Governor: Fox and Croft were key players in a 2020 plot to kidnap Governor Whitmer. Prosecutors presented evidence showing their active roles in planning and recruiting others, including an FBI informant. This evidence contradicts theories that the plot was a government setup.

The Legal Battle Continues: Despite appeal efforts, the 6th Circuit Court upheld the convictions, affirming the lower court’s decision. This outcome underscores the legal system’s evaluation of evidence, separating fact from theory in the case.

What’s Next for Croft and Fox?: As the legal battle concludes, attention turns to potential pardons. Martin’s call highlights broader discussions on clemency powers, particularly in politically charged cases. While Trump has pardoned many, the implications of such actions remain contentious.

Conclusion: The upheld convictions and ongoing pardon debate illustrate tensions between justice, politics, and loyalty. As the story evolves, it continues to spark discussions on the role of government and the judiciary in such cases.

Key Takeaways:

• The Golden Dome, a proposed missile shield, is expensive and outdated.
• Drones may offer a cheaper and more effective defense solution.
• The U.S. lags behind China in drone production, raising security concerns.
• Ukraine’s success with drones suggests their potential for defense.

The High Cost of the Golden Dome

President Trump’s Golden Dome project aims to build a missile shield over the U.S. using space-based interceptors. The estimated cost is a whopping $175 billion, with operations starting in 2029. Critics argue this is a step backward, favoring outdated technology over modern solutions.

Drones: A Better Investment?

Instead of investing in the Golden Dome, some suggest drones could be a smarter choice. Max Boot points out that the U.S. could produce 100,000 drones annually, a number that seems large but is actually insufficient compared to global needs.

Concerns Over Reliance on Foreign Tech

China dominates the drone market, with DJI controlling 90% of global sales. This raises concerns about U.S. reliance on foreign technology, especially from a potential adversary. U.S. law forbids the military from using Chinese-made drone components, highlighting the need for self-sufficiency.

A Lesson from Ukraine

Ukraine’s effective use of drones against Russia shows their potential. Spending $2.6 billion to produce 4.5 million drones, Ukraine demonstrates that cost-effective, mass-produced drones can be an impactful defense strategy. If the U.S. adopted a similar approach, $25 billion could yield 43 million drones, significantly enhancing security.

The Future of Warfare

The debate between the Golden Dome and drones reflects broader discussions on defense strategies. Advocates for drones argue their scalability and affordability make them a superior investment. Meanwhile, the Golden Dome’s high cost and delayed deployment raise questions about its practicality.

Conclusion

As the U.S. weighs its defense options, the choice between expensive, unproven technology and cost-effective drones is clear. Embracing drone production could provide a robust, modern defense system, aligning with future warfare needs. The Golden Dome, while ambitious, may not be the best path forward in today’s rapidly evolving military landscape.

Key Takeaways:

• Trump’s pardon attorney is looking at cases of militia leaders convicted for their roles in the January 6 Capitol attack.
• Peter Ticktin, Trump’s lawyer and friend from school, delivered 11 pardon applications to the Justice Department.
• Stewart Rhodes, leader of the Oath Keepers, and members of the Proud Boys are among those seeking pardons.
• Many January 6 rioters were pardoned, but some with serious convictions only had their sentences reduced, not fully cleared.
• Bryan Martin, a far-right activist, is leading the pardon reviews and has a controversial past as a former U.S. Attorney.

Trump’s Pardon Attorney Reviews Jan. 6 Militia Leaders’ Cases

The legal team of former President Donald Trump is taking a closer look at the cases of militia leaders who were convicted for their roles in the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. According to recent reports, Trump’s pardon attorney, Bryan Martin, is personally reviewing these cases to decide if those involved should receive full pardons.

Who Is Involved?

One of the key figures in this situation is Peter Ticktin, Trump’s lawyer and a longtime friend from their time at the New York Military Academy. Ticktin recently hand-delivered 11 pardon applications to the Justice Department. Among those seeking pardons is Stewart Rhodes, the former leader of the Oath Keepers militia group. Rhodes was convicted of seditious conspiracy and sentenced to 18 years in prison for his role in the Capitol attack.

Other high-profile individuals on the list include members of the Proud Boys, such as Joseph Biggs, Ethan Nordean, Zachary Rehl, and Dominic Pezzola. These individuals were also convicted of seditious conspiracy, a serious charge related to plotting against the U.S. government.

What’s Happening Now?

Most people convicted of participating in the January 6 riot have already been pardoned by Trump. However, those convicted of seditious conspiracy—like Rhodes and some Proud Boys members—only had their prison sentences shortened, not erased. This means their criminal records still stand.

Now, with Bryan Martin leading the pardon process, these individuals are hoping to have their convictions fully cleared. Martin, a far-right activist and lawyer, has been a controversial figure in Trump’s administration.

Who Is Bryan Martin?

Bryan Martin was briefly appointed as the acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia when Trump took office, despite having no prior prosecutorial experience. His time in that role was rocky. He faced criticism for trying to drop cases he had previously represented, which created a conflict of interest.

Martin also made headlines for sending aggressive letters to individuals and groups that upset Trump’s supporters, including lawmakers, Wikipedia, and even a medical organization. His actions caused so much chaos that Senate Republicans pressured Trump to withdraw his nomination for the permanent U.S. Attorney position.

Instead, Trump appointed Martin as the chief pardon attorney for the Justice Department, where he now plays a key role in deciding who gets pardons.

Why This Matters

The decision to pardon individuals convicted of serious charges like seditious conspiracy is a significant one. A full pardon would not only free them from prison but also erase their criminal records. This move could have major political implications, especially for Trump, who has been accused of using pardons to reward loyal supporters.

For the militia leaders and their allies, a full pardon would be a victory. It would allow them to regain their freedoms and restore their reputations. However, critics argue that such pardons could send the wrong message about the seriousness of the January 6 attack and the rule of law in the United States.

What’s Next?

As Martin reviews these cases, the outcome could spark intense debate. If Trump grants full pardons to these individuals, it may draw praise from his supporters but outrage from others who view the January 6 attack as a threat to democracy.

For now, the Justice Department and the White House have not commented on the status of the pardon applications. But one thing is clear: the decision will have far-reaching consequences, both legally and politically.

Key Takeaways:

• President Donald Trump pardoned Paul Walczak, a convicted tax cheat, after his mother, Elizabeth Fago, attended a pricey fundraiser.
• Fago is a major donor to Trump and Republicans, raising millions of dollars for their campaigns.
• The pardon spared Walczak from prison and paying nearly $4.4 million in restitution.
• Fago was involved in efforts to undermine Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign by leaking his daughter’s private diary.
• The Justice Department closed its investigation into the diary leak just days after Trump’s inauguration.

A Pardon With a Price Tag

President Donald Trump recently granted clemency to Paul Walczak, a former nursing home executive convicted of tax crimes. This decision came after Walczak’s mother, Elizabeth Fago, attended a high-dollar fundraiser at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort. The event reportedly cost attendees $1 million per plate, and guests were promised face-to-face access to the former president. Just three weeks after this gala, Trump pardoned Walczak, saving him from an 18-month prison sentence and a $4.4 million restitution payment.

Who Is Elizabeth Fago?

Elizabeth Fago is no stranger to politics. She has been a major donor to Trump’s campaigns and has hosted at least three fundraisers for him. Her efforts have earned her VIP treatment at Trump’s inaugurations and other exclusive events. Fago’s political activities extend beyond fundraising. She played a role in an effort to sabotage Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign by leaking the private diary of Biden’s daughter, Ashley. The diary was found in a rental home in Florida, and Fago tried to pass it to Trump’s campaign team. However, campaign lawyers were uncomfortable with the situation and alerted the FBI instead.

The Diary Controversy

The diary leak attempt became a significant issue during the 2020 election. Fago worked with others to hand the diary over to Project Veritas, a media group closely tied to Trump. The Justice Department investigated the matter, but no charges were filed against Fago or anyone from Project Veritas. However, two of Fago’s associates, Robert Kurlander and Aimee Harris, pleaded guilty in connection with the incident.

The Timing of the Pardon

Walczak’s pardon came just in time. He was supposed to report to prison 12 days before Trump granted him clemency. A judge had made it clear that wealth and influence wouldn’t save him from punishment, stating, “There is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for the rich.” Yet, Walczak’s mother’s deep ties to Trump and her fundraising efforts seem to have played a significant role in his pardon.

A History of Questionable Practices

This isn’t the first time Trump’s pardons have raised eyebrows. Critics argue that some of his pardons appear to favor political allies and donors rather than individuals who genuinely deserve clemency. In this case, the timing of the fundraiser and the pardon has led to accusations of favoritism and corruption.

The Broader Implications

The pardon of Paul Walczak highlights concerns about the influence of money in politics and the justice system. While everyone deserves a fair shot at redemption, the appearance of a “pay-to-pardon” system undermines public trust in the fairness of the legal process. This case also brings back questions about Trump’s handling of sensitive political material, especially after the diary leak controversy.

What’s Next?

The pardon of Paul Walczak is likely to fuel ongoing debates about Trump’s use of presidential powers for personal or political gain. As the 2024 election approaches, this issue could become a talking point for critics and opponents. For now, Walczak is free, and Fago remains a prominent figure in Trump’s political orbit. Whether this decision will have legal or political consequences for Trump remains to be seen.

Conclusion

The story of Paul Walczak’s pardon is another chapter in the controversial legacy of Donald Trump’s use of presidential powers. While the law allows presidents to grant pardons, cases like this one raise important questions about fairness, ethics, and the influence of money in politics. As the political landscape continues to shift, this issue is likely to stay in the spotlight.