In his first television interview since leaving the Justice Department, Jack Smith was inspiring, defiant, cool-headed, fact-focused… and thus sure to infuriate Trump.

Note: If you enjoy this and appreciate our work, please support us by Upgrading now, so we can keep posts like this free for all who need to hear it.

Subscribe now

Below is the video, the 7 takeaways you need, and the rush transcript.

7 Key Takeaways of Jack Smith’s stunning take down of Trump

1. “I would do it again.”

Smith never wavered on the central question.

He said the evidence his team gathered proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Donald Trump committed crimes, and he rejected the idea that politics played any role in the investigation.

“I stand by my decisions as special counsel... If asked whether to prosecute a former president based on the same facts today, I would do so regardless of whether that president was a Democrat or a Republican. No one should be above the law.”

That statement alone destroys Trump’s years of claims that the prosecution was politically motivated. Smith said the same standards applied to Trump that would apply to anyone else.

2. He refused to act intimidated.

Perhaps the most memorable exchange came near the end of the interview.

Trump has repeatedly threatened to prosecute Smith himself. Nicolle Wallace asked whether he was afraid to speak publicly.

Smith’s answer was immediate.

“No, not at all. I am not going to be intimidated.”

He continued:

“There is no way in the world if the thought was to go after me so that I wouldn’t speak up about the corruption that’s happening or speak up to defend these agents and prosecutors, that is a grave miscalculation.”

It was one of the strongest moments of the entire interview because it wasn’t delivered with anger. It was delivered with absolute certainty.

3. His greatest concern wasn’t himself. It was the public servants Trump targeted.

Rather than talking about the attacks against him, Smith repeatedly returned to the FBI agents and prosecutors who investigated Trump’s cases.

He described attending the funeral of one FBI agent’s wife after the agent was fired shortly after she died of cancer.

“I feel terrible about what has happened to them.”

He called the people he worked with heroes, saying they devoted their careers to protecting the country rather than enriching themselves.

Smith argued that one goal of Trump’s campaign is to isolate career public servants and convince them nobody supports them anymore.

His message was the opposite.

“We need to hold them up and celebrate them because they’re part of what makes this country great.”

4. He said Trump’s Justice Department has destroyed its own credibility.

Smith delivered one of his harshest criticisms when discussing today’s Justice Department.

“If you go to court and the judges don’t trust you, you can’t do the basic things that you need to do.”

He said that during his career, a single judicial opinion questioning the department’s honesty would have been shocking.

Now, he said, judges across the country have openly questioned whether Justice Department lawyers can be trusted.

“Trust that’s been built over generations has been lost in days.”

For a lifelong prosecutor, that appeared to be one of the deepest wounds.

5. The January 6 case was built exactly like every other criminal case.

Smith rejected claims that Trump’s prosecution required some novel legal theory.

Instead, he explained that investigators simply followed the evidence.

“You prove what happened. You prove the intent of the person. You also are thoughtful about what’s the defense going to be... We did that.”

He also reminded viewers of an important legal point often ignored in public debate.

“Speech in furtherance of crimes is not protected.”

Fraud, bribery and conspiracies frequently happen through words, he said. The Constitution protects free speech, but it does not protect using speech to commit crimes.

Subscribe now

6. He warned that the next election deserves enormous attention.

Smith did not predict another January 6.

Instead, he urged people to prepare for every possible attempt to interfere with future elections.

His advice to state attorneys general was blunt.

“I would be ready to litigate everything.”

He also praised election workers who resisted pressure after the 2020 election and said Americans should publicly support them before the next election arrives.

“The last time around, we saw that those people stood firm and they were, in many cases, the difference.”

7. Despite everything, he remains optimistic.

The interview ended on a surprisingly hopeful note.

Smith acknowledged the enormous damage done to the Justice Department but refused to declare the rule of law dead.

“I don’t think so at all.”

He pointed to the thousands of career prosecutors still trying to do the right thing every day.

He compared today’s challenges to the reforms that followed Watergate, arguing that America has repeatedly recovered from moments of institutional crisis.

“I want to behave now in a way that my kids will be proud. I want to act in a way that when I’m retired, I look back on this time and say I did things right.”

For nearly an hour, Smith barely talked about himself. He defended investigators, prosecutors, election workers and career public servants who continued showing up despite extraordinary political pressure. He never raised his voice, never sounded defensive, and never backed away from his conclusions.

Final Takeaway

THIS was what American needed to hear right now.

Despite the personal hell and disappointment this man went through, he’s STILL optimistic, still hopeful.

That’s a shot in the arm to keep me pushing to support Jack Smith in his effort to PUNISH Trump for his crimes.

If you are as inspired by Jack Smith as I am, Upgrade now to help us in our shared goal – CRUSH Trump and put him in PRISON.

👇

Subscribe now

Transcript (rushed)

Nicolle Wallace: I asked you this when you walked out, and I’ll ask you: how weird is it to view it as part of your service to tell the story of the investigations you led?

Jack Smith: Yeah. Well, you know, I was a career prosecutor. I worked in the Justice Department and other prosecutors’ offices for near on 30 years. And I don’t know if your viewers know this, but I worked in Republican and Democratic administrations over and over. I was the acting U.S. attorney in the first Trump administration in Nashville, Tennessee. And that administration appointed me to a position running a war crimes tribunal for the State Department. So I have investigated cases focusing on the facts and the law throughout my career. We did this case the same way, under the same standards. And, you know, the thing that’s, I think, important for your viewers to know is those standards are not meant to change from one administration to the next. And in my experience, until now, they haven’t. And so, you know, I think we are facing an attack on the rule of law that is different in kind and scope to anything I’ve seen in my lifetime. And one of the reasons I wanted to be with you here today, in advance of the Fourth of July, celebrating the birth of a country that we all love, is to celebrate the public servants who do this work — the people I spent my career working shoulder to shoulder with. I loved being a prosecutor. And part of it was I loved being around these sort of people. And it angers me to see them victimized, to see them demonized for doing their jobs. I think it’s really important that we stand up for them and let them know that there are a lot of people out there who back them and who are with them. And that’s not just the people who’ve been targeted and fired for no reason for doing their jobs. It’s also the people still in the Justice Department today. There are a lot of good career prosecutors who right now are working under incredibly difficult circumstances. And they’re still trying to do the right thing. And these are not self-promoters. These are not people who are going to go out and, you know, crow about their achievements. We need to hold them up and celebrate them, because they’re part of what makes this country great.

Nicolle Wallace: Some of the agents, FBI agents, that worked for you have been savaged by Donald Trump and Kash Patel. At least one agent talked about being fired while he was taking care of his very, very sick wife. What did you expect to happen to these agents? And do you regret putting any of them in that position?

Jack Smith: I feel terrible about what has happened to them. If there’s one thing I’ve spent my time on since leaving my work as special counsel, it is doing what I can to help and support them. The individual you’re talking about — he was nursing his wife, who was dying of cancer, and they fired him shortly after she died. I went to the funeral. That funeral was filled with heroes, public servants on both families. And I just can’t believe that if people knew the character of these people I worked with, that they could ever stand for the demonizing that’s happened to them. It’s just beyond anything I can understand. And my sense from my limited exposure to people in DOJ and the FBI from my time in government is they don’t really want to go do other things. They want this to be their life’s work — protecting the country’s national security.

Nicolle Wallace: Can we talk a little bit about the price people have paid who have been purged for political purposes?

Jack Smith: Yeah. I mean, you know, a lot of the agents and prosecutors I’ve worked with — and to be clear, not just in the special counsel’s office, but throughout my career in a bunch of different positions I’ve had in the Justice Department — this is the culmination of what they wanted to do. It’s why they went to law school. And it’s their way of serving our country. And we’ve seen so many times in these retribution cases where prosecutors wouldn’t be a part of it. You know, prosecutors in Minnesota who are like, “I’m not going to investigate the family member of a shooting victim. I’m not doing that.” Prosecutors who wouldn’t go through with retribution prosecutions. And those people gave up a lot. This is their whole career. A lot of them, you know — this is a lucrative sort of profession for a lawyer in terms of what you could do in private practice. They have to support their families. And one thing I have hope about is I think the traditions in the department, and the people it draws, are so strong. We’re going to have to rehabilitate the department, for sure. But there’s a lot of people still there, still in place, wanting to do the right thing, wanting to follow the facts and law, not be a part of any retribution campaign. And I think, for me, one of the things I see as I go around and talk to folks — and I try to travel around the country a lot and see different people and talk to different perspectives about this — is that those people, it really matters to them if they know they’re being supported. Part of this campaign is to make people feel isolated and feel like they don’t have people backing them up. And so I just think it’s really important. I want to express my support. I think everybody else should express their support. It’s something with meaning, and it’s also something that matters.

Nicolle Wallace: Chris Wray was the director of the FBI when the FBI agents that you’re talking about went to work for you. He said nothing. Why?

Jack Smith: You know, I can’t really comment on other people’s choices. I would say—

Nicolle Wallace: Would it help?

Jack Smith: Well, I think my perspective on this is that in the moment we’re in, which is a pretty dire moment, right — what we’re facing — that we should be uplifting the people who are doing the right thing. And I’ll give you an example from my life. I resign as special counsel. I know I need to get a lawyer, because the president has said he wants to jail me for doing my job. And so I retain lawyers — Covington and Burling. As soon as that becomes public, the president and the Justice Department target that law firm. And they do it because they don’t want me to have counsel. They don’t want anyone to represent me. And what happened next was, the very day that happened, Nicolle, the lawyers at the firm called me up and said, “Jack, don’t worry about it. We’re there for you.” They did not blink for a second. And as you know, that’s very different than how some other law firms behaved. I think we should focus on things like that — in separating a firm like Covington and Burling from other ones that didn’t show courage to come forward.

Nicolle Wallace: Well, right. The ones that fought also have batted a thousand in the courts. I think Judge Beryl Howell described those executive orders as giving her chills, chilling her to the bone. But some of the giant law firms that were so central in our politics in the first Trump term didn’t just capitulate to Trump — they’re now working for Trump’s Justice Department, firms like Paul Weiss and others. What do you make of the damage they’re doing to our democracy at a moment you describe as dire?

Jack Smith: Yeah, well, I think one of the problems — I mean, there’s several layers, right? One of the problems right today, besides the retribution prosecutions, is that the Justice Department can’t do its job, right? If you go to court—

Nicolle Wallace: Explain that.

Jack Smith: Well, if you go to court and the judges don’t trust you, you can’t do the basic things that you need to do to represent the American people in court. And we have seen judges across the country say they can’t trust prosecutors anymore. And that has such a cascading effect on any sort of case. And I can’t count how many opinions — but one opinion like that in my career would have been seismic. People would not know what to do if a court said trust that’s been built over generations has been lost in days, right? And that’s happening every day. And so, regardless of what you think politically, they’re just not effective at doing their job anymore. They’ve jettisoned expertise, right? And so we have a situation where we’ve got rid of people who know how to protect our national security. And we think that that’s somehow not going to have an effect on our national security. An example I can give you: Brian Driscoll. I don’t know if you know who he is. He was—

Nicolle Wallace: He made a great video at the beginning to kind of rally the troops, that made it out to the outside.

Jack Smith: Yeah. I mean, he’s a folk hero in the FBI.

Nicolle Wallace: If you were casting for a hero, that’s what they look like, right? Central casting.

Jack Smith: Yes. And just for your viewers, this is a guy — career agent, mob investigator, SWAT team, hostage rescue, served overseas, medal of valor, bravery medals, all these things. And an expert in counterintelligence. They got rid of him because he stood up for agents who were being targeted improperly. You can’t tell me — you cannot tell me — our country is as safe as it was when people like that are being let go and fired for no reason.

Nicolle Wallace: Well, the purge seems to have multiple tentacles. It’s for FBI agents and prosecutors who worked on your two cases. It’s also for people who aren’t doing the personal political bidding of the individuals there. I think Mr. Bove started that in the short time he was there. Kash Patel, based on his account, seems to be carrying that out for deeply personal conduct. What does that mean for the people who were there because it was their life’s dream to do that work, to protect the country? What are they doing instead?

Jack Smith: Yeah, I mean, it’s very tough. Because the people we’re talking about — these people I spent my career with, that I’ve so enjoyed their company, and I have both respect and affection for — they’re resilient people, right? And they’re not going to quit at this first sign of resistance. And so, as I say, as many of these examples as we’ve seen where people have just said, “I’m not going to be a part of that,” because of their integrity, because of their character — there are a lot of people still in place. And I want to be clear: these are not people who are, like, throwing sand in the gears. They’re just doing their job as they’re supposed to do it, following the facts and the law.

Nicolle Wallace: But is that because they haven’t run into any friction from the politicization and the weaponization cases?

Jack Smith: Yeah, I think that’s right. I mean, I think, you know, what I tell friends who are still in the department is: serve as long as you can. The Justice Department — our country needs the Justice Department to do its job, and you should do it as long as you feel like you can. And obviously, if you’re asked to do something that you know is wrong, then your number is up and you can’t do it. I would also add, Nicolle, I think one of the things that maybe isn’t being talked about enough is the effect it is having on the Justice Department in the future. You know, this last year, I’ve done a lot of speaking at law schools and universities. And, you know, it used to be that getting a job in the U.S. Attorney’s Office or the Justice Department was, you know, one of the most sought-after things you could possibly have. Great people who want to serve their communities and serve their countries — that was their dream. That was my dream as a young person. Those people, I can tell you, are not as interested, and they’re looking to do other things. And my concern is that — you know, the Justice Department works because I learned from mentors who came before me. And then I tried to do the same and teach those that followed me. When you break that chain, it’s a real problem. And so I tell people when I go to these universities and law schools: don’t give up on it. Don’t. Even if you don’t like what’s going on right now, there’s a much longer path here. And we need you if you want to serve. For you, I guess, resilience is going to have to live a little earlier in your career. But I don’t want people to get away from service as a result of this, because I think that’s a knock-on effect that will be much harder to solve than some of the things that we’re seeing in the headlines every day.

Nicolle Wallace: I’m sure these people that listen to you speak admire you and your career and the things you’ve been a part of. Do you think that this is a department that you could send someone to go work in, and they could be asked to indict you?

Jack Smith: Oh, I think that could happen. But I also think in the Justice Department, even as we sit here right now, there are lots of people doing good work — prosecuting violent crime, protecting their communities, doing the everyday work of being a prosecutor. And yes, it could happen. That could happen. And that would be unfortunate. And then you might have to step down. But I don’t want to see people run from public service because of that possibility.

Nicolle Wallace: Do you expect to be indicted?

Jack Smith: Listen, I—

Nicolle Wallace: Donald Trump has made a bunch of statements. He said he would indict you.

Jack Smith: Yes. I’ll tell you, Nicolle, I honestly do not spend a lot of time thinking about the things he says about me and his threats about me. I’m real focused on the people who I worked with — looking out for them. I’m real focused on how the Justice Department is going to be better going forward, things like that. In my situation, I did my job the right way. I had an all-star team. I mean, Nicolle, the agents on my case — if I were to walk you through all the awards they’ve won throughout generations of administrations, we would be here all night. These were superstars. And I’m much more concerned that those people get to serve in the department, get to serve in the bureau again someday.

Nicolle Wallace: What do you say about the facts that you developed, that you see — I know you don’t watch a ton of news, but that you see enough to know that the basic principle of recidivism likely applies to the election case. The things that you charged are a lot of the same kinds of stories we cover. What is the cost of someone not being held accountable for their crimes?

Jack Smith: Yeah. I mean, talk about the pardons of these people convicted for the violence on January 6th, right? There’s all sorts of costs. There’s the obvious cost of just recidivism. These are people who committed their crimes in the name and in the interest of Donald Trump, and he’s returned the favor, right, by pardoning them. That sends one message to them. A message I’m equally concerned about is the message that it sends to law enforcement. Supporting law enforcement should not be a political issue. It should not be a Republican-Democrat, red-blue thing. And when I see people like Harry Dunn, who was here before, who put his life on the line to protect others, and seeing him be smeared and vilified — I don’t understand that. It’s deeply wrong. And I think more people who understand the actual facts of that — I don’t think most people are okay with that. And I have a concern because we’ve seen that sort of thing in the incentives it sets up.

Nicolle Wallace: What do you make of the fact — do you support this theory — that the pardons were step one, the slush fund is step two, and sending a message to the violent insurrectionists that not only would they not be criminally accountable for their crimes, but they’d be paid for their service?

Jack Smith: Yeah, listen, I have no unique insight on that. I see the same things you see. Regardless of whether it sets up an incentive system that you’re suggesting, it’s just plain wrong, right? I mean, our country is built on values. That’s what binds us all together. And my view has always been that those values don’t have anything to do with political parties. When I’m a prosecutor and I have to build credibility with a judge or a witness or the jury, right — it’s not about politics. It’s about truthfulness, integrity, being decent to each other, exhibiting kindness, judgment. I think those are the things that bind us together, and those are the sort of things we should lean into. I feel like, personally, as divided as we are, if we lean into issues of integrity more, that’s the best hope to get people more back together than we are now.

Nicolle Wallace: Do you think we still have a common definition of integrity?

Jack Smith: I think we do. But I also — for me personally, if I’m going to have that discussion — like I said, I travel around and I go to places where people don’t expect me to be. I do athletic events where I travel, and I’ll be in rural areas or different parts of our country. And people will come up and talk.

Nicolle Wallace: During sporting events, right?

Jack Smith: Yeah, I do ride bikes and things like that. But I go out in these places and I talk to different people. People come up to me, and it’s interesting, because they don’t expect me to be there. And I have to say, the vast majority of people are really appreciative of my service and the service of our team. But even when they’re not, if you engage in a discussion with people and you’re open to hearing them, and not just kind of telling them what you think, I actually do think that people agree that integrity is a good thing.

Nicolle Wallace: Do they believe the facts? I mean, do they ask you about the cases you brought, and do they believe you?

Jack Smith: Well, it depends on who you’re talking about. But often the people who are more skeptical know less about the facts. And I think one of the things that’s hard for me in this process is, you know, I’m a facts guy. Facts matter. I’m really big on that. And, you know, when you go in a courtroom, that’s all that matters, right? And you know that you’re going to get your turn to present the facts, and then they can present theirs, and there’s a process. How we communicate with each other right now — it’s very hard to do that. And very foreign to someone like me who was raised as a prosecutor: you do your talking in the courtroom, not on the courtroom steps. And I think that’s harder, because a lot of the people, I think, who have resistance to what we do — they’re just not versed in the facts. And, you know, not everybody wants to read a hundred-whatever-page report. I get it. But I think — and this goes to the DOJ going forward — my view is that going forward, we can’t get away from the issues of integrity and doing things the right way and facts and law. But I also think people like me, who kind of were raised on that, know that we’ve got to start listening more to people who know how to communicate, and choose to communicate in more innovative ways. Because a lot of the people that I bump into and talk to — no one’s tried to communicate with them. No one’s tried to give them the facts in a way that’s actually easy for them to digest. And so, you know, very foreign to a courtroom guy like me. But I think it’s a step that we’ve got to be talking about.

Nicolle Wallace: I mean, this was the challenge of the Mueller findings, right? You know, here it was — it kind of landed like a phone book, and that was just volume one — and no one explained it and no one defended it. And Trump and his supporters were able to misrepresent it in a single news cycle. Was that on your mind as you did your work in these two cases?

Jack Smith: Honestly, no. My job was to do my job the right way. And when it came time to write a report, to write a report that summarized accurately what I did. I didn’t really think about stuff like that. And, you know, I understand your point about Robert Mueller, but I think Robert Mueller is an American hero. I mean, how he conducted his life — serving our country in the military, serving throughout, at the FBI, as a prosecutor. I mean, the story I like about Robert Mueller is: this is a guy who did everything you could do as a lawyer. He’s a partner at a big law firm making a million bucks or more. And he wants to go back and be a line prosecutor.

Nicolle Wallace: In San Francisco, right?

Jack Smith: No, he lined up in D.C. to be a homicide prosecutor. I mean, it’s such a badass thing to do. I mean, in my world, that’s really a cool thing. And so, you know, maybe, as you say, how that rolled out — he was working from a different era. And that’s why I say we’ve got to get better at that. But I don’t want to lose the core of functioning with integrity and doing what’s good for the country rather than what’s good for you.

Nicolle Wallace: Do you agree that we are covering, in real time, an assault on our elections — the upcoming ones?

Jack Smith: I’m very concerned about what’s going to happen in the next election, absolutely.

Nicolle Wallace: Do you see, again, in things that are covered and things that are public-facing conduct ahead of the midterms, what you investigated in the January 6th case?

Jack Smith: Well, I’ve been thinking about it more in terms of what needs to be done based on what we saw happen last time. And, you know, it’s a different situation now, based on — you know, the people who perpetrated January 6th, they probably learned from how they did that. My personal view is I think the state attorneys general have a tremendous role to play here. They can make sure the rule of law functions in their state. And I would also say that I think a thing that all of us can do is support election workers and election officials. The last time around, we saw that those people stood firm, and they were, in many cases, the difference. It’s clear to me, anyway, from what I’ve seen publicly, that those people are going to be put under great pressure. And my experience — not only just as special counsel, but, you know, I was the chief of the Public Integrity Section at the Department of Justice for five years — had a number of cases with election officials. These are people, also, who don’t toot their own horn. They’re not self-promoters. They just care about our democracy. We need to show them that we have their back. I think those two things are central to getting ready for the elections that are coming up.

Nicolle Wallace: What is your advice to state attorneys general?

Jack Smith: I would be ready to litigate everything. I would brainstorm — and I think they are, I get that sense — every possible permutation, and don’t let reason be a limitation. Imagine everything that could possibly be tried.

Nicolle Wallace: That Trump will do.

Jack Smith: Yeah. And I also think it’s important for them to be proactive and, you know, initiate litigation where it’s appropriate — and where it would make sense to, if you have a sense or reason to believe that something’s going to be done to interfere with people’s right to vote and participate in democracy.

Nicolle Wallace: The strength of the evidence that you and your investigators developed is at least as detailed in the report that was released. It seems to me that you were able to develop — and I’ll say this as a non-lawyer — sort of the 360 evidence, that you understood the state of mind. You had evidence that Trump knew he was lying. There were all sorts of interactions where he said to people, well, that national security issue will be dealt with by Joe Biden, because I lost. He said to another aide, quote, “I can’t believe I lost to that guy.” So you were able to establish — and I think the congressional committee established some of this as well — people to whom he acknowledged losing. How much of the ability to hold people accountable is based on being able to see inside meetings and have witnesses that cooperate? And I guess I’m getting back to the pardon conversation we just had. I mean, how much do you think Trump has learned in terms of how to evade an indictment like the one you brought?

Jack Smith: Yeah, I think the one thing to start on this sort of topic is: we did this case the way I’ve done cases throughout my career — same investigative techniques, same use of the tools that a federal prosecutor has. And our proof was the same sort of proof you have in all sorts of cases — not just political corruption cases, but all sorts of cases I’ve done in my career. You prove what happened. You prove the intent of the person. And you also are thoughtful about what’s the defense going to be, and can we disprove that? Because if you can’t, then you can’t prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt. And we did that. We did that in this case. It wasn’t unique in terms of how we did it. It was the same sort of process you’d use in any case.

Nicolle Wallace: And around speech — one of the things that the right used to say before Trump came back into office was to champion First Amendment-protected speech. One of the things that I understood better when I read this again, to prepare to talk to you, was that speech in furtherance of crimes is not protected. I mean, how much do you think people should just be monitoring and tracking the things people are saying out loud in terms of stealing the midterms?

Jack Smith: Yeah. I mean, and that’s maybe a good point for your viewers: there is rock-solid Supreme Court precedent that you cannot just use speech to commit a crime. Fraud, particularly — there’s a specific case on it. And so, obviously, people have a First Amendment right. And I think we made clear in our indictment that we respect First Amendment rights. That’s certainly important to me — that we not charge a case that would in essence be violating someone’s rights. But that doesn’t mean that you can’t commit crimes through words. Happens all the time. When a Ponzi scheme person is bilking someone out of their life savings, they’re doing it with words. That’s how that’s done. All sorts of financial crimes, all sorts of corruption crimes. A bribe is usually communicated in words. That happens all the time. And in a lot of ways, this case was no different.

Nicolle Wallace: I was also reminded that after the Supreme Court grants Donald Trump immunity, you file a superseding indictment. You’re still ready to bring the case to trial, right?

Jack Smith: Yeah, correct.

Nicolle Wallace: Explain how you had to adjust, and what that adjustment was.

Jack Smith: Sure. And we set this forth in our report. We did what good prosecutors do and what you’re supposed to do. We received a decision from the court. It wasn’t the decision we wanted. We didn’t agree with the reasoning of it. But in a society where you believe in the rule of law, you follow the court’s decisions. And so we analyzed the decision, and we looked at what sort of evidence we could no longer use and what sort of evidence we could use. And we set this forth in filings, because in this particular case, a lot of the evidence was him in his role as a candidate. We felt we could go forward, and we briefed this issue for the court. And obviously, we never got to a conclusion where we could litigate the ultimate conclusion of that. But we would not have gone forward with the case unless I still felt we could prove it beyond a reasonable doubt — just like we wouldn’t have gone forward with the case in the first place if we couldn’t. And I guess one point I would want to emphasize there is, I think, a difference between the work we did and what you’re seeing today: in our work, there was no predetermined outcome. When I took this job, I was perfectly happy to bring this case if the facts and law warranted it — or not. And I’ve done that throughout my career, and it hasn’t mattered what a person’s political party was. That’s how we went about our work. Completely apolitical. Politics did not play a role.

Nicolle Wallace: Were you kind of hoping that the criminality wasn’t as brazen as what you developed and uncovered?

Jack Smith: I don’t think good prosecutors hope. You follow the facts and the law. And one of the good principles that real prosecutors always follow is: the facts matter. And you don’t not go down an avenue because, oh, maybe some facts will come out that will hurt my case. You go and look at all the facts you possibly can, as searching as you possibly can, because you want to get it right. That contrasts with what we’re seeing today, where there is a predetermined outcome, process doesn’t matter, and we just have to find a way to get to that outcome. And if there’s facts that don’t fit that outcome, we don’t recognize them. And if there’s facts that make it not a crime, we just pretend those don’t exist.

Nicolle Wallace: I mean, a judge basically said that in the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case — said that he found that this was an instance where basically criminality was being reverse-engineered, all the way up to Todd Blanche. If a judge has found that, what do you think they’re capable of with two more years?

Jack Smith: Well, as I said earlier, I, from my perspective, have seen a number of cases: James Comey, Letitia James, Jerome Powell — I mean, right? There’s not criminality here. I mean, seashells. So the only reasonable explanation is the president has it out for these people. And he has people who are former personal lawyers who are going to do what he says, regardless of the facts or the law. I mean, you know, again, just to juxtapose it: I didn’t have people on my team resigning because they refused to go along with a scheme to go after somebody. That was not what happened. You see that in all these cases. And just, again, imagine if you would like — I was appointed from outside the government, no political allegiance to anybody. And they were comfortable with: Jack, wherever you think the facts and law dictate, that’s what we’ll do, and that’s what will happen. Can you imagine that happening now? If there was an allegation of corruption in this administration — them saying, let’s appoint an outside, independent person to make a call on this? I think we know it would never happen. And I think that’s a real easy way to differentiate: following process, following the facts, having independence.

Nicolle Wallace: If you took the name of our country off it, and you were just examining the state of the rule of law in America — is it dead?

Jack Smith: I don’t think so at all. And for the reasons I said earlier: there are legions of career prosecutors, people just like me — you just don’t know their names — who want to do the right thing. They’re in the Justice Department. They want to serve. We have a lot of challenges in front of us, and the rehabilitation of the department is not going to be any mean feat. You know, recovering character is a lot harder than gaining it in the first place. But I think we’re totally capable of doing that. I’m completely optimistic.

Nicolle Wallace: We’ve talked about the dedicated public servants in the department and the FBI that worked on your cases. One of them you can’t talk about. And these are some of the ones that Trump has raged against most ferociously — and that is the prosecutors and agents involved in the documents case. Just explain why you can’t talk about that.

Jack Smith: Yeah, there’s an order from the judge in Florida, Judge Cannon, that that report is under seal. And I don’t want to do anything that could be misconstrued as me not following a court order. I’m a lawyer who follows court orders. And so I just don’t want to do anything that would be remotely construed as not complying with her order.

Nicolle Wallace: Let me just ask about the things that you’ve said publicly about standing by the facts that you developed and standing by what you’ve put in your reports. You stand by volume two?

Jack Smith: Absolutely.

Nicolle Wallace: And the men and women who worked on those cases have been targeted with some of the most vicious retribution and political attacks. Are they political actors?

Jack Smith: Absolutely not.

Nicolle Wallace: Have any of them survived the purge at the Bureau and the Department of Justice?

Jack Smith: I don’t think that’s really for me to say. I’m focused on the people I can help, and that’s what I’ve been trying to do.

Nicolle Wallace: All right. We don’t want to jeopardize any of those individuals. And we don’t want to put you in a bad spot with Judge Aileen Cannon. You think there’s any chance she ends up on the Supreme Court?

Jack Smith: I have no views on that whatsoever.

Nicolle Wallace: We’ll watch that with bated breath. I want to share some reporting from my friend Glenn Thrush of The New York Times. He’s covered some of the folks that you’ve talked about, and sort of come back to what’s on the other side. Kash Patel summarily fired Chris Meyer and another top agent in the Washington, D.C. field office who had been targeted by the right, Walter Giardina. Mr. Patel did so after being told that the terminations were unlawful, and that pushing out Mr. Giardina, who was caring for his dying wife — something you talked about — would be inexcusably cruel, according to a lawsuit filed by three FBI supervisors also dismissed by Kash Patel. Quote: “We were always told that we would be taken care of and there would not be any retaliation for our assigned work,” Mr. Giardina, 48, told his supervisors the day he was fired. The circle of trust had been broken. I want to ask you about this concept of a circle of trust. Because, as we talked about with the pardons and the slush fund, Trump seems to be erecting — again, what is public-facing — a circle of trust with people who committed crimes for which they were convicted by juries of their peers. Not just pardoning them, but giving them money. That circle of trust doesn’t do anything for the public, for public safety, or for U.S. national security. How do you begin to put back together a circle of trust between public servants who protected the country from threats?

Jack Smith: Yeah, I think for me, the biggest thing we can do — and it’s challenging — is to get the facts out in ways that people can digest them. I think if you have a question of: is a rioter who assaulted a police officer on January 6th a patriot, or is Harry Dunn a patriot? We win that argument every time if people have the facts. And I think it’s hard. As a prosecutor who worked in a courtroom and didn’t really work in the media and didn’t want to give a speech on the courthouse steps, I think we’ve now learned that you’ve got to be able to get people to understand the facts. We’ve got a great product in the work that we did as a special counsel, the work the Justice Department does every day. But the people who do it, who are really the reason you can trust it — they don’t promote themselves. And so we need to get their stories out there. I think if that happens, the sort of trust in government, which is pretty hard to earn — you can do that. That’s my experience as a trial lawyer. It’s my experience in life when I interact with people in the world. And part of the reason I frankly wanted to talk to you today is to talk about these people, because they’re good people. And if you sat down with them for a coffee or a beer or a meal, you would like them, and you would trust them, and you would see the things that are being said about them are lies. And in my experience — which is dated — none of them are particularly political. I don’t know the politics of any of these people. That’s not something we talk about in the Justice Department.

Nicolle Wallace: What does it do to the ability to imagine something on the other side that isn’t a reaction to what’s happening now? I mean, everyone, from all the reporting that we have access to, is only doing the kind of work you’re talking about if they’ve avoided being asked to do something that violates their oath, or is unethical, or is part of the retribution cases, or is predicated on Trump’s conspiracies — as we covered at the top of the hour, a massive deployment of intelligence agents to go look at data in Georgia based on a lie. What happens on the other side to people that were involved in that misdirection of resources?

Jack Smith: Well, you know, one thing I don’t like is this idea that everybody who did things we don’t like — they’re guilty of crimes too, and we’re going to prosecute them. It should be the facts and the law. And you shouldn’t look at it as: let’s find this person and let’s target them and see if we can find a crime. That’s what’s happening now. I think it’s really important that whoever leads the Justice Department after this rejects that sort of thinking. That doesn’t mean that people who have committed crimes should get a free pass. And it’s going to be difficult. I actually think the investigation of these things isn’t hard. What’s hard is getting people to understand it’s been done in an objective way — explaining, in a way that people can digest, that things are done following the facts and the law and don’t involve politics. That’s a challenge. Doing the actual work — there’s lots of people out there who’ve spent their careers like I have who are capable of doing that work. Not just cases in the political realm, but particularly cases also affecting our national security. I spend a lot of time worrying about that when I see some of the people who’ve been fired.

Nicolle Wallace: When you feel optimistic about our ability to come through, and about the caliber of the people who are inside the department — what do you think, and how do you feel optimistic, about a country that would re-elect someone for whom the facts showed he’d committed multiple felonies?

Jack Smith: My view, Nicolle, is our country has been a lot of things at a lot of different times. What generally happens is, when something really bad happens — Watergate, for example — we respond and we get better as a result. I’m not saying the Justice Department has been perfect every day, but the people I worked with — I saw people trying to move things in the right direction. I think it would be foolish to say we’re not facing challenges right now. But when you face a challenge like we are today, you have a choice about the attitude you take towards it. Anyone can put anything on you, but you have a choice about the attitude you take. For me — and I think a lot of the people that I’ve worked with — our view is: I want to behave now in a way that my kids will be proud. I want to act in a way that, when I’m retired, I look back on this time and say I did things right. I think a lot of people relate to that, and I think it’s understandable. I think if we start aligning actions with our beliefs, it’s a huge, huge step. I think one of the things I’ve seen — which is the sort of journey I’ve been on — is, with me being targeted by the president, you get to find out who’s who, right? You get to find out who runs towards the fire, who kind of backs away. It’s difficult in the moment, but I think for the future, that’s going to be really helpful to know.

Nicolle Wallace: Are you afraid to be speaking out?

Jack Smith: No, not at all. I am not going to be intimidated. And there’s no way in the world — if the thought was to go after me so that I wouldn’t speak up about the corruption that’s happening, or speak up to defend these agents and prosecutors, that is a grave miscalculation. There is no way I’m going to be intimidated.

Nicolle Wallace: Would it help the Bureau and the Department of Justice if more of the leaders above the chain of command, above you, spoke out with the same messages — Merrick Garland and Lisa Monaco?

Jack Smith: I’m not going to forecast what other people can do, or tell other people how they should handle a particular situation. Everyone’s got to make their own particular choice. My strong view is, rather than sort of critiquing people who haven’t done what we might like them to do — good, high-integrity people who serve the public, who spent their careers in public service — let’s focus on: when we see somebody doing a good thing, we raise them up. I think that’s a more productive way to face the challenge we’re facing right now.

Nicolle Wallace: I want to ask you about some of your earlier work at DOJ. You worked in public integrity — which, somewhere, someone has all of their office supplies, right? And this week we reported that Donald Trump raked in $2 billion since returning to the White House. It’s such a perversion of everything that’s come before it. What do you make of, or what do you think, when you think about the gutting of all of the prosecutors that used to investigate and prosecute those crimes?

Jack Smith: Yeah, I’m saddened by it. Because when I was at public integrity, when I was the chief of the section — and this was a section that was created in the wake of Watergate, as one of the reforms after Watergate, to deal with corruption in the government — we did good work. We did important work. We did nonpartisan work. And seeing that section gutted saddens me. But I have to say, at the same time, that started because the attorneys in that section stood up. When the Adams case in New York — they forced the dismissal of a completely legitimate case that the prosecutors in the Southern District of New York brought, and they tried to force public integrity to sort of lend their credibility to the dismissal. That’s what I’m talking about, about people of integrity.

Nicolle Wallace: You know, the Southern District prosecutors — they left, and they’re not in the department anymore.

Jack Smith: Right. But my point is, there’s people like that throughout the department, and there’s people who are going to continue to stand up. I have a huge allegiance to them, and I have a huge affection for them. And I know they’re out there, and I just want to make sure they all hear us. Because this is going to go on for a while. The path to victory here is not a short one. And I think the people in place who are doing their jobs, the people who stood up — we should celebrate them, just like we’re celebrating the Fourth of July. These are the people who make this country great, in my view.

Nicolle Wallace: Is this the beginning of speaking out on the rehab more regularly, more frequently? Will you come back?

Jack Smith: You know, this is new for me, Nicolle. We’ll see. You know, I was a prosecutor for 30 years, and I’m in a different world now. I started a law firm, as I think you know, with our friend Tim Heaphy. And I want to do whatever I can to be helpful right now. And I want to figure out what that is. I don’t have an interest in being on TV to talk just so I can be on TV to talk. If there’s a way that I feel like I can be helpful, I’m going to do it. And that’s going to guide me.

Nicolle Wallace: We really appreciate you deciding to talk to us here today. We’ve covered you for a long time. We admire what looks like sort of standing strong in the face of withering attacks from the most powerful person in the country, in our politics. And it’s really a treat to get to talk to you. Thank you.

Jack Smith: Well, I really appreciate you having me. Thanks so much.

Nicolle Wallace: Thank you for being here. If we ever get anything wrong, though, you know, send up a flare. Let us know.

Jack Smith: Sounds good.

Nicolle Wallace: Thank you so much for being here.

If you made it this far, I’m impressed. You care about this country more than 90% of our our list!

THANK YOU for being part of our community. You are EXACTLY the kind of person I write for.

P.S. Special thanks to Paid Subscribers. You keep the lights on and help us on our mission to get Trump held ACCOUNTABLE! Without you, we can’t do this work.

If you haven’t upgraded yet, you can do so here.

Subscribe now

– Ben

Dear loyal Democratic Voice member: I know I should be sleeping right now, but I wanted to get this AMAZING news for you before you miss the big debut. Enjoy! – Ben

Alex Jones’s punishment starts TODAY!

Alex Jones thought he could rip off Sandy Hook parents by bullying them, and fighting a forced sale to The Onion.

But The Onion had other ideas.

In true Onion form, they found two ruthless ways to mock Jones, diminish that lunatic’s power… and help Sandy Hook families doing it!

Alex Jones spent years getting rich by tormenting grieving parents. Now the brand he built is being turned against him, and the families he targeted will finally receive money from it.

Enjoy!

If you are as grateful to see Alex Jones PUNISHED, Subscribe or Upgrade! You’re my kind of people!

Subscribe now

The Onion’s Big Move

After fighting for 18 months to take over Alex Jones’ conspiracy empire, today they are launching Infowars with a BRUTAL first episode, on TheOnion.info!

The Onion isn’t simply replacing the show. They’re turning it into a weapon against the right.

Think of it as Comedy Central’s The Colbert Report, but without the corporate sponsors to hold them back from being as brutal as we want them to be!

The new show will parody the fake supplements, fear campaigns, and conspiracy theories that helped Jones build a media empire worth more than $50 million a year at its peak.

Instead of selling panic, it will sell satire.

But it gets better.

The Deeper Burn: Helping Sandy Hook Families

Alex set himself up for karma years ago, when that human steaming potato chose to profit from lies about murdered children.

His followers harassed parents, called them crisis actors, and made death threats against families who had already endured the worst pain imaginable. Courts found him liable and ordered him to pay more than $1.4 billion, yet the families are still waiting to receive what they are owed.

Now the very brand that spread those lies is becoming a source of support for the victims instead.

Under the name Infowars, The Onion will donate the first $100,000 they earn straight to Sandy Hook Families.

That simple act transforms one of the internet’s most toxic platforms into a permanent reminder that lies can carry consequences, and that he can’t escape the money he owes the Sandy Hook families.

THIS is the power of what The Onion is doing. And why we’re joining in!

Share

Why Mocking the Right Is CRITICAL

Ridicule has always been one of the fastest ways to strip power away from extremists.

Fear gives demagogues influence. Laughter takes it away. Once people stop treating conspiracy peddlers like dangerous masterminds and start seeing them for the clowns they are, they lose the mystique that keeps followers coming back.

We are SO grateful to The Onion, but it doesn’t stop with them. You, I, and our entire community must MOCK these “tough guys” by showing how pathetic they really are.

Nathan and I are doing our part at The Democratic Voice to mock the lunatics in charge.

Our videos and posts crushing Trump over his pathetic UFC fight, reflecting pool disaster, Kennedy Center name removal and pathetic Great American Fair crowds got 76.4 MILLION views over 10 days alone!

Don’t get me wrong. It’s not without risks. We get hell for it from the cult. These people are crazy, vile, and even violent.

But like the Onion, we will not stop. We’re EXPANDING.

If you can chip in to help us chip away at the power of Alex Jones and Donald Trump, please Upgrade as an annual supporter now! 👇 The more help we get, the more people we can reach!

Subscribe now

THANK YOU for standing with this movement to fight back! You’re my kind of people. 👏

— Ben

Subscribe now

This is what bravery looks like!

Air Force Major Jason Watson risked EVERYTHING today – his career, his pension, his freedom – to be the first active duty service member to call for the impeachment of the Commander in Chief…

All because he took his oath seriously – to defend the country from enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.

But after he gave this speech, he was immediately ARRESTED.

After seeing his speech below, you’ll know why.

Who else thinks this man is a hero?

If you stand with him, Subscribe or Upgrade now! We get the word out about actions like his by breaking video and news to PUNISH Trump, around the clock, exclusively for YOU, our community.

👇

Subscribe now

Watch his full brave speech below.

Partial Transcript

NOTE: Special thanks to those who support our work as part of the Paid Subscriber community!

YOU make posts like this FREE to EVERY American who needs to hear it, but can’t afford it.

Subscribe now

If you agree, Subscribe or Upgrade now! You’re my kind of people!

Subscribe now

The details they hid from us are shocking:

Sen. Mitch McConnell, 84, was reportedly found unconscious at his Washington, D.C., home on June 14 and may have suffered a heart attack before being rushed to a local hospital, according to a District of Columbia Fire and EMS dispatch call made public Wednesday. The emergency radio traffic, first reported by Punchbowl News, described an Advanced Life Support ambulance responding to McConnell’s residence for a “cardiac arrest” with “CPR in progress.”

Representatives for the former Senate Republican leader declined to comment on the dispatch communications. At the time, a spokesperson said only that McConnell had been admitted to the hospital and was receiving “excellent care.”

The following day, his office said he was continuing his recovery while working on Senate and Kentucky matters, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune said McConnell remained engaged in legislative business.

It looks like this may have been a complete lie.

The incident was not publicly disclosed when it occurred and comes after several years of health concerns, including multiple falls, a concussion, cracked ribs, and highly publicized episodes in which McConnell froze while speaking in public.

McConnell represents millions of Kentuckians in the U.S. Senate and remains one of the country’s most influential elected officials.

While medical privacy is important, significant health events involving senior officeholders can affect their ability to carry out their duties.

That is why there is a legitimate public interest in timely disclosure when an elected official experiences a serious medical emergency.

Who else feels we have a right to know?

Demanding Answers

Is Mitch on death’s door? Is his reign of terror about to end?

The media refuses to press his office on this, leaving Kentuckians and America in the dark.

That is where we come in. We are determined to push through the BS and get you the TRUTH.

But every day, MAGAs try to hide or intimidate Nathan and me into silence. They leave us hundreds of vile comments and messages a day, often wishing us harm. All because we expose Trump, McConnell, and the Republican crooks destroying our country, and push to hold them ACCOUNTABLE.

We REFUSE to be intimidated. Trump and his cult must be stopped ASAP. We won’t quit. In fact, we are now inspired to EXPAND.

If you can afford to chip in less than $7/month as an annual full paid member to support our effort to expose the truth and PUNISH Trump, please upgrade to become an annual subscriber now! We’d be so grateful for your support!

Subscribe now

THANK YOU for supporting this community! You’re my kind of people. 👏

— Ben

The Top 7 hits Trump suffered in the last 36 hours are BRUTAL, and we’ll know you’ll enjoy each one… Some of these haven’t even been picked up by the corporate news yet!

To be clear, there was some bad news for our side from the Supreme Court, which in some ways handed Trump more power. But in other ways, particularly in his personal life, Trump got KNEECAPPED.

But SCOTUS losses were just part of Trump’s terrible 36 hours. Enjoy every single one of his Karma hits.

Enjoy each hit…. They each keep getting harder and harder. #5 is our favorite – it just happened minutes ago, and the media is ignoring it!

NOTE: This post is a gift to our paid-subscriber community, for helping support our work getting America ‘round the clock news, commentary, actions to fight back, and PUNISHING Trump. 🙏

If you’re not a paid subscriber yet, are you in for a treat! You’ll get long pieces like this, special access to a full-supporter DM group, and many more perks… and of course your contribution makes sure that those on a low/fixed income can see the vast majority of our content for FREE.

Will you join tonight and help us get 15 paid members by midnight? 💪

THANK YOU for supporting independent activists/journalists fighting for you when the media fails!

Here we go! 👇

Subscribe now

7. Trump’s SAVE Act gets CRUSHED… by Republicans!

Trump just got SLAPPED in the face by his own party – HARD.

The SAVE Act was supposed to be another Republican voter suppression trophy.

Instead, it became a public Republican mess. Four Senate Republicans joined Democrats to block it in a 48 to 50 vote, and today, 14 House Republicans jammed up GOP business over the bill’s exclusion from the defense package.

This is absolutely brutal for Trump on two levels.

One: He needs the SAVE Act to pass, because it will help him cheat in the midterms. Ensuring people can’t vote is the only way he can win.

Two: Republicans know this, and understand they will lose power, but STILL chose to risk their power, careers, and lives to reject Trump personally.

Trump needed total obedience to push election restrictions, and instead his own party turned the machinery into a clown car with paperwork.

And speaking of clown, Trump is going to HATE this:

6. Stephen Miller gives FREE Ad to Democrats for the Midterms

In front of the emptiness of Trump’s Great American State Fair on Fox News, Miller accidentally made the Democratic closing argument for them. He warned that if Democrats take power, they could add Supreme Court seats, add two Democratic states, and get rid of ICE.

That is supposed to scare voters. Instead, it tells everyone exactly what is at stake.

Trump’s whole project depends on minority rule, captured courts, and immigration terror. Miller just put the nightmare on television and called it a warning.

Good. Run that ad everywhere.

But having his #1 guy tell the entire country to vote for Democrats was just the beginning of his disastrous 36 hours. It got much, much worse for him, and better for America!

Now the #5 is a BRILLIANT move by Thomas Massie to hit back at Trump for covering up the Epstein Files.

As of this writing, it hasn’t even been covered by the media yet.

5. Thomas Massie WINS House Vote to EXPOSE the Names of Sexual Predators like Donald

In a unanimous vote today at 5:15PM, Massie just won a historic fight that will expose an entire ring of sexual predators in Washington, and could soon lead to Trump’s demise:

Read more

If you support Massie’s motion 100% and support us getting you huge breaking news like this before it even appears in mainstream media, subscribe or upgrade now! 💪

Subscribe now

P.S. THANK YOU to those who upgrade as an annual subscriber! Your generosity makes our work possible. 💪

Subscribe now

Now Mike Johnson only has TWO DAYS to act!

According to Craig Caplan, the Capitol Hill Producer at C-Span:

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) on the House floor tonight just gave notice of his intent to offer a privileged resolution "directing the Ethics Committee to preserve and publicly release records relating to monetary settlements involving acts of sexual harassment."

House has two days to act on his resolution, which would require the Ethics Committee to release all of the names of House members who settled sexual misconduct claims & the total dollar amount of each settlement.

Who else wants this passed ASAP? Get their names out in public, then read the names of the Epstein clients on the House floor!

C’mon, Massie, you’ve got nothing left to lose!!

– Ben & Nathan

Share

Subscribe now

Give a gift subscription

Why did SCOTUS both help and hurt Trump today?

The secret the media refuses to report:

Today was historic – a day for sane people to be devastated at what the Supreme Court just did to our country on one hand, and happy about what they did to him personally on the other.

So why the seemingly contradictory decisions, both helping him and hurting him?

The easy narrative is that “Trump owns SCOTUS” was proven false by three decisions from today, as we dive into below.

The truth reveals an enemy the media doesn’t like to talk about. SCOTUS doesn’t just serve Trump. SCOTUS serves someone with even more nefarious means.

And this deeper, darker motive of SCOTUS is essential for The Democratic Voice community to know.

First, let’s evaluate three key cases that give SCOTUS’ scheme away, and then we’ll dive into what’s really going on.

1. Expansion of Presidential power over agencies

Their biggest handover of power to Trump came in a 6-3 ruling that overturned nearly a century of Supreme Court precedent and greatly expanded presidential authority over independent federal agencies.

The case involved former Federal Trade Commission Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, whom Trump fired despite a federal law requiring presidents to show cause before removing FTC commissioners.

The Supreme Court ruled that those protections unconstitutionally restricted presidential authority, overturning the landmark 1935 decision Humphrey’s Executor v. United States.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said presidents must be able to control executive officials carrying out executive power.

“Subordinates who exercise the president’s power are subject to removal by him,” Roberts wrote. “Then, and only then, can they remain accountable to the president, and the president to the people.”

It’s hard to overstate how huge this ruling is.

The decision could reshape how more than a dozen independent agencies operate, including agencies responsible for consumer protection, communications, transportation safety, and nuclear regulation.

It gives Trump more power to rule the executive branch like a dictator.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor warned in a dissent read from the bench that the decision would “fundamentally recalibrate the balance of power in the nation” and could produce “only chaos.”

Former Federal Election Commission Chairman Trevor Potter called the decision “a direct attack on the constitutional authority of Congress” and warned it weakens the nation’s system of checks and balances.

This decision seems to consolidate power for Trump, as if they’re doing him a personal favor. Right?

Wrong. SCOTUS just proved they have another agenda in their next move:

2. Federal Reserve ruling blocks Trump

Trump lost his immediate attempt to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook.

The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that Trump cannot remove Cook without first giving her notice of the mortgage fraud allegations, an opportunity to respond, and appropriate due process.

Chief Justice Roberts wrote that Cook “was entitled to some explanation of the evidence at issue, some avenue for a response, and a deadline by which a response would be due.”

Cook will remain on the Federal Reserve Board while lower courts determine whether Trump’s allegations justify removing her.

This appears to contradict their decision in the “Slaughter” case above. First they ruled he has absolute power to fire people, then they ruled he doesn’t.

So what makes this case different?

The justices’ ruling says it all: They emphasized that the broader constitutional question remains unresolved and will likely return to the Supreme Court later.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh warned that uncertainty surrounding the Federal Reserve’s independence could “spark ... turmoil in the US and world economies.”

He said allowing immediate removal without resolving the constitutional issues could “jeopardize the efficacy of U.S. monetary policy.”

Then came the final blow to Trump:

3. Trump loses final appeal in E. Jean Carroll case

The Supreme Court also refused to hear Trump’s appeal of the civil judgment won by writer E. Jean Carroll.

Without comment, the justices left intact the jury’s finding that Trump sexually abused Carroll and later defamed her after publicly denying her allegations.

Because the court declined review, Carroll will now receive the multi-million-dollar judgment that Trump deposited into a court-controlled account following the verdict in 2023.

Trump continued denying Carroll’s allegations and argued on social media that the case represented political “Weaponization” and “Lawfare.”

The Supreme Court’s decision effectively ends Trump’s challenge to that judgment.

So why would they hand Trump so much power in the first case, handcuff him in the second case, and humiliate him in the third case?

The answer is that they don’t serve Trump. They serve something much bigger – and until we understand it, we can’t defeat it.

The TRUTH

The truth is not, “the Supreme Court is owned by Donald Trump.”

The truth is that they keep ruling for consolidation of power that will help the insanely rich, and only the insanely rich.

The justices aren't simply advancing Trump's agenda. They're advancing a project that began decades before he entered politics – The Federalist Society.

The Federalist Society spent forty years cultivating judges committed to centralizing power, weakening the administrative state.

Why?

Money.

The Federalist Society presents itself as conservative, and being concerned with what our founders wanted. Nothing could be further from the truth.

What they care about is concentrating power, to serve their billionaire donors.

Concentrating power at the top means weakening power at the bottom. And in this case, the bottom is 99% of the population. They feel they control the kind of people who become president – those who largely serve the needs of billionaires and their ilk, due to the massive campaign donations they can afford.

And the #1 payback for that campaign funding is a wink and a nod to select judges from the Federalist Society.

Trump didn’t create that vision. He inherited it. Like a good little puppy, he only picked judges hand picked by The Federalist Society.

He supplied the appointments. They supplied the blueprint.

Even if they don’t have a president who will do their bidding, they know it is easier to pressure one person in the White House than it is to pressure all of Congress.

It’s about consolidating control over protecting their money, and giving them even more money through cuts to their taxes.

That is why they gave the president sweeping power over agencies. Because when those agencies commit the egregious crime of actually doing their job – like an Education secretary advocating for education, an EPA advocating for the environment, etc – which will cost the government money and therefore give the rich more to pay for, the president must have full control to shut it down.

And that’s exactly what they’re doing.

The One Agency SCOTUS Will Protect

You’ll note that the exception is protecting the Federal Reserve.

Why? Because the Fed is too important to let the President operate. The Fed assures the rich get wildly richer.

SCOTUS knows Trump is out of his mind. They’re willing to let him kill all of government’s functions, but NOT the independent Federal Reserve.

They are so disinterested in Trump personally that they are just fine with Trump needing to pay one of his accusers millions of dollars. They don’t want to touch that case with a ten-foot pole. That’s why they didn’t even bother giving him a written ruling – they simply dismissed his request, and him.

SCOTUS isn’t ruled by Trump. They’re ruled by the billionaires funding The Federalist Society.

Next Steps

Keep this in mind, as Tuesday’s rulings come in: including rulings on Trump's birthright citizenship executive order, state bans on transgender athletes in girls' sports, and campaign finance limits.

But it’s not just about curiosity. For The Democratic Voice, it’s about ACTION.

1. Organize to crush Trump in November by getting rid of his rubber-stamp Congress.

2. Get ready to join our upcoming boycott of the companies owned by major donors to The Federalist Society.

3. And for 2028, help us pressure candidates who pledge to BAN all judicial nominees that come from The Federalist Society.

Our effort to do that starts NOW.

Join the movement by subscribing at the level you can afford, which not only gets you all the info you need, but helps us launch this community’s efforts to FIGHT.
➡️ If only 5% of our Free Subscribers become Paid Subscribers, we will have the resources we need to make it happen. ⬇️

Subscribe now

THANK YOU for being part of this movement. It’s a long road, but having you with us gives us the strength to fight!

PS. If you are already a full paid subscriber, THANK YOU! If you know someone who wants to join the fight, please consider gifting them a subscription.

Give a gift subscription

BRUTAL!! 💪

I know I should be resting right now after a wild week of bringing you news of Trump fails, but I wanted you start your week off with this EPIC inspiring clip of Biden crushing Trump over everything from Iran to the East Wing, ASAP. Enjoy!

P.S. If you appreciate us working 24/7 to get you breaking good news, analysis of Trump fails, and boycott info that punishes Trump, please UPGRADE to become a full supporter here, to say thanks… it’s less $7/month for annual supporters! You’ll get exclusive access to DMs with Nathan and me, and more big perks on the way… we’re grateful to you! – Ben

Support Us Now To Say Thanks

Watch Biden CRUSH “Loser” Trump, and read the transcript of his full speech below.

THIS is how a REAL president stands up to the TRUE enemy of the people!

Share

If you can afford to chip in less than $7/month as an annual supporter to support the effort to PUNISH him, please upgrade to become an annual subscriber now! I’d love to start our week off knowing I have your support!

Subscribe now

Full transcript is below!

— Ben

Give a gift subscription

FULL TRANSCRIPT

The middle class built this country and labor built the middle class.

Look, it’s not just his deliberate distortion and destruction of NATO, and it’s choosing Putin as an American, over American allies. Or the fact that he’s the many star standing in the eyes of the world, more than any president in history has. It’s not just his vanity projects, tearing down the east wing of the White House, making room for his ballroom, his name on a Kennedy Center, building an arch in his own honor, and hiring his own pool guy to fix the reflecting pool.

Whoa, what a loser.

Look, folks, folks, it’s not just that.

Reflecting pool reflects something even worse than the narcissism and incompetence at the core of this administration.

It’s the corruption, the corruption, the brazen, blatant corruption.

Everyone on scale never seen before in American history in any administration.

Trump has made billions of dollars as he turned to the White House.

It’s simply stunning to me.

He has no shame.

And frankly, it’s embarrassing for the country. But Trump, Trump can care less.

Making money off the presidency is one of the reasons he wants to be president.

But you know what?

It’s not even the corruption and the money that makes me the most angry.

What makes me angry is Trump wants to give taxpayers money, your money, to the January 6th insurrectionist.

All that he wants to do, people who stormed the Capitol, attacked the police, and tried to execute his own vice president.

My God, these people don’t deserve to be compensated. They deserve to be put in jail for a long, long, long time.

There’s young people in this room. I know you’re trying to make sense of all this bubbling and unfolding around you. I get it. I really do.

We have faced dark, difficult times before.

If there’s one thing I know about the American people, they never give up and we can’t give up now.

This is not about – there’s no quitting this country.

There’s no quitting you.

Folks, your governor here in Maryland is the real deal.

Oh, he is.

We should live.

By the lessons his grandparents taught him.

They said, “Have faith, not fear. Have faith, not fear.” Folks, this is just another way of saying what my dad used to tell me as a kid growing up when something bad happened. He said, “Joey, look at me. Look at me, Joey. Get up, pal. Get up, Joey. Get up.”

So to all you who love our country, my message to you is not as straightforward and simple. It’s time to get up, damn it. Get up.

Get up now and continue this fight.

My fellow Democrats, in this 250th year of our founding, let’s get back up. Let’s be the country we know we can be. Fair, equal, honest, decent.

A country where we give hate and no safe harbor.

A land where we treat everyone with dignity and respect.

A nation that’s a beacon, a shining beacon to the rest of the world as we’ve been.

Folks, I guarantee we can do this, and we will.

We just need to remember who in the hell we are. We’re the United States of America.

There’s nothing. There’s really nothing, nothing beyond our capacity if we act together. So let’s get up and fight back, God. Darn it.

Thank you all. God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America. And may God protect our troops.

We can do this.

We can do this. We must do it.

I love you. Thank you. Thank you.

Subscribe now

I know I should be taking time off for the weekend, but I wanted to get this great news to you… ASAP. Enjoy! – Ben

THIS is how everyone bullied by Trump in court should get their revenge.

It’s a bit strange for an American to be celebrating the British destroying our own president, but the BBC’s legal jiu jitsu here is so brutally beautiful, I am happy to make an exception.

Trump is already regretting suing the BBC for $10 billion over their “defamation” of him in their documentary. Not only is the BBC refusing to lay down like the lapdogs did at ABC, but the way they’re fighting back may just land him in prison.

Subscribe now

The BBC’s Power Move

Trump thought he could bully them into silence — the same playbook he ran against ABC, CNN, and every media company that ever dared to cover him honestly.

But the BBC had other plans: DISCOVERY.

Discovery, for those who don’t know, is where lawsuits get fun. Because when you sue someone, they get to ask for things too — all the evidence you might not like exposed.

And what the BBC’s lawyers have formally requested as part of that discovery, is:

1. Every phone record Donald Trump had from November 3, 2020 through January 20, 2021.

2. His private schedules. His calendars. His diaries.

3. A complete list of every single person he talked to about the January 6 rally. The planning. The speech. What was said after the Capitol was stormed.

All of it. And now Trump is the one on defense.

That evidence alone would make any judge laugh Trump out of court, and likely force Trump to compensate the BBC for their legal fees. His lawyers are melting down.

But it gets even better.

Using His Cult Against Him

In their court filings, the BBC didn’t just defend themselves in their own words. They went on offense — citing the fact that over 100 people criminally charged for January 6 told federal courts they were following Trump’s orders.

That’s not the BBC saying that. Not Democrats. Not the queer community, not “communists” in New York. His own supporters. In sworn statements. To judges.

This gives Donald a few choices: either he tells his cult they’re lying, thus destroying his base, or he agrees with the 100 defendants, and he loses the suit.

His lawsuit is all but dead in the water. And why?

The BBC has Guts the American Media Can Learn From

Here’s the thing nobody talks about enough.

Trump’s whole playbook is built on the assumption that people will fold. ABC folded. They paid $15 million and apologized on air. Disney apparently decided that was worth it.

The BBC is publicly funded. They don’t have nervous shareholders. They don’t have a CEO calculating reputational risk at the next earnings call. They have lawyers. They have time. They have all of Britain behind them. They have 45,000 documents already filed… and they are just getting started.

This is how you fight a bully:

You don’t apologize. You don’t settle. You show up in court, you file your paperwork, and you say: wonderful, now tell us everything you did on January 6.

Helping Send Trump to Prison

Here’s the best part. When this evidence gets submitted, it is public record. Then, guess who can use it? CRIMINAL PROSECUTORS.

After Trump’s out of the White House, prosecutors can simply lift that data, and bring it into court, to try Trump for inciting an insurrection.

He can and WILL have this used against him in a court of law.

This is the energy. This is the template. Every media company Trump has ever threatened, sued, or tried to silence should be watching this case with a notepad.

That includes US at The Democratic Voice.

Every day, MAGAs try to intimidate us into silence, leaving us hundreds of vile comments and messages, often wishing us harm.

But like the BBC, we REFUSE to be intimidated. We refuse to stop. In fact, we are now inspired to EXPAND.

If you can afford to chip in less than $7/month as an annual supporter to support the effort to PUNISH him, please upgrade to become an annual subscriber now! We’d love to start our week off with your support!

Subscribe now

THANK YOU for celebrating with us, and your support! You’re my kind of people. 👏

— Ben

Give a gift subscription

WOW. Together, this community just hit a huge number.

It’s been a rough week for America, so we wanted to lift your spirits with some great news: The anti-Trump, pro-democracy movement you’re a part of is now officially one of the fastest-growing movements in America.

5 weeks ago, we started The Democratic Voice with zero subscribers. But today, THIS just happened:

🤯 🤯 🤯

How?

We (Ben & Nathan) happily put in 12-hour days, building this community with you – people who were

• Excited about Trump’s name being taken off the Kennedy Center

• Boycotting CBS for their treatment of Stephen Colbert & Scott Pelley

• Celebrating the Obamas’ new Presidential Center

• Grateful to the people fighting to stop Trump

The result?

Not only are we one of the top growing political Substacks, but we’ve had 355 MILLION views across all platforms since we started. That’s the population of the entire country. And then some!

But this is not just posting to blow off steam.

We have a strategy: The more Americans who see our posts exposing Trump, boycotting his team, and organizing actions, the more Americas who will REJECT HIM FOR GOOD.

Question: What would you like to see more of from us?
More boycotts? Analysis? Breaking news? News summaries?

In any case, thank you for celebrating this. We are truly thrilled.

Hopefully you found this as a moment to smile with us. 😊

P.S. An EXTRA special thanks to our paid subscribers. Nathan and I are stretched thin, but soon we hope to be able to sustain this work through your generosity.

Whether the $8/month (or less) you pay is a lot or a little from you, your support means THE WORLD to us!

Subscribe now

Note: If you support us taking down Trump when the corporate media fails to do so, please consider joining as an annual supporting member. It allows us to keep critical news and boycotts FREE for those who cannot afford it, in a crucial time where we need everyone to see it. Thank you. 💪

Become a Full Supporter NOW

No matter your subscription level, we thank you for doing your part to get our country back.

– Ben & Nathan

This is what it looks like when even his own side has had ENOUGH of his BS! 👇

Video embed by the amazing folks at – Subscribe to them too!

If Love to See Trump Humiliated, Join Our Community Below to Help Us Keep Bringing You Moments Like This!

Please join as an annual paid member if you can — YOU are what makes our work possible. 👇 Our goal is to get 7 paid members by midnight!

Subscribe now

If you already subscribe, thank you! Will you upgrade to help us keep spreading Trump’s humiliating moments like these to as many people as possible? 🙏

Time to celebrate the worst 36 hours of Trump’s presidency… and one of them just happened a few minutes ago!

We ranked them in reverse order, from simply brutal to most DEVASTATING for Donald. Pretty sure he will NEVER recover from #1. Enjoy!

Here we go! 👇

NOTE: This post is a gift to our paid-subscriber community! YOU support our tireless work of getting America videos and articles with breaking news, analysis, and actions to fight back.

If you’d like to become a full supporter to read this post in full, and support the work we do, you can do so here. THANK YOU – you’re my kind of people! 🙏

Become a paid supporter now

7. BREAKING: Trump loses NJ sanctuary city lawsuit in humiliating court defeat

Minutes ago, the Trump administration suffered yet another courtroom loss after U.S. District Judge Evelyn Padin dismissed the Justice Department’s lawsuit against four New Jersey cities over their sanctuary policies. Trump whined that the cities were “illegally limiting cooperation” with him. But Padin wasn’t having it.

Padin flatly REJECTED those arguments, marking the latest in a growing series of defeats as Trump’s Justice Department tries to force Democratic-led jurisdictions to change their immigration policies.

The ruling leaves the cities’ policies in place and further weakens one of Trump’s signature immigration strategies.

Mayors around New Jersey rejoiced. Jersey City Mayor James Solomon said the city will “continue to do everything within our power to protect our neighbors and push back against the Trump Administration’s abusive and cruel federal overreach.”

And this was just the latest in Trump’s horrific week. And it’s only Wednesday!

6. ICE blocked from making courthouse arrests across the country

One of the most emotional images across the country — ICE tearing families apart in courthouses as they apply for asylum – is now a thing of the PAST.

U.S. District Judge P. Casey Pitts ruled that the administration violated federal law when it abruptly expanded courthouse arrests after Trump returned to office.

Pitts wrote that the policy “exceeds DHS’s statutory authority” and found that immigration advocates had shown they were likely to succeed on the merits of their case.

The judge also noted that courthouse arrests discourage people from participating in the justice system, making victims and witnesses afraid to appear in court.

Damn right!

THIS is the kind of victory any decent human being in this country needed to see right now.

But what we need to see just as much is a good old-fashioned Trump MELT DOWN.

What he did today in #5 below will go down in history as one of the worst self owns of all time. He blew up at Senator Cassidy and others in his party, as his Republicans scrambled to contain him. It may be the final blow for Senators who have stood by him:

Read more

If you needed a reason to smile today, THIS is it.

Share

Ben here from The Democratic Voice. Just wanted to pause the videos I was making and get this FANTASTIC news to you ASAP:

U.S. District Judge Denise Casper just PERMANENTLY blocked the core of Trump’s election executive order.

Even better, she banned his attempt to force Americans to show documentary proof of citizenship in order to register to vote.

And to top it off, this is no longer a weak “temporary pause.” It is a permanent ban.

Judge Casper delivered a simple reminder that should never have been necessary in the first place, saying, “The Constitution does not grant the President any specific powers over elections.”

The Constitution WON. Trump LOST. This is one of the biggest legal defeats of his presidency. The fact that it came from the type of person he fears most – a strong Black woman – will make this burn all the better:

But make no mistake about what was at stake here…

Just how horrible this executive order was

Here are all the nefarious things Trump was trying to do with this order:

• Required documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote federally, such as a passport, birth certificate, or similar records, making voter registration harder for millions of eligible Americans who do not readily possess those documents.

• Allowed the federal government to override state election procedures despite the Constitution giving election authority primarily to states and Congress.

• Blocked the counting of many mail ballots that arrived after Election Day even when they were mailed on time and legally cast under state law.

• Threatened states with the loss of federal funding if they refused to comply with the administration’s election demands.

It would have disproportionately affected low income voters, new citizens, and married women with name changes – all people more likely to vote Democrat.

The Brennan Center for Justice warned that Trump was attempting to “illegally overhaul and take control of major parts of the nation’s election systems.”

But Judge Casper shut it all DOWN. She did not mince words:

Brutal Defeat for Trump, Celebration for Voters

Judge Casper ruled what EVERY subscriber of The Democratic Voice already knew: America does not allow presidents to rewrite election laws with the stroke of a pen.

In her 44-page beat down, she said Trump’s order was "contrary to the will of Congress,” and completely "untethered from precedent and unsupported by even a maximalist view of 'the executive Power' under our Constitution."

New York Attorney General Letitia James celebrated the ruling, saying, “Generations of Americans fought tirelessly for the right to vote, and we honor their legacy by protecting that right against anyone who tries to undermine it.”

Today, the Constitution won.

Today, voting rights won.

Today, a federal judge reminded Donald Trump that presidents do not get to seize control of American elections because they feel like it.

Thank you, Judge Denise Casper!

And THANK YOU, dear reader, for celebrating this moment with us!

If you are able to, please support our team. YOU make posts like this possible.

Become a paid supporter now

No matter how you subscribe, thanks for being part of The Democratic Voice community. You’re my kind of people!

– Ben

Donald Trump tries to put his name on everything. Towers. Steaks. Golf courses. So when a judge made him take it off the Kennedy Center he couldn’t handle the embarrassment. He had to hide his shame with a tarp.

Rep. Joyce Beatty, the woman who sued to get Trump’s name removed from the Kennedy Center, isn’t having it. Her lawyers called the tarp exactly what it is, an “act of petty defiance.”

Now Rep. Beatty and her lawyers decided to go back to court and call for the judge to force the tarp to come down.

This is just too good. There are few things more fun to look forward to than watching a powerful black woman defeat Trump… AGAIN.

Make sure everyone knows Trump’s tarp is about to come down 👇

Share

Trump lost to Beatty once. He’s going to lose to her again. He’s embarrassed, but she’s not going to let him hide his shame forever no matter how big the tarp is.

We know the mainstream media doesn’t do enough to highlight Trump’s losses. That’s why we go looking for moments like this one.

Bringing these moments straight to our readers is what’s made us #38 on Substack’s new bestseller list, but we couldn’t get there without our paid supporters.

Would you upgrade right now to help us keep spreading Trump’s losses across the internet? It means the world to us to have your support and it would help us move up the new bestseller charts! Just 7 paid upgrades in the next 24 hours is all we need to push into the top 30. 👇

Become a paid supporter now

To everyone who has upgraded, thank you. Your support helps make it possible for us to do this work while keeping the majority of our content free for our subscribers who are struggling in Trump’s economy.

The boycott of all the brands owned by CBS’s parent company has started moving in a big way. Below is how YOU can help make it reach even more people! Ready? 👇

We need your help to keep up the heat on CBS so they pay for firing Scott Pelley, a 37 year veteran journalist of the network. Pelley said he was fired because he pushed back against the new leadership who was trying to make him include falsehoods and political bias in his journalism, which he refused to do.

Bari Weiss then told CBS staff the firing was about a breakdown in trust. Pelley says that is a lie.

In response to CBS firing Pelley and Weiss lying about it, we called for a boycott that has gotten real traction!

We put up a post on Facebook calling for a boycott of Skydance, the owner of CBS, and all the biggest brands they own including Showtime, Nickelodeon, BET, MTV, CMT, Comedy Central, Paramount, Paramount Pictures, Paramount+, CBS, CBS News, Smithsonian Channel, and TV Land.

That is a massive amount of subscription revenue and ad dollars riding on nobody connecting the dots. We made sure people connected the dots.

The post we ran exposing exactly who to punish for silencing Pelley went viral.

We got 8.5 MILLION views so far on our work exposing who we need to boycott in order to make CBS pay for silencing Pelley 👇

Next step: help put this boycott brand list in front of as many people as possible

Will YOU help us put this in front of even more people to make CBS’ parent company lose even more money?

We need your help to turn this into a paid ad campaign that puts the full list of Skydance brands in front of as many people as possible, so this boycott has real teeth.

Here’s how you can help:

For every new paying supporter we get from this Substack post, we’ll put 100% of the first month’s revenue we get into ads spreading this boycott list as widely as possible!

Become a paid supporter now!

If you are already a paying supporter, give a friend a gift Subscription and we’ll count your gift towards our ad spend!

Give a gift subscription

Paid amplification works, but not without your help.

With your support, we can fund ads putting this boycott list directly in front of as many people as possible on Facebook and Instagram. Let’s make CBS and their parent company pay for the silencing of journalists who refuse to push Trump’s agenda 💪

Hi everyone, Nathan here. It’s been a hell of a day for Trump, so let’s get right to it.

The stories I’m covering today are:

• A Bush-appointed judge just called out Trump’s DOJ in a brutal ruling for Trump.

• Trump-appointed Judge hands DOJ Trump’s ninth defeat in a row on a critical election issue.

• Tucker Carlson just said he’s done with the GOP (with receipts).

• DOJ quietly moved to roll back disabled Americans’ right to live at home.

• The US asked the world to stop saying “climate change.” France said no.

• A 67-year-old Olympian touched some paint. He was arrested.

• Ted Lieu just called out Jeanine Pirro, Trump’s attorney for the District of Columbia.

• Hegseth axed a flu shot mandate. Now 222 recruits are sick.

• Another federal judge blocked Trump’s voter citizenship database.

A Judge Blocks Trump’s DOJ. The Ruling Is Brutal.

In January, ICE launched “Operation Metro Surge,” an immigration crackdown across the Twin Cities. By the time it was over, Trump’s gestapo had killed two American citizens, Alex Pretti and Renee Good, and shot a third person.

Minnesota’s leaders didn’t stay quiet. Attorney General Keith Ellison sued to block the operation. Governor Tim Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her, and county officials all spoke out.

Eight days later, the DOJ’s response arrived. A grand jury subpoena aimed at nearly the entire political leadership of the state.

This week, a federal judge responded and Trump is not happy about it.

Read more

Thousands packed Chicago’s South Side today to celebrate Barack Obama’s legacy, while Donald Trump was pouting at home on Truth Social, trying to make himself feel better about the fact that he was helpless to stop this glorious event.

Here are the 5 reasons the grand opening was truly humiliating for Donald Trump

1. Trump Wasn’t Invited to the Obama Presidential Center Opening

This was not a scheduling conflict. This was not Trump deciding not to come. Trump was not invited. The Chicago Sun-Times confirmed it. NPR confirmed it. Every other living president and first lady were there. Trump and Melania were the only ones left out, and it was a deliberate decision. After years of birtherism, attacks, and relentless attempts to erase Obama’s legacy, the Obamas made a simple choice: you are not part of this.

2. Obama Drew the A-List Trump Could Never Get

Just days ago, Trump hosted a UFC fight at the White House and was snubbed by many major celebrities he invited, including Adam Sandler, Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, Tom Brady, and others. Today in Chicago, Obama drew Stevie Wonder, Bruce Springsteen, Bono and The Edge, Jennifer Hudson, John Legend, Christina Aguilera, Eddie Vedder, The Roots, Common, and Marc Anthony. Grammy winners. Oscar winners. Rock and Roll Hall of Famers. The contrast is not subtle. It is a verdict.

3. The Tan Suit Troll Was in Full Force

In 2014, Fox News spent days losing their minds because Barack Obama wore a tan suit to a press conference. THAT was the scandal. No criminal investigation. No corruption charges. No coverup. No hocking bibles. No insider trading. No selling of pardons. No $400 Billion illegal wars. Times have changed and multiple guests showed up to the opening ceremony in tan suits to highlight how wonderful it was when the biggest controversy of the day was Obama’s wardrobe. The guests included Stephen Colbert, state Rep. La Shawn Ford, U.S. Rep. Bill Foster, Obama Foundation board chairman Marty Nesbitt, NBA legend Isiah Thomas, and David Letterman.

4. The Ceremony Was on John Lewis Plaza

The stage where Obama spoke, where Stevie Wonder performed, where thousands cheered, is named John Lewis Plaza. John Lewis, the civil rights icon Trump publicly mocked, calling his district “in horrible shape” and “falling apart.” His name was on the stage. Trump’s name was nowhere near it.

5. The Obama Presidential Center Opens to the Public on Juneteenth

It opens the day of the federal holiday celebrating the emancipation of enslaved African Americans in Texas. A holiday Trump snubbed last year saying we have, “too many non-working holidays.” Obama chose this date deliberately. The most powerful statement of the day was not made in a speech. It was made on a calendar.

Notice how good that felt? Watching Trump squirm while he had no control over any of it? That’s the feeling we’re in the business of delivering. If you want to see moments like these every time it happens, become a paid subscriber to help us continue delivering these wonderful moments to you in real time. 👇

Subscribe now

To everyone who has upgraded, thank you. Your support helps make it possible for us to do this work while keeping the majority of our content free for our subscribers who are struggling in Trump’s economy.

It created a huge uproar the moment it happened. On June 14th, a screenshot was posted on Daniel Cormier’s verified X account showing what appeared to be Eric Trump asking Daniel whether any of the White House UFC fights were rigged. Fifteen minutes later, the post was gone. Eric Trump called it AI-generated. Cormier said he was hacked. The story was supposed to be over.

It isn’t.

This isn’t the first time evidence has surfaced of the Trumps potentially profiting off shady insider information.

While Donald Trump was publicly announcing Iran deescalation talks this spring, a brokerage account in his name was buying millions in oil, defense stocks and gold. Fortune documented it. The Office of Government Ethics confirmed the trades.

With this sort of track record, nobody should be taking Eric Trump and Daniel Cormier at their word, but it gets even worse.

What most people following the Cormier story do not know is that the FBI was already investigating UFC fight fixing before Eric Trump ever allegedly slid into anyone’s DMs.

The most active case centers on a featherweight bout between Isaac Dulgarian and Yadier del Valle at a UFC Fight Night event in Las Vegas in 2025. Dulgarian entered the fight as a heavy betting favorite. He lost by first-round submission. In the hours before the fight, multiple sportsbooks flagged a surge of large bets placed on del Valle. Caesars Sportsbook later refunded all bets placed on Dulgarian. The UFC cut Dulgarian from the promotion almost immediately after the fight and started working with the FBI on an investigation.

That case did not emerge in a vacuum. It is the second public federal investigation into suspicious betting activity around the UFC. The first began with a Darrick Minner fight, which led to the suspension of coach James Krause in 2023.

The FBI’s interest in UFC fight fixing is not a theory. It is an active, documented, multi-case federal investigation.

Now hold that fact alongside what Daniel Cormier posted on June 14th. The conversation, if real, was not just inappropriate. It was potentially criminal. It implicated insider knowledge, possible match manipulation, and a member of the President’s family.

Many on Twitter clearly do not believe the explanation provided by Cormier, nor the one provided by Eric Trump:

Given the history of potential fight rigging within the UFC, and concerns about the Trump family using insider information as a revenue stream, it’s easy to see why there would still be suspicion.

We can’t take Eric Trump nor Daniel Cormier at their word. We need independent verification of their claims.

The only evidence that could definitively settle this is X’s own server data, the post record, the account activity logs, the DM history at the database level. That data exists. It would show whether those messages were ever sent, whether that post was ever made, and whether a deletion event occurred. It requires a subpoena or court order to obtain.

Nobody has sought to verify Eric Trump’s and Daniel Cormier’s claims. Members of Congress should.

Members of Congress should demand that Daniel Cormier’s and Eric Trump’s direct messages be audited by the FBI, the same organization that is actively investigating suspicious betting activity inside the very organization Cormier works for.

The question is not whether these screenshots look real or fake. The question is why, with a federal investigation into UFC fight fixing already underway, the allegation that a member of the President’s family was soliciting insider information from a UFC broadcaster has not been treated as potentially relevant evidence.

The reasons Members of Congress should push for verification are clear…

A president buying defense stocks while announcing the war news that moves their price. A federal investigation into rigged UFC fights. A screenshot that appeared on a UFC broadcaster’s account alleging Eric Trump asked whether fights were fixed, which then vanished. A broadcaster who went from “I refuse to stay silent” to “it was a hack” in under 20 minutes.

This pattern does not require a leap of faith. It requires an investigation.

Stories like this one are why The Democratic Voice is currently ranked the 39th New Bestseller on Substack after just one month since we launch and we’re just getting started. If you appreciate our work to uncover the truth, will you upgrade today and help us climb our way into the top 30 New Bestselling Susbtacks? We’re very close. We just need 6 new paid members by midnight to move the needle. 👇

Become a Paying Supporter Now

P.S. Thank you to all who have upgraded to paid! Your support is what makes it possible for us to keep doing this important work while keeping the majority of our content free for those who are struggling in Trump’s economy.

The case for Michelle Obama to SUE the UFC and Trump is heating up. Below is a way YOU can help make it happen! Ready? 👇

It was a historically horrific moment heard around the world: At the UFC fight on the White House lawn, heavyweight Josh Hokit grabbed the microphone after winning his bout and, in front of millions of Paramount+ viewers, shouted: “Michelle Obama is a man. Am I right, America?”

Joe Rogan stepped back. Trump was reportedly caught smiling. The broadcast moved on. Nobody said a word to condemn the disgusting defamation.

This is what they do when they think there are no consequences.

But here’s what they don’t want too many people to know… and why we’re organizing a way to support Michelle fighting back:

The Macrons proved the legal case

The first lady of France, Brigitte Macron, heard the same lie told about her, and she fought back.

In France, she took ten people to criminal court and got every single one of them convicted. In America, she hired the law firm that got $787.5 million out of Fox News to go after Candace Owens for spreading the same lie. Right now that lawsuit is threatening to destroy Owens’ entire media empire.

Michelle Obama has the exact same case. The blueprint already exists.

And the social media campaign we started is going viral! YOU can help us get her to see it:

We got 6.6 MILLION views so far on our work supporting Michelle SUING 👇

Next step: Join us to get Michelle herself to see our call to SUE!

Here’s our next big step: A campaign to get Michelle to personally hear our call of support for her to sue, by getting the message to where she lives – Washington DC’s Kalorama neighborhood.

Here’s how you can help:

For every new paying supporter we get from this post, we’ll put 100% of the first month’s revenue we get into an ad aimed at getting Michelle Obama herself to see it!

Become a Paying Supporter Now

Neighborhood-targeted ads WORK.

If we get enough support, The Democratic Voice community will target only where Michelle lives on Facebook and Instagram, so that EVERYONE in her neighborhood – her friends, family, and Michelle herself – hears our call that she has the support and legal precedent to SUE.

Her case is strong. The message is clear. NOW, with you, we want to support her in taking the next step. Just join us as a paying supporter – if you can, join us with an annual subscription to help us keep our work going!

Will you help us get this message to Michelle Obama?

Become a Paying Supporter Now

Our birthday gift to Donald: The Top 7 HUGE humiliations Trump suffered for the week of his 80th birthday. Let’s count down to the very worst hit… He will NEVER recover from #1! Enjoy!

NOTE: This post is a gift to our paid-subscriber community! YOU support our tireless work of getting America ‘round the clock news, commentary, and actions to fight back. 🙏

We’re already the 26th fastest growing political Substack in America, but we need your help to keep it up, and break into the top 20! Will you join tonight and help us get 15 paid members by midnight so we can crack into the top 20? 💪

P.S. If you’re facing financial hardship, we never want that to stand between you and this content. Reach out and we’ll make it work – that’s our Trump birthday gift to you.

Here we go! 👇

Subscribe now

7. Approval Rating Just Hit an ALL TIME Low

As Trump prepared to celebrate his 80th birthday, The Economist’s presidential approval tracker, which has tracked every president since 2009, recorded his net approval rating at negative 25 percentage points, making him the most unpopular president EVER measured by that tracker.

On the specific issue of inflation and prices, his net rating sat at negative 43 percent. Gas prices have climbed to over $4 a gallon as a direct result of his Iran war, and Americans have not forgiven him for it.

In May, Trump was asked about the financial strain on everyday Americans and responded, “I don’t think about Americans’ financial situations.” Voters, it turns out, think about theirs. And they are rejecting him on historic levels.

Americans are finally, nearly universally, WAKING UP. A gift to us all!

But being declared the most unpopular president in modern history was just the beginning of his disastrous week. It got much, much worse for him, and better for America!

Some people wouldn’t guess the #6 Karma Hit on this list, but we think it’s fair to say this one will be the most remembered by Americans for DECADES to come, because it was so brutally humiliating – and that that moment is…

Read more