Live Coverage of Trump’s Trial: Ivanka Trump to Take the Stand in Her Father’s Fraud Case

Conservative supporters of Donald Trump are developing a plan for a potential Republican administration in 2025 that may involve deploying US military forces to quell demonstrations and instances of civil disobedience throughout the country, should Trump win the 2024 election.

On Sunday, The Washington Post released a comprehensive article discussing the progress being made through “Project 2025”, a collaborative initiative among conservative organizations to develop a political and governing plan for a Republican president. While there are no official links to the Trump campaign, the Post reveals that the coalition has affiliations with several individuals within Mr. Trump’s inner circle, notably Jeffrey Clark, a former assistant US attorney general who is currently facing criminal charges in Fulton County, Georgia.

Mr. Clark, believed to be a major contributor to the strategy of the Trump campaign’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election through legal challenges, is currently a fellow at the Center for Renewing America. This organization was involved in the campaign’s efforts. According to the Washington Post, Mr. Clark is now focused on a new “legal” plan to target those who oppose Donald Trump, both well-known figures and others, starting from the first day of a potential second Trump presidency.

Ivanka Trump, the previous daughter of a former president, is scheduled to testify on Wednesday in a legal proceeding that has the potential to greatly impact her family’s business and extensive real estate holdings.

Earlier, Ms Trump was unable to prevent a request for her to appear in court as a witness. She will now give her testimony as the last witness for the prosecution.

Her testimony inside a lower Manhattan courtroom arrives two days after Mr Trump’s, whose verbal outbursts from the witness stand this week unloaded on the case, the presiding judge and the attorney general suing him for fraud.

Alex Woodward has the complete account.

A team of prominent conservative attorneys who objected to former President Donald Trump’s attempts to manipulate the legal system are initiating a new, ongoing venture focused on promoting reverence for the United States Constitution and the principles of justice in the legal field.

In 2018, a group called “Checks and Balances” was formed, consisting of prominent conservative legal figures like J Michael Luttig (a former Fourth Circuit judge who was considered for a Supreme Court nomination during the George W Bush administration) and George Conway (who was chosen by former president Donald Trump to lead the Justice Department civil division before becoming a vocal opponent of the ex-president).

Unlike other groups formed by anti-Trump conservatives during Mr Trump’s presidency, the Checks and Balances group has been a bit of a shoestring operation, until now operating with a small budget raised from its’ members.

A reliable source revealed to The Independent that the board of the group has decided to secure external funding for a significant re-launch and rebranding effort under the name “Society for the Rule of Law.” This new entity has obtained the necessary licenses to function as a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, along with a 501(c)(4) “social welfare” arm that can engage in certain political activities. The society will launch with a “Rule of Law summit” scheduled for Wednesday evening in Washington.

Documents filed in the federal case against Donald Trump for attempting to undermine the election suggest that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team intends to summon individuals who participated in the January 6 riot to give testimony against the ex-president.

According to the official documents, the authorities intend to present “statements, footage, and pictures as evidence of certain individuals who were present at the Ellipse when the defendant incited them to ‘fight’ at the Capitol, and subsequently engaged in aggressive actions against law enforcement and broke into the Capitol.”

According to Alan Feuer from The New York Times, it appears that this also applies to the focus on former Vice President Mike Pence.

Judge Tanya Chuktan of Washington, DC rejected the defense’s plea to extend deadlines for pretrial motions, discovery, and subpoenas until February 9th in Donald Trump’s case of undermining the federal election. However, she did grant a two-week extension.

The updated schedule is as follows:

Requests for court orders must be submitted by November 27, 2023. Any arguments against these requests must be submitted by December 11, 2023, and any responses in favor of the requests must be submitted by December 18, 2023.

Requests for Rule 17(c) subpoenas must be submitted by December 13, 2023. Any objections to these requests must be submitted by December 27, 2023. Responses in favor of these requests must be submitted by January 3, 2024.

Donald Trump made a misleading statement about an episode of 60 Minutes and a new federal law that clarified the electoral process. He used this to support his unfounded belief that former vice-president Mike Pence could have halted or changed the counting of the 2020 election results.

Regarding the Act for Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement in December 2022, as discussed on a recent episode of 60 Minutes, President Trump stated on Truth Social, “The need for a clarification of the law suggests that there was uncertainty, indicating that it was subject to interpretation. There was potential for action to be taken.”

There is disagreement among legal scholars regarding this interpretation.

Josh Marcus reports.

The Special Counsel, Jack Smith, has requested a federal judge in Washington DC to deny Donald Trump’s attempts to remove “provocative” language about January 6 from the criminal charges filed against him. Smith argues that Trump is accountable for the events at the Capitol and therefore, the statements are pertinent.

“In fact, that specific day marked the climax of the accused individual’s criminal schemes to overturn the lawful outcome of the presidential election. The accused individual intentionally incited a sizable and enraged crowd, which he had called upon to gather in Washington, DC and instigated with knowingly false allegations of election misconduct, to storm the Capitol and obstruct the congressional certification process,” stated the special counsel in the document.

Mr. Smith’s office claimed that Mr. Trump filed a motion to remove incendiary accusations from the indictment in order to distance himself from the aggressive assault on the Capitol. They dismissed this as a baseless attempt to avoid being held accountable for the allegations outlined in the indictment.

In October, Mr. Trump requested that the court eliminate references to the events of January 6 from the indictment. He argued that they were not pertinent to his case since he is not being accused of being responsible for those actions.