Texas Weekly Online

Texas-trans-white
Menu
Menu

Author: shailender

White House unleashes on Raskin for clinging to ‘deranged’ Jack Smith ‘lies’ in latest Trump docs flare-up

White House unleashes on Raskin for clinging to ‘deranged’ Jack Smith ‘lies’ in latest Trump docs flare-up

A new clash erupted Wednesday over records from the dismissed Trump classified documents case after Rep. Jamie Raskin accused the Department of Justice of improperly turning over sensitive material to Congress, drawing sharp rebukes from the White House and DOJ. “Democrats with zero credibility like Jamie Raskin are still clinging to deranged Jack Smith and his lies in 2026,” White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told Fox News Digital when asked about Raskin’s claims.  Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter on March 24 to Attorney General Pam Bondi alleging that the DOJ may have inadvertently sent his panel previously undisclosed materials showing Trump retained sensitive classified documents tied to his business interests and may have exposed them to others after his first administration.  Trump has denied any wrongdoing in the classified documents case for years, including when FBI agents searched Mar-a-Lago in 2022 for materials he allegedly retained following his exit from the Oval Office, and when then-special counsel Jack Smith brought an indictment against him in 2023 accusing him of willfully retaining national defense information and obstructing efforts to recover it. JACK SMITH FACES PUBLIC GRILLING ON CAPITOL HILL ABOUT TRUMP PROSECUTIONS Raskin accused the DOJ of violating a court order requiring parts of the classified documents case to remain under seal, including Smith’s final report, which Democrats have long demanded the DOJ hand over to Congress. Raskin’s letter quickly drew pushback from the White House, which called it “pathetic” and pointed out that Smith was forced to drop his case against Trump when he won the 2024 election.  Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee who presided over the case, had tossed it out in July 2024 after finding Smith’s appointment by Attorney General Merrick Garland was unconstitutional. Smith was appealing her decision but withdrew his appeal after Trump’s victory, citing a DOJ policy that discourages prosecuting sitting presidents.  “President Trump did nothing wrong, which is why he easily defeated the Biden DOJ’s unprecedented lawfare campaign against him and then won nearly 80 million votes in a landslide election victory,” Jackson continued in her statement.   A DOJ spokesperson said Raskin was “blinded by hatred” of Trump and that the DOJ has been the “most transparent in history.” The spokesperson said the accusations leveled by Raskin were “baseless” and also refuted Raskin’s claims that the DOJ violated a court order by releasing the material to Raskin’s committee. “Judge Cannon’s protective order was not violated, and none of the documents produced by DOJ violated 6e [grand jury rules] as none of them disclosed matters occurring before a grand jury,” the spokesperson said. “The documents marked ‘6e’ contained redactions of any 6e material. As an attorney and law professor, one must assume Raskin understands this, and thus, reveals this letter is nothing more than a cheap political stunt almost as if taking cues from members of the corrupt Jack Smith prosecution team.” House Judiciary Committee Republicans said in a statement Raskin’s letter was another example of “manufactured outrage from the left.” “Once again, Democrats are more focused on targeting President Trump than working with Republicans to put America first,” a committee spokesperson said.  JACK SMITH DENIES POLITICS PLAYED ANY ROLE IN TRUMP PROSECUTIONS AT HOUSE HEARING In his letter, Raskin alleged that the materials his committee received from DOJ showed that some classified documents in Trump’s possession were so sensitive that only six government officials had access to them and that Trump may have retained materials connected to his business dealings to enrich himself. The Maryland Democrat also cited a memorandum indicating Trump “may have shown” a classified map to individuals while on a private plane. Raskin also accused the DOJ of cherry-picking information about the case to release to Congress while continuing to withhold other information, including the second volume of Smith’s final special counsel report. Cannon had ordered that portion of Smith’s report to remain permanently sealed, though her order is being appealed. DEMOCRATS RAMP UP CALLS TO RELEASE JACK SMITH’S SPECIAL COUNSEL REPORT ON TRUMP CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS CASE The sealed report has become a top focus for Democrats as no final reports produced by DOJ special counsels have been kept from the public before Smith’s. Democrats have claimed the report could shed new light on the case, while Republicans have argued the investigation was politically motivated, that the report is too prejudiced against Trump and that any disclosures at this stage must comply with Cannon’s order. A spokesperson for committee Democrats accused the DOJ of doing “legal gymnastics” to prevent the release of Smith’s report, accusing the department of wanting to “advance his corrupt business interests.” In August 2022, the FBI carried out a controversial search in which they seized 33 boxes from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, which included agents scouring Melania Trump’s wardrobe, Trump has previously said. Prosecutors defended the search in court, saying Trump withheld some boxes when they sought his voluntary compliance, leading them to resort to a search warrant. The president denied any wrongdoing throughout the investigation and prosecution, calling it a “scam” pushed by the Biden administration. Raskin in his letter demanded DOJ turn over a slate of documents related to the case and answer questions about who may have seen the classified materials.

Trump scores ‘massive court victory’ with appellate ruling on ICE detention

Trump scores ‘massive court victory’ with appellate ruling on ICE detention

Illegal immigrants nabbed by ICE do not have to face bond hearings, a step that has become a potential legal impediment to President Donald Trump’s mass deportation agenda, a second federal court found Wednesday. The case involved Mexican national Joaquin Herrera Avila, who was captured in Minneapolis in August and failed to produce legal credentials authorizing his admission to the U.S. He was detained without bond and faced removal proceedings. “Massive court victory against activist judges and for President Trump’s law and order agenda,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said after the St. Louis-based Eighth Circuit reversed a lower court’s ruling and deemed many captured illegal immigrants ineligible for such chances to be released. TOP US COURT HANDS TRUMP A WIN ON DEPORTATIONS AS SCOTUS CHALLENGE LOOMS A district court in Minnesota granted Avila’s petition for habeas corpus, or to challenge the legality of his detention, which the Trump administration challenged. “We reverse and remand [that ruling] for proceedings consistent with this opinion,” the Eighth Circuit ruled Wednesday in a split decision, with George W. Bush-appointed Judge Bobby Shepherd of Arkansas writing for the majority. Shepherd wrote that the district court relied on federal law allowing detention without bond for “an alien who is an applicant for admission [or] seeking admission…” while considering Avila to be no longer seeking formal admission because he had resided and worked in the U.S. for many years. But, Avila did not seek further residency status such as naturalization or asylum, according to the court, which ruled that aspect proved he was not “seeking admission” in a legal sense. “The Eighth Circuit has held that illegal aliens can be detained without bond — following a similar ruling from the Fifth Circuit last month. The law is very clear, but Democrats and activist judges haven’t wanted to enforce it. This administration will,” Bondi said. “Imagine how many illegal alien crimes could have been averted if the left had simply followed the law?” BORDER PATROL CHIEF BOVINO SAYS CHICAGO EFFORTS ‘VINDICATED’ AFTER COURT REVERSES ORDER RESTRICTING OPERATIONS The Eighth Circuit’s ruling concurs with a related ruling from the New Orleans-based Fifth Circuit, which found that noncitizens can be held without bond, according to Bloomberg Law. “If Congress wanted to make clear that ‘seeking admission’ was an independent requirement in the statute, it could have easily done so,” the court added. Right-wing commentator Gunther Eagleman tweeted that the decision was indeed a win against “activist judges.” “The Eighth Circuit just overturned an activist judge and upheld ICE’s mass detention policy in a 2-1 ruling,” he said, as a Trump appointee joined Shepherd in concurrence and another dissented. FEDERAL JUDGE REJECTS MINNESOTA REQUEST TO BLOCK ICE-LED OPERATION METRO SURGE “Key decision: Illegal aliens already inside the U.S. can be detained without bond during removal proceedings. This is a massive victory for the deportation mission. Leftist judges can no longer force DHS to simply release invaders into our communities to commit more crimes. Huge L for open borders,” Eagleman said. In his dissent, Trump-appointed Judge Ralph R. Erickson of Minnesota said that with the exception of a single DUI conviction, Avila had lived as a law-abiding resident for just under 20 years. “On August 29, 2025, he was stopped by deportation officers while driving on Cedar Avenue in Minneapolis, Minnesota. For the past 29 years, Avila would have been entitled to a bond hearing during his removal proceedings,” Erickson wrote, noting that the court’s ruling means that Avila and millions of others are now “subject to mandatory detention” under federal law. “In doing so, the court does not rely on recent congressional action or a change in the regulations governing detention but rather engages in a novel interpretation of ‘alien seeking admission’ that eluded the courts and five previous presidential administrations,” he said. “Because the court’s interpretation is not supported by the plain meaning of ‘seeking,’ the context of the INA, or the history of the IIRIRA (an immigration reform law signed by Bill Clinton), I respectfully dissent.” Fox News Digital did not encounter any immediate negative responses from pundits or politicians within a few minutes of its release.