IHIP News: Trump Hits ROCK BOTTOM As Ghislaine Maxwell THREATENS Him for a Pardon!

All right, Donald Trump's supporters are. like rats. They are jumping ship. They. do not want to go down with it. So, what. is he going to do? He's going to call. all of his AI oligarch friends, and they. are creating fake maga supporters. These. are bots. Pop this up. These are all. generated by AI. These are fake maga. supporters because very few people will. go on record aside from like Laura. Loomer and Benny Johnson saying they. really like this guy. The New York Times. reports in the months leading up to the.

midterm elections, hundreds of. AI-generated pro-Trump influencer. accounts have emerged on social media. Is Trump so desperate that he needs his. tech buddies to make AI supporters. for him? And I think the answer to that. is an overwhelming yes, because this. man, our dementia-ridden president, is. mentioned over 1 million times in the. Epstein files. He started an illegal war. in Iran. He barely knows where he is. His ankles are gigantic. And here to. discuss this with me is criminal defense.

attorney and husband of mine, Josh. Welch. >> Hello. Josh, what do you make of Trump. having no support that he has to make. fake supporters online? >> It sounds eerily familiar uh from 2016. It seems like all of these accounts from. Russia were supporting Donald Trump. They all talked about God and. religion, and but they're all located in. Russia, somehow miraculously rallying. behind Donald Trump. So, it sounds.

familiar. And I think we have to realize. why would he have to do this? And it's. because a lot of his network, the. right-wing media uh ecosystem, they've. all or they're all like, "Why won't he. release the Epstein files? Why is he in. them so many times? And why did. Ghislaine Maxwell get moved from one. prison to a cream puff, you know, country club prison? Well, Politico's. done some reporting on this, and this is. a bombshell. Pop this up. Will Trump pardon Ghislaine Maxwell? Her.

lawyer thinks so. Florida attorney David. Oscar Marcus has made a career of. representing controversial clients. His. next challenge is trying to get. Ghislaine Maxwell out of prison. Why. does he think that he could get. Ghislaine a pardon, Josh? Well, think. about this in this context. So, Ms. Maxwell was convicted in a jury trial. and sentenced to 20 years in prison. Uh the Supreme Court recently uh denied.

the writ of certiorari that they applied. for an appeal. So, she's got no appeals. pending. So, what does she have to offer. President Trump? Why in the world would. the Deputy Attorney General, Todd. Blanche, meet with her personally. without any of his assistants present uh. last summer for 2 days? Uh what incentive do they have to do. that? And who honestly thinks that. Donald Trump, who rationally thinks. Donald Trump, really wants Ms. Maxwell.

to be truthful. and that he's really seeking the truth. here? I mean, and what does Ms. Maxwell. have to offer? Nothing. She's been. convicted. She has no appeal left. What. could she possibly give Donald Trump? Well, the answer to that is she could. possibly exonerate him. She could. possibly come forward and say, "I know nothing about Donald Trump. I. never saw him do this. I never saw him. do that." We know that her lawyer leaked. transcript excerpts from transcripts. from Mr. Blanche's interview of Ms.

Maxwell, which. sort of exonerated Donald Trump. But, that would be the only incentive that. that. uh. Donald Trump would have to want to. give her clemency is that she would. offer him something in return. So, what. could she offer him in return? She could say he had nothing to do with. Jeffrey Epstein or any of these. sex crimes or any of these things that. she's aware of. But then that comes at a price for. Donald Trump because then to grant her.

clemency, you're going to have his base. and various people within his base go. crazy, go bananas. So which does he want more? Does he want this juicy piece of her. exonerating him, saying I did nothing. wrong, or does he want to fade the heat and. give her clemency? I mean, don't you. think it's more he would be asking her. to lie and say that some evidence that. exists potentially she would say, "Oh, no, that's not the way it was." I think.

that's implied that whatever he wants. from her isn't truthful. It would be. some sort of a narrative that meets his. end game of I did nothing wrong here. >> Let's talk about the relationship. that Ghislaine Maxwell's lawyer has with. Todd Blanche and Donald Trump. I think. it's interesting in the Politico report. it talks about actually Mr. Markham. meets with Donald Trump at uh Doral. Country Club and Todd Blanche in 2023 to.

discuss Mr. Markham representing Donald. Trump. So let's fast. >> Maxwell's attorney According to. >> met with Trump to potentially be Donald. Trump's attorney. According to the. Politico article, that is correct. So I. think what we're seeing here is that. everybody is somewhat interconnected. We. also know that. Mr. Markham has a podcast in which Mr. Blanche has appeared twice, I believe in. 2023, 2024,

and we we know uh according to reports. they're friends. They're. And anyone that knows the hierarchy of. the Department of Justice knows that it. was odd last summer when Todd Blanche, the Deputy Attorney General, set aside. everything else he was doing. and traveled to interview Miss Maxwell. None of the line attorneys that were. involved in her trial or involved in her. appeal were present. It was only the. Deputy Attorney General. That's odd. That's weird. Anyone that.

knows anything about a criminal case. >> she's transferred to She's transferred. to a. >> better prison. a better prison, but. Think about it in terms like Miss. Maxwell has nothing to give. She's lost. all of her appellate rights. She's been. convicted. She's looking at 20 years. She's got nothing to give that would. catch the attention of the Deputy. Attorney General and cause him to give. up everything he's doing. to go and meet with her unless. she knows something that they don't want.

her. to say or reveal and she's using that as. leverage to try to get clemency. Bingo. So, I want to go back to 2008 when Jeffrey. Epstein received a sweetheart deal from. Alex Acosta. Obama was president. There was a. complete barrier between Obama's. executive branch and the DOJ. So, I just. want to say that if anybody wants to. like, you know, blame Obama for this.

There was a legitimate like no colluding. whatsoever. Um but you as a criminal defense. attorney, you represent, you know, potentially. uh a um Ghislaine Maxwell or Jeffrey. Epstein. And you're up against. US attorneys like Alex Acosta. And when. this happened at the time, when Jeffrey. Epstein should have gone to prison, they. had this incredible case built against. him. What was your take on that at the. time and what is your take on it now.

considering how every single way this. case has been passed on and on up the. Justice Department, different. administrations, different political. parties, it seems like they're always. currying favor. to the pedophiles. >> Think about it like this. Like most. prosecutors love to beat their chest. about sending pedophiles, people who. molest children, sending those people to. prison. They they they love to be able. to say that because honestly everybody.

in society feels that way. Uh and this case is different. This goes. back to 2008. You've got this sweetheart. deal that Mr. Acosta makes with Jeffrey. Epstein. And and it's interesting because that. sweetheart deal reared its head again in. Miss Maxwell's appeal with Mr. Mark. Markham. He says in the appeal he's. trying to argue that the deal that Mr. Acosta made to Miss Maxwell. was binding to all other districts and. she shouldn't have been tried in the.

Southern District of New York in 2022. And that was part of his appeal, uh which was denied. The Supreme Court. refused to accept that and hear that. Uh. but it's interesting along the way. everybody everybody has given Jeffrey. Epstein a pass. And you don't see that with law enforc-. you you don't see that in these kinds of. cases involving traffic sex trafficking. of children. And so in 2008 when Mr. Acosta makes. that deal no one can explain that. It.

has to be that there are higher powers, there's money involved. It has to be. that there's something bigger going on. that's causing them to make those types. of decisions. And then this thing goes. all the way up until 2019. Then you just recently, the last summer, you've got the Deputy AG going to see. Miss Maxwell. You've got them now. considering granting clemency to her. So. keep in mind her alone. She's been. convicted of trafficking. children, sex trafficking. And she's. been sentenced to 20 years. So.

and we're going to grant clemency to. her? And it just seems like this. cover-up has just been going on for so. long. It's really, really disturbing and. we need to keep it at the top of the. news cycle. But, I want to now shift. gears a little bit to the Supreme Court, which has been an abject disappointment, to say the least. And no one is more. disappointing on the Supreme Court than. Clarence Thomas. And pop up this post, Kylie. Supreme Court Justice Clarence. Thomas on Wednesday, this is last.

Wednesday, you guys, delivered a. televised broadside against. progressivism, a political philosophy he. described as an existential threat to. America and the principles that founded. it 250 years ago. Here is a video of. Clarence Thomas railing against. progressivism. Play the clip. Progressivism seeks to replace the basic. premises of the Declaration of. Independence and hence our form of.

government. It holds that our rights and our. dignities come not from God, but from. government. It requires of the people a. subservience and weakness in com- Okay, I've heard enough. I've heard enough. Does this man not realize the irony of. the argument that he is making? Because. of progressive politics, this man has a white wife. I think it's. Loving versus Virginia is the case where. Clarence Thomas um has a.

a wife who was able to plan an. insurrection. against the United States of America. This guy is just unbelievable. In other. parts of the speech speech, he blamed. progressive politics for Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, racial segregation, and. eugenics. He personally thanked Harlan. Crow, who is his billionaire benefactor, who collects Nazi dishes as a side. hustle. Um.

Josh, what is your take on. uh. Justice Thomas? >> Well, I mean where where do we start. here? So, I believe it was in 1971, he was admitted to Yale uh. based on affirmative action and he. admits that. Like he said that. So, just. knowing that, he has the right to be a. Supreme Court Justice and a federal. judge based on the Voting Rights Act of. 1965 is what even allows him. to be sitting where he's sitting. So, I.

mean I don't even know where to begin. with all of this I mean how. how do you. How do you masquerade just complete and. utter ignorance? Um. for Clarence Thomas, you don't do it. very well. And I think Clarence Thomas when he. makes speeches like this, I think it's. something more insidious is going on. There Clarence Thomas provides a. permission structure for crusty white. Republican people to feel like oh, I get.

to oppose. progressive politics and I can oppose. equality for all and I can oppose all of. these things because this black. successful. Supreme Court Justice did it. Therefore, I'm not a racist because I'm just. echoing what he says. >> Yeah. We need to make Clarence Thomas go to. all of these Kid Rock concerts. He [laughter] needs to walk around in. the in the concert with all of the. people that go there. He needs to go to.

Walmart four or five times a week. Agreed. and shop around. >> Rural diners. That's right. Get in there. and and and see it and feel it. And and. let's hear what you got to say. I I. think he likes to speak down to these. people hoping that they're as ignorant. as he thinks they are. Because the things that he says makes no. sense. Completely agree. Okay. And then. we're also learning more about Chief. Justice John Roberts. And I think that. it's really important to note that long.

before Trump, the Roberts Court is the. one that has really jet fuel accelerated. this march into fascism. The decision. Citizens United and allowing all of this. money into politics and then every other. decision after that. has been on Chief Justice John Roberts. Court. And David Sirota has some. analysis on this. Pop this up.

Documents show John Roberts proudly. casting himself as a leader of the. opposition to activist judges. Now, newly revealed memos show he led the. charge to wield unprecedented. judicial activist power to make sure. corporations would never be forced to. reduce pollution. And so this is a. really important part because I think. there's a thirst for all of us to learn.

more when we are living in the luxury of. a superpower and politics are not. affecting us, you know, we're interested. in, you know, our own, you know, our. pets, our lives, our kids. But we need. to learn more about this. And you have to understand that this. Supreme Court works for the oligarchs. They want to service corporations. Uh the aforementioned Clarence Thomas, he is bought and purchased by a Nazi. billionaire and he gets a lot of perks.

from that. All of these Supreme Court. Justices are prostitutes that are. purchased in the same way that Donald. Trump is purchased and the same way that. America's top. Vice President J.D. Vance, the most. purchased man in American politics, all of this, the Supreme Court, the. Republican Party, MAGA is all about. stealing money from working-class. Americans and shifting it to these evil, corrupt oligarchs.

Well, how do I follow that up? So, I say, "Great speech, darling.". Great speech, sweetheart. >> [laughter]. >> So, um. this was an interesting piece in the New. York Times talking about the Supreme. Court. And it And it And it sort of. talks about the birth of where these. shadow docket came from. In 2016, it. stemmed from uh an Obama case that. involved uh the coal industry and the. EPA. And it became a vehicle for the. court over the past 4 or 5 years. I. think they've used it 25 times or so,

the shadow docket. And I think 20 of. those 25 times have been in Trump's. favor. Uh those are rough numbers. Um but what you see in just a general. concept is what you see is that Trump. passes some law or or administrative. rule, or he takes some action. A lower. court deems it unconstitutional. The appellate court deems it. unconstitutional. They then appeal it to. the Supreme Court, and they say, "Nope. Sorry, we're not going to go with the. lower courts. We're going to on the. shadow docket issue a three-sentence.

opinion saying, 'No, we're going to stay. that order and allow them to continue. doing what they're doing.'" And so, that's the pattern, and that's the the. court's way of taking immediate action, uh which goes against everything the. court has said that they like, which is. full briefing. They like to hear. everything from the lawyers. They like. to be methodical. They like to be. intellectual. Blah, blah, blah. All. that's Um they're making these. decisions, like you said, for financial. and/or improper reasons, and they're. siding with Trump most of the time, if.

not all. And just last question, Josh. As a. criminal defense attorney, you're in. federal courthouses a lot, and you read. about this extensively. And you have a. lot of Trump-appointed, George W. Bush-appointed, even Reagan-appointed. federal judges that are pulling their. hair out at the actions of the Supreme. Court in the shadow docket. I'm talking. conservative conservative federal. judges. Because it creates chaos because. when you have a two or three sentence.

order from the shadow docket that. overturns years of precedent. that and you have no rationale or reason. for lower courts to follow why this is. the law now and so it throws this whole. concept of stare decisis or precedent. in in the chaos because the lower courts. don't know how to interpret. a two or three sentence order and and. and and and in law like previous. decisions guide everything like it's a.

very important concept. And and so yeah. and another thing too is that you have. you have a lot of federal judges right. now. and and a lot of them are conservative. federal judges but they're also rule of. law federal judges that are seeing that. this administration is turning the rule. of law upside down and it's an. interesting dichotomy because these. judges are conservative a lot of them. appointed by conservative presidents but. they also are losing or seeing the slow. deterioration of the rule of law by this.

president with his policies and the. rules and regulations he's attempting to. pass and so you see this dichotomy with. them. They don't like this. They do. support conservative policies but they. don't like the rule of law being. disturbed. It's interesting to watch it play out. All right, that's all we have for today. Please like and subscribe and we'll be. back later with more news.