A MAGA Acolyte’s Utterly Transparent Gift to Trump – The No More Political Prosecutions Act

“District Attorney = Democrat Prosecutor = donated to Biden in 2020
= Prosecutor = paid by the DNC, former Biden DOJ official
= Jury = pulled from one of the most liberal areas = Judge, donated to Biden in 2020 = Trial and Conviction = total sham”

Twitter/X May 31, 2024, MAGA & causation expert Rep. Russell Fry, R SC-District 6,
immediately after Trump’s 34 NY felony convictions

Fry, Instagram May 8, 2024

As you can see above, first term backbench GOP/MAGA congressman Russell Fry had his dander up on May 31st, one day after Trump was convicted of 34 felonies. He torched the usual MAGA suspects: the District Attorney, the prosecutor, the jury, and, as a result, the 34 convictions.

And. as we’ll see after the next section, in April of 2023 Fry began to take on the federal criminal procedure that disallowed Trump from removing his election fraud case from New York to a federal District Court. His bill, H.R. 2553, has been percolating since then and, significantly, was reported out of the Judiciary Committee in January 2024 onto the House Calendar. It’s shyly named, “No More Political Prosecutions Act of 2023”. It’s important and potentially game changing.

But first, and briefly . . .

For a Backbencher He’s Got Front Bench Chutzpah

Fry is a typical MAGA extremist, beloved of Donald Trump. He describes himself on Twitter/X as: “Husband. Dad. Sock game on point. 8th grade ping pong champ. Fmr Chief Whip in SC House. #AmericaFirst. Trump Endorsed.” And there’s more than just sock game on point to please him.

His voting record for his first 19 months in Congress is rated as highly as the most MAGA Republicans in the House. He’s earned a 94% from the maniacal Heritage Foundation (the average House Republican garners an 745% rating). The Freedom Index has him at 90%, and for comparison, madman Jim Jeffords is at 80% and the equally mad Speaker of the House is at 73%). So, you know who we’re dealing with here . . . If you need any more info, there’s this: He received the Award for Conservative Excellence from the infamous The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). He liked that: “It is an honor to receive the Award for Conservative Excellence and be rated among the top 10% of the most conservative members of Congress. I will never stop fighting for conservative wins in Washington!” In short, he’s a MAGA doozy, thinking erroneously that he’s a “conservative,” when he’s a MAGA bomb thrower. And he seems to be a MAGA up and comer, especially given his bill’s success, No More Political Prosecutions Act of 2023, now on the House Union Calendar.

The No More Political Prosecutions Act of 2023

On April 11, 2023, Fry introduced H.R. 2553 and referred to which was referred to the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by the MAGA star and irritant Jim Jordan. Fry’s website described the bill,

“Congressman Russell Fry (SC-07) has introduced the No More Political Prosecutions Act, legislation that would give Presidents and Vice Presidents, both former and current, the option to move their own civil or criminal cases from a state court to a federal court. Presidents and Vice Presidents are among the most visible politicians in the United States government — making them a target for rogue prosecutors looking to build up their profile and make a name for themselves on the political stage. Because of that threat, it’s important for Presidents and Vice Presidents to have the option to move their case to a federal court — where judges are confirmed by the U.S. Senate, serve in their role for life, and don’t need to win an election to keep their position. 

I’m proud to introduce the No More Political Prosecutions Act. Politically motivated prosecutors should not be able to wield unwarranted power and target our nation’s top leaders for their own personal gain. This legislation will prevent the political prosecutions of Presidents and Vice Presidents and thwart corrupt prosecutors’ agendas.’” [Emphasis in original]

28 U.S. Code § 1442 – Federal officers or agencies sued or prosecuted

(a) A civil action or criminal prosecution that is commenced in a State court and that is against or directed to any of the following may be removed by them to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place wherein it is pending:
(1) The United States or any agency thereof or any officer (or any person acting under that officer) of the United States or of any agency thereof, in an official or individual capacity, for or relating to any act under color of such office or on account of any right, title or authority claimed under any Act of Congress for the apprehension or punishment of criminals or the collection of the revenue.
(2) A property holder whose title is derived from any such officer, where such action or prosecution affects the validity of any law of the United States.
(3) Any officer of the courts of the United States, for or relating to any act under color of office or in the performance of his duties.
(4) Any officer of either House of Congress, for or relating to any act in the discharge of his official duty under an order of such House;
(5) The President or Vice President, or a former President or Vice President. [Emphasis added]

(b) Application.—The amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply to civil actions or criminal prosecutions pending on the date of enactment of this Act or commenced on or after such date. [Emphasis added]”

The Donald Trump Legislation Machine

Fortunately, this legislative proposal, which is among many MAGA/GOP ideas specifically designed to protect Donald Trump from accountability, languishes on the House Calendar; let’s hope it stays that way. It’s another super-partisan example of the extent to which MAGA politicos go to subvert the very idea of creating laws of general applicability. The No More Political Prosecutions Act was introduced in January 2024, two months before Trump’s New York state criminal trial began, a trial that Trump, in 2023, tried to remove from state court to federal court where his team believed he’d fare better than in New York’s state court. This attempted movement is not illegal or even underhanded, it is an attempt at what is labeled forum shopping and is subject to complex removal rules.

Trump averred that the federal district court had subject matter jurisdiction because he was charged “for conduct committed while he was President of the United States that was within the ‘color of his office,'” and that the charges involved both federal and state election law violations about which the state election law was preempted by federal law, and thus ought to be removed to federal court. U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein, who heard Trump’s removal request, denied it. POLITICO reported:

“In his written decision Wednesday [July 19, 2023], however, U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein found that ‘[t]he evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the matter was a purely a personal item of the President — a cover-up of an embarrassing event. He added: “Hush money paid to an adult film star is not related to a President’s official acts. It does not reflect in any way the color of the President’s official duties.’” [Emphasis added]

As you see again, Trumpists have a very “liberal” view of official presidential acts. Don’t they see the irony in that? Of course they do. They just don’t give a damn.

In any event, Trump stayed in the New York judicial system and was crowned on the last day of May with 34 criminal convictions.

One can see, then, that Congressloon Russell Fry’s No More Political Prosecutions Act, introduced in January 2024, was then an obvious pander to Trump and for no other purpose. The bill’s language (see above) is phrased in general terms; it would be a bridge too far for even a MAGA superstar like Fry to explicitly limit the proposed legislation to Donald Trump exclusively. But for many MAGA acolytes, Trump presents a single purpose for them, to protect and defend. I have little doubt that Fry’s interest in the complexities of federal-state removal law ever burdened even a moment of thought prior to Trump’s New York indictment. He is, after all, just a water boy.


Mark Meadows Seeks to Have His Georgia Election Case Moved to Traffic Court

Mark Meadows, Trump’s alleged henchman in the effort to illegally reverse his 2020 loss in Georgia, got some bad news a day ago: his effort to have his case moved from Georgia to federal court was denied quickly and summarily by the local Federal District Court. Meadows’s reasoning was that his actions in the event were, in brief, part and parcel of his job as Chief-of-Staff. Under federal law, he argued, his case belonged in federal court because the law “allows people charged with crimes while carrying out their official duties to be prosecuted in federal court, even in cases involving state law and state prosecutors.” Thereby, he thought, his case would be immediately dismissed, and then, back to writing his memoirs. The district court thought otherwise about his characterization of state election interference as merely part of his job as Trump’s Chief-0f-Staff.

Meadows, his chances of moving to federal court diminishing (he did appeal to the 5th Circuit Court), thought of an off-ramp that would allow a Georgia court to decide his case but not the court where prosecutor Fani Willis awaits him. His spokesperson explained:

“At the outset, we maintain that the charges placed against Mr. Meadows are relatively minor, a few phone calls to friends in Georgia, casual discussions really. A text message or two. A friendly visit to the state. These are not felonies regardless of what the state’s laws might imply. At best, they are minor matters much like routine traffic offenses.

Therefore, Mr. Meadows is today filing a lawsuit in the local Fulton County court to have his trial removed to the Fulton County Traffic Court. There Mr. Meadows will admit he accidentally veered out of his lane, thereby crossing briefly into the path of oncoming traffic. Perhaps he was distracted by his cell phone. We all have this happen. Every day. I myself had to take a call on my drive to court today. I barely missed squashing an elderly nun in a crosswalk, but my point is, I missed her and she went on about her day as if nothing had occurred. No blood, no foul.

Suppose we were all held accountable for each minor bit of accidental reckless driving in the wrong lane or a pedestrian crosswalk? Why, all of us would be in court every day! Calls would go unanswered, national commerce would shut down, dogs and cats would go hungry, children would panic, our elders would fall out! We look forward to a speedy resolution of the matter in traffic court, and are prepared to accept the small fine imposed for what was, at best, a momentary glitch in Mr. Meadows’s sterling driving record.”