Body camera footage released by Chicago police shows the moments a Democrat official was arrested for suspicion of driving while intoxicated. Samantha Steele, 45, a Democratic member of the Cook County Board of Review, reportedly crashed her car into another vehicle. Steele was charged with a misdemeanor count of driving under the influence of alcohol after the incident earlier this month. “Cook County Board of Review Commissioner Samantha Steele was arrested for DUI. When police pulled her over, Steele quickly told them that she was ‘an elected official.’ After resisting field sobriety tests and declining to provide a breathalyzer sample, Steele was sent to the hospital,” Collin Rugg wrote. “There, she reportedly taunted the officer, asking: ‘Is your p*nis that small?’ She was charged with misdemeanor DUI. Cook County Commissioner Sean Morrison has since demanded her resignation,” he added. WATCH: NEW: Chicago Democrat threatens police officers that she is an "elected official" and taunts an officer for his "small p*nis" after she drunkenly crashed into cars. Cook County Board of Review Commissioner Samantha Steele was arrested for DUI. When police pulled her over,… pic.twitter.com/LahixVof2K — Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) November 25, 2024 From the Chicago Sun-Times: In police body-camera videos from the incident in Andersonville on Nov. 11 that WBEZ and the Chicago Sun-Times obtained this week, Board of Review Commissioner Samantha Steele repeatedly refused to cooperate with officers who responded, including requests from cops to get out of the smashed car she was driving. One officer told her, “Ma’am, if you don’t exit the vehicle … I’m going to help you to exit, and you don’t want that.” “You don’t want that! I’m an elected official,” Steele shot back. “Elected official of what?” the officer asked. “Cook County,” Steele told him. When the officer asked for her name, Steele held out her hand and said, “I’m Sam.” The cop replied, “Sam who?” But Steele did not give the police her full name at that point. The officer told other cops, “She’s saying she’s an elected official of Cook County.” Steele then said, “I don’t want to be on the video.” But police told her she was indeed on video and they continued to record the interaction with Steele. "I'm an elected official!" Body camera footage shows a Cook County Board of Review commissioner wasted little time throwing her status around as cops prepared to arrest her for DUI this month. Video via @FrankCalabrese https://t.co/2Hp4UqjW1a — CWBChicago (@CWBChicago) November 23, 2024 “At the risk of being redundant… I urge Commissioner Steele to respect the citizens of Cook County and resign. Still no accountability, showing no remorse, offering no apology to the Officers she horribly berated and abused. It provides a glimpse into the arrogance and disrespect for the rule of law and most importantly our Police officers! This contempt is unbecoming any elected official,” Cook County Commissioner Sean Morrison said. At the risk of being redundant… I urge Commissioner Steele to respect the citizens of Cook County and resign. Still no accountability, showing no remorse, offering no apology to the Officers she horribly berated and abused. It provides a glimpse into the arrogance and… https://t.co/ilbc5tFjlk — Commissioner Sean Morrison (@SeanMMorrison) November 23, 2024 FOX 32 Chicago reports: Officers responding to the scene found significant front-end damage to a Honda Accord and a Dodge Charger. Steele was lying on the sidewalk near the crash when they arrived, an arrest report states. Steele told officers she had been driving south on Ashland Avenue when the crash occurred. Police said they observed an open bottle of red wine on the floorboard of Steele’s car, and noted her eyes appeared “bloodshot and glassy” with a “strong odor of alcoholic beverage” coming from her breath. When asked how much she had been drinking, Steele reportedly refused to answer, stating, “I want my lawyer and I am not talking to you.” She also refused a field sobriety test, police said. Steele, who was reportedly “swaying front to back” during questioning, complained of head injuries and was taken to an area hospital, where she was later discharged. At the hospital, police arrested her for DUI. According to the arrest report, Steele made inappropriate remarks to the arresting officer, saying, “Is your p**** really that small?” Steele was also read her Miranda rights, but she refused to speak to the officer and against requested her attorney, who was at the hospital. Additional footage provided by Chicago Sun-Times:

The federal election interference case against President Trump has officially been tossed. U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan dismissed the charges against Trump after Special counsel Jack Smith requested to toss the case. “Chutkan dismissed the charges against Trump without prejudice, leaving open the highly unlikely possibility of a future prosecution,” ABC News noted. “Judge Tanya Chutkan approved Special Council Jack Smith’s motion to dismiss the election interference case against Trump without prejudice, citing longstanding DOJ policy barring prosecution of sitting presidents. The court found no evidence of prosecutorial misconduct and emphasized the temporary nature of presidential immunity,” Mario Nawfal wrote. “Charges against co-defendants in a separate classified documents case remain intact,” he added. BREAKING: JUDGE CHUTKAN OFFICIALLY DISMISSES TRUMP ELECTION CASE Judge Tanya Chutkan approved Special Council Jack Smith's motion to dismiss the election interference case against Trump without prejudice, citing longstanding DOJ policy barring prosecution of sitting… pic.twitter.com/cQRzdwzVwM — Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) November 25, 2024 Per ABC News: In a two-page opinion, Judge Chutkan wrote that dismissing the case without prejudice is “appropriate” and would not harm the “public interest,” agreeing with Smith’s argument that Trump’s immunity would not cover him when he leaves office. “Dismissal without prejudice is also consistent with the Government’s understanding that the immunity afforded to a sitting President is temporary, expiring when they leave office,” Chutkan wrote. However, it’s extremely unlikely that any prosecutor would attempt to bring the same charges in the future, in part because the statute of limitations for the alleged crimes will have expired by the time Trump leaves office in four years. Trump’s lawyers did not oppose the government’s motion to dismiss the case without prejudice. #BREAKING: The federal judge has OFFICIALLY dismissed Jack Smith’s “election interference” case against President Trump FINALLY! We’re beating the lawfare! Now it’s time to prosecute Jack Smith. pic.twitter.com/0Harxl8ukL — Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) November 25, 2024 “And just like Jack Smith, Chutkan has to take one final shot suggesting the case can be revisited after Trump leaves office in January 2029,” Julie Kelly commented. And just like Jack Smith, Chutkan has to take one final shot suggesting the case can be revisited after Trump leaves office in January 2029. pic.twitter.com/VgBxzqRUM7 — Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) November 25, 2024 From The Hill: She dismissed it without prejudice, leaving open a theoretical possibility that the government can bring charges again after Trump leaves office. But the two-page opinion officially marks the end of the historic indictment brought last year, which charged Trump with four federal felonies over his efforts to overturn his election loss to President Biden that culminated in the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. Earlier in the day, Smith moved to drop both of his criminal cases against Trump in alignment with a Justice Department policy against prosecuting a sitting president. “After careful consideration, the Department has determined that OLC’s prior opinions concerning the Constitution’s prohibition on federal indictment and prosecution of a sitting President apply to this situation and that as a result this prosecution must be dismissed before the defendant is inaugurated,” Smith wrote, referencing the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel. Read the full opinion below:

Rand Paul is drawing a red line with President Trump on one key issue…. And I can’t even say he’s wrong. I’m not educated enough on the topic to know, and I trust President Trump implicitly, but I do think there is some wisdom in what Rand Paul is saying here. Basically, Rand Paul stands with President Trump on mass deportations and cleaning up our country, but he differs on one key point: he doesn’t want to use the Military to do it. Why? He says he believes that is illegal. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) says he supports President-elect Donald Trump’s plan for mass deportations, but not his suggestion of using the military for it, “because it’s illegal.” “We’ve had a distrust of putting the army into our streets,” he says, calling for deportations “through the normal process of domestic policing.” He adds: “I will not support and will not vote to use the military in our cities. I think it’s a terrible image.” Watch here: Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) says he supports President-elect Donald Trump’s plan for mass deportations, but not his suggestion of using the military for it, “because it’s illegal.” “We’ve had a distrust of putting the army into our streets,” he says, calling for deportations “through… pic.twitter.com/WUms7FSu66 — Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) November 24, 2024 I suppose the issue comes down to whether you view the mass illegal immigration to be a threat to our country. If so, is the military not created for that very purpose?  To protect our country from invasion? Is that illegal? As I said, I don’t know and I suspect the issue will be hotly debated. But I am sensitive to not turning the weaponry of the Federal Government against American Citizens. Didn’t we all learn our lesson on that? The Patriot Act and the creation of the TSA has been one of the worst things to ever be done to Americans.  And that was done in the name of “safety”. We should never trade a little bit of liberty for a temporary bit of “safety” — or even the illusion of safety. Other scourges? FISA courts and the weaponization of the FBI and CIA against American Citizens. So I have great sympathy for Rand Paul in urging caution to use the Military here. I don’t know who is right. And on the big picture, Rand Paul and President Trump are totally aligned on doing the mass deportations in general. Here is another clip from the same interview where Rand Paul says any Mayors who get in the way should go to prison: Senator Rand Paul says if Denver Mayor, Mike Johnston refuses to comply with the Trump Administration’s mass deportation plans and resist Federal Law that he will be removed from office and could be criminally prosecuted. “It’s a form of insurrection.” pic.twitter.com/Loaz3j7z7P — Ian Jaeger (@IanJaeger29) November 24, 2024 So what do you think? Who’s right here?

It’s official, the lawfare case brought by Jack Smith against President Trump is officially GONE — dismissed by the Court! It all started this morning when Jack Smith filed a Motion To Dismiss the federal case against President Trump: BREAKING: Special counsel Jack Smith has moved to dismiss his federal election interference case against President-elect Donald Trump due to a long-standing Justice Department policy that bars the prosecution of a sitting president. Read more: https://t.co/QGRgJ2cMqq pic.twitter.com/WJ1FBotMMJ — ABC News (@ABC) November 25, 2024 It became official just about an hour ago when Judge Tanya Chutkan granted the Motion to Dismiss: It is official. Judge Tanya Chutkan grants motion to dismiss J6 case pic.twitter.com/ORi7h0pLvs — Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) November 25, 2024 So that’s great news! We knew it from day 1, the case was always bogus and we told you so right from the jump. Now they head off with their tail between their legs losing once again. But….I told you there was one small detail and it’s this: the case is Dismissed “Without Prejudice” and the Judge went out of her way to make a big federal case about that (no pun intended): And just like Jack Smith, Chutkan has to take one final shot suggesting the case can be revisited after Trump leaves office in January 2029. pic.twitter.com/VgBxzqRUM7 — Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) November 25, 2024 So what’s that mean and why is it a big deal? Because it means the DOJ can refile the case in the future. And look at the highlighted portion below from the Judge’s Order: Look, I’m no legal scholar, but that sentence doesn’t even make any sense! Immunity afforded to a sitting President expires when they leave office? That is wildly false. Immunity afforded to a sitting President applies to all official duties served while in office and it does NOT expire when they leave office.  That’s the whole point!  If it simply expired after they leave office, that would defeat the entire point! Wow, that’s a really uninformed sentence to write. And while the case was bogus to begin with, even the flimsy claims in the case apply to when President Trump was in office, not when he was out of office. So what is the point of the highlighted sentence other than to just have one (unintelligent) hissy fit on the way out the door? Wow! I completely agree with Julie Kelly here: I explain why Jack Smith–who burned through an estimated $50 million in two years to pursue Pres Trump–should face an investigation into prosecutorial misconduct, selective prosecution, tampering with evidence, and withholding discovery:https://t.co/qbbNNbfUUP — Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) November 8, 2024 Watch it live on Fox News: THIS AFTERNOON: Jack Smith has dismissed the… Trump Election Interference CaseTrump Classified Documents Case This lawfare was always unprecedented. This lawfare was always wrong. This lawfare was always politically-motivated. And this lawfare MUST NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN. pic.twitter.com/xigUnwjeeu — Byron Donalds (@ByronDonalds) November 25, 2024 Steve Bannon and Mike Davis nail it here: IF IT WASN’T ABOUT ELECTION & LAWFARE, WHY ARE THEY DROPPING CHARGES? Mike Davis questions remarks of Jack Smith and colleagues that case wasn’t about lawfare and the election, why are they dismissing case? Davis believes severe charges should be used.@Mrddmia @BANNONS_WARROOM pic.twitter.com/MC4KJLuFKW — Real America’s Voice (RAV) (@RealAmVoice) November 25, 2024 Here’s more, from ABC News: The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s election interference case has dismissed the case, after special counsel Jack Smith asked the judge to toss the case due to a long-standing Justice Department policy that bars the prosecution of a sitting president. Smith earlier Monday moved to dismiss Trump’s election interference case and the appeal of his classified documents case ahead of Trump’s impending inauguration, due to the DOJ’s presidential immunity policy and not because the charges lacked merit. U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan dismissed the charges against Trump without prejudice, leaving open the highly unlikely possibility of a future prosecution. In a two-page opinion, Judge Chutkan wrote that dismissing the case without prejudice is “appropriate” and would not harm the “public interest,” agreeing with Smith’s argument that Trump’s immunity would not cover him when he leaves office. “Dismissal without prejudice is also consistent with the Government’s understanding that the immunity afforded to a sitting President is temporary, expiring when they leave office,” Chutkan wrote. However, it’s extremely unlikely that any prosecutor would attempt to bring the same charges in the future, in part because the statute of limitations for the alleged crimes will have expired by the time Trump leaves office in four years. My take? There’s no way in hell this case ever gets brought again in the future. This case was brought for one reason and one reason only: to distract President Trump and hurt him in the election. And it failed even at that one job.

Over 100 Republican lawmakers are demanding answers about federal dollars. They want to know why they’re flowing to health centers that also provide abortions, including Planned Parenthood. They’re calling on the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to give an account from the past three years. Turns out past reports revealed billions were sent to health facilities and $49 million to Planned Parenthood affiliates. Time for more transparency. And it’s time for Planned Parenthood to get defunded. The Hill reports: More than 100 Republican lawmakers are asking for an investigation in to the amount of federal funding that has been awarded to health centers that also provide abortion, including Planned Parenthood. Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), as well as House Pro-Life Caucus co-Chair Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), led a letter Friday to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), asking for a report on the funding sent to the groups over the past three years. The lawmakers noted the GAO has prepared several congressionally requested reports on federal funding for these organizations over the years. According to its most recent report, the Department of Health and Human Services obligated an estimated $33.67 billion to federally qualified health centers and about $49 million to Planned Parenthood affiliates from 2019 through 2022. “It is our hope that this report will provide greater insight as Congress considers funding levels and provides increased transparency and openness for our constituencies and the general public,” the lawmakers wrote. BREAKING: Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy Call for Defunding Planned Parenthood Via DOGE https://t.co/4NEp5j4HUC pic.twitter.com/rZxN80dBcS — LifeNews.com (@LifeNewsHQ) November 21, 2024   In a WSJ OpEd, @elonmusk and @VivekGRamaswamy call for a partial taxpayer defund of abortion chain Planned Parenthood via @DOGE Amazing! pic.twitter.com/IjLoqALiuK — Lila Rose (@LilaGraceRose) November 21, 2024 Time to DEFUND Planned Parenthood. Take action now to ask President Trump, RFK Jr., Elon Musk, and Vivek Ramaswamy to defund Planned Parenthood! https://t.co/Is923AxZ38 Planned Parenthood murdered 392,715 preborn babies in the last reported year alone. This makes them the largest abortion chain in America—a… pic.twitter.com/i3iXIKE6Ls — Live Action (@LiveAction) November 22, 2024

Pearl Jam share rare outing of Temple Of The Dog masterpiece Hunger Strike in Sydney, Australia

Shoegaze legends My Bloody Valentine will play a rare hometown show in 2025

A judge has granted a request by Special Counsel Jack Smith to dismiss President-elect Donald Trump’s election interference case.