A New York State appellate judge has denied Donald Trump’s latest attempt to have his very narrow gag order loosened, ruling his request must be heard by a panel of judges, and will not be taken up until at least the day he is scheduled to testify in the $250 million civil business fraud case.

“The application for interim relief seeking an expedited grant of leave to the Court of Appeals is denied, as such motion must be decided by a full panel of this Court. Further, the movant seeks an interim application for a preference is likewise denied, as such determination must be made by a full panel of this Court,” the judge ruled.

MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin reported, “Trump will not be free from the gag order any sooner than late 12/11, the same day he is scheduled to testify” in the State of New York’s civil business fraud case against the ex-president.

READ MORE: Comer Says Biden’s Bank Records ‘Don’t Lie’ but His Claims Are Quickly Debunked

Katie Phang, MSNBC anchor and legal contributor, added, “the fact that the highest court in New York told Trump it wouldn’t let him say whatever he wants to say in the meantime is noteworthy.”

The Messenger‘s Adam Klasfeld suggests the gag order “likely” will not be lifted “during the defense case” either.

The gag order bans Trump and his attorneys from publicly commenting on Judge Arthur Engoron’s court staff, including his principle law clerk.

Republican House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer has been ramping up his media campaign attacking President Joe Biden as GOP Speaker Mike Johnson signals he is readying a vote for a formal impeachment inquiry. On Monday, Chairman Comer released a two-minute video alleging President Biden has been lying and alleging “corruption” related to payments the President’s son, Hunter Biden, sent his father, claiming it is evidence of foreign money flowing to the President.

Reporters were quick to punch holes in the Kentucky Republican’s allegations.

“Today the House Oversight Committee is releasing subpoenaed bank records that show Hunter Biden’s business entity, a Owasco PC, made direct monthly payments to Joe Biden. This wasn’t a payment from Hunter Biden’s personal account, but an account for his corporation that received payments from China and other shady corners of the world,” Comer says in his latest video (below.)

But journalists are calling out Comer, and debunking his claims.

READ MORE: ‘Authoritarianism’: Florida Says Its Public Schools Exist to ‘Convey Government’s Message’

Pointing to Comer’s video, Public Notice founder Aaron Rupar writes, “this is a bold claim for which absolutely 0 evidence is presented in the video.”

“So, these three payments of $1,380 each (totaling $4,140) appear to be Hunter Biden paying his dad back for truck loan/lease payments that his dad paid on his son’s behalf when Hunter was low on cash,” explains journalist Yashar Ali, noting his “source is an NY Post article about Hunter’s finances and emails from the Hunter Biden email archive.”

Responding to Ali’s post, Rupar adds, “James Comer said these payments were linked to China. James Comer is lying. Don’t be like James Comer.”

“These appear to be monthly payments (already reported in the media) of $1,380 for a truck,” writes Mother Jones’ D.C. Bureau Chief David Corn. “I don’t think fronting a son money for a truck is an impeachable offense. Another swing and a miss.”

Even the right-wing Washington Examiner on Monday reported, “An email found on Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop suggests Hunter Biden had listed the $1,380 payments to his father as reimbursements for a Ford Raptor truck.”

READ MORE: ‘Given My Experience’: Gaetz Waiting to ‘Render Judgment’ on Florida GOP Chair Accused of Rape

Watch Chairman Comer’s video below or at this link.

🚨BREAKING🚨

Hunter Biden’s business entity, Owasco PC, made direct monthly payments to Joe Biden. The bank records don’t lie.

Owasco PC received payments from Chinese-state linked companies & other shady entities. Joe Biden knew & benefitted from his family’s business schemes. pic.twitter.com/MfvtA4yEZU

— Rep. James Comer (@RepJamesComer) December 4, 2023

GOP Governor Ron DeSantis often talks about what he calls “the free state of Florida” but Florida Republican Attorney General Ashley Moody has declared the Sunshine State’s public schools, including its libraries, do not exist to promote the free exchange of ideas, but rather, to “convey the government’s message.”

In a legal brief, the State of Florida argues it has a First Amendment right to remove LGBTQ books, or any book, from public schools and libraries, USA Today’s Tallahassee Democrat reports.

“It’s a contention that First Amendment experts and advocates call extreme and chilling. But the state maintains the books on school shelves represent protected government speech. Public school libraries are ‘a forum for government speech,’ it says, not a ‘forum for free expression.'”

READ MORE: ‘Given My Experience’: Gaetz Waiting to ‘Render Judgment’ on Florida GOP Chair Accused of Rape

“Public-school systems, including their libraries, convey the government’s message,” Attorney General Moody (photo) also wrote in the legal brief.

“Like the selection of monuments,,” Moody writes, quoting a legal case: “the government speaks through its selection of which books to put on the shelves and which books to exclude.”

She also argues that the “purpose” of public school libraries “is to support the government’s educational mission.”

Moody also cites the very narrow recent anti-LGBTQ Supreme Court ruling in 303 Creative that was riddled with falsehoods.

Florida’s First Amendment stance has experts calling the State’s claims “authoritarianism.”

READ MORE: ‘Chutzpah’: Biden Blasts Johnson ‘Taking Credit’ for $30 Million Project He Voted Against

“There’s considerable irony in that those who seek to limit access to books in school libraries often say they’re fighting for parental rights,” Ken Paulson, the director of the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University, told the Tallahassee Democrat. “If government speech determines what books can be in the library, the government is essentially saying your children can only see the ideas that the government has approved.”

“That’s not parental rights,” he added. “That’s authoritarianism.”

NYU professor Ruth Ben-Ghiat, the well-known scholar on fascism and authoritarian leaders, called it “straight-up authoritarianism.”