[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Santiago Pena, a former central banker, has won Paraguay’s presidential election, seeing off a strong challenge from centre-left leader Efrain Alegre.
The former International Monetary Fund (IMF) economist, who was hand-picked by the powerful head of the country’s dominant political force, the conservative Colorado Party, scored a strong victory in presidential elections on Sunday.
Pena, 44, secured 43 percent of the vote to 27.5 percent for Alegre, according to preliminary results from the nation’s electoral court.
“Today, we are not celebrating a personal triumph. We are celebrating the victory of a people who with their vote chose the path of social peace, dialogue, fraternity and national reconciliation,” Pena said in his victory speech, adding that there was “a lot to do”, particularly in reviving the economy.
“The time has come to postpone our differences to prioritise the common causes that unite us as a nation,” he said.
Pena will take office on August 15.
Quick to smile and described as affable, Pena is the fresh face of an old institution.
Known as “Santi”, he became a father at the age of 17 when his now-wife Leticia Ocampos became pregnant.
Early parenthood did not stop him from furthering his education, but he said it was a “difficult” time that helped shape his political career.
“It led me to build on very solid principles of commitment, of responsibility, of honesty, of integrity, of knowing that there are people who depend on you. And without realising it, when I was 17, I began to develop a vocation of service,” Pena said.
Pena is a defender of what he describes as traditional family values and is opposed to abortion and gay marriage.
For him, a family is comprised of “mother, father and children.”
His son is now 26, and the couple also has a 17-year-old daughter.
After becoming a father as a teenager, Pena was encouraged to get an education by family. He studied economics at university in Paraguay before heading to Columbia University in New York for his postgraduate education.
He then worked as an economist at the central bank in Paraguay’s capital, Asuncion, before joining the IMF in Washington, DC. He later returned to Paraguay as a member of the central bank board.
Those who know Pena described him to the Reuters news agency as “clean-cut”, “decent” and having “good ideas”. Critics said he is a member of the out-of-touch elite who lacks political experience and is acting as a puppet of Colorado Party leader and former President Horacio Cartes, Pena’s main backer.
“He is not a politician who wants a revolution – he wants evolution,” said a businessman with investments in Paraguay who knows Pena personally and asked not to be named.
Supporters said Pena will be able to keep a cool head during any tumult.
“I think what characterises him is that he has infinite tranquility,” said Lea Gimenez, who served as Pena’s deputy when he was finance minister and was later finance minister herself.
“Even during this election campaign, which has been so long because we have been in the process for almost a year and a half, I have not seen him once lose his temper,” she said.
“He is very serene. His peace of mind is impressive,” a collaborator told the AFP news agency.
Pena made a first attempt at the presidency in 2017 when he lost the party primary to the man he will now replace after a constitutionally limited single term, Mario Abdo Benitez.
He entered politics as finance minister during the presidency of Cartes, who is under United States sanctions for alleged corruption.
Pena’s detractors describe him as Cartes’s secretary.
Alegre went even further, describing Pena as the “servant” of Cartes and the party as a corrupt institution.
But Pena was nonchalant about the criticism and has pledged business-friendly policies that focus on job creation, keeping taxes low and attracting foreign investment.
“He matured very quickly, being a young father. … He became an adult very quickly,” a former colleague told Reuters. “‘Santi’ has a lot of life experience and is a natural negotiator.”
Pena said he will preserve diplomatic relations with Taiwan despite demands from the agricultural and livestock industries to open up an export market to China.
Paraguay is one of only 13 countries to recognise Taiwan.
Also on the diplomatic front, Pena told AFP that he would move Paraguay’s embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
Paraguay had moved its embassy there in 2018 under Cartes but reversed its decision within months, provoking anger from Israel, which closed its own mission in Asuncion in retaliation.
“Yes, I would go back to Jerusalem,” Pena told AFP before Sunday’s vote.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
The Mexican president has renewed calls for the independent transparency agency to be folded into other government offices.
Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has called for an end to the agency that oversees government transparency and freedom of information, in what critics consider his latest attempt to limit oversight.
After recovering from a third COVID infection, López Obrador resumed his practice of morning press conferences on Friday, where he backed a plan proposed by his political party to shutter the Institute for Information Access and Transparency (INAI).
“Let the federal comptroller’s office, which belongs to another branch of government, the legislative branch, take over this function and let this agency disappear. Enough playing with appearances,” he said, adding that INAI’s dissolution would save taxpayer money.
Mexico created its freedom of information system in 2002 – laying the groundwork for INAI – and a constitutional reform in 2013 granted the agency autonomy to ensure it can provide transparency without interference.
INAI holds the power to compel other government bodies to submit to freedom of information requests as part of the government’s checks against corruption. But INAI has been in crisis recently, as appointments to its seven-member governing body have been stymied by the ruling party, called the National Regeneration Movement or Morena.
INAI needs at least five members to form a quorum. Currently, it has only four, leaving the institute unable to issue official decisions.
Late on Thursday, Mexico’s Senate once again failed to appoint a fifth member to the agency, amid opposition from the Morena policy.
The deadlock briefly prompted a scuffle on the chamber floor as opposition legislators unfurled banners at the Senate podium calling for immediate appointments to INAI. The Associated Press reported that Morena Senator César Cravioto was seen slapping away hands in an attempt to wrestle the banners away.
Also on Thursday, the president of the Senate, Morena ally Alejandro Armenta Mier, introduced an initiative to get rid of the agency altogether, folding it into the government’s civil service functions.
The opposition has already promised to block the bill, which needs a two-thirds majority to be approved.
López Obrador has long criticised INAI, denouncing it as a waste of government funds. Last month, he vetoed two new INAI appointees, preventing it from reaching the minimum of five members it needs to function.

He has also been critical of the country’s judicial system for blocking his policies, saying it is “eclipsed by money, by economic power”. He supported a controversial bill in February to slash the budget for Mexico’s electoral agency and weaken campaign spending oversight.
That stance has earned López Obrador criticism for dismantling democratic safeguards.
In 2021, when the president announced plans to eliminate INAI, Human Rights Watch issued a statement blasting the proposal.
“Shuttering this independent body and transferring its functions to entities that report to the executive or Congress is the perfect recipe for secrecy and abuse,” the right group’s Americas director said at the time.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
A lobbyist has pleaded guilty to conspiring to pass bribes to the head of a Michigan marijuana licensing board
GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. — A lobbyist pleaded guilty Friday to conspiring to pass bribes to the head of a Michigan marijuana licensing board, the third conviction since charges were announced just a few weeks ago.
Vincent Brown acknowledged that he had a role in getting $42,000 and other benefits to Rick Johnson before the board was disbanded in 2019.
Brown’s goal was to drum up business for his lobbying firm by promoting his access to Johnson. The board reviewed and approved applications to grow and sell marijuana for medical purposes.
Johnson pleaded guilty to bribery Tuesday, admitting he accepted at least $110,000 in exchange for approving applications for lucrative licenses. Years ago he was a powerful state lawmaker, serving as speaker of the Republican-controlled House from 2001 through 2004.
A Detroit-area businessman, John Dalaly, pleaded guilty last week. He said he provided at least $68,200 in cash and other benefits to Johnson.
Another lobbyist, Brian Pierce, is scheduled to plead guilty May 5.
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer abolished the medical marijuana board a few months after taking office in 2019 and put oversight inside a state agency.
Michigan voters legalized marijuana for medical purposes in 2008. Voters approved the recreational use of marijuana in 2018.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
The former head of a Michigan marijuana licensing board has pleaded guilty to bribery
GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. — The former head of a Michigan marijuana licensing board pleaded guilty to bribery Tuesday, acknowledging he accepted at least $110,000 in exchange for approving applications for the lucrative business.
Rick Johnson’s appearance in federal court in Grand Rapids was a remarkable fall. Years ago he was a powerful state lawmaker, serving as speaker of the Republican-controlled House from 2001 through 2004.
The investigation so far has centered on corruption at the marijuana board before it was disbanded in 2019. The board reviewed and approved applications to grow and sell marijuana for medical purposes.
A Detroit-area businessman, John Dalaly, pleaded guilty last week. He said he provided at least $68,200 in cash and other benefits to Johnson, including two private flights to Canada.
Johnson, 70, answered a series of questions from the judge during the hourlong hearing but wasn’t asked to explain his motive for taking bribes. Johnson and defense lawyer Nick Dondzila declined to comment outside court.
Two lobbyists, Brian Pierce and Vincent Brown, have agreed to plead guilty to conspiring to pass bribes to Johnson. All four men are cooperating with the FBI, which could help them at sentencing.
Johnson’s plea agreement states that he must provide investigators with information about “any and all criminal activity of which he is aware” and testify in court or to a grand jury if necessary. That provision isn’t limited to his work on the marijuana board.
“We may or may not bring future charges in this case,” U.S. Attorney Mark Totten told reporters. “What I can say is that the investigation and prosecution of public corruption is a priority for our office. We will follow it wherever we find it.”
Prosecutors agreed not to bring charges against Johnson’s wife, Janice. Dalaly said Rick Johnson told him to hire her to work on license applications.
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer abolished the medical marijuana board a few months after taking office in 2019 and put oversight inside a state agency.
Michigan voters legalized marijuana for medical purposes in 2008. Voters approved the recreational use of marijuana in 2018.
___
White reported from Detroit.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
LIMA, Peru — Former President Alejandro Toledo arrived in Lima Sunday after being extradited from the United States to face charges he allegedly received millions of dollars in bribes in a giant corruption scandal that has ensnared four of Peru’s ex-presidents.
Toledo, who was Peru’s president from 2001 to 2006, had surrendered to U.S. authorities on Friday, ending a yearslong legal battle against his extradition, which started in 2019 when he was arrested at his home in Menlo Park, California.
Police and officials from Peru’s prosecutor’s office received Toledo, 77, at Lima’s airport early Sunday. Police released a photo of Toledo, looking disheveled, accompanied by agents. He was transferred to a court in Lima’s historic center.
Peru’s former president will serve 18 months of preventative detention while he is investigated for allegedly taking at least $20 million in bribes from Odebrecht, a giant Brazilian construction company that has admitted to U.S. authorities that it bribed officials to win contracts throughout Latin America for decades. Toledo has denied the charged.
After his arrest in California, he was initially held in solitary confinement at the Santa Rita Jail about 40 miles (60 kilometers) east of San Francisco but was released in 2020 because of the COVID-19 pandemic and his deteriorating mental health. He was held under house arrest after that.
He had sought a stay on his extradition, pending a legal challenge to the U.S. State Department’s decision to send him back to Peru, but a court of appeals denied his latest motion and a federal judge ordered him to surrender.
Toledo had been living in California since 2016 when he returned to Stanford University, his alma mater, as a visiting scholar to study education in Latin America.
Prison officials in Peru have not decided where Toledo will be held but have said it could be the prison that already holds ex-president Alberto Fujimori (1990 -2000) and ex-president Pedro Castillo (2021-2022). Fujimori is serving a 25-year prison sentence for his role in the murders of 25 Peruvians during his administration. Castillo is being held in pretrial detention while being investigated for rebellion in attempting to dissolve Parliament in 2022.
He is one of four ex-presidents linked to the Odebrecht corruption scandal that has shaken Peru’s politics, with nearly every living former president now on trial or under investigation.
Former President Ollanta Humala is standing trial on charges that he and his wife received over $3 million from Odebrecht for his presidential campaigns in 2006 and 2011. Both have denied any wrongdoing.
Ex-leader Pedro Pablo Kuczynski, who left office in 2018, is under house arrest for similar charges.
Former leader Alan García, in office from 2006-2011, fatally shot himself in the head in 2019 as police arrived at his home to arrest him.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Wilmington, Delaware
CNN
—
Dominion Voting Systems’ high-stakes defamation trial against Fox News, which was supposed to begin Monday, was abruptly delayed on Sunday evening, in a stunning eleventh-hour twist that threw into question whether a settlement was in the works.
Opening statements were expected on Monday, but the Delaware Superior Court said in a surprise announcement that “the start of the trial” will now be Tuesday.
The judge’s statement did not provide an explanation for the delay.
“The Court has decided to continue the start of the trial, including jury selection, until Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. I will make such an announcement tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 7E,” using the legal term “continue,” which means delay or postpone.
But the announcement came as The Wall Street Journal, which is owned by Fox Corporation Chairman Rupert Murdoch, reported on Sunday evening that “Fox has made a late push to settle the dispute out of court,” citing people familiar with the matter.
Neither Dominion nor Fox commented on the delay Sunday.
“Dominion has seemed quite motivated, throughout this case, to play it out on a public stage and correct the larger record on election denialism,” said RonNell Anderson Jones, a First Amendment expert and professor of law at the University of Utah.
“But Fox may be far more incentivized to move closer to whatever Dominion might be asking, after a very rough week of pretrial hearings last week and, especially, in light of the recent revelations from the ex-employee who is now in Dominion’s camp.”
Dominion had sued Fox News for defamation seeking damages of $1.6 billion. It says it was defamed by the right-wing network when Fox hosts and guests claimed in 2020 that its voting systems illegally rigged the election against Donald Trump.
Fox News has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, maintained it is “proud” of its 2020 election coverage, and argued that Dominion’s lawsuit represents a threat to the First Amendment. The network says the $1.6 billion figure is wildly inflated.
As the case has progressed through the court system and more damning material has emerged, legal experts have expressed surprise that Fox has not settled the case. A settlement would avert what promises to be an excruciating and embarrassing several weeks for Fox.
Some of the company’s highest-ranking executives and highest-profile hosts are scheduled to otherwise testify during the trial about the election lies promoted by the network in the wake of the 2020 election.
If a panel of jurors side with Dominion during trial and award a sum of money near what the voting technology company is asking for, it would represent one of the largest defamation defeats ever for a US media outlet.
Regardless of whether a case goes to trial, the evidence that has emerged from the case has battered Fox News’ credibility and reputation, exposing the network as a dishonest organization willing to push lies to its audience.
Private text messages and emails released as part of the case have already revealed top personnel at the right-wing talk network didn’t believe the conspiracy theories that were being put on the air and spread to viewers.
Prominent hosts such as Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity knew Trump’s lies about the election were detached from reality, the communications revealed, but they leaned into the voter fraud theories anyway on their shows.
— CNN’s Jon Passantino contributed reporting
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
CNN
—
Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp on Saturday urged his fellow Republicans to move on from the 2020 presidential election, offering a thinly veiled dig at former President Donald Trump and his continued election grievances.
Without naming Trump, Kemp’ said at a private Republican National Committee donor retreat in Nashville that “not a single swing voter in a single swing state will vote for our nominee if they choose to talk about the 2020 election being stolen.”
“To voters trying to pay their rent … make their car payment … or put their kids through college … 2020 is ancient history,” Kemp said, according to his prepared remarks, which were obtained by CNN’s Jake Tapper.
Trump, who announced his reelection campaign last fall, has repeatedly argued since leaving office that Republicans cannot have a successful future – either at the ballot box or legislatively – if they turn a blind eye to the past.
Tension between Trump and Kemp has been simmering for years. When Kemp refused to overturn Joe Biden’s 2020 win in Georgia, Trump made the governor his No. 1 enemy, publicly railing against him throughout 2021 and recruiting former US Sen. David Perdue to challenge Kemp in a GOP primary. Through it all, Trump failed to draw Kemp into a fight, and the governor won his 2022 primary overwhelmingly before handily defeating Democratic opponent Stacey Abrams in the November general election.
Also in the midterm elections, candidates who backed Trump’s false election claims did poorly in key swing states the former president will need to win back the White House in 2024.
Further complicating Trump’s bid is a cloud of legal woes. In New York, a hush money payment to an adult-film star shortly before the 2016 election has resulted in his indictment by a Manhattan grand jury over his alleged role in the scheme – the first time in American history that a current or former president faces criminal charges.
And in Atlanta, a select grand jury has investigated efforts by Trump and allies to overturn his election loss in Georgia in 2020.
Kemp made direct mention of these investigations Saturday, according to his prepared remarks, calling the probes distractions that could take the Republican Party off course and away from issues voters care about.
“Being distracted by what is happening at the Manhattan and Fulton County district attorney offices is not going to win us back the White House in 2024,” Kemp said. “The media and Democrats would love nothing more than for us to talk about this from sun-up to sundown until next November.”
“But here’s the truth: Fani Willis and Alvin Bragg’s investigations into allegations of the past don’t help hardworking Americans battling high grocery prices, growing pain at the gas pump or violent crime plaguing their neighborhoods,” he continued, referring to the district attorneys of Fulton County, Georgia, and Manhattan respectively.
“In fact, the person they help the most is Joe Biden.”
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
What are the ethical boundaries for people who have political power and influence?
I once invited a local lawmaker to lunch for an interview. Lunch would be on me. He wouldn’t allow it. “I wouldn’t even let you buy me a cup of coffee at Starbucks,” he told me.
At least that was a good thing, since I’m not exactly a fan of Starbucks.
But we did the interview, and we split the lunch tab.
I’m pretty sure he’d have turned down a chance to go island-hopping on some billionaire’s yacht.
Nearly every year for the past two decades, the Supreme Court justice enjoyed luxury vacations and free travel at the invitation of GOP megadonor and conservative billionaire Harlan Crow.
We’re only now learning about this because Thomas disclosed none of it. It took an investigation by ProPublica to bring the story to light, and we find ourselves in that familiar void between what’s not illegal and what’s unethical.
It shouldn’t be too hard to decipher. A 4-year-old child can make the distinction. “Run out and find me a 4-year-old child,” Groucho Marx once joked.
ProPublica spoke to several experts on disclosure laws and ethics.
Like most government officials, like most government employees, Supreme Court justices are required to report all gifts every year on a public filing. If they don’t reimburse the value of the gift, it has to be disclosed. The threshold requiring disclosure for Supreme Court justices is $415. The cost of renting a private jet for domestic travel is $70,000, according to ProPublica’s investigation.
Only once in 20 years — 1997 — has Thomas disclosed receiving a private jet trip on Crow’s Bombardier Global 5000.
Several experts on the issues of disclosure and ethics who spoke to ProPublica agreed: “Failure to report the gifts is a violation of the disclosure law.”
In a nutshell, Thomas was required to disclose gifts valued over $415, including travel. He has been getting private jet flights every year to the tune of $70,000 a pop, not to mention cruises and trips around the world. It’s millions of dollars in gifts, and he didn’t report a dime of it.
Federal rules on gifts and disclosure are stringent. Employees cannot accept any personal gift from a vendor or consultant that exceeds $20 without reporting it. They are warned regularly and typically required to take mandatory annual ethics training to remind them of this simple rule.
The same is true for many who work in the private sector. In some operations, employees must disclose the gifts they returned. Or it is mandatory to take an annual ethics compliance course complete with a test to prove your training in the company code of conduct. You would then sign off on that training with the understanding your employer would terminate you for any violations.
A federal employee once told me that if he took too many branded pens and Post-it notes from a vendor, that mere appearance of impropriety could cost him his job.
The reason for all this is obvious: Accepting any form of gift opens the door to a potential quid pro quo for the giver of such gifts.
A federal judge is under strict rules about accepting any gratuities. One federal judge told ProPublica that when making dinner reservations, she would never use her title as a judge to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.
“It was a question of not wanting to use the office for anything other than what it was intended,” she said.
The code of conduct for federal judges has never applied to the Supreme Court — only to federal judges below that level. According to Chief Justice John Roberts, members of the high court “consult” that code for guidance. The Supreme Court has been left almost entirely to police itself.
However, recently updated filing instructions for the judiciary now require Supreme Court justices to follow tougher financial disclosure requirements surrounding gifts.
Harlan Crow has been a major Republican donor for decades and has deep connections with conservative pro-business politics. He helped found the influential anti-tax group Club for Growth, which openly pushed to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which has gone before the Supreme Court more than once. Crow has donated to the Federalist Society, a group central in the Supreme Court’s shift to the right.
He was a backer of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group that successfully assailed John Kerry’s war record in the 2004 presidential campaign. In 2011, he donated half a million dollars to a Tea Party group founded by Ginni Thomas, which also paid her annual salary of $120,000.
He also heavily supports FreedomWorks, a group opposing President Joe Biden’s student loan relief plan. For over 25 years, he’s been on the board of the American Enterprise Institute, a staunchly conservative think tank. He also sits on the board of the Hoover Institution, another conservative think tank.
But the full scale of Crow’s patronage is unknown, given donations to groups that keep their donors secret. “I don’t disclose what I’m not required to disclose,” Crow once told The New York Times. And there is still much we don’t know about the relationship between Crow and Thomas, partly because so much of what Thomas knows remained secret for many years.
In a statement to ProPublica, Crow insisted there was never any form of influence peddling:
We have never asked about a pending or lower court case, and Justice Thomas has never discussed one, and we have never sought to influence Justice Thomas on any legal or political issue. More generally, I am unaware of any of our friends ever lobbying or seeking to influence Justice Thomas on any case, and I would never invite anyone who I believe had any intention of doing that. These are gatherings of friends.
Thomas claimed that he was not required to disclose the lavish trips via private plane rides from his billionaire friend.
“Early in my tenure at the Court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable,” Thomas said in a statement released by the court Friday. “I have endeavored to follow that counsel throughout my tenure, and have always sought to comply with the disclosure guidelines.
“These guidelines are now being changed, as the committee of the Judicial Conference responsible for financial disclosure for the entire federal judiciary just this past month announced new guidance. And, it is, of course, my intent to follow this guidance in the future.”
I don’t care if they discussed cases or not. With the current “donation logic” in a political world with big corporations and the wealthy “donating” to conservative politicians to get what they want without discussing it, it simply doesn’t pass the sniff test.
It doesn’t matter that not a single mention of Harlan Crow or his business ever came up during those 20 years. Every case relating to business, be it Crow’s as a real estate magnate, or any issue of indirect consequence — water regulation, zoning, workers’ compensation — affects the bottom line of a billionaire. Isn’t it conceivable that Crow could benefit his bottom line with every drink and every meal he served the Thomases?
Just having a chat over dinner is bound to influence Thomas in some way or another. It’s like saying, “Yeah, I hang out with Dave, a card-carrying Communist, but we never discuss politics.” Just being around someone can influence your thinking. It’s the reason we have mandatory gift reporting.
How can Supreme Court justices have weaker ethics rules than the average government worker? How could an individual so learned in the law not understand the appearance of impropriety?
There is something wrong with the reality of being ruled by an unaccountable group of clerics with lifetime appointments who get to decide our laws.
It practically goes without saying that if one of the court’s three liberal justices had been doing what Thomas has been doing throughout their tenure, Republicans would be screaming bloody murder. If Sonya Sotomayor accepted even a single dinner from George Soros, the right-wing media would be apoplectic.
Would Democrats and liberals remain quiet if the tables were turned? I dunno, let’s ask Al Franken.
When this news broke, I imagined people throughout the Fox network shouting into telephones about crafting talking points to make it look as if Clarence Thomas did nothing wrong. You’d be left in a state of complete bewilderment about how they can be so brazen. (What, you mean again?)
This shouldn’t be a left or right issue, but simply an ethical one. As one ethics lawyer put it to ProPublica: “When a justice’s lifestyle is being subsidized by the rich and famous, it absolutely corrodes public trust.”
And that is the point. Legal experts can say what they will, but the way the public sees it, or should see it, is pretty simple: “Dat don’t look good.”
In a functioning democracy, Thomas would be impeached immediately. His failure to report the flights appears to violate a law passed after Watergate that requires justices, judges, members of Congress, and federal officials to disclose most gifts.
Don’t hold your breath on an impeachment. In Congress, the House launches an impeachment proceeding. The Senate handles the trial. You do know who controls the House, right? Good luck getting Marjorie Taylor Greene to give Kevin McCarthy permission to let anybody even mention it on the floor.
If Thomas were a Democrat, the GOP would be screaming for him to step down immediately, and he probably would. But because he’s a Republican, no one in the GOP will call for him to step down because everyone knows there’s no chance he ever will. Just ask George Santos.
But fear not, good citizen. Surely John Roberts will do something. He would never let anything tarnish the legitimacy of his court!
A fundamental problem with our democracy is that bribery is legal and baked into the system. A fundamental mistake has been to assume that a Supreme Court justice would be ethical beyond reproach because they get a job for life. But they are human beings with flaws and personal biases, just like anyone else. They should be subject to the same ethical standards, just like anyone else.
People of influence should avoid even the hint of impropriety in their dealings, especially those with the power to make and interpret laws. Isn’t this what the nation is dealing with now with Donald Trump? Have you ever seen the film “American Gangster”? Or “Serpico”? Those are based on true stories about corrupt cops who took drug money to look the other way. When they got caught, and they did, they went to jail.
Bad enough that Ginni Thomas has been deeply involved in conservative advocacy for many years, disturbingly so given who she’s married to. What Clarence Thomas has been doing for the past 20 years is even more brazen: a Supreme Court justice behaving as if he is above the law. And if it isn’t a question of law, how about a question of public trust?
The Supreme Court has maintained that they it does not have a code of conduct because it doesn’t need one. It’s clear now that the honorables have always needed one. One wonders, too, how many fellow justices looked the other way in the face of clear ethical violations.
I’m not even sure we need a rule to prohibit this sort of thing. Any citizen of even pedestrian knowledge can see this is entirely unacceptable. How can the high court have any credibility now? We can’t even call it a high court anymore, can we?
We want to believe that no one is above the law. Does that also hold for Supreme Court justices? What if it isn’t a law, but a question of ethics? Should we also live by a code that says an ethical violation should result in a punishment similar to illegal behavior?
The possibility always troubles us that public officials in service to the electorate and the nation might fall prey to temptation that can compromise their ethics. It’s one of many things that makes us suspicious about government, that makes us mistrust government. If that is an accurate reading of the electorate, then what do we say about people who violate those ethical standards. And what should we do about them?
The ProPublica investigation has given us yet another reason the Supreme Court enjoys little respect anymore and no longer deserves any. As if we needed another reminder that we are at the mercy of a tiny group of people.
In closing, I’ll just say this: I believe you, Anita.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Former President Donald Trump is charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in connection with a scheme that directed hush money payments to two women before the 2016 presidential election.
The 16-page indictment against Trump was unsealed Tuesday as he became the first former U.S. president ever to be arraigned on criminal charges.
“Not guilty,” Trump said from his seat to Judge Juan Merchan during the hearing in Manhattan Supreme Court.
The indictment says those payments were part of a broader scheme to suppress claims by the women, porn star Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal, that they had sex with Trump, in a bid to keep their stories from affecting Trump’s chances against Democrat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.
Follow CNBC.com‘s live coverage of former President Donald Trump’s surrender and arraignment at the Manhattan criminal courthouse.
Prosecutors also said a Trump-friendly publishing company, American Media Inc., paid $30,000 to a former Trump Tower doorman who claimed to have a story about Trump fathering a child out of wedlock.
All three payments were part of an alleged “catch and kill” effort by Trump and others, among them then-AMI chief David Pecker, from August 2015 to December 2017 “to identify, purchase, and bury negative information about him and boost his electoral prospects,” prosecutors said.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg at a press conference said each of the false statements in business records, which related to the payment to Daniels, were done to cover up other crimes related to the 2016 election.
Those crimes included violations of New York state election law, and false statements to tax authorities, he said. Falsifying business records can be charged as a misdemeanor, but it also can be charged as a felony if done to cover up another crime.
Merchan scheduled the next hearing in the case for Dec. 4. It is possible that the criminal case will not be resolved before the 2024 presidential election, where Trump is seeking the Republican nomination.
Bragg in a statement said, “The People of the State of New York allege that Donald J. Trump repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal crimes that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election.”
“Manhattan is home to the country’s most significant business market. We cannot allow New York businesses to manipulate their records to cover up criminal conduct,” Bragg said.
A prosecutor told the judge that the DA’s office was concerned about comments Trump has made on social media that could threaten the DA’s office and the city.
That included one post depicting Trump wielding a bat over the head of District Attorney Alvin Bragg.
The judge said that he was taking the harsh rhetoric by Trump about the case very seriously.
One of Trump’s lawyers, Todd Blanche, told Merchan that Trump has spoken forcefully, but that he was within his rights to do so.
Before the arraignment, Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., posted a photo on Trump’s Truth Social site of Merchan’s daughter, who according to a Breitbart news article worked on the election campaign of President Joe Biden.
“Seems relevant,” the younger Trump wrote. “The BS never ends folks.”
Daniels received $130,000 from Trump’s then-lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen at Trump’s direction, 12 days before the 2016 election. Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, says she had sex with Trump one time in 2006, several months after his wife Melania Trump gave birth to their son Barron.
Trump later reimbursed Cohen with a series of monthly checks, 11 in total. The checks first were issued by the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, while later ones came from Trump’s bank account, prosecutors said.
Nine of the checks were signed by Trump, and “Each check was processed by the Trump Organization and illegally disguised as a payment for legal services rendered pursuant to a non-existent retainer agreement” with Cohen.
Former U.S. President Donald Trump appears in court with his lawyer Joe Tacopina for an arraignment on charges stemming from his indictment by a Manhattan grand jury following a probe into hush money paid to porn star Stormy Daniels, in New York City, U.S., April 4, 2023.
Andrew Kelly | Reuters
McDougal received $150,000 from AMI, the publisher of The National Enquirer, the supermarket tabloid that was allied with Trump. McDougal has said she had a long-term affair with Trump that began in 2006.
Trump denies having sex with either Daniels or McDougal.
Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 to federal crimes, two of which were campaign finance violations for facilitating the payments to both Daniels and McDougal.
The grand jury indicted Trump on Thursday. The charging document had remained sealed since then.
The grand jury began hearing testimony in the case in late January.
News of the proceedings came as a surprise, since a former prosecutor in the district attorney’s office last year had suggested the investigation into Trump was all but dead after Bragg declined to seek an indictment against Trump in connection with allegedly false financial statements involving real estate assets.
Trump separately is under criminal investigation by the Department of Justice and a state prosecutor in Georgia for efforts to reverse his 2020 election loss to President Joe Biden.
The DOJ also is probing Trump for retaining government records after leaving the White House and for possible obstruction of justice.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
A judge in the Dominican Republic on Tuesday ordered an ex-presidential candidate held under house arrest and two former high-ranking officials jailed while awaiting trial in a record $347 million embezzlement case
SANTO DOMINGO, Dominican Republic — A judge in the Dominican Republic on Tuesday ordered an ex-presidential candidate held under house arrest and two former high-ranking officials jailed while awaiting trial in a record $347 million embezzlement case linked to illegal campaign financing.
Gonzalo Castillo, a former public works minister who won 37% of the vote when he ran in the 2020 general elections and lost to current President Luis Abinader, was held under house arrest on $365,000 bond. Donald Guerrero, former treasury minister, and José Ramón Peralta, former administrative minister to the presidency, were ordered held without bail for 18 months.
The judge also banned former comptroller general, Daniel Omar Caamaño, from leaving the country, and placed former director of the State Sugar Council, Luis Miguel Piccirilo, under house arrest.
It wasn’t immediately clear if their attorneys would appeal the decision. A total of 20 suspects have been arrested in the case. Officials of Castillo’s Dominican Liberation Party have accused prosecutors of investigating only former government officials while turning a blind eye to corruption allegations against Abinader’s current administration.
The Dominican Republic’s justice system allows authorities to hold suspects in jail without bond or under house arrest ahead of trial.
Judge Kenya Romero also stated that prosecutors have a total of 18 months to investigate what is considered the country’s biggest corruption case.
Last month, authorities arrested Castillo and other suspects accused of paying bribes, laundering assets and illegally financing the previous electoral campaign after embezzling $347 million in government funds.
Abinader has vowed to crack down on corruption and impunity. Last year, police arrested Jean Alain Rodríguez, the Dominican Republic’s former attorney general, and others accused of diverting government funds in an unrelated case.
Also arrested in other cases are several high-ranking government officials with ties to former President Danilo Medina.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Charlie Javice, Founder/CEO of Frank, which is a college financial aid start-up.
Source: JP Morgan
The Justice Department on Tuesday criminally charged Charlie Javice, founder of college financial planning platform Frank, with defrauding JPMorgan Chase out of $175 million.
Javice, 31, is accused of “falsely and dramatically” inflating the number of customers Frank actually had in a scheme to “fraudulently induce” the bank to acquire the startup in 2021, federal prosecutors in Manhattan said. She stood to gain more than $45 million from the alleged deception, they added.
The one-time rising tech star — who was once named as one of Forbes’ 30 Under 30 — was arrested Monday night in New Jersey and is expected in Manhattan federal court Tuesday afternoon.
She faces four counts. They are one count of conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud, one count of wire fraud affecting a financial institution, one count of bank fraud, and one count of securities fraud. Three of the charges each carry a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison.
“This arrest should warn entrepreneurs who lie to advance their businesses that their lies will catch up to them, and this Office will hold them accountable for putting their greed above the law,” Damian Williams, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said in a statement.
The Securities and Exchange Commission on Tuesday also sued Javice for fraud in connection with the alleged scheme.
“Charlie denies the allegations,” a spokesperson for her attorney, Alex Spiro, told CNBC. Spiro had no additional comments, the spokesperson said.
JPMorgan did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The bank’s CEO, Jamie Dimon, in January called the acquisition of Frank a “huge mistake.”
The charges come months after JPMorgan filed a lawsuit against Javice alleging she duped the bank into believing Frank had more than 4 million customers. In reality, the startup had fewer than 300,000, JPMorgan said in its suit.
Javice used a data science professor to invent millions of fake accounts after JPMorgan pressed for confirmation of Frank’s customer base, the bank alleged. The suit included emails between the professor and Javice, including when the entrepreneur asked, “Will the fake emails look real with an eye check or better to use unique ID?”
JPMorgan only discovered the discrepancy when 70% of emails sent to a batch of about 400,000 Frank customers bounced back, according to the bank. It shut down the startup in January.
Javice in February filed a counterclaim, saying it was “implausible” that JPMorgan “was led to believe Frank had 4.25 million registered users when its website publicly claimed the company had helped more than 350,000 people access financial aid.”
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
U.S. President Donald Trump delivers an update on the so-called Operation Warp Speed program, the joint Defense Department and HHS initiative that has struck deals with several drugmakers in an effort to help speed up the search for effective treatments for the ongoing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, in an address from the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, U.S., November 13, 2020.
Carlos Barria | Reuters
Former President Donald Trump has been hit with about 30 criminal charges related to alleged document fraud in the indictment issued against him by a New York grand jury, NBC reported Friday.
The indictment, which was approved Thursday, remains sealed in Manhattan Supreme Court.
Trump, who is the leading contender for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, is scheduled to be arraigned in Manhattan court on Tuesday.
At least part, if not all, of the indictment is understood to be related to Trump’s reimbursement of his then-lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen for a $130,000 hush money payment made to porn star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 presidential election.
The Trump Organization recorded payments that Trump made to Cohen for that purpose as “legal expenses.”
It is a misdemeanor under New York law to misclassify business expenses. That can become a felony if done to cover up another crime.
Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, was paid to keep silent about her claim that she had sex with Trump in 2006. He denies her account.
Trump is the first U.S. president, former or otherwise, to be charged in a criminal case.
A Quinnipiac University poll released this week found that a majority of Americans believe that Trump should be disqualified from running for the White House if he is charged with a crime.
However, there is no law against Trump seeking the presidency while facing charges.
Follow our live coverage of the NY grand jury’s indictment of former President Donald Trump.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
CARACAS, Venezuela — One startup lists as its address a small home in a working-class district in Venezuela‘s capital whose owner has never heard of the firm. Another is a Hong Kong-based shell company created in 2020. Yet another belongs to a Spanish commodities trader indicted in the U.S. for allegedly helping Russian oligarchs launder ill-gotten profits.
They are among the dozens of obscure middlemen and go-betweens at the center of a new crackdown in Venezuela on corruption in the state-run oil industry that has government insiders scurrying for cover. At the same time, regular Venezuelans are asking how more than $20 billion in proceeds from oil shipments seemingly vanished.
The purge began this month when authorities arrested 21 people, including business executives, senior officials and a lawmaker, as part of an investigation into missing payments for oil shipments. In a sign of the government’s desire to promote its anti-corruption crusade, state media this week were filled with images of the defendants dressed in orange jumpsuits walking into their initial judicial hearing.
Corruption has long plagued Venezuela — the OPEC nation was the fourth-most corrupt in the world in the latest rankings by Transparency International — but those in positions of power are rarely held accountable.
And when high profile arrests do take place, Venezuelans tend to view them as the result of a behind-the-scenes tug of war among rival heavyweights in the ruling socialist party, and not any impartial meting out of justice in a country where most institutions lack independence.
An entrenched culture of corruption and the inherently opaque nature of trading illegal crude oil take malfeasance to another level.
“These are two things that come together at the same time,” said Francisco Monaldi, a Venezuelan economist who heads the Latin America energy program at Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy. “It would be very difficult for even a much less corrupt state to implement all the necessary controls.”
While the fallout from the scandal continues, it already has felled one major power broker — Tareck El Aissami, the country’s oil czar. He quit in the wake of the arrests, which included the detention of a close associate, Joselit Ramirez, who had been serving as Venezuela’s cryptocurrency regulator. The U.S. already considered both of them fugitives from justice.
While Venezuelan authorities have not mentioned El Aissami as a target in the investigation, most of the shady transactions at state-run oil giant Petroleos de Venezuela SA occurred under his watch and while Asdrubal Chávez, a cousin of the late President Hugo Chávez, served as president of the company, known widely as PDVSA.
“As a revolutionary militant, I place myself at the disposal of the socialist party leadership to support this crusade …. against the anti-values that we are obliged to fight, even with our lives,” El Aissami tweeted to announce his surprise resignation as oil minister.
Internal PDVSA documents obtained by The Associated Press show the state oil company was owed $10.1 billion as of August 2022 from 90 mostly unknown trading companies that have emerged as major buyers of Venezuelan crude since the U.S. imposed economic sanctions in a campaign to oust President Nicolás Maduro.
An additional $13.3 billion, corresponding to 241 tanker shipments, is owed directly to the national government as a result of an October accounting maneuver by PDVSA that reassigned responsibility for collecting the unpaid invoices directly to the Maduro administration in lieu of cash royalties. That is more than the entire foreign currency reserves held at Venezuela’s central bank.
All the oil cargoes were sold on consignment at a deep discount owing to the sanctions, which have dissuaded more established traders from doing business with Venezuela.
PDVSA’s reliance on intermediaries surged in 2020, when the Trump administration expanded sanctions with the threat to lock out of the U.S. economy any individual or company, regardless of nationality or location, that did business with Maduro’s government.
The punishing action, combined with a pandemic-induced global slump in demand for oil, led PDVSA’s production that summer to drop to as little as 350,000 barrels a day — just 10% of what it produced when Chávez took office in 1999.
To sell what little is being produced, Maduro, with the help of allies Russia and Iran — themselves under U.S. sanctions — has had to rely on a complex network of intermediaries. Most are shell companies, registered in jurisdictions known for secrecy like Panama, Belize and Hong Kong. The buyers deploy so-called ghost tankers that hide their location and hand off their valuable cargoes in the middle of the ocean before they reach their final destination, usually in Asia.
To get around Western banks, Venezuela started accepting payments in Russian rubles, bartered goods or cryptocurrency.
But not everyone paid.
The internal documents show that uncollected payments owed to PDVSA by the go-between brokers range from as little as $526 to $1.2 billion as of August.
Among those on the delinquent list is Walker International DW-LLC, which owes PDVSA about $77 million, according to the internal documents. The company is registered in the United Arab Emirates but lists as its Venezuela address a modest house almost at the foot of the mountain range that separate Caracas from the Caribbean Sea.
The owner of the home, Andres Muzo, expressed shock that his home could somehow be connected to a case of international corruption.
“I’m finding about this right now,” Muzo said after seeing his address in Dubai corporate records, which were first unearthed in a November report by the Venezuelan investigative news website Armando.info. He shook his head and said he would ask the people who rent his adjacent garage for a car wash and oil-change business if they knew anything.
“They have tools in there, but no, we don’t know anything,” Muzo said standing outside the home with decorative clay tiles on the roof and brown ceramic tiles on the weathered façade. “They must be clandestine companies, I would say. They have nothing, nothing under my name, not even a piece of paper.”
A small lock keeps shut the rolling garage door with a message that instructs drivers not to block it.
At least 15 of the 90 defaulters accumulated debts for two consecutive years.
The broker with the largest debt is M and Y Trading Co. Little is known about the company, which was registered in Hong Kong in late 2020. But it owes PDVSA more than $1.2 billion, according to the internal documents, which someone knowledgeable about the transactions shared with AP on the condition that they remain anonymous.
Another preferred vendor was United Petroleo Corp, which was registered in Panama in 2021 and owes more than $468 million to PDVSA. One of United’s cargoes — a 600,000-barrel shipment last September — is at the center of a controversy on the Dutch Caribbean island of Curacao, where the Venezuelan crude is being stored at a facility tied to U.S. investors in possible defiance of sanctions.
Yet another of PDVSA’s go-to partners was Treseus International. The commodities broker took possession of only $16 million worth of oil from PDVSA, almost all of which it has paid. But the company, which did not respond to an email seeking comment, stands out for the alleged criminal activity of its chief executive officer, Juan Fernando Serrano.
Serrano, a commodities trader, was indicted last year on money laundering charges in a New York federal court for conspiring to smuggle oil on behalf of wealthy Russian businessmen. That court also wants El Aissami and Ramirez on charges of violating U.S. sanctions stemming from El Aissami’s 2017 designation by Washington as a “drug kingpin” for allegedly helping cartels smuggle multiple cocaine shipments through Venezuela.
Venezuelan authorities have yet to say how much money may be missing, nor has the government mentioned specific companies it is investigating. But Maduro has used some of his recent evening appearances on state TV to warn ministers and other officials against corruption and urge them to do their jobs. Ruling party supporters even gathered for an anti-corruption protest in Caracas.
“I think it’s a horrible thing. One trusts people and doesn’t know they are a lion in sheep’s clothing,” said Lidia Rondón, a housewife who participated in the demonstration. “This destroys us all.”
Past crackdowns — like the arrest of a former PDVSA president in 2017 — did little to clean up the Venezuelan oil industry, which is responsible for almost all of the country’s hard currency earnings. Many analysts suspect Maduro is looking to finally address critical cash flow problems and stabilize the economy before next year’s presidential election.
“Coffers are bare and the country is entering an election year in which Maduro wants to convey a message that Venezuela is getting back on track,” said Geoff Ramsey, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. “The more it becomes clear that the economy remains in dire straits, the more Maduro will look for people to take the fall.”
___
Goodman reported from Miami.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
LOS ANGELES — A longtime Los Angeles politician was convicted Thursday on federal corruption charges in a scheme in which prosecutors said he promised to help steer a multimillion-dollar government contract to the University of Southern California if his son got a scholarship and a teaching job.
Former Democratic City Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas — a one-time legislator, county supervisor and a fixture in local politics for decades — was found guilty in U.S. District Court of seven felonies, including conspiracy, bribery and fraud.
The jury’s verdict marked a stunning fall for a once-commanding figure in Los Angeles County politics known for his involvement in civil rights and racial issues.
Marilyn Flynn, who was dean of USC’s School of Social Work from 1997 to 2018, pleaded guilty last year to one count of bribery in the case. Prosecutors said that as part of the plot, she concocted a scheme to funnel $100,000 that Ridley-Thomas provided from campaign funds through the university to a nonprofit run by his son.
“When elected leaders engage in acts of corruption, our community suffers immense damage. Ridley-Thomas engaged in a corrupt conspiracy with a university dean to steer taxpayer-funded contracts to the school in exchange for benefits for his son,” U.S. Attorney Martin Estrada said in a statement.
Ridley-Thomas, then a county supervisor, offered to support county contracts for USC’s School of Social Work that could potentially bring the institution millions of dollars in new revenue in return for helping his son, Sebastian Ridley-Thomas, according to prosecutors. At the time, the school had a multimillion-dollar budget deficit.
Sebastian Ridley-Thomas was a state assemblyman who resigned the last day of 2017 while facing allegations that he made an unwanted sexual advance toward a Capitol staffer. The $100,000 went to his organization, known as the Policy, Research & Practice Initiative, prosecutors said.
The son later received a $26,000 graduate scholarship for 2018 and was offered a paid teaching position with a $50,000 salary, even though being a student and a teacher would violate school policy, authorities said.
The Los Angeles City Council suspended Mark Ridley-Thomas in October 2021, shortly after he was charged in the case. With his conviction on felony charges, Council President Paul Krekorian said in a statement the seat was vacant under city law.
Krekorian said he was appointing Councilwoman Heather Hutt as a caretaker of the seat, who earlier had been named to temporarily fill the post after Ridely-Thomas was suspended. Krekorian said he would urge the council at its next meting to appoint Hutt to hold the office for the remainder of Ridley-Thomas’ term.
Ridley-Thomas, who denied wrongdoing, left the courthouse after the verdict without speaking to reporters. A representative for his defense team told the Los Angeles Times that he would appeal.
He will be sentenced in August.
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, a longtime friend and political ally, called the verdict a “sad day for Los Angeles.”
USC wasn’t accused of wrongdoing in the criminal case but it further tarnished the school’s elite image, already battered by a series of scandals.
USC was one of the universities embroiled in an admissions cheating scandal in which wealthy parents sought to get their undeserving offspring into college by falsely portraying them as star athletes. Dozens of parents and athletic coaches nationwide were charged and more than 50 people were convicted in the “Operation Varsity Blues” case. They include TV actresses Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin, and Loughlin’s fashion designer husband Mossimo Giannulli.
In 2021, USC agreed to an $852 million settlement with more than 700 women who accused the college’s longtime campus gynecologist of sexual abuse. It was believed to be a record amount for such a lawsuit. When combined with an earlier settlement of a separate class-action suit, USC has agreed to pay out more than $1 billion for claims against the doctor, who worked at the school for nearly three decades.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
A New York grand jury voted Thursday to indict former President Donald Trump in connection with a $130,000 hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election, his lawyer told CNBC.
Trump attorney Joe Tacopina told NBC News that Trump is expected to surrender to the Manhattan District Attorney’s office early next week.
Trump is the first former president to be charged with a crime, a development that will reverberate around the country. The indictment comes as he is the leading contender seeking the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.
The office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg confirmed the indictment Thursday evening.
“This evening we contacted Mr. Trump’s attorney to coordinate his surrender to the Manhattan D.A.’s Office for arraignment on a Supreme Court indictment, which remains under seal. Guidance will be provided when the arraignment date is selected,” said a spokesperson for Bragg’s office.
The number of charges Trump faces in the indictment was not disclosed Thursday. And it was not known whether the indictment was limited to conduct related to the payment to Daniels or if it also includes conduct surrounding a separate hush money payment to former Playboy model Karen McDougal by the publisher of The National Enquirer.
Trump blasted the decision, calling it “Political Persecution and Election Interference at the highest level in history.” Just Wednesday, he had said in a social media post that he had “gained such respect for this grand jury.”
The charge stems from the district attorney’s investigation into how the Trump Organization recorded a reimbursement to Trump’s then-lawyer Michael Cohen after Cohen paid Daniels, who’s also known as Stephanie Clifford, to keep her quiet about an alleged sexual encounter she says she had with Trump in 2006.
Follow our live coverage of the New York grand jury vote to indict former President Donald Trump.
Trump was filming his TV show, “Celebrity Apprentice,” at the time of that purported tryst, and was married to his current wife, Melania Trump, who had given birth to their son, Barron, a few months earlier.
The Trump Organization in business records described the reimbursement to Cohen as a legal expense.
Falsifying business records is normally a misdemeanor under New York law, but can be elevated to a felony if the misstatement was done to cover up another crime.
Trump denies having sex with Daniels or committing wrongdoing of any kind.
“This is Political Persecution and Election Interference at the highest level in history,” Trump said in a statement. “The Democrats have lied, cheated and stolen in their obsession with trying to ‘Get Trump,’ but now they’ve done the unthinkable — indicting a completely innocent person in an act of blatant Election Interference.”
Tacopina and another Trump lawyer, Susan Necheles, said: “President Trump has been indicted. He did not commit any crime.”
“We will vigorously fight this political prosecution in Court,” the defense lawyers said.
The indictment, which will be prosecuted by Bragg’s office, is the first in what could end up being several criminal cases against Trump, the leading contender for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.
Trump is also under investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice in two separate criminal cases. One is related to his efforts to overturn the Electoral College victory of President Joe Biden in the 2020 election as he made false claims of widespread ballot fraud in the popular vote that year. The other probe is focused on Trump’s removal of government records from the White House, and whether he obstructed justice by keeping them at his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, for more than a year as government officials sought their return.
A state prosecutor in Atlanta is also separately investigating Trump and a number of his allies over their attempt to get Georgia officials to reverse his loss to Biden in the state in 2020.
Former US President Donald Trump speaks at a campaign event in Waco, Texas, on Saturday, March 25, 2023.
Brandon Bell | Getty Images
Cohen, in a statement to NBC News, said: “For the first time in our Country’s history, a President (current or former) of the United States has been indicted. I take no pride in issuing this statement and wish to also remind everyone of the presumption of innocence; as provided by the due process clause.”
“However, I do take solace in validating the adage that no one is above the law; not even a former President,” Cohen said. “Today’s indictment is not the end of this chapter; but rather, just the beginning. Now that the charges have been filed, it is better for the case to let the indictment speak for itself. The two things I wish to say at this time is that accountability matters and I stand by my testimony and the evidence I have provided to” the Manhattan district attorney, he said.
The Manhattan prosecution of Trump comes more than four years after Cohen, who loyally served him for years before that, turned on Trump and began cooperating with federal, state and local law enforcement officials in New York.
Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 to federal criminal charges that included campaign finance violations for both the Daniels payment and a separate payment he facilitated to McDougal, the former Playboy model, to buy her silence over an affair she said she started with Trump in 2006.
The Federal Election Commission in 2021 fined the publisher of The National Enquirer $187,500 for “knowingly and willfully” violating campaign law by paying McDougal a $150,000 “catch and kill” fee to buy her story and bury it ahead of the 2016 election.
Michael Cohen, former attorney for former U.S. President Donald Trump, arrives to the New York Courthouse in New York City, U.S., March 13, 2023.
Eduardo Munoz | Reuters
Cohen said the payments were designed to protect Trump’s chances in that election, when he faced Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Trump escaped punishment from the FEC.
Cohen met 20 times with investigators from the DA’s office before testifying over two days last week before the grand jury in Manhattan Criminal Court. That panel began meeting in late January and heard testimony from multiple witnesses before Cohen.
Trump and a number of Republican elected officials have accused Bragg, who is a Democrat, of pursuing the investigation to harm him politically.
Bragg’s focus on the payment to Daniels in recent months came as a surprise, as it was considered by many to be the weakest possible criminal case against Trump in a probe that began four years ago under Bragg’s predecessor as DA, Cyrus Vance Jr.
Adult-film actress Stephanie Clifford, also known as Stormy Daniels speaks US Federal Court with her lawyer Michael Avenatti (R) on April 16, 2018, in Lower Manhattan, New York.
Eduardo Munoz Alvarez | AFP | Getty Images
In February 2022, two top prosecutors who were working on the investigation quit after Bragg indicated he was suspending the probe.
At the time, that investigation was focused on Cohen’s allegations that Trump and the Trump Organization reported different values for the same real estate properties to lower their tax burden and insurance costs and to maximize the value of loans against them, among other things.
One of the prosecutors, Mark Pomerantz, in his resignation letter said Trump was “guilty of numerous felony violations,” which related to the “preparation and use of his annual Statements of Financial Condition,” which “were false.”
Attorney General Letitia James in September filed a civil lawsuit seeking at least $250 million in penalties from Trump, his company, and three of his adult children, alleging widespread fraud in financial statements.
James’ lawsuit, which is headed to trial later this year, seeks to permanently bar Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and Ivanka Trump from serving as an officer of a company in New York and permanently prohibit the Trump companies named in the suit from doing business in New York state.
In December, a Manhattan jury convicted two subsidiaries of the Trump Organization of multiple crimes related to a scheme that since 2005 had sought to avoid paying taxes on executive compensation in the form of perks including free apartments and luxury cars to then-chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg.
Trump was not personally charged in that case, but he “knew exactly what was going on,” a prosecutor said in closing arguments in Manhattan Supreme Court.
The Trump subsidiaries convicted in the case were fined $1.6 million for the scheme in January at sentencing.
Weisselberg, who had pleaded guilty in that case in August, was sentenced in January to five months in jail. He is scheduled to be released from the notorious Rikers Island jail on April 19, which factors in time off his sentence for good behavior.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
The Teflon Don is facing his biggest test.
After years of investigations and probes into Donald Trump for a wide variety of alleged crimes, a Manhattan grand jury voted Thursday to indict him, marking the first time in U.S. history a former president will face criminal charges.
The indictment has yet to be unsealed so the specifics of the charges weren’t immediately clear, but the Manhattan district attorney has alleged that Trump had broken the law for his role in a hush-money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels at the height of the 2016 presidential election to silence her story claiming they once had an affair. Despite years of various investigations, Trump had so far avoided prosecution.
The New York Times was first to report the indictment, which was confirmed by Trump’s lawyers, Joe Tacopina and Susan Necheles, late Thursday. “President Trump has been indicted,” they said in a statement. “He did not commit any crime. We will vigorously fight this this political prosecution in court.”
In his own statement, Trump called the indictment “political persecution and election interference at the highest level,” and accused Democrats of “cheating” and “weaponizing our justice system.”
In an emailed statement Thursday, a spokesperson for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Braggs said arrangements are being made for Trump’s surrender: “This evening we contacted Mr. Trump’s attorney to coordinate his surrender to the Manhattan D.A.’s Office for arraignment on a Supreme Court indictment, which remains under seal. Guidance will be provided when the arraignment date is selected.”
There were news reports that Trump would turn himself in next week, and in an email to MarketWatch, Necheles said Trump’s arraignment is expected to be Tuesday.
Also see: Donald Trump has been indicted. Could he still run for president?
The hush-money charges mark an extraordinary turn of events for Trump, who has been under investigation for election interference in Georgia and the storage of classified documents at his Florida mansion, as he seeks to make a political comeback with a run for the White House in 2024.
Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, was paid $130,000 by Trump’s then-personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, after she had approached the National Enquirer offering to sell her kiss-and-tell story about having sex with Trump at a celebrity golf tournament in 2006.
Clifford then signed a non-disclosure agreement and the National Enquirer never published the story — a tabloid journalism practice known as “catch and kill.”
Cohen initially made the payment using money he took from a home equity loan on his house, and funneled it to Clifford through a shell company he created in Delaware. Cohen, who pleaded guilty in 2018 in federal court to campaign finance violations for his role in the payoff, said he was directed to make the payment by Trump who later reimbursed him.
That payment was recorded by Trump’s company as being for legal services. Federal prosecutors had argued that the payments amounted to illegal, unreported assistance to Trump’s campaign.
Trump was never charged in the federal probe but was listed in court documents as “co-conspirator number one.”
The former president has denied having an affair with Clifford and has characterized her selling the story as extortion.
Cohen had also been involved in orchestrating an earlier “catch-and-kill” payment in 2016 to former Playboy bunny Karen McDougal, who was given $150,000 for her story of having an affair with Trump by the National Enquirer, which then never ran an article.
The editor and publisher of the National Enquirer were given non-prosecution agreements in exchange for their cooperation with the federal investigation.
Trump has been facing an FBI investigation into his keeping boxes of highly classified documents after he left the White House following his defeat by President Joe Biden in 2020. He also has been subject to a grand jury probe into his alleged tampering with the election process in Georgia.
His real estate company, the Trump Organization, has been the subject of a lawsuit by the New York Attorney General’s office for allegedly falsifying business and tax records. The Manhattan district attorney had similarly looked into Trump’s business practices but has so far declined to press charges.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Sam Bankman-Fried pleaded not guilty in New York federal court Thursday to five additional charges related to the collapse of his former crypto exchange FTX and hedge fund Alameda Research.
Bankman-Fried’s attorney, Mark Cohen, said he plans to file a motion that his client not be tried on all the counts, arguing that he cannot be tried on charges brought after his extradition.
The U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York unveiled its third round of criminal charges against the disgraced ex-CEO of FTX in a superseding indictment that was unsealed on Tuesday. This time, the focus was on Bankman-Fried allegedly bribing a foreign government.
Prosecutors allege that Bankman-Fried — who arrived at the courthouse about an hour before the hearing, looking disheveled after an intense media scrum — directed the payment of at least $40 million in cryptocurrency to one or more Chinese government officials to an attempt to unfreeze trading accounts tied to his crypto hedge fund, Alameda Research.
Bankman-Fried and his associates considered and tried “numerous methods” to unfreeze the accounts, which contained around $1 billion worth of cryptocurrency, prosecutors allege. Ultimately, after both legal and personal efforts failed, Bankman-Fried agreed to and directed a multimillion-dollar bribe to have the frozen accounts unlocked, prosecutors alleged.
Bankman-Fried’s hedge fund then allegedly used the unfrozen assets to continue to fund Alameda’s loss-generating trades, continuing on what the government says was a fraud upon customers and investors for another year.
The onetime crypto billionaire, who did not speak during the entirety of the hearing, also pled not guilty to charges related to bank fraud, money laundering, as well as operating an unlicensed money transmitting business and making unlawful political contributions in the U.S. The 13-count indictment gives details of hundreds of political donations that Bankman-Fried allegedly directed in violation of federal campaign finance laws. Bankman-Fried already pleaded not guilty to eight other counts.
FTX and Alameda imploded in November 2022 after concerns about their balance sheet turned into a veritable bank run. In addition to this federal indictment, Bankman-Fried also faces civil charges from both the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Meanwhile, Bankman-Fried’s collapsed FTX remains mired in Delaware bankruptcy court proceedings.
The trial is set to begin in October.
— CNBC’s Dawn Giel contributed to this report.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Ecuador’s Constitutional Court has ruled the opposition-dominated National Assembly can take up the question of whether to impeach President Guillermo Lasso over allegations of crimes against state security and corruption
QUITO, Ecuador — Ecuador’s Constitutional Court ruled Wednesday the opposition-dominated National Assembly can take up the question of whether to impeach President Guillermo Lasso over allegations of crimes against state security and corruption.
The ruling was only a first step. The congress still must follow a formal process that requires the presentation of evidence and arguments before legislators may vote on impeachment.
The court, which is the interpreter and guarantor of Ecuador’s constitution, gave the go-ahead for impeachment proceedings on a 6-3 vote by the justices.
The issue was put before the court by the unicameral legislature, a body of 137 legislators in which a majority is held by opposition parties led by the Union for Hope party, which has ties to former President Rafael Correa, who governed in 2007-2017.
Lasso, a conservative former banker, began his four-year term in May 2021.
Allegations have been raised that the president’s brother-in-law, Danilo Carrera, has links with public officials involved in corruption and drug trafficking. In urging the court to reject the matter, Lasso said there was no evidence to justify the accusations.
The National Assembly now has up to 45 days to complete the impeachment process against Lasso. Removing the president will require the votes of at least 92 of the 137 legislators.
There is constitutional provision that would allow Lasso to dissolve the legislature and then govern by decree for six months while running for re-election. But analysts think that unlikely due to his low popularity among Ecuadorians.
[ad_2]