ReportWire

Tag: scandals

  • Campaign fundraiser for George Santos is indicted for impersonating top aide to House Speaker McCarthy | CNN Politics

    Campaign fundraiser for George Santos is indicted for impersonating top aide to House Speaker McCarthy | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A campaign fundraiser for indicted US Rep. George Santos has been charged for allegedly impersonating a high-ranking congressional aide to solicit contributions for the New York Republican’s campaign in 2021, according to court documents.

    A federal grand jury in Brooklyn indicted Samuel Miele, who worked for the Santos campaign during the 2020 and 2022 election cycles, on four counts of wire fraud and one count of aggravated identity theft in the alleged scheme to defraud prospective donors, according to the indictment unsealed Wednesday.

    Miele allegedly impersonated a top aide to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, according to a source familiar with the case.

    He allegedly solicited contributions from more than a dozen potential contributors using the aide’s identity in phone and email communications, the indictment says.

    Miele created an email account purporting to belong to the McCarthy staffer and sent fundraising solicitations signing the aide’s full name and title, prosecutors allege.

    Santos’ fundraiser received a 15% commission on the campaign contributions he raised, the filing says.

    According to the indictment, Miele wrote to Santos in a September 2022 letter, “Faking my identity to a big donor.”

    “High risk, high reward in everything I do,” Miele also wrote.

    An attorney for Miele, Kevin H. Marino, said in a statement to CNN that his client “is not guilty of these charges.”

    “He looks forward to complete vindication at trial as soon as possible,” Marino said.

    The latest indictment does not specifically identify Santos, McCarthy or his aide by name in the filing.

    Additional court documents clarify that the unnamed candidate in the indictment is Santos.

    Miele surrendered Wednesday morning and pleaded not guilty at an arraignment in Brooklyn federal court later in the day.

    He was released on a $150,000 bond.

    A status conference has been scheduled for August 22 in the Eastern District of New York.

    Santos himself was indicted in May on 13 counts of federal fraud and money laundering charges. He pleaded not guilty. He announced in April that he is running for reelection to his Long Island-based congressional seat.

    Representatives for McCarthy did not immediately respond for comment on the matter.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Does the US prosecute more Republicans or Democrats? Here’s some data | CNN Politics

    Does the US prosecute more Republicans or Democrats? Here’s some data | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

    A version of this story appears in CNN’s What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here.



    CNN
     — 

    Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez was indicted Friday for the second time in 10 years on bribery and corruption charges.

    In this new case, federal authorities allege he and his wife accepted a luxury Mercedes, envelopes full of cash and multiple bars of gold in exchange for influence and favors. It’s wild. Read CNN’s report.

    Menendez denies the allegations, and he has a track record of beating bribery charges. The last time the government took him to court, a jury deadlocked, a judge acquitted him of some charges and the government finally dropped that separate set of bribery charges. Menendez was able to win reelection.

    He’s up for reelection again next year, and Democrats badly need to keep his New Jersey seat if they have any hope of maintaining control of the Senate.

    The case, if nothing else, is a serious complication to former President Donald Trump’s often-repeated claim that he is the subject of a partisan “witch hunt.”

    An unusually feisty Attorney General Merrick Garland rejected any such claim during testimony on Capitol Hill this week.

    Watch Garland’s response to GOP accusations

    “Our job is not to do what is politically convenient,” he said. “Our job is not to take orders from the president, from Congress or from anyone else about who or what to criminally investigate.”

    The prosecution, again, of Menendez, which is a major headache for Democrats, could help prove this point. So should the prosecution of Hunter Biden, the president’s son, in a gun case that is rarely brought as a standalone charge.

    But it is worth looking at the recent history of Department of Justice prosecutions of lawmakers. Is one party targeted more than another?

    Here’s a look at active and recent federal cases against federal lawmakers and governors. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list, but it is what I could find going back to 2000 in CNN’s coverage and from other news outlets.

    There is one against a Republican, Rep. George Santos of New York, and one against a Democrat, Menendez.

    There is also a non-prosecution to mention. Rep. Matt Gaetz, the Florida Republican, was informed this year by the DOJ that he would not be charged in a long-running sex trafficking probe.

    These are federal cases against current or former federal lawmakers. I was able to find nine targeting Republicans and eight targeting Democrats.

    Former Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, a Republican from Nebraska – Found guilty in 2022 of three felonies in a case that centered on campaign contributions.

    Former Rep. TJ Cox, a Democrat from California – Still awaiting trial after his 2022 indictment, including for fraudulent campaign contributions.

    Former Rep. Duncan Hunter, a Republican from California – Sentenced to 11 months in prison for misusing campaign funds, but later pardoned by Trump.

    Former Rep. Chris Collins, a Republican from New York – Sentenced to 26 months in prison for insider trading, but later pardoned by Trump.

    Former Rep. Corrine Brown, a Democrat from Florida – Served more than two years for setting up a false charity.

    Former Rep. Steve Stockman, a Republican from Texas – Sentenced to 10 years in prison for multiple felonies including fraud and money laundering, but pardoned by Trump after serving part of his sentence.

    Former Rep. Anthony Weiner, a Democrat from New York – Sentenced to 21 months in prison for sexting with a minor.

    Former Rep. Chaka Fattah, a Democrat from Pennsylvania – Sentenced to 10 years in prison for racketeering, fraud and money laundering.

    Former Rep. Michael Grimm, a Republican from New York – Pleaded guilty and sentenced to eight months in prison for tax evasion. Attempted to run again for Congress.

    Former Rep. Rick Renzi, a Republican from Arizona – Sentenced to three years for corruption. Pardoned by Trump after he served time.

    Sen. Bob Menendez, a Democrat from New Jersey – Acquitted by a judge and other charges dismissed after a jury deadlocked in a bribery case.


    Former Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., a Democrat from Illinois – Sentenced to 30 months in prison for misusing campaign funds.

    Former Sen. Ted Stevens, a Republican from Alaska – Conviction by jury for lying on ethics forms was later set aside over allegations of prosecutorial misconduct.

    Former Rep. William Jefferson, a Democrat from Louisiana – Sentenced to 13 years for corruption and soliciting bribes. There was video of him taking $100,000 from an African official. Served multiple years in prison, but many of the charges were later vacated by a judge based on a US Supreme Court decision.

    Former Rep. Bob Ney, a Republican from Ohio – Sentenced to 30 months after a guilty plea for corruption tied to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

    Former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham, a Republican from California – Sentenced to eight years in prison after a guilty plea for bribery. Later pardoned by Trump.

    Former Rep. James Traficant, a Democrat from Ohio – Sentenced to eight years in prison for corruption after defending himself during trial. Was later expelled from the House.

    Two Republican governors and two Democratic governors have been convicted in federal courts in recent decades:

    Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, a Republican, was convicted for bribery and corruption. But the US Supreme Court changed the rules in corruption and bribery cases when it threw out the case against McDonnell.

    Former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, a Democrat, was convicted for trying to sell his power to appoint a replacement to Barack Obama’s Senate seat. His sentence was later commuted by Trump.

    Former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman, a Democrat, was convicted by a jury of bribery and corruption and was sentenced to more than six years in prison.

    Former Illinois Gov. George Ryan, a Republican, was convicted on corruption charges after an FBI sting.

    Did we miss a federal lawmaker convicted or charged? Let me know at zachary.wolf@cnn.com.

    Local prosecutions – like the state or local cases against former Rep. Trey Radel, the Republican from Florida, for cocaine possession in Washington, DC, or former Sen. Larry Craig, the Republican from Idaho, for lewd behavior in the Minneapolis airport – don’t really fit here since they were not conducted by the Department of Justice.

    Some notable recent DOJ prosecutions have focused on Democrats at the state level, like Andrew Gillum, the Democrat and former Tallahassee, Florida, mayor who ran for governor and lost to Gov. Ron DeSantis in 2018. Gillum was recently acquitted of lying to the FBI.

    Former Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh, also a Democrat, was sentenced to three years in prison after she pleaded guilty to charges related to a scheme in which local nonprofit organizations bought her self-published children’s book.

    Trump likes to argue he’s the subject of a conspiratorial “witch hunt” engineered by a deep state.

    Why, he will often say, was Hillary Clinton not prosecuted for her email server while he is being prosecuted for mishandling classified material?

    This forgets the history of the 2016 election, which Clinton has said she lost because of then-FBI Director James Comey’s handling of the investigation of her emails. Comey did not charge her before the election but did criticize her, and then, 11 days before Election Day, he said the investigation had been reopened.

    These whataboutisms can go on and on without changing anyone’s mind.
    This story has been updated to include additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Bob Menendez remains defiant amid bribery charges and calls to resign | CNN Politics

    Bob Menendez remains defiant amid bribery charges and calls to resign | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey remained defiant on Monday after being indicted on bribery charges at the end of last week, saying he believes he will be exonerated as he responded to some of the specific charges and evidence outlined by prosecutors.

    Menendez’s comments come amid a flurry of calls for his resignation – including from his own party and from his Senate colleagues. On Monday, Sens. Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Peter Welch of Vermont became the latest Democrats in the chamber call on Menendez to step down, joining Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman.

    In a statement delivered to reporters, Menendez offered some of his first public defense against some of the evidence discovered by investigators during their search of his home, including hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash, which he argued he had on hand for emergencies and described as an “old-fashioned” habit derived from his family’s experience in Cuba.

    “For 30 years, I have withdrawn thousands of dollars in cash from my personal savings account, which I have kept for emergencies, and because of the history of my family facing confiscation in Cuba,” said Menendez. “Now this may seem old fashioned, but these were monies drawn from my personal savings account based on the income that I have lawfully derived over those 30 years.”

    According to the indictment, searches of Menendez’s home and safe deposit box that federal agents conducted in 2022 turned up nearly $500,000 in cash, including in envelopes inside jackets emblazoned with Menendez’s name. Prosecutors say some of the envelopes had the fingerprints or DNA of one of the business contacts from whom the senator is accused of taking bribes.

    Menendez has been charged with three alleged crimes, including being on the receiving end of a bribery conspiracy. The conspiracy counts also charge his wife and three people described as New Jersey associates and businessmen.

    The group is accused of coordinating to use Menendez’s power as a US senator to benefit them personally and to benefit Egypt.

    On Monday, Menendez defended his record as it relates to Egypt, saying, “If you look at my actions related to Egypt during the period described in this indictment, and throughout my whole career, my record is clear and consistent in holding Egypt accountable for its unjust detention of American citizens and others, its human rights abuses, its deepening relationship with Russia, and efforts that have eroded the independence of the nation’s judiciary, among a myriad of concerns.”

    Menendez has been called upon to resign by a growing list of prominent Democrats – including the New Jersey governor and six members of the state’s congressional delegation. Rep. Andy Kim announced Saturday plans to challenge Menendez in the Democratic primary next year should Menendez run again for his US Senate seat.

    And on Monday, Brown and Welch joined Fetterman to become the second and third Senate Democrats to call for Menendez to step down.

    “Senator Menendez has broken the public trust and should resign from the U.S. Senate,” said Brown, who is running for reelection next year.

    Welch said in a statement later in the day that “the shocking and specific allegations against Senator Menendez have wholly compromised his capacity to be that effective Senator,” adding: “I encourage Senator Menendez to resign.”

    Fetterman, who first called for Menendez’s resignation over the weekend, will return $5,000 in donations his campaign received from Menendez’s political action committee, according to the Pennsylvania Democrat’s office.

    The New Jersey senator has denied wrongdoing and pushed back on calls to resign.

    On Monday, Menendez accused those who “rushed to judgment” of doing so for “political expediency.”

    “I recognize this will be the biggest fight yet,” Menendez said, referencing the legal battle ahead. “But as I have stated throughout this whole process, I firmly believe that when all the facts are presented, not only will I be exonerated, but I still will be New Jersey’s senior senator.”

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House Judiciary Committee expected to launch inquiry into Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis | CNN Politics

    House Judiciary Committee expected to launch inquiry into Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Republican-led House Judiciary Committee is expected to open a congressional investigation into Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis as soon as Thursday, a source tells CNN – the same day former President Donald Trump is slated to surrender at the county jail after being charged for participating in schemes to meddle with Georgia’s 2020 election results.

    The committee is expected to ask Willis whether she was coordinating with the Justice Department, which has indicted Trump twice in two separate cases, or used federal dollars to complete her investigation that culminated in the fourth indictment of Trump, the source added. The anticipated questions from Republicans about whether Willis used federal funding in her state-level investigation mirrors the same line of inquiry that Republicans used to probe Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who indicted Trump in New York for falsifying business records to cover up an alleged hush money scheme.

    Meanwhile, Georgia Republicans could launch their own state-level investigation into Willis’ probe, according to GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, who has spoken to top officials in the state about a potential probe. She has also been pushing for a congressional-led inquiry into Willis, who has previously dismissed GOP accusations accusing her of being partisan and consistently defended her investigation.

    “I’m going to be talking to (House Judiciary Chair) Jim Jordan, (House Oversight Chair) Jamie Comer, and I’d like to also ask (Speaker) Kevin McCarthy his thoughts on looking at doing an investigation if there is a collaboration or conspiracy of any kind between the Department of Justice and Jack Smith’s special counsel’s office with the state DA’s,” Greene told CNN. “So, I think that could be a place of oversight.”

    It all amounts to a familiar playbook for House Republicans, who have been quick to try to use their congressional majority – which includes the ability to launch investigations, issue subpoenas and restrict funding – to defend the former president and offer up some counter programming amid his mounting legal battles. But they’ve also run into some resistance in their extraordinary efforts to intervene in ongoing criminal matters, while there are questions about what jurisdiction they have over state-level investigations.

    As their target list on behalf of Trump grows, House Republicans are also cranking up the heat on their own investigations into the Biden family.

    Just this week, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy vowed to move ahead with an impeachment inquiry of President Joe Biden after the House returns from August recess if the Biden administration does not turn over more documents and information related to the Republican led investigations related to Hunter Biden – the strongest sign yet that House Republicans are poised to launch an impeachment inquiry of the president.

    A McCarthy spokesperson did not respond to CNN’s request for comment to elaborate on the speaker’s remark that opening an impeachment inquiry hinged on whether committees received the “bank statements, the credit card statements and other” documents they were asking for.

    House Oversight chair James Comer has subpoenaed six banks for information regarding specific Biden family business associates, received testimony from Hunter Biden’s associates and reviewed hundreds of suspicious activity reports related to the Biden family at the Treasury Department. The Kentucky Republican has not yet subpoenaed bank records from Biden family members themselves. He boasted in June on Fox Business that “every subpoena that I have signed as chairman of the House Oversight Committee over the last five months, we’ve gotten 100% of what we’ve requested, whether it’s with the FBI, or with banks, or with Treasury.”

    The House Judiciary chair, GOP Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, just subpoenaed four individuals involved in the Hunter Biden criminal probe and has requested a number of documents and interviews pertaining to special counsel David Weiss’ ongoing criminal investigation.

    There is still some skepticism among more moderate Republicans, however, about whether they should be trying to intervene in ongoing investigations and whether an impeachment inquiry is warranted.

    Behind the scenes, members of the House Judiciary panel, who would help oversee an impeachment inquiry, have recently been discussing how all signs are pointing towards the House launching one in short order.

    “We had even some of our more moderate members saying that the oversight wasn’t serious if the next step wasn’t an impeachment inquiry,” Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, a top Trump surrogate and Judiciary panel member, told CNN about a recent committee call. “There was great interest among my Judiciary colleagues to really include and involve everyone in the conference. There’s a real desire to get everyone on board and go through the evidence with those who might remain skeptical.”

    Trump’s allies have called for Congress to expunge Trump’s two previous impeachments, a move that has sparked pushback by many even among House Republicans.

    Greene, who spoke with McCarthy on Tuesday, said she doesn’t think the votes are there yet for expunging Trump’s previous two impeachments, even as the former president continues to promote the idea on Truth Social. But she said, “I think the impeachment inquiry looks very, very good.”

    “He is spending the recess talking about it constantly,” Greene added of McCarthy. “I really feel strongly that that’s something that’s going to happen.”

    Even before Trump’s indictment in Fulton County his congressional allies were laying the groundwork to take aim at Willis and broader election laws.

    GOP Rep. Russell Fry of South Carolina introduced a longshot bill earlier this year to give current and former presidents and vice presidents the ability to move their civil or criminal cases from a state court to a federal court as the investigation in Fulton County was ongoing. Fry introduced the bill shortly after Trump was indicted by Bragg on more than 30 counts related to business fraud.

    The Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over Fry’s bill, is examining ways to move this bill forward and schedule a markup, two sources familiar with the process told CNN.

    Fry, who tweeted shortly after the Fulton County indictment that the outcome underscores the need for his bill, said in a statement to CNN, “these rogue prosecutors shouldn’t be able to wield unwarranted power and target our nation’s top leaders for their political agendas.”

    Separately, the House Committee on Administration has been working on a conservative election integrity package that Republicans are calling “transformative,” but Democrats frame as “designed to appease extremist election deniers.”

    Republicans argue the bill gives states the tools to strengthen voter integrity, implement selection reforms in Washington, DC, and protects conservatives’ political speech. Democrats, meanwhile, contest the legislation attacks the freedom to vote, burdens election workers and creates less transparency in elections.

    One of the nine hearings that Republicans held on the bill, which recently passed out of committee and is ready for a floor vote in the House, was held last month in Atlanta.

    The top Democrat on the panel, Rep. Joe Morelle of New York, accused Republicans of playing defense for Trump through the field hearing, which Republicans have said was not the case.

    “One might ask, why are we here in Georgia? The answer is simple. We’re here because in 2020, Joe Biden won and Donald Trump lost. There was no widespread voter fraud in Georgia, there were no suitcases full of fake ballots, no voting machines changed any votes. In fact, we know of only one possible crime that took place, because it was recorded on tape,” Morelle said.

    Democrats on the House Oversight Committee have also accused their Republican counterparts of coinciding the release of key interview transcripts with days consumed by Trump’s legal woes, according to a recent memo released by Democratic committee staff.

    An Oversight Committee spokesperson said in a statement to CNN, “to be clear, there was absolutely no connection between the transcript releases and anything else covered in the news.”

    The types of moves Republicans made on behalf of Trump in the wake of the Fulton County indictment are not necessarily new. After Trump was indicted by the Department of Justice in two separate cases, Greene called for Congress to defund Smith’s office, who is overseeing the two federal indictment cases, and House Freedom Caucus members issued a statement Monday that they would not support even a short-term government spending bill that does not address what they see as the weaponization of the Department of Justice.

    Gaetz recently introduced a resolution to censure and condemn the judge presiding over Trump’s federal indictment in the 2020 election subversion case.

    Despite the partisan back and forth, Trump’s Capitol Hill allies remain unfazed. But, not all Republicans have bought into the Trump defensive strategy.

    “Nobody is paying attention other than the people who are obsessed with Trump,” a senior Republican lawmaker told CNN.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fact check: Republicans make false, misleading claims at first Biden impeachment inquiry hearing | CNN Politics

    Fact check: Republicans make false, misleading claims at first Biden impeachment inquiry hearing | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Republican-led House Oversight Committee is holding its first hearing Thursday in the impeachment inquiry of President Joe Biden – and Republicans on the committee have made a series of false and misleading claims, as well as some other claims that have left out critical context.

    Below is a CNN fact check. This article will be updated as additional fact checks are completed.

    Republican Rep. James Comer, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said in his opening remarks at the hearing on Thursday that the committee has uncovered how “the Bidens and their associates created over 20 shell companies” and “raked in over $20 million between 2014 and 2019.”

    Facts First: The $20 million figure is roughly accurate for Joe Biden’s family and associates, according to the bank records subpoenaed by the committee, but the phrase “the Bidens and their associates” obscures the fact that there is no public evidence to date that President Joe Biden himself received any of this money. And it’s worth noting that a large chunk of the money went to the “associates” – Hunter Biden’s business partners – not even Biden’s family itself.

    So far, none of the bank records obtained by the committee have shown any payments to Joe Biden. And a Washington Post analysis in August found that, of about $23 million in payments the committee had identified from foreign sources, nearly $7.5 million went to members of the Biden family – almost all of it to Hunter Biden – and the rest to people Hunter Biden did business with. (The Post also questioned the use of the vague phrase “shell companies,” noting that “virtually all of the companies” that had been listed by the committee at the time had “legitimate business interests” or “clearly identified business investments.”)

    A Republican aide for the House Oversight Committee disputed the Post’s analysis on Thursday, saying that bank records obtained by the panel actually show that, of $24 million in payments between 2014 and 2019, $15 million went to members of the Biden family and $9 million went to associates. CNN has reached out to the Post for comment; the committee has not publicly released the underlying bank records that would definitively show the breakdown in payments.

    The records obtained by the committee have shown that during and after Joe Biden’s tenure as vice president, Hunter Biden made millions of dollars through complex financial arrangements from private equity deals, legal fees and corporate consulting in Ukraine, China, Romania and elsewhere. Again, Republicans have not produced evidence that Joe Biden got paid in any of these arrangements.

    Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio repeated a false claim about Hunter Biden that CNN debunked when Jordan made the same claim last week.

    Jordan claimed that Hunter Biden himself said he was unqualified to sit on the board of directors of a Ukrainian energy company, Burisma Holdings.

    “Hunter Biden’s not qualified, fact number two, to sit on the board. Not my words, his words. He said he got on the board because of the brand, because of the name,” Jordan said Thursday.

    Facts First: It’s not true that Hunter Biden himself said he wasn’t qualified to sit on the Burisma board. In fact, Hunter Biden said in a 2019 interview with ABC News that “I was completely qualified to be on the board” and defended his qualifications in detail. He did acknowledge, as Jordan said, that he would “probably not” have been asked to be on the board if he was not a Biden – but he nonetheless explicitly rejected claims that he wasn’t qualified, calling them “misinformation.”

    When the ABC interviewer asked what his qualifications for the role were, he said: “Well, I was vice chairman on the board of Amtrak for five years. I was the chairman of the board of the UN World Food Programme. I was a lawyer for Boies Schiller Flexner, one of the most prestigious law firms in the world. Bottom line is that I know that I was completely qualified to be on the board to head up the corporate governance and transparency committee on the board. And that’s all that I focused on. Basically, turning a Eastern European independent natural gas company into Western standards of corporate governance.”

    When the ABC interviewer said, “You didn’t have any extensive knowledge about natural gas or Ukraine itself, though,” Biden responded, “No, but I think I had as much knowledge as anybody else that was on the board – if not more.”

    Asked if he would have been asked to be on the board if his last name wasn’t Biden, Biden said, “I don’t know. I don’t know. Probably not.” He added “there’s a lot of things” in his life that wouldn’t have happened if he had a different last name.

    A side note: Biden had served as the board chair for World Food Program USA, a nonprofit that supports the UN World Food Programme, not the UN program itself as he claimed in the interview.

    Jordan cited new documents obtained from IRS whistleblowers, made public by House Republicans on Wednesday, to argue that the Justice Department improperly blocked investigators from asking about Joe Biden in a 2020 search warrant related to Hunter Biden’s overseas dealings.

    “We learned yesterday, in the search warrant…examining Hunter Biden electronic communications, they weren’t allowed to ask about Political Figure 1,” Jordan said. “Political Figure number 1 is the big guy, is Joe Biden.”

    Facts First: This is highly misleading. The Justice Department official who gave this instruction said Joe Biden’s name shouldn’t be mentioned in the search warrant because there wasn’t any legal basis to do so. Furthermore, this occurred during Trump’s presidency, so it doesn’t prove pro-Biden meddling by the Biden-era Justice Department.

    The August 2020 email from a deputy to now-special counsel David Weiss, the Trump-appointed federal prosecutor who is leading the Hunter Biden probe, said the warrant was for “BS,” an apparent reference to Blue Star Strategies, a lobbying firm that represented Burisma Holdings, the Ukrainian energy company where Hunter Biden was on the board.

    The Weiss deputy said in the email that “other than the attribution, location and identity stuff at the end, none if it is appropriate and within the scope of this warrant” and that “there should be nothing about Political Figure 1 in here,” according to emails released by House Republicans. Another document released by the GOP confirm that Joe Biden is “Political Figure 1.”

    Before obtaining a search warrant, investigators need to establish probable cause and secure approval from a judge. If federal prosecutors believed the references to Joe Biden weren’t within the legal scope of what the warrant was looking for, it wouldn’t have been appropriate or lawful to include them.

    Comer said in his opening remarks that the committee recently uncovered “two additional wires sent to Hunter Biden that originated in Beijing from Chinese nationals; this happened when Joe Biden was running for president of the United States – and Joe Biden’s home is listed on the beneficiary address.”

    Facts First: This lacks important context. Comer was correct that the committee has found evidence of two wire transfers sent to Hunter Biden from Chinese nationals in the second half of 2019, during Joe Biden’s presidential campaign, but he did not explain that Joe Biden’s home being listed as the beneficiary address doesn’t demonstrate that Joe Biden received any of the money. Nor did he explain that there may well be benign reasons for the inclusion of the address. Hunter Biden has lived at his father’s Wilmington, Delaware, home at times and listed that address on his driver’s license; Hunter Biden’s lawyer Abbe Lowell said in a statement to CNN this week that the address was listed on these transfers simply because it was the address Hunter Biden used on the bank account the money was going to, which Lowell said Hunter Biden did “because it was his only permanent address at the time.”

    “This was a documented loan (not a distribution or pay-out) that was wired from a private individual to his new bank account which listed the address on his driver’s license, his parents’ address, because it was his only permanent address at the time,” Lowell said in the statement. “We expect more occasions where the Republican chairs twist the truth to mislead people to promote their fantasy political agenda.”

    White House spokesman Ian Sams wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter, on Wednesday: “Imagine them arguing that, if someone stayed at their parents’ house during the pandemic, listed it as their permanent address for work, and got a paycheck, the parents somehow also worked for the employer…It’s bananas…Yet this is what extreme House Republicans have sunken to.”

    Comer told CNN this week his panel is trying to put together a timeline on where Hunter Biden was living around the time of the transfers, which occurred in July 2019 and August 2019. Joe Biden was a candidate in the Democratic presidential primary at the time.

    Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina claimed at the Thursday hearing, “We already know the president took bribes from Burisma,” a Ukrainian energy company where Hunter Biden sat on the board of directors.

    Facts First: Mace’s claim is false; we do not “already know” that Joe Biden took any bribe. The claim about a bribe from Burisma is a completely unproven allegation. The FBI informant who relayed the claim to the FBI in 2020 was merely reporting something he said he had been told by Burisma’s chief executive. Later in the hearing, a witness called by the committee Republicans, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, called “the bribery allegation” the most concerning piece of evidence he had heard today – but he immediately cautioned that “you have to only take that so far” given that it is “a secondhand account.”

    According to an internal FBI document made public by Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa earlier this year over the strong objections of the FBI, the informant said in 2020 – when Donald Trump was president – that the CEO of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky, had claimed in 2016 that he made a $5 million payment to “one Biden” and another $5 million payment to “another Biden.” But the FBI document did not contain any proof for the claim, and the document said the informant was “not able to provide any further opinion as to the veracity” of the claim.

    Republicans have tried to boost the credibility the allegation by saying it was in an FBI document and that the FBI had viewed the informant as highly credible. But the document merely memorialized the information provided by the informant; it does not demonstrate that the information is true. And Hunter Biden’s former business associate Devon Archer testified to the House Oversight Committee earlier this year that he had not been aware of any such payments to the Bidens; Archer characterized Zlochevsky’s reported claim as an example of the Ukrainian businessman embellishing his influence.

    Rep. Tim Burchett, a Tennessee Republican, falsely claimed that Hunter Biden never paid taxes on his foreign income.

    He said Hunter Biden “failed to pay any taxes” on the millions of dollars he got from Ukrainian companies, and that this shows how “the Biden family doesn’t have to” pay taxes.

    “Who’s going to write the check for the money Hunter Biden didn’t pay?” Burchett asked, adding that “hardworking Americans” would end up footing the bill.

    Facts First: This is false. Hunter Biden repeatedly missed IRS deadlines, and his conduct was so egregious that federal investigators believe it was criminal, but he eventually belatedly paid all of his back taxes, plus interest and penalties, to the tune of about $2 million.

    Documents from Hunter Biden’s criminal cases indicate that he repeatedly missed tax deadlines, even though he had the funds and was repeatedly warned by his accountant and business partners. He was prepared to plead guilty to two misdemeanors in July, for failing to pay taxes on time in 2017 and 2018, before the plea deal collapsed.

    But there’s a difference between failing to pay taxes on time and failing to pay taxes at all. In 2021, while the criminal investigation was still underway and before any charges were filed, Hunter Biden paid roughly $2 million to the IRS to cover all the back taxes, plus penalties and interest.

    Hunter Biden was able to make the massive payment thanks to a roughly $2 million loan from a friend and attorney who has been supporting him during his legal troubles, according to court filings.

    Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York accused a Republican member of the committee, Rep. Byron Donalds of Florida, of cutting out “critical context” from an image of a purported text message that Donalds displayed earlier in the Thursday hearing. Ocasio-Cortez also said that Donalds had displayed a “fabricated image.”

    The dispute was over an image Donalds showed of a purported 2018 text message from the president’s brother James Biden to the president’s son Hunter Biden – provided by IRS whistleblowers and released by House Republicans on Wednesday – in which James Biden purportedly wrote, “This can work, you need a safe harbor. I can work with you father [sic] alone !! We as usual just need several months of his help for this to work.”

    After showing the image, Donalds asked a witness at the committee, “If you saw a text message like this between the president’s brother and the president’s son, wouldn’t you be concerned about them trying to give plausible deniability for the president of the United States to not have any knowledge of said business dealings?”

    Facts First: Donalds didn’t invent the James Biden text message, but Ocasio-Cortez was correct that Donalds left out critical context – specifically, context that showed there was no sign that the purported text exchange between James Biden and Hunter Biden was about business dealings. The information released by House Republicans this week appeared to show that James Biden’s purported text about getting “help” from Joe Biden came in direct response to a purported Hunter Biden text saying he could not afford alimony, school tuition for his children, food and gas “w/o [without] Dad.” Donalds did not display this purported Hunter Biden text at the Thursday hearing.

    In other words, when James Biden purportedly mentioned the possibility of several months of help from Joe Biden, he gave no indication he was referring to some sort of business transaction, much less the foreign transactions that House Republicans have been focused on in their investigations into the president. But Donalds didn’t make that clear.

    With that said, Ocasio-Cortez herself could have been clearer about what she meant when she claimed the image Donalds showed was “fabricated.”

    The contents of the purported James Biden text Donalds displayed were not made up, according to the IRS whistleblowers. What appeared to be novel was the graphic Donalds used; he showed the text in a form that made it look like a screenshot from an iPhone text conversation, with white words over a blue background bubble. The House Republican spreadsheet that the words were taken from did not include any such graphics, and, again, it did include the preceding purported Hunter Biden message that Donalds didn’t show.

    Republican Rep. Pat Fallon of Texas said at the Thursday hearing, “In an interview back in 2019 with The New Yorker, even Hunter admitted that he talked to his dad about business, specifically Burisma.”

    Facts First: This needs context. The 2019 New Yorker article in question reported that Hunter Biden said he recalled Joe Biden discussing Burisma with him “just once” in a brief exchange that consisted of this: “Dad said, ‘I hope you know what you are doing,’ and I said, ‘I do.’”

    It’s fair for Fallon to say that this counts as Joe Biden discussing business with his son, but Fallon did not mention how brief and limited Hunter Biden said the purported discussion was.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Chris Christie Fast Facts | CNN Politics

    Chris Christie Fast Facts | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

    Here’s a look at the life of former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.

    Birth date: September 6, 1962

    Birth place: Newark, New Jersey

    Birth name: Christopher James Christie

    Father: Wilbur “Bill” Christie, an accountant

    Mother: Sondra (Grasso) Christie

    Marriage: Mary Pat (Foster) Christie (1986-present)

    Children: Bridget, Patrick, Sarah and Andrew

    Education: University of Delaware, B.A., 1984; Seton Hall University, J.D., 1987

    Religion: Roman Catholic

    While serving as the US attorney for New Jersey, Christie prosecuted more than 130 public officials for corruption.

    A fan of Bruce Springsteen, Christie claims to have attended more than 100 of the New Jersey rocker’s performances.

    1977 – Volunteers for Republican Tom Kean’s gubernatorial campaign.

    1987-2002 – Attorney at the law firm of Dughi and Hewit, later named Dughi, Hewit & Palatucci PC.

    1992 – Co-coordinates the New Jersey reelection efforts of US President George H.W. Bush.

    1993 – Becomes a partner at Dughi and Hewit.

    1995-1997 – Member of the Morris County Board of Chosen Freeholders.

    1997 – Director of the Freeholder Board.

    2002-2008 – US attorney for New Jersey. Earns a reputation for being tough on corruption.

    November 3, 2009 – Defeats Democrat Jon Corzine, winning the election for governor.

    January 19, 2010-January 16, 2018 – Republican Governor of New Jersey.

    October 31, 2012 – Two days after Hurricane Sandy hits New Jersey, President Barack Obama visits the Garden State and tours devastated beach towns with Christie.

    February 4, 2013 – During an appearance on the “Late Show with David Letterman,” Christie pulls a doughnut out of his pocket and begins eating it mid-interview. Christie’s weight has often been commented on in the media and mocked by comedians.

    May 7, 2013 – Christie reveals to the New York Post that he secretly underwent lap-band surgery for the sake of his wife and kids.

    November 5, 2013 – Wins reelection.

    November 21, 2013 – Becomes the 2014 chairman of the Republican Governors Association.

    January 8, 2014 – Emails emerge from Christie’s top aides bolstering suggestions that George Washington Bridge lane closures last year that tied up traffic stemmed from a political vendetta and not bureaucratic incompetence as his administration claimed. The scandal is dubbed Bridgegate.

    June 30, 2015 – Formally announces he is running for the Republican presidential nomination during a speech in Livingston, New Jersey. On February 10, 2016, announces that he is suspending his campaign.

    February 26, 2016 – Endorses Donald Trump for president of the United States.

    May 9, 2016 – Trump announces that Christie will lead his presidential transition team, serving as chairman of the group tasked with finding candidates for jobs in a potential Trump administration.

    August 10, 2016 – In a text message, a Christie aide declares the governor “flat out lied” during a 2013 Bridgegate press conference, according to court documents filed in the criminal case against two Christie staffers accused of plotting to create a traffic jam in Fort Lee.

    November 11, 2016 – After Trump wins the election, he shakes up his transition team, demoting Christie to a supporting role and selecting Vice President-elect Mike Pence to take Christie’s place as chair.

    December 6, 2016 – A Quinnipiac University Poll indicates that 19% of voters approve of Christie’s job performance as governor and 77% disapprove. That’s the lowest score for a governor in 20 years of Quinnipiac’s polls of 11 different states.

    January 27, 2017 – The Bergen County prosecutor’s office says it won’t pursue charges of official misconduct against Christie in the Bridgegate case.

    February 16, 2017 – A Bergen County municipal judge rules that a misconduct case against Christie, stemming from a citizen’s complaint related to Bridgegate, can proceed in court.

    March 29, 2017 – Trump announces that Christie has been tapped to chair a commission that will seek ways to address the opioid crisis. On the same day, Christie’s former staffers, Bill Baroni and Bridget Anne Kelly are sentenced for their roles in the Bridgegate scandal. Baroni is sentenced to two years in prison while Kelly is initially sentenced to 18 months behind bars.

    July 1, 2017 – Due to a dispute over a Christie-backed bill that would allow the state to control how Horizon Blue Cross/Blue Shield spends its cash reserve funds, the legislature fails to break an impasse during budget talks. As a result, Christie orders a government shutdown, closing state parks, courts, motor vehicle commission offices and unemployment offices statewide. Christie says the Democrats in the legislature created the crisis.

    July 2, 2017 – As the government shutdown continues, Christie and his family vacation at one of the state parks that is closed during the holiday weekend. Island Beach State Park has a private governor’s residence, where Christie, his wife and other family members soak up sun on an empty beach. During the afternoon, the governor travels via state helicopter to Trenton to hold a news conference and denies that he has been enjoying the beach amid the crisis. Photos published by NJ Advance Media show that Christie was sitting on a beach chair earlier in the day.

    July 3-4, 2017 – The state legislature reaches a deal to reopen the government and Christie signs the budget into law. During a press conference, Christie says that the backlash over the beach photos was unwarranted. He says that he was transparent about his plans to visit the oceanfront residence during the weekend and questions the news value of the pictures.

    January 16, 2018 – Christie leaves office after two terms, and turns control of New Jersey’s state government over to Democrats for the first time in eight years.

    January 29, 2019 – Christie’s memoir “Let Me Finish: Trump, the Kushners, Bannon, New Jersey, and the Power of In-Your-Face Politics” is published.

    April 24, 2019 – Bridget Anne Kelly, Christie’s former chief of staff, is sentenced to 13 months in prison for her involvement in the “Bridgegate” scandal. She was previously sentenced to 18 months but appealed her conviction. Following her sentencing, Kelly makes a statement: “Mr. Christie, you are a bully and the days of you calling me a liar and destroying my life are over.”

    May 7, 2020 – The US Supreme Court throws out fraud convictions against Kelly and Baroni, who were involved in the “Bridgegate” political scandal. Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Elena Kagan says the move “jeopardized the safety of the town’s residents,” but concludes that “not every corrupt act by state or local officials is a federal crime.”

    October 3, 2020 – Christie tells CNN he checked himself into a hospital as a precautionary measure after announcing earlier in the day that he had tested positive for Covid-19. Christie was among a group of senior Trump campaign staffers who were tested following news of the President’s positive diagnosis.

    October 15, 2020 – In a statement, Christie says he spent seven days in an intensive care unit before recovering from Covid-19.

    October 21, 2020 – In a Wall Street Journal op-ed titled “I Should Have Worn a Mask,” Christie writes that mask wearing is not a “partisan or cultural symbol,” and that he was “wrong” not to wear a mask at the Supreme Court nomination ceremony of Judge Amy Coney Barrett and during debate prep with Trump.

    December 16, 2020 – In an ad paid for by the COVID Collaborative, Christie says that he regrets not wearing a mask while visiting the White House, a choice he acknowledges led to him contracting the coronavirus and spending a week in the ICU.

    November 16, 2021 – Christie’s book “Republican Rescue: Saving the Party From Truth Deniers, Conspiracy Theorists, and the Dangerous Policies of Joe Biden” is published.

    June 6, 2023 – Announces that he’s running for the Republican presidential nomination at a New Hampshire town hall event. Christie suspends his campaign on January 10, 2024.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Hunter Biden’s former business partner testifying behind closed doors for GOP-led committee | CNN Politics

    Hunter Biden’s former business partner testifying behind closed doors for GOP-led committee | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Hunter Biden’s former business partner Devon Archer is meeting behind closed doors Monday with the House Oversight Committee on Capitol Hill, the latest development in the Republican-led investigations into the president’s son.

    The Justice Department submitted a new request over the weekend asking a judge to schedule a date for Archer to surrender to prison and begin serving out his one-year sentence resulting from a conviction in an unrelated fraud case, according to court filings. The move prompted immediate speculation among some Republicans that the Biden administration was attempting to prevent Archer from answering questions about Hunter Biden before the GOP-led committee, though in a court filing, the government explicitly requested that Archer’s sentence begin after he completes his congressional testimony.

    In a statement, Archer’s attorney said his client does not believe the DOJ request is connected in any way to the upcoming closed-door interview, despite continuing to fight demands related to scheduling a surrender date. “We are aware of speculation that the Department of Justice’s weekend request to have Mr. Archer report to prison is an attempt by the Biden administration to intimidate him in advance of his meeting with the House Oversight Committee on Monday,” Matthew Schwartz, an attorney for Archer, said in a statement Sunday.

    “To be clear, Mr. Archer does not agree with that speculation. In any case, Mr. Archer will do what he has planned to do all along, which is to show up on Monday and to honestly answer the questions that are put to him by the Congressional investigators,” Schwartz added.

    While House Oversight Chairman James Comer would only go as far as to call the timing of DOJ’s letter “odd” in an interview with Fox News on Sunday, the letter prompted more bombastic reactions from other House Republicans.

    Archer’s testimony comes as House Republicans appear to be shifting their focus away from trying to impeach members of President Joe Biden’s Cabinet and prioritizing efforts to impeach the president himself by linking him to controversial business dealings by his son, Hunter.

    And they are doing so with the apparent support of Speaker Kevin McCarthy, CNN recently reported.

    As a result, House investigations related to Hunter Biden are now expected to take center stage as Republicans continue to try to link the President to his son’s controversial business dealings.

    But speaking to CNN in recent weeks, McCarthy signaled that Republicans have yet to verify the most salacious allegations against Biden, namely that as vice president he engaged in a bribery scheme with a foreign national in order to benefit his son’s career, an allegation the White House furiously denies.

    But he said that launching an impeachment inquiry would unleash the full power of the House to turn over critical information, mirroring an argument advanced by House Democrats when they impeached then-President Donald Trump in 2019.

    McCarthy – who sources said has also been consulting with former House GOP Speaker Newt Gingrich on the issue – has warmed up to an idea of going after the president rather than members of his Cabinet. In recent weeks, he delivered his most explicit threat yet to Biden, saying House Republicans’ investigations into the Biden family’s business deals appear to be rising to the level of an impeachment inquiry.

    This story and headline have been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Inside McCarthy’s sudden warming to a Biden impeachment inquiry | CNN Politics

    Inside McCarthy’s sudden warming to a Biden impeachment inquiry | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Speaker Kevin McCarthy in recent weeks has heard similar advice from both a senior House Republican and an influential conservative lawyer: prioritize the impeachment of President Joe Biden over a member of his Cabinet.

    Part of the thinking, according to multiple sources familiar with the internal discussions, is that if House Republicans are going to expend precious resources on the politically tricky task of an impeachment, they might as well go after their highest target as opposed to the attorney general or secretary of homeland security.

    And McCarthy – who sources said has also been consulting with former House GOP Speaker Newt Gingrich on the issue – has warmed up to an idea that has long been relegated to the fringes of his conference. This week, he delivered his most explicit threat yet to Biden, saying their investigations into the Biden family’s business deals appear to be rising to the level of an impeachment inquiry.

    Speaking to CNN on Tuesday, McCarthy signaled that Republicans have yet to verify the most salacious allegations against Biden, namely that as vice president he engaged in a bribery scheme with a foreign national in order to benefit his son Hunter Biden’s career, an allegation the White House furiously denies. But he said that launching an impeachment inquiry would unleash the full power of the House to turn over critical information, mirroring an argument advanced by House Democrats when they impeached then-President Donald Trump in 2019.

    “How do you get to the bottom of the truth? The only way Congress can do that is go to an impeachment inquiry,” McCarthy said Tuesday, stopping short of formally moving to open such a probe.

    It all amounts to a consequential shift in thinking among Republican leaders, who were previously reluctant to call for Biden’s impeachment and have instead focused more energy on Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and Attorney General Merrick Garland. Those were largely seen as lower stakes fights that could be easier to sell to the party and the public.

    Yet as some of the GOP’s investigative lines have lost momentum – border crossings are down in recent weeks, for example – and Republicans believe they have uncovered compelling new information about Hunter Biden, they increasingly see the president as their most ripe candidate for impeachment.

    Rep. Mike Johnson, a member of the GOP leadership team from Louisiana, told CNN on Tuesday that “all the evidence leads to the big guy.”

    “Speaking as a member of the Judiciary Committee, we’re certainly at the point of an impeachment inquiry. … I feel like we’re there,” Johnson said. “And so we’ll continue to investigate and see if we’re going to follow the facts where they lead we’re not going to use impeachment for a political tool, like the Democrats did in the last administration. We will not do that. But we do have an obligation on the Constitution to follow the facts.”

    As another senior GOP source put it: “When you’re going deer hunting, you don’t shoot geese in the sky.”

    Even some of the more hardline members of McCarthy’s conference said that if the GOP needs to settle on one target, it should be Joe Biden.

    “If I had to pick one, I would pick Biden,” said Rep. Andy Ogles, a Tennessee Republican and member of the House Freedom Caucus.

    The White House has maintained that Biden has had no involvement in his son’s business deals, and Republicans have yet to link Biden directly to them.

    But even with more Republicans coalescing around the idea, impeachment would still be a complicated and time consuming endeavor, given McCarthy’s razor thin majority and the need to fund the government by September 30. And there’s anxiety about impeachment backfiring with the party’s moderates while energizing the Democratic base, all for an effort that is sure to be doomed in the Senate – a similar concern shared by Democrats in 2019, when they launched their first impeachment into Trump ahead of the 2020 election, proceedings that took about three months to complete in the House.

    In moving to potentially make Biden just the fourth president in US history to get impeached, McCarthy could appease some of his sharpest critics in his conference, especially as the House will have to cut a deal in the fall to keep the government funded and prevent a shutdown. Some on his far-right, who have threatened to boot him from the speakership if he strays from their demands, are now praising his embrace of potential impeachment proceedings.

    “We probably should have moved to an impeachment inquiry probably sooner than this,” said Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs, a former leader of the House Freedom Caucus. But he added: “I understand.”

    “He was reticent at first,” Biggs said of McCarthy. “We don’t want to look like our colleagues across the aisle. But as we’ve continued to amass evidence and information, I certainly think (at) a bare minimum, we should be doing an impeachment inquiry.”

    Rep. Bob Good, a Virginia Republican who tried to prevent McCarthy from winning the speakership, said of McCarthy: “I don’t think there’s any question that him speaking to that has caused a paradigm shift.”

    “I’m just glad to hear that the speaker is recognizing that that we need to follow the evidence and the truth wherever it might lead us,” Good said. “I don’t know how anyone, any objective, reasonable person couldn’t come to the conclusion that this appears to be impeachment worthy.”

    But GOP Rep. Ken Buck of Colorado, a member of the Judiciary Committee and hardline Freedom Caucus who has been more skeptical of impeachment, shot back at the idea he would take impeachment cues from the speaker: “The Freedom Caucus hasn’t listened to McCarthy in years.”

    “I can’t imagine that we would start now,” he told CNN.

    With concerns among vulnerable members that impeaching Biden may not be a winning message in their districts, House Republicans would like to wrap up any such proceedings before year’s end, according to senior Republican sources familiar with the party’s thinking. But that means Republicans are going to have to make a decision soon on if – and whom – they want to impeach, given the desire among Republicans for impeachment hearings and a formal inquiry process. The House is slated to leave at the end of this week for a six-week recess.

    Getting an impeachment resolution through the narrowly divided House – where McCarthy can lose no more than four of his members on party-line votes – will only get tougher in an election year, Republicans say.

    Plus Republicans still appear to be all over the map on their impeachment strategy.

    Firebrand Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Georgia Republican who is not only seeking to expunge Trump’s two impeachments but also introduced a slew of impeachment articles against Biden and members of his Cabinet, told CNN: “I couldn’t prioritize one.”

    That sentiment was echoed by Rep. Ralph Norman, a hard-right South Carolina Republican who said impeaching Biden is just “the start of the list.”

    “His judgment is wrong on who he has in office,” Norman said. “They got to have to be accountable. And I think you’re seeing the accountability now.”

    But with economic concerns expected to dominate voters’ minds in next year’s elections, many in the House GOP have been skeptical about moving forward with charging the president with committing a high crime or misdemeanor.

    Nebraska GOP Rep. Don Bacon, whose district Biden carried in 2020, told CNN that the House needs to be deliberate.

    “This needs to be thoroughly vetted in the Judiciary Committee,” Bacon said, arguing the approach needs to differ from the two impeachments under then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

    “The Watergate profile is what we should benchmark off of, not the Pelosi method of putting it on the floor without a single committee hearing,” Bacon said. “Pelosi watered down and lowered the threshold for impeachment, and we should not follow her example. It’s not good for the country.”

    In the first Trump impeachment, House Democrats led a number of closed and open hearings before charging Trump with abuse of power and obstructing Congress. In the second impeachment, Democrats charged Trump with inciting the January 6, 2021, insurrection just days after the deadly attack in the Capitol.

    Republicans have already had a tough time convincing even members of the House Judiciary Committee, where impeachment articles would originate. Indeed, one GOP Judiciary member who has been skeptical of a Mayorkas impeachment leaned over to share that assessment with a Democrat on the panel during a recent hearing.

    During a private leadership meeting on Tuesday, McCarthy stressed the difference between opening an impeachment inquiry and actually voting to impeach someone – an important distinction that could be key to convincing moderates skeptical of impeachment to back a formal inquiry. Still, McCarthy fielded questions from members during the meeting about how this could impact the party’s more vulnerable members.

    Democrats say Republicans are just using the threat of impeachment as a political stunt to help boost Trump, who remains their frontrunner in the GOP presidential primary.

    “It’s clear that Donald Trump is the real Speaker of the House,” Jaime Harrison, chair of the Democratic National Party, said in a statement. “He has made sure the House majority is little more than an arm of his 2024 campaign, and Kevin McCarthy is happy to do his bidding.”

    Indeed, McCarthy has been under pressure to placate Trump, particularly after he questioned Trump’s strength as a candidate – comments he quickly walked back. As CNN previously reported, McCarthy told Trump in a private phone call that he supports the idea of expunging his past two impeachments and said he would bring the idea up with the rest of the conference.

    But there’s no sign that GOP leadership is planning to bring such a symbolic resolution to the floor any time soon, with many Republicans pouring cold water on the idea. That has privately frustrated Trump, who called Greene earlier this month to complain about the lack of action from McCarthy, according to a source familiar with the conversation.

    McCarthy has had to walk a tightrope on the issue of impeachment amid growing frustration from his right flank, which has been itching to launch impeachment proceedings. Last month, McCarthy opted to defer a push from GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado to force a snap floor vote on impeaching Biden over his handling of the southern border and immigration problems, saying they need time to gather the facts and build a case.

    On Tuesday, Boebert took notice of the apparent shift in McCarthy’s tone.

    “The Speaker of the House is now talking impeachment,” Boebert tweeted. “The Biden corruption has risen to a level that there is no other response that can possibly be leveled against it. Impeachment is a very big deal, but these are incredibly serious crimes. I look forward to holding Joe Biden accountable for all that he’s done.”

    Hunter Biden walks to a waiting SUV after arriving with US President Joe Biden at Fort McNair in Washington, DC, on July 4.

    Republicans argue that a string of recent developments have generated new momentum that has helped bring McCarthy on board and will even satisfy the remaining holdouts.

    Last week, GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa released an internal FBI document containing unverified allegations that both Hunter and Joe Biden were involved in an illegal foreign bribery scheme that Republicans had been trying to make public for weeks, despite serious warnings from the FBI.

    The House Oversight Committee held a hearing last week that put a spotlight on two IRS whistleblowers who have claimed that the Justice Department politicized the Hunter Biden criminal probe, and has a deposition with Hunter Biden’s long-time associate and Burisma co-board member Devon Archer next week. And the House Judiciary Committee just secured assurance from the Justice Department that US Attorney David Weiss, who is overseeing the Hunter Biden criminal probe, can testify publicly before Congress this fall.

    But Republicans still have yet to tie such allegations directly to the president’s actions, which will be a major hurdle for GOP leaders to clear if they move ahead with impeaching Biden. The White House has repeatedly stated that the allegations launched by Republicans have all been debunked.

    Part of the consideration for House Republicans will be figuring out how to delineate or combine the work currently being conducted by House Oversight Chair James Comer and House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, who are in constant communication with each other and McCarthy, sources told CNN.

    Comer confirmed he has been regularly briefing McCarthy on his Hunter Biden probes, which he thinks helped give McCarthy the “confidence” to publicly raise the idea of an impeachment inquiry. But he said it’s ultimately “McCarthy’s decision.”

    With just three days to go before the House stands in recess for six weeks, Greene, who continues to serve as a conduit to Trump in the House and has been relentless in pushing McCarthy toward a Biden impeachment, wasted no time in making her case again on the House floor.

    And afterward, the firebrand conservative had this message to her reluctant GOP colleagues: “Any Republican that can’t move forward on impeachment with all of the information and overwhelming evidence that we have, I really don’t know why they’re here to be honest with you.”

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • First lawsuit filed on behalf of female Northwestern University athlete as hazing scandal widens

    First lawsuit filed on behalf of female Northwestern University athlete as hazing scandal widens

    [ad_1]

    CHICAGO — The hazing scandal at Northwestern University has widened to include a volleyball player who on Monday became the first female athlete to sue the university over allegations she was retaliated against by the coach for reporting her mistreatment.

    “This shows that it isn’t just men,” said Parker Stinar, one of her attorneys. “It isn’t just football players.”

    The private school in Evanston, Illinois, is facing multiple lawsuits, including one planned for later in the day that was to be announced by civil rights attorney Ben Crump.

    The scandal at the Big Ten school centers on a problem that seems to extend far beyond sports, even if it is sports that often gets the headlines. While major college sports programs have become multimillion-dollar, ritualistic hazing appears to remain a problematic tradition within them.

    Football coach Pat Fitzgerald was fired after a university investigation found allegations of hazing by 11 current or former players, including “forced participation, nudity and sexualized acts of a degrading nature,” school President Michael Schill said. One previous lawsuit accuses Fitzgerald of enabling a culture of racism, including forcing players of color to cut their hair and behave differently to be more in line with the “Wildcat Way.”

    The volleyball player, identified in Monday’s lawsuit as Jane Doe, says she was physically harmed to the point of requiring medical attention during a hazing incident in early 2021.

    According to the lawsuit, Jane Doe contracted COVID-19 in February of that year, despite following the team’s COVID guidelines. Despite this, she says, Northwestern volleyball coach Shane Davis and an assistant coach informed her she would need to undergo a “punishment” for violating the guidelines. A day later, on March 2, 2021, the coaches permitted the volleyball team’s captains to pick the punishment: She was forced to run “suicides” in the gym while diving to the floor each time she reached a line on the court. As she did this, the suit says, volleyball coaching staff, team members and trainers watched.

    Campus police were made aware of the incident, as was the athletic department, the lawsuit says. Jane Doe says she was isolated from the team and Davis forced her to write an apology letter to trainers. The lawsuit also says the player met with athletic director Derrick Gragg to discuss the culture of the volleyball program but he “did nothing in response” to her concerns.

    Davis did not immediately respond Monday morning to messages seeking comment. Messages also were left with Gragg and a spokesperson for the athletic department.

    The school announced in December 2021 that it had signed Davis to a multi-year contract extension. A year later, in December 2022, the player medically retired from the sport.

    Northwestern spokesperson Jon Yates confirmed the unnamed student made a hazing allegation in March, 2021. Yates said after suspending the coaching staff during an investiation, which confirmed hazing took place, two volleyball games were canceled and mandatory anti-hazing training was implemented.

    “Although this incident predated President Schill’s and Athletic Director Gragg’s tenure at the University, each is taking it seriously,” Yates said. “Dr. Gragg met with the student at her request last year, and as President Schill wrote in a message to the Northwestern community, the University is working to ensure we have in place appropriate accountability for our athletic department.”

    The lawsuit was submitted in Cook County, Illinois, by the Chicago-based Salvi Law Firm and names as defendants Davis and Gragg as well as the university, its current and former presidents and the board of trustees. The suit also names Atlantic Coast Conference Commissioner James J. Phillips, who was Northwestern’s athletic director until 2021. Phillips, who has been named as a defendant in two other lawsuits, has said he never “condoned or tolerated inappropriate conduct” against athletes while he was Northwestern’s athletics director.

    Crump planned to announce another lawsuit against Northwestern over hazing allegations in its athletic programs, with the latest suit touted as containing “damning new details” of sexual hazing and abuse in its football program.

    Fitzgerald, who led Northwestern for 17 seasons and was a star linebacker for the Wildcats, has maintained he had no knowledge of hazing. Fitzgerald said after being fired that he was working with his agent, Bryan Harlan and his lawyer, Dan Webb, to “protect my rights in accordance with the law.”

    The hazing allegations have broadened beyond the school’s football program as attorneys said last week that male and female athletes reported misconduct within its baseball and softball programs. They also suggested that sexual abuse and racial discrimination within the football program was so rampant that coaches knew it was happening.

    Crump’s advisory for Monday’s news conference states that the suit will identify “one Northwestern football coach who allegedly witnessed the hazing and sexual conduct and failed to report it.”

    Northwestern has been added to a long list of American universities to face a scandal in athletics and may eventually join the trend of making large payouts following allegations of sexual abuse.

    ___

    Householder reported from Detroit, and Lage reported from Allen Park, Michigan.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Pelosi says McCarthy is ‘playing politics’ with impeachment expungement | CNN Politics

    Pelosi says McCarthy is ‘playing politics’ with impeachment expungement | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Nancy Pelosi said on Sunday that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy was “playing politics” with the idea of expunging former President Donald Trump’s two impeachments.

    “Kevin is, you know, playing politics. It is not even clear if he constitutionally can expunge those things. If he wants to put his members on the spot, his members in difficult races on the spot, that is a decision he has to make. But this is not responsible,” Pelosi told CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union.”

    McCarthy said in a private call with Trump that he personally backed the idea of expunging the former president’s two impeachments and would bring it up to the conference to gauge support. However, he has not scheduled a floor vote, and when asked about the idea on Thursday, McCarthy said it should “go through committee like anything else.”

    The California Republican has been working overtime to placate Trump after an interview last month in which McCarthy said he thinks the former president can win in 2024 but did not know if he was the “strongest” candidate, prompting outrage from Trump advisers and allies. McCarthy called Trump to apologize after the interview, claiming he misspoke on CNBC, sources told CNN.

    “This is about being afraid. As I have said before, Donald Trump is the puppeteer. And what does he do all the time but shine the light on the strings? These people look pathetic,” Pelosi said Sunday.

    Pelosi also labeled the recent “Weaponization of the Federal Government” hearing from a GOP-led panel as “clown show.”

    The hearing saw Robert F. Kennedy Jr. testify that he has never been anti-vaccine, racist or antisemitic, despite the fact that he has promoted a litany of conspiracies and discriminatory statements over the years.

    Republicans had called Kennedy and others as witnesses as part of their probe into alleged censorship against conservatives at large technology companies.

    “What a ridiculous clown show, again, on the part of the Republicans,” Pelosi said.

    A member of the House of Representatives since 1987, Pelosi would not say whether she plans to run for reelection.

    Turning to the economy, Pelosi said Sunday she was “so proud” of President Joe Biden’s record but urged him to “get out there” and tout recent economic trends.

    “This president did such a remarkable job. He is a person of such knowledge, such vision for the country, such knowledge of the issues, such strategic thinking and such a legislator, and, on top of it all, a person who connects with the American people,” she said.

    US annual inflation slowed to 3% last month, according to the Consumer Price Index by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That’s a sharp cooldown from June of last year, when surging energy costs helped inflation spike to 9.1%

    The US economy added 209,000 jobs in June and the unemployment rate was 3.6%, the BLS reported. The monthly job gains represent a significant slowing from the breakneck pace of employment growth seen during the recovery from the pandemic; however, the current labor market is outpacing what was seen in and prior to February 2020.

    “He’s just going to have to make sure the American people know at that kitchen table what this means to them,” she said.

    Pelosi separately called it “completely, totally ridiculous” that Alabama GOP Gov. Kay Ivey approved a new congressional map with just one majority-Black district, despite a court order calling for the redrawn lines to create two majority-Black districts or “something quite close to it.”

    “Something is wrong with that picture, and it’s larger. You see the racism that is happening in our country,” Pelosi said Sunday.

    She added: “What has happened to the Republican Party that they have taken it to this?”

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former Mozambique finance minister is extradited to the US to face trial over $2 billion scandal

    Former Mozambique finance minister is extradited to the US to face trial over $2 billion scandal

    [ad_1]

    JOHANNESBURG — A former Mozambique finance minister who has been held in prison in South Africa for nearly five years was extradited Wednesday to the United States to face a fraud and corruption trial over a $2 billion scandal involving fraudulent government loans.

    South African authorities said that Manuel Chang, who was Mozambique’s finance minister from 2005 to 2015, was handed over to U.S. authorities after his last-ditch court effort to avoid extradition failed in May.

    Chang is scheduled to be arraigned Thursday in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn.

    It brings to an end a nearly five-year legal battle by Chang to avoid facing trial in the U.S. and be extradited instead to his home country, where rights groups have protested that he would likely be treated leniently.

    He is accused of receiving bribes of up to $17 million during a scheme that secured loans for Mozambican state-owned companies from foreign banks and financiers for maritime projects. The money was looted through kickbacks and other corrupt dealings, according to U.S. prosecutors.

    Chang was indicted in federal court in New York over his involvement in the scheme, which U.S. authorities allege defrauded American and international investors. He has not commented on the charges against him.

    The loans totaling $2 billion were intended for the purchase of fishing vessels and naval patrol boats and other resources to help Mozambique’s fishing industry, but it’s alleged that never happened.

    “The Ministry of Justice and Correctional Services confirms that the Republic of South Africa’s law enforcement agencies successfully surrendered Mr Manuel Chang to the United States of America on July 12, 2023,” the ministry said.

    The scandal caused a financial crisis in Mozambique when the International Monetary Fund withdrew its support for the country after the so-called “hidden debts” were revealed in 2016.

    Chang was arrested at the O.R. Tambo International Airport in Johannesburg in 2018 on a U.S. warrant.

    The Mozambican government’s own attempts to have him face trial in Mozambique have been dismissed by several South African courts.

    In 2021, Swiss bank Credit Suisse agreed to pay at least $475 million to British and American authorities to settle bribery and kickback allegations stemming from their involvement with the corrupt loans.

    At least 10 people have already been convicted and sentenced to prison by a Mozambican court over the scandal, including Ndambi Guebuza, the son of former Mozambican president Armando Guebuza. He was sentenced to 12 years in prison for receiving up to $33 million from the corrupt deal.

    ___

    Associated Press writer Bobby Caina Calvan in New York contributed.

    ___

    Associated Press Africa news: https://apnews.com/hub/africa

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ex-Ohio GOP chair, lobbyist Matt Borges shows remorse, gets 5 years for role in $60M bribery scheme

    Ex-Ohio GOP chair, lobbyist Matt Borges shows remorse, gets 5 years for role in $60M bribery scheme

    [ad_1]

    CINCINNATI — Ohio lobbyist Matt Borges was sentenced Friday to five years in prison for his part in the largest corruption scandal in Ohio history. He avoided the much harsher sentence received a day earlier by former House Speaker Larry Householder, the scheme’s mastermind, by accepting responsibility and apologizing before the judge.

    “Nothing makes it feel more stark than knowing I could have walked away from this at the very beginning,” the 51-year-old Borges, a former chair of the Ohio Republican Party, told U.S. District Judge Timothy Black.

    Black nonetheless rebuked Borges for his role in preventing Ohioans the chance to repeal a tainted nuclear plant bailout bill.

    “Larry Householder was a crook and you knew it. ‘ An unholy alliance ‘ is what you called it,” Black said.

    “You didn’t care that you were aiding an Ohio House speaker to undermine the very foundation of our democracy,” he told Borges. “You just saw everyone else getting fat and rich, and you wanted a piece of it.”

    Black admitted to being moved by Borges’ contrition, however, which may have contributed to him escaping the top of the 5- to 8-year range federal prosecutors sought. But the judge rejected any notion that Borges should only get the six months offered to cooperative witnesses or the 1 1/2 years sought by his attorneys, and ordered him into immediate custody.

    As a handcuffed Borges left the courtroom, he looked back at his wife Kate, who had delivered an impassioned plea for leniency to the judge, and could be heard saying, “Bye, babe.” She blew him a kiss.

    A jury convicted Householder and Borges in March, determining that Householder orchestrated and Borges participated in a $60 million bribery scheme secretly funded by Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp. to secure Householder’s power, elect his allies and pass and defend a $1 billion nuclear plant bailout. Specifically, Borges was found to have offered a bribe in exchange for inside information on a referendum campaign aimed at repealing the bailout law.

    Householder, 64, was sentenced to 20 years, the maximum allowed, on Thursday.

    During the trial, Borges sought to distance himself from Householder — once one of Ohio’s most powerful Republican politicians — with his defense team highlighting his absence from meetings held by Householder’s allies and Borges quipping audibly in the courtroom that he didn’t even like the man.

    After Householder confirmed on the stand during their trial that Borges was not among his confidantes, the younger Republican opted against testifying on his own behalf at that time.

    Black said Friday that Borges’ expunged conviction years ago in a state government pay-to-play scandal didn’t play a significant role in his sentence this time.

    Borges, who served as a campaign staffer and chief of staff to then-Republican State Treasurer Joe Deters, pleaded guilty in 2004 to one count of improper use of a public office. He was fined $1,000, but avoided jail time of up to six months.

    Borges was charged with giving 10 brokers who had contributed to Deters’ campaign fund an advantage in getting contracts with the office of the treasurer — Ohio’s chief investment officer. A Deters fundraiser and a lobbyist who served as a go-between to the preferential treatment also were convicted.

    Though Deters was never directly connected to the scheme, it stymied his career in state politics for almost two decades. That was, until GOP Gov. Mike DeWine named him in December to an open seat on the Ohio Supreme Court.

    Because of his association with Borges, Deters has recused himself from a separate state case against FirstEnergy stemming from the scandal that’s been appealed to the high court.

    U.S. Attorney Kenneth Parker said he was gratified that Borges showed remorse during Friday’s hearing, including saying how disappointed he was in himself and apologizing in open court to adversaries he lashed out at through a dedicated website.

    “That’s the first step to rehabilitation, so I was glad to see that,” Parker said. “He, and only he, knows whether or not it was genuine. But that’s the first step to making things right, inside and outside.”

    Householder and Borges were among five people arrested by federal authorities in July 2020, charged along with a dark money group, for their roles in the wide-ranging scheme. A federal investigation remains ongoing.

    Two others — Juan Cespedes and Jeff Longstreth — have pleaded guilty and are cooperating as they await sentences of up to six months in prison. A third man, the late Statehouse superlobbyist Neil Clark, pleaded not guilty before dying by suicide in 2021. Generation Now, the 501(c) nonprofit through which much of the money flowed, also has pleaded guilty to racketeering.

    FirstEnergy also has admitted to its role, admitting in an agreement with the government to using dark money groups to fund the effort and agreeing to pay a $230 million fine and meet other conditions in order to avoid prosecution.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ex-Audi boss convicted of fraud after pleading guilty in German automaker’s diesel emissions scandal

    Ex-Audi boss convicted of fraud after pleading guilty in German automaker’s diesel emissions scandal

    [ad_1]

    Ex-Audi boss convicted of fraud after pleading guilty in German automaker’s diesel emissions scandal

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fact check: Trump’s self-serving comparison to Hillary Clinton’s classified email scandal | CNN Politics

    Fact check: Trump’s self-serving comparison to Hillary Clinton’s classified email scandal | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly and inaccurately compared his federal indictment to the Hillary Clinton email investigation that ended without charges, claiming unfair treatment.

    Trump most recently invoked Clinton on Tuesday night during a lie-filled fundraiser at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, hours after his arraignment in federal court. This misleading line of attack is a common refrain at his public events – and also for some of his opponents in the 2024 Republican presidential primary.

    Facts First: This is an inaccurate and self-serving comparison. To be sure, investigators found problems with how both Trump and Clinton handled classified material, and they both misled the public about their conduct. But there are several major differences that break in Clinton’s favor. Trump mishandled far more classified material. And prosecutors have presented evidence that he knowingly broke the law and obstructed the investigation, while the FBI concluded that Clinton didn’t act with criminal intent.

    On Tuesday night, Trump baselessly claimed that “Hillary Clinton broke the law, and she didn’t get indicted” because “the FBI and Justice Department protected her.” But an exhaustive 2018 report from the Justice Department inspector general concluded that investigators made the right call by not charging Clinton, and that their decision-making wasn’t motivated by political bias.

    Trump also claimed Clinton had a “deliberate intention” of violating records retention laws when she used a private email server to conduct government business as secretary of state. He also said “there has never been obstruction as grave” as what Clinton did to impede the FBI probe into her emails. Both of Trump’s assertions here are belied by the FBI’s conclusions in the case.

    Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who supervised the Clinton email probe in 2015-2016 and is now a CNN contributor, told CNN’s Dana Bash on Monday that the Clinton probe was “very, very different” from the Trump case.

    “Should it have happened? No,” McCabe said of Clinton’s private email server. “But what we didn’t have was evidence that Hillary Clinton had intentionally exchanged or withheld classified information.”

    Here’s a breakdown of some of the key differences between the Clinton and Trump situations.

    The FBI examined tens of thousands of emails from Clinton’s private server. Investigators found 52 email chains that contained references to information “that was later deemed to be classified,” McCabe said. Only eight of those chains contained “top secret” material, the highest level of classification.

    Almost none the email chains had markings or “stampings” on them that would’ve indicated at the time that the material was classified, McCabe said.

    Compare that with Trump, who took more than 325 classified records to Mar-a-Lago after leaving the White House, including at least 60 “top secret” files, according to prosecutors. The indictment says these documents contained foreign intelligence from the CIA, military plans from the Pentagon, intercepts from the National Security Agency, nuclear secrets from the Department of Energy, and more.

    These were full documents with “headers and footers” and cover sheets explicitly “indicating they were some of the most classified materials we have,” McCabe said. A picture that federal prosecutors included in a court filing shows some of the papers found at Mar-a-Lago with clear classification markings in large bold letters, saying “TOP SECRET” or “SECRET.”

    Then-FBI Director James Comey announced in July 2016 that Clinton wouldn’t be charged. He said, “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” because there wasn’t enough evidence that Clinton “intended to violate laws,” even though she had been “extremely careless” with classified information.

    In the Trump probe, special counsel Jack Smith had enough evidence for a federal grand jury to indict Trump on 37 criminal charges, including 31 counts of willfully retaining national defense information. The former president has pleaded not guilty.

    There are also significant differences on obstruction that undercut Trump’s narrative.

    Prosecutors say Trump conspired to defy a grand jury subpoena demanding the return of all classified documents, and that he misled his attorneys who were trying to comply with the subpoena.

    In the indictment, prosecutors also cited a recorded conversation from 2021 where Trump admitted that he possessed a document containing “secret information” about US military plans that he “could have declassified” as president – but didn’t.

    For this and other conduct, six of his 37 overall charges are related to potential obstruction.

    Despite Trump’s repeated claims to the contrary, prosecutors never accused Clinton of obstructing the investigation into her emails. The FBI ultimately concluded that there was not “clear evidence” that Clinton “intended to violate laws,” and that charges weren’t warranted in this situation without any evidence of obstruction.

    Furthermore, Clinton gave a voluntary interview to the FBI and she could have been prosecuted if she made any false statements. After closing the probe, Comey later told lawmakers that “we have no basis to conclude she lied to the FBI” or was “untruthful with us.”

    Two of the 37 charges against Trump use that same false-statements statute.

    From the moment Trump’s documents scandal became public last year, he has responded with a constant stream of lies, recycled falsehoods, and anti-government conspiracy theories.

    Clinton’s public dishonesty about her emails was nowhere near as frequent and egregious as Trump’s dishonesty about the classified documents probe. Nonetheless, some of Clinton’s own public defenses, which she offered to voters amid the 2016 campaign season, ended up proving untrue.

    For example, while she was under FBI investigation, Clinton publicly said she “never sent or received any classified material,” and also said she “did not email any classified material to anyone.” In another instance, she offered an unequivocal denial, saying “there is no classified materials” on her private server.

    Fact-checkers deemed these claims to be false or misleading after Comey revealed after the probe that some classified material was found on Clinton’s server – albeit in less than 1% of the 30,000-plus emails reviewed by the FBI.

    Some of Clinton’s public denials included a caveat that she never transmitted anything with visible classification “markings.” Comey later testified to Congress that only three emails reviewed by the FBI contained a classification marking.

    Regarding Trump’s claim that biased FBI and Justice Department officials “protected” Clinton in 2016 — in her view, they actually cost her the presidency. She has publicly blamed her election loss on Comey’s bombshell announcement in late October 2016 that he was reopening the email probe, only to clear her again on the eve of Election Day.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Scathing report finds Boris Johnson deliberately misled UK Parliament over ‘partygate’

    Scathing report finds Boris Johnson deliberately misled UK Parliament over ‘partygate’

    [ad_1]

    LONDON — A committee of lawmakers harshly rebuked former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Thursday, saying he lied to Parliament about lockdown-flouting parties and was complicit in a campaign to intimidate those investigating his conduct.

    The House of Commons Privileges Committee found Johnson’s actions were such a flagrant violation of the rules that they warranted a 90-day suspension from Parliament. That sanction would have been more than enough to trigger a by-election that could have cost Johnson his seat in Parliament, but the former prime minister avoided that ignominy by resigning on Friday after the committee gave him advance notice of its findings.

    Release of the committee’s scathing 77-page report touched off an angry exchange of recriminations, with Johnson repeating his claims that the panel was a “kangaroo court” bent on ousting him from Parliament and the committee saying his defense was an after-the-fact justification that was “no more than an artifice.”

    The report is just the latest episode in the “partygate” scandal that has angered the public and distracted lawmakers since local news organizations first revealed that members of Johnson’s staff held a series of parties in 2020 and 2021 when such gatherings were prohibited by pandemic restrictions.

    Johnson initially denied that any parties took place, then repeatedly assured lawmakers that rules and guidance were followed at all times.

    The committee, which took testimony from Johnson and senior members of his government during its 14-month investigation, concluded that those assurances were misleading and that Johnson failed to correct the record when asked to do so. This amounted to a “serious contempt” of Parliament, the panel found.

    “The contempt was all the more serious because it was committed by the Prime Minister, the most senior member of the government,” the committee said. “There is no precedent for a Prime Minister having been found to have deliberately misled the House. He misled the House on an issue of the greatest importance to the House and to the public, and did so repeatedly.”

    The committee also said Johnson should not be granted a pass to Parliament’s grounds.

    Johnson, 58, fought back in a statement tinged by fury. He insisted he had done nothing wrong.

    “The committee now says that I deliberately misled the House, and at the moment I spoke I was consciously concealing from the House my knowledge of illicit events,” Johnson said. “This is rubbish. It is a lie. In order to reach this deranged conclusion, the Committee is obliged to say a series of things that are patently absurd, or contradicted by the facts.”

    Johnson angrily quit as a lawmaker on Friday after the committee informed him in advance that he would be sanctioned. In his statement Thursday, he lashed out at the committee, saying they used their prerogatives to bring about what “is intended to be the final knife-thrust in a protracted political assassination.”

    Johnson’s move to quit Parliament means he can no longer be suspended, and his seat of Uxbridge and South Ruislip will be contested in a special election in July.

    Johnson and his wife, Carrie, were fined by the Metropolitan Police last year for breaching COVID-19 laws at a birthday party for Johnson in June 2020 in his Downing Street residence and office.

    Current Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was also among dozens of people issued with fixed-penalty notices for a series of office parties and “wine time Fridays” in 2020 and 2021 across government buildings.

    Revelations of the booze-fueled gatherings, which took place at a time when millions were prohibited from seeing loved ones or even attending family funerals, angered many Britons and added to a string of ethics scandals that spelled Johnson’s downfall. Johnson resigned as prime minister in July 2022 after a mass exodus of government officials protesting his leadership.

    Johnson has acknowledged misleading lawmakers when he assured them that no rules had been broken, but he insisted he didn’t do so deliberately.

    In March he told the committee he “honestly believed” the five gatherings he attended, including a send-off for a staffer and his own surprise birthday party, were “lawful work gatherings” intended to boost morale among overworked staff members coping with a deadly pandemic.

    Families of people who died in the pandemic flatly disagreed. The Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice UK group said the committee’s report was a painful reminder that while they were saying goodbye to loved ones on Zoom, the prime minister was holding parties.

    David Garfinkel, a spokesperson for the group, said Johnson should be barred from holding office again.

    “Johnson has shown no remorse,” Garfinkel said in a statement. “Instead he lied to our faces when he told us that he’d done ‘all he could’ to protect our loved ones, he lied again when he said the rules hadn’t been broken in number 10, and he’s lied ever since when he’s denied it again and again.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Japan entertainment company launches probe into sexual abuse allegations against founder

    Japan entertainment company launches probe into sexual abuse allegations against founder

    [ad_1]

    TOKYO — An investigation by a major Japanese talent agency into sexual abuse allegations against its founder won’t address monetary or criminality questions but rather aims to prevent such cases in the future, the lead investigator said Monday.

    “We see what has happened at the company and this is a serious governance problem,” Makoto Hayashi, a former prosecutor, told reporters at a Tokyo hotel.

    Hayashi said the process would focus on hearing from victims who have come forward. The panel will outline where the response at Johnny & Associates failed and provide recommendations to prevent a recurrence, he said.

    Allegations against Johnny Kitagawa, a powerful figure in Japanese entertainment, have been tossed around for decades but he was never charged with any crime. He died in 2019.

    The allegations resurfaced as a topic for scrutiny after BBC News produced a special segment earlier this year focused on several people who said they were sexually abused as youngsters while working at the company.

    Since then, others have come forward, including Kauan Okamoto, who spoke in April at the Foreign Correspondents Club in Tokyo.

    The Associated Press does not usually identify victims of alleged sexual assault, but Okamoto has chosen to identify himself in the media.

    The scandal at Johnny’s, as the company was widely known, has served as a wake-up call over Japan’s lagging fight against sexual harassment and abuse.

    Dozens of children, perhaps hundreds, may have been assaulted while working at Johnny’s.

    Earlier this month, Okamoto and two other men submitted to Japan’s parliament a petition signed by 40,000 people, demanding revised legislation to better protect children against abuse. Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has promised to take action, although his specific plans remain unclear.

    According to the allegations, Kitagawa asked fledgling singers and dancers to stay at his luxury home. When he told one of them to go to bed early, everyone knew “it was your turn,” Okamoto said.

    “These are facts. Instead of denying these facts, I hope people will respect and support us,” Okamoto told reporters.

    Hayashi’s in-house investigation has been criticized as lacking independence. But Hayashi stressed his panel’s efforts are independent despite being paid by Johnny’s office.

    Hayashi also brushed off a question about Chief Executive Julie Keiko Fujishima’s apparent denial of the allegations. What the company decides to do with the panel’s findings is up to the company, he said. He gave no date for when the investigation might be finished.

    Fujishima apologized last month in an online video for the “disappointment and worries” fans must be feeling. But she said she was unaware of any wrongdoing. She did not appear at Monday’s news conference.

    Top executives at many major Japanese companies that become ensnared in scandals, including Toyota and Toshiba, bow deeply in apology at a news conference.

    Hayashi said finding fault was not the point of the probe and suggested instead that aspects of the company culture may not have taken sexual abuse seriously.

    “But our mission is separate from any criminal investigation,” he said.

    Much of Japan’s mainstream media has been silent or reticent in reporting about the allegations against Kitagawa.

    Foreign media, including the AP, have reported about the allegations. Japanese magazine Shukan Bunshun, which broke the Kitagawa story, recently reported that another official at Johnny’s, a manager, was also abusing children.

    Hayashi said all such allegations would be subject to the investigation.

    Veteran Johnny’s stars like Noriyuki Higashiyama and Sho Sakurai have recently spoken up, stressing the need for the agency to come clean. Singer and actor Hideaki Takizawa, who was an executive at Johnny’s, quit in November, and created his own production company called TOBE Co. in March.

    ___

    Yuri Kageyama is on Twitter https://twitter.com/yurikageyama

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Boris Johnson quits as UK lawmaker after being told he will be sanctioned for misleading Parliament

    Boris Johnson quits as UK lawmaker after being told he will be sanctioned for misleading Parliament

    [ad_1]

    LONDON — Former U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson shocked Britain on Friday by quitting as a lawmaker after being told he will be sanctioned for misleading Parliament. He departed with a ferocious tirade at his political opponents — and at his successor, Rishi Sunak — that could blast open tensions within the governing Conservative Party.

    Johnson resigned after receiving the results of an investigation by lawmakers into misleading statements he made to Parliament about “partygate,” a series of rule-breaking government parties during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    In a lengthy resignation statement, Johnson accused opponents of trying to drive him out — and hinted that his rollercoaster political career might not be over yet.

    “It is very sad to be leaving Parliament — at least for now,” he said.

    Johnson, 58, said he had “received a letter from the Privileges Committee making it clear — much to my amazement — that they are determined to use the proceedings against me to drive me out of Parliament.”

    He called the committee investigating him — which has members from both government and opposition parties — a “kangaroo court.”

    “Their purpose from the beginning has been to find me guilty, regardless of the facts,” Johnson said.

    The resignation will trigger a special election to replace Johnson as a lawmaker for a suburban London seat in the House of Commons.

    Johnson, whose career has seen a series of scandals and comebacks, led the Conservatives to a landslide victory in 2019 but was forced out by his own party less than three years later.

    He had been awaiting the outcome of an investigation by a House of Commons standards committee over misleading statements he made to Parliament about a slew of gatherings in government buildings in 2020 and 2021 that breached pandemic lockdown rules.

    Police eventually issued 126 fines over the late-night soirees, boozy parties and “wine time Fridays,” including one to Johnson, and the scandal helped hasten the end of his premiership.

    Johnson has acknowledged misleading Parliament when he assured lawmakers that no rules had been broken, but he said he didn’t do so deliberately.

    He told the committee he “honestly believed” the five events he attended, including a send-off for a staffer and his own surprise birthday party, were “lawful work gatherings” intended to boost morale among overworked staff members coping with a deadly pandemic.

    The committee had been expected to publish its report in the next few weeks, and Johnson could have faced suspension from the House of Commons if he was found to have lied deliberately.

    By quitting, he avoids a suspension that could have seen him ousted from his Commons seat by his constituents, leaving him free to run for Parliament again in future. His resignation statement suggested he was mulling that option. It was highly critical of Sunak, who served as Treasury chief in Johnson’s government before jumping ship with many other colleagues in July 2022 — resignations that forced Johnson out.

    Johnson took aim at Sunak, who was chosen by the Conservatives in October to steady the government after the terms of Johnson and his briefly serving successor Liz Truss, who stepped down after six weeks when her tax-slashing policies caused financial turmoil.

    Johnson claimed that “when I left office last year the government was only a handful of points behind in the polls. That gap has now massively widened.”

    Conservative poll ratings went into decline during the turbulent final months of Johnson’s term and have not recovered. Opinion polls regularly put the opposition Labour Party 20 points or more ahead. A national election must be held by the end of 2024.

    “Just a few years after winning the biggest majority in almost half a century, that majority is now clearly at risk,” Johnson said. “Our party needs urgently to recapture its sense of momentum and its belief in what this country can do.”

    Johnson resigned hours after King Charles III rewarded dozens of his loyal aides and allies with knighthoods and other honors, a political tradition for former prime ministers that drew cries of cronyism from opponents of the ousted leader.

    Johnson’s dramatic exit is the latest — but maybe not the last — chapter in a career of extremes. The rumpled, Latin-spouting populist with a mop of blond hair had held major offices, including London mayor, but also spent periods on the political sidelines before Britain’s exit from the European Union propelled him to the top.

    Johnson’s bullish boosterism helped persuade 52% of Britons to vote to leave the EU, and he was elected prime minister in 2019 on a vow to “get Brexit done.”

    He was less suited to the hard work of governing, and the pandemic — which landed Johnson in intensive care with COVID-19 — was a major challenge. Johnson’s government won plaudits for its rapid vaccine rollout, but the U.K. also had one of the highest coronavirus death tolls in Europe, and some of the longest lockdowns.

    The final straw came when details emerged of parties held in Johnson’s Downing Street office and home while the country was in lockdown. “Partygate” caused outrage and finally pushed the Conservative Party to oust its election-winning but erratic leader.

    Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the opposition Labour Party, responded to Johnson’s resignation with: “enough is enough.”

    “The British public are sick to the back teeth of this never ending Tory soap opera played out at their expense,” she said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Texas businessman at center of Attorney General Ken Paxton’s impeachment scandal charged with making false statements

    Texas businessman at center of Attorney General Ken Paxton’s impeachment scandal charged with making false statements

    [ad_1]

    Texas businessman at center of Attorney General Ken Paxton’s impeachment scandal charged with making false statements

    AUSTIN, Texas — Texas businessman at center of Attorney General Ken Paxton’s impeachment scandal charged with making false statements.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Angry lawmakers accuse Fed of inaction in insider trading investigation | CNN Business

    Angry lawmakers accuse Fed of inaction in insider trading investigation | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Congressional lawmakers grilled Federal Reserve Inspector General Mark Bialek Wednesday over possible insider trading among Fed officials in 2020, accusing the nation’s central bank of inaction.

    The heads of the Boston and Dallas Federal Reserve banks retired early in 2021 after trades they made before and during the pandemic came to light. Bialek said his investigation into any potential legal violations from the trades is “ongoing.”

    A separate investigation by Bialek last year found no wrongdoing stemming from trades by a financial adviser on behalf of Fed Chair Jerome Powell’s family trust and by former Fed Vice Chair Richard Clarida.

    Bialek told members of a Senate Banking Subcommittee on Economic Policy that he was limited in what he could disclose because it would impede his ability to “conduct a thorough, independent investigation” into the former regional bank heads’ trades.

    Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts, interrupted: “You have had a year and a half,” she said. “This is not strong oversight. In fact, it is not even competent oversight.”

    As Republican and Democratic lawmakers on the subcommittee pointed out, Bialek, who has served in his role since 2011, is appointed by members of the Fed’s Board of Governors, whom he is tasked with investigating. Bialek told lawmakers there was no conflict of interest and that he was still able to conduct fair, independent investigations. Warren, among others, said she was unconvinced.

    “It looks like, to anyone in the public, that you gave your boss a free pass,” she said. “The Fed continues to stonewall Congress, stonewall the public on the underlying information about these trades. This is not acceptable.”

    The Office of Inspector General declined to comment Wednesday night.

    After Silicon Valley Bank collapsed in March, Warren and Republican Sen. Rick Scott of Florida introduced a bill to require a presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed inspector general to the Fed Board of Governors.

    A separate Fed investigation into SVB’s collapse, not involving Bialek, faulted Fed supervisors. Scott on Wednesday said he lacked confidence in Bialek’s ability to investigate those Fed supervisory lapses.

    “Somebody at the Federal Reserve that was responsible for these banks for supervision clearly did it wrong,” he said Wednesday, referring to bank collapses since 2008. “The average person in America pays for all this.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Wells Fargo agrees to pay $1 billion to settle shareholders’ class-action lawsuit

    Wells Fargo agrees to pay $1 billion to settle shareholders’ class-action lawsuit

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Wells Fargo has agreed to a pay $1 billion to settle a lawsuit filed by its shareholders who alleged the bank made misleading statements about its compliance with federal regulators after a fake account-opening scandal came to light in 2016.

    The class-action lawsuit was filed on behalf of hundreds of thousands of public employees of Rhode Island and Mississippi whose retirement funds had invested in Wells Fargo. A federal judge in New York on Tuesday granted preliminary approval of the settlement that was filed late Monday.

    Wells Fargo has been sanctioned repeatedly by U.S. regulators for violations of consumer protection laws going back to 2016, when employees were found to have opened millions of accounts illegally in order to meet unrealistic sales goals.

    In addition to inflating sales figures that boosted the company’s stock, the actions by Wells’ employees caused damage to customers’ credit scores and cost some of them money in fees.

    San Francisco-based Wells remains under a Federal Reserve order forbidding the bank from growing any larger until the Fed deems that its internal oversight problems are resolved. That order, originally enacted in 2018, was expected to last only a year or two.

    Since then, executives repeatedly boasted that Wells was cleaning up its act, only for the bank to be found in violation of other parts of consumer protection law, including in its auto and mortgage lending businesses.

    The shareholder lawsuit related to the settlement announced Tuesday alleged that between May of 2018 and March of 2020, the bank and its senior executives “repeatedly told investors that regulators were satisfied with the bank’s progress under the consent orders and that the asset cap would be timely removed.”

    However, federal regulators did not lift the cap, and more scandals surfaced.

    In a statement about the settlement Tuesday, Wells Fargo said, “While we disagree with the allegations in this case, we are pleased to have resolved this matter.”

    Last last year, Wells agreed to pay $3.7 billion to settle charges that it harmed customers by charging illegal fees and interest on auto loans and mortgages, as well as incorrectly applying overdraft fees against savings and checking accounts.

    Since the fake accounts scandal came to light in 2016, Wells has paid out billions in fines to state and federal regulators, reshuffled its board of directors and seen two CEOs and other top-level executives leave the company. Wells Fargo’s reputation has never fully recovered from the sales scandal.

    Before the scandal, Wells Fargo was considered to have a sterling reputation among the big banks. But behind the scenes, Wells’ top management was pushing sales goals that were both aggressive and unrealistic.

    Shares in Wells Fargo ended Tuesday down about 1% at $38.39, approaching 2023 lows.

    [ad_2]

    Source link