ReportWire

Tag: Subpoenas

  • US Virgin Islands seeks to subpoena Elon Musk in Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit

    US Virgin Islands seeks to subpoena Elon Musk in Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — The government of the U.S. Virgin Islands is trying to subpoena billionaire Elon Musk for documents in its lawsuit seeking to hold JPMorgan Chase liable for sex trafficking acts committed by businessman Jeffrey Epstein.

    Musk has never been publicly accused of any wrongdoing related to Epstein, who killed himself in 2019 as he awaited sex trafficking charges in a federal jail in Manhattan.

    But over the years, there had been unconfirmed speculation — encouraged by Epstein himself — that Epstein had advised Musk on certain business matters.

    Spokespeople for Musk have denied those reports, but the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands said in a court filing that it believes Epstein may have referred or tried to refer Musk to JPMorgan as a potential client.

    The Virgin Islands, where Epstein had an estate, sued JPMorgan last year, saying its investigation has revealed that the financial services giant enabled Epstein’s recruiters to pay victims and was “indispensable to the operation and concealment of the Epstein trafficking enterprise.”

    Lawyers for JPMorgan did not immediately return messages seeking comment Monday.

    In the past, they have said victims are entitled to justice but litigation attempting to blame the financial institution for Epstein’s actions were legally meritless, directed at the wrong party and should be dismissed.

    Authorities alleged that Epstein recruited and sexually abused dozens of underage girls at his mansions in New York and Palm Beach, Florida, in the early 2000s. He had pleaded not guilty.

    Lawyers for the Virgin Islands told a federal judge Monday that they haven’t been able to locate Musk to serve him with the subpoena.

    They asked the court to serve Tesla, his electric vehicle company, instead.

    They said they hired an investigative firm to search public records databases for possible addresses for Musk and reached out to one of his lawyers by email, but received no response.

    A message sent to a lawyer for Musk seeking comment Monday was not immediately returned.

    The subpoena — one of several sent to prominent business figures — sought documents from Jan. 1, 2002, to the present reflecting communications between Musk and JPMorgan or Musk and Epstein regarding Epstein or Epstein’s role in Musk’s accounts, transactions or financial management.

    It also sought all documents reflecting or regarding Epstein’s involvement in human trafficking and his procurement of girls or women for commercial sex.

    And it sought information about fees Musk might have paid to Epstein or JPMorgan and any documents concerning communications between Musk, Epstein and JPMorgan regarding accounts, transactions or the relationship at JPMorgan.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US Virgin Islands says it can’t find Elon Musk to serve a subpoena in Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit

    US Virgin Islands says it can’t find Elon Musk to serve a subpoena in Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit

    [ad_1]

    The government of the U.S. Virgin Islands is asking a federal judge to help it serve billionaire Elon Musk with a subpoena for documents in its lawsuit seeking to hold JPMorgan Chase liable for sex trafficking acts committed by businessman Jeffrey Epstein

    ByLARRY NEUMEISTER Associated Press

    NEW YORK — The government of the U.S. Virgin Islands told a federal judge Monday that it can’t find billionaire Elon Musk to serve him with a subpoena for documents in its lawsuit seeking to hold JPMorgan Chase liable for sex trafficking acts committed by businessman Jeffrey Epstein. It wants to serve his electric vehicle company instead.

    Lawyers asked Judge Jed Rakoff in Manhattan in a court filing to let it serve the subpoena on Tesla Inc. because it has not been able to give the papers to Musk or his lawyers since it issued the subpoena on April 28.

    They said they hired an investigative firm to search public records databases for possible addresses for Musk and reached out to one of his lawyers by email but received no response.

    A message sent to a lawyer for Musk seeking comment Monday was not immediately returned.

    The government of the U.S. Virgin Islands said it believes Epstein may have referred or tried to refer Musk to JPMorgan.

    It sued JPMorgan last year, saying its investigation has revealed that JPMorgan enabled Epstein’s recruiters to pay victims and was “indispensable to the operation and concealment of the Epstein trafficking enterprise.”

    The subpoena sought documents from Jan. 1, 2002, to the present reflecting communications between Musk and JPMorgan or Musk and Epstein regarding Epstein or Epstein’s role in Musk’s accounts, transactions or financial management.

    It also sought all documents reflecting or regarding Epstein’s involvement in human trafficking and his procurement of girls or women for commercial sex.

    And it sought information about fees Musk might have paid to Epstein or JPMorgan and any documents concerning communications between Musk, Epstein and JPMorgan regarding accounts, transactions or the relationship at JPMorgan.

    Epstein, 66, took his own life in August 2019 as he awaited sex trafficking charges in a federal jail in Manhattan. Authorities alleged that he recruited and sexually abused dozens of underage girls at his mansions in New York and Palm Beach, Florida, in the early 2000s. He had pleaded not guilty.

    Lawyers for JPMorgan did not immediately return messages seeking comment Monday.

    In the past, they have said victims are entitled to justice but litigation attempting to blame the financial institution for Epstein’s actions were legally meritless, directed at the wrong party and should be dismissed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • GOP lawmaker: Former Trump prosecutor declines to provide details on hush-money investigation

    GOP lawmaker: Former Trump prosecutor declines to provide details on hush-money investigation

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — An ex-prosecutor who once oversaw Manhattan’s yearslong investigation of former President Donald Trump repeatedly declined to substantively answer questions at a closed-door deposition Friday of the House Judiciary Committee, according to a Republican lawmaker in the meeting.

    Rep. Darrell Issa, a California Republican, exited the meeting after roughly one hour and said Pomerantz, the former prosecutor, repeatedly invoked the Fifth Amendment that protects people from providing self-incriminating testimony.

    Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in a scheme to bury allegations of extramarital affairs that arose during his 2016 White House campaign. GOP lawmakers have decried the investigation as a “political persecution.”

    Pomerantz said in a written opening statement that he was invoking the Fifth Amendment because the Manhattan District Attorney’s office had previously warned him before he published a book on the investigation that he could face criminal liability if he revealed grand jury material or violated a provision of the New York City Charter dealing with misuse of confidential information.

    Pomerantz, who left Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office after disagreements over the direction of the Trump investigation, was subpoenaed by the Republican-controlled House committee. The panel, chaired by GOP Rep. Jim Jordan, is probing how Bragg handled Trump’s historic indictment.

    “This deposition is for show,” Pomerantz also said in prepared remarks. “I do not believe for a moment that I am here to assist a genuine effort to enact legislation or conduct legislative ‘oversight.’”

    Bragg had sued to halt Jordan’s subpoena of Pomerantz, but last month agreed to Pomerantz’s testimony after a delay and a condition that lawyers from the prosecutor’s office be present. The committee has said it would have allowed the district attorney’s lawyers even without the agreement.

    Pomerantz had argued in court papers that the subpoena left him in an “impossible position” and would potentially require him to violate his ethical obligations.

    Issa told reporters, “I think it’s very appropriate to say this is an obstructing witness who has no intention of answering any questions.”

    Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz, another Republican on the committee, also said lawmakers were “not getting many answers.”

    Pomerantz is allowed to refuse to answer certain questions that touch on legal privilege and ethical obligations, but Jordan can rule on those assertions on a case-by-case basis.

    Pomerantz recently wrote a book about his work pursuing Trump and discussed the investigation in interviews on “60 Minutes” and other shows. But Issa said he was not answering questions even on previous statements he had made.

    Issa suggested that the fight over Pomerantz’s cooperation may return to the legal system, saying it would be “for the court to decide when we object to his failure to answer any questions.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House Republicans allege Biden family members received millions in payments from foreign entities in new bank records report | CNN Politics

    House Republicans allege Biden family members received millions in payments from foreign entities in new bank records report | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    House Oversight Chairman James Comer laid out new details to support allegations that members of Joe Biden’s family including his son Hunter received millions of dollars in payments from foreign entities in China and Romania including when Biden was vice president, according to a memo obtained by CNN.

    New bank records cited in the memo were obtained by the committee through a subpoena and include payments made to companies tied to Hunter Biden. Republicans also alleged that Hunter Biden used his familial connections to help facilitate a meeting in 2016 between a Serbian running for United Nations Secretary-General and then-national security adviser to the vice president Colin Kahl.

    The foreign payments raise questions about Hunter Biden’s business activities while his father was vice president, but the committee does not suggest any illegality about the payments from foreign sources. The bank records by themselves also do not indicate the purpose of the payments that were made.

    The memo marks Comer’s most direct attempt to substantiate his allegations that Biden family members have enriched themselves off the family name. Comer has suggested that Biden may have been improperly influenced by the financial dealings, particularly by his family’s foreign business partners.

    But the latest report does not show any payments made directly to Joe Biden, either as vice president or after leaving office.

    Comer has been publicly teasing information for months about the paper trail committee Republicans have uncovered through subpoenas sent to multiple banks and trips to the Treasury Department to review records.

    Comer and other Republicans on the committee held a press conference Wednesday morning to tout their findings.

    “These people didn’t come to Hunter Biden because he understood world politics or that he was experienced in it, or that he understood Chinese businesses. They wanted him for the access his last name gave him,” Rep. Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican, said during the news conference.

    On Wednesday, Comer was asked about specific policy decisions Biden made while president or vice president that may have been directly influenced by these foreign payments. Comer failed to name any and instead pointed to then-vice president Biden traveling around the world and discussing foreign aid in the last year of the Obama administration, and added they think there are decisions Biden made as president that “put China first and America last.” Comer said the committee “will get into more of those later.”

    Ahead of the memo’s release, White House spokesperson Ian Sams said in a statement to CNN, “Congressman Comer has a history of playing fast and loose with the facts and spreading baseless innuendo while refusing to conduct his so-called ‘investigations’ with legitimacy. He has hidden information from the public to selectively leak and promote his own hand-picked narratives as part of his overall effort to lob personal attacks at the President and his family.”

    Abbe Lowell, counsel for Hunter Biden, said in a statement, “Today’s so-called “revelations” are retread, repackaged misstatements of perfectly proper meetings and business by private citizens. Instead of redoing old investigations that found no evidence of wronging by Mr. Biden, Rep. Comer should do the same examination of the many entities of former President Trump and his family members.”

    The top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Jamie Raskin, said in a statement to CNN, “Chairman Comer has failed to provide factual evidence to support his wild accusations about the President. He continues to bombard the public with innuendo, misrepresentations, and outright lies, recycling baseless claims from stories that were debunked years ago.”

    Bank records cited in the committee’s memo show that within five weeks of then-Vice President Biden’s meeting with Romanian President Klaus Iohannis in 2015, a Romanian who Hunter Biden was doing legal consulting for, Gabriel Popoviciu, started sending money to Rob Walker, a business associate of Hunter’s.

    Walker received more than $3 million from November 2015 to May 2017 and wired approximately $1 million in various installments to Hunter Biden, his business associate James Gillian, and Hallie Biden, the widow of the president’s oldest son, Beau Biden who died in May 2015. Hallie Biden and Hunter Biden were romantically involved for a period after Beau’s death.

    It has long been known that Hunter Biden did legal work for Popoviciu, a wealthy Romanian business executive who was convicted in 2016 on corruption charges.

    Comer’s memo raises questions about why Popoviciu was paying a Biden family business associate directly instead of the law firm where Hunter Biden worked at the time or the other firm Hunter reportedly referred Popoviciu to.

    Former President Donald Trump’s former lawyer Rudy Giuliani was also involved with Popoviciu, which Comer’s memo does not mention.

    Committee Republicans obtained the bank records from subpoenas to four different banks.

    The report also alleges that in 2016, Vuk Jeremic, a Serbian politician who was running for UN secretary-general, tried to use his business relationship with Hunter Biden and his associates to get a meeting with Kahl, who was then an aide in Biden’s vice president’s office.

    In a June 2016 email, Jeremic wrote to Hunter Biden and a business associate, Eric Schwerin, asking to “meet with VPOTUS National Security Advisor Colin Kahl” related to the UN secretary-general election.

    Schwerin instructed Hunter Biden to “Think about how you want to respond,” according to the report.

    In a July 2016 email, Jeremic followed up via email saying, “[m]y meeting with Colin did not last very long, but didn’t go too bad, I think. What is suboptimal is that OVP seems to be outside the decision-making loop on the UNSG elections issue. Colin promised to get better informed on what’s going on at the moment,” according to the report.

    Republicans said they intend to pursue more communications related to the matter, but concluded it appears that “a Biden administration official met with Jeremic to discuss the UN Secretary General election at the direction of Hunter Biden and/or his business associates.”

    Kahl did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Jeremic’s attorneys told the committee in a letter last month he would not cooperate with a request for documents and testimony due to separation of powers issues and because House rules limit subpoenas to people “within the United States.”

    The memo also alleges that two Chinese nationals made payments of $100,000 to Hunter Biden’s professional corporation through a Chinese-backed energy company. Republicans claim that at least one of those individuals had ties to the Communist Party of China.

    The memo alleges that those two individuals were connected to CEFC, a Chinese energy conglomerate, had a business relationship with Hunter Biden.

    Committee Republicans claim one of the individuals “used CEFC to bribe and corruptly influence foreign officials.”

    The memo includes a copy of a bank transaction showing that on August 4, 2017, CEFC Infrastructure wired $100,000 to Owasco P.C, Hunter Biden’s professional corporation.

    The memo also includes details from the bank records on how money was moved between companies, including a $100,000 payment to one of Hunter Biden’s companies that was then funded by a Chinese based firm tied to the CEFC, the Chinese energy conglomerate.

    Comer alleges the transaction “disproves President Biden’s claim that his family received no money from China.”

    In the report, the committee acknowledged there “exist legitimate commercial transactions with China-based entities and individuals.”

    “However, the pattern of behavior engaged in by the Bidens and their Chinese counterparties—memorialized in relevant bank records—signals an attempt to layer companies and cloud the source of money,” the committee alleges.

    Comer has previously revealed that members of Biden’s family received just over $1 million indirectly from State Energy HK Limited, a Chinese company.

    Senate Republicans in 2020 first detailed how Walker made wire transfers to companies associated with Hunter Biden and president’s brother, James, after receiving a $3 million wire from the Chinese company.

    The latest GOP memo claims Walker also sent some of that money to Hallie Biden and an unknown bank account identified as “Biden.”

    Committee Republicans said they are continuing to trace bank records and have written to additional witnesses involved in certain transactions to request documents as well as interviews.

    According to the report, Republicans intend to pursue legislative changes – a key step needed to justify their investigation if fights over subpoenas head to court.

    Those changes include laws that require additional reporting about the finances of a president or vice president’s family members, public disclosure of foreign transactions involving the family members of senior elected officials and an expedited law enforcement review of any suspicious bank activity reports related to a president or vice president’s immediately family members.

    Comer left the door open on whether his committee would investigate the foreign business dealings of former President Donald Trump and his family ahead of making any legislative recommendations to address influence peddling. To date however, Comer has not looked into Trump’s financial dealings or pursued an investigation into the classified documents that he had at Mar-a-Lago.

    “We’re going to look at everything when we get ready to introduce the legislation to ban influence peddling” Comer said. “This has been a pattern for a long time. Republicans and Democrats have both complained about Presidents’ families receiving money.”

    On the foreign business dealings of Trump’s son-in law, Jared Kushner, specifically, Comer said, “I’m not saying whether I agreed with what he did or not, but I actually know what his businesses are. What are the Biden businesses?”

    This story has been updated with additional reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jordan subpoenas CDC, other federal agencies over censorship concerns | CNN Politics

    Jordan subpoenas CDC, other federal agencies over censorship concerns | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The House Judiciary Committee has sent subpoenas to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, and the Global Engagement Center for documents as it continues to investigate whether the federal government pressured social media companies to censor certain viewpoints.

    The subpoenas mark an escalation in the panel’s inquiry, as House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan described the agencies responses to previous voluntary request in March as “inadequate” in the subpoena cover letter and said that none of the agencies have produced any documents responding to previous requests to date.

    Jordan, a Republican, has long claimed that the federal government and big tech companies have been “weaponized” against conservatives, and leads a subcommittee on that topic.

    The subpoena letters do not list any specific allegations the committee is investigating but raises the concern over censorship more broadly. The subpoenas set a document deadline of May 22 for a broad request of information and communications.

    Through the subpoenas to the CDC, CISA (which is a part of the Department of Homeland Security) and the Global Engagement Center, under the Department of State’s purview, the Judiciary panel claims to be seeking information about the extent to which the Executive Branch “pressured and colluded” with social media and other tech companies and others to “censor certain viewpoints on social and other media in ways that undermine First Amendment principles.”

    Conservative critics have said that correspondence released by Twitter owner and CEO Elon Musk late last year demonstrates a willingness by social media publishers to act on requests by government officials to suppress certain points of view. Federal officials, however, have rejected this accusation.

    “The Department of Homeland Security does not censor speech and does not request that content be taken down by social media companies,” a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson told CNN. “Instead of working with the Department, as numerous committees have done this Congress, the House Judiciary Committee has unnecessarily escalated to a subpoena. DHS will continue cooperating appropriately with Congressional oversight requests, all while faithfully working to protect our nation from terrorism and targeted violence, secure our borders, respond to natural disasters, defend against cyberattacks, and more.”

    The Judiciary panel “made no effort to work with DHS through traditional channels” a source familiar with the backchanneling between the committee and DHS said.

    Outlining the scope of the agency, the source added that CISA provides guidance on foreign influence operations, disinformation tactics and issues of election security and shares that information with state and local election officials. In the 2018 and 2020 election cycles, CISA shared potential election security related disinformation identified by local authorities with social media companies, but did not do so in the 2022 election cycle. The source emphasized, “platforms make their own decisions according to their policies and terms of service.”

    CNN has reached out to the other agencies for comment as well.

    Jordan claims that the subpoenas will help his panel determine if legislation is needed to create “new statutory limits on the Executive Branch’s ability to work with social media platforms and other companies to restrict the circulation of content and deplatform users.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jordan subpoenas FBI human resources official | CNN Politics

    Jordan subpoenas FBI human resources official | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan has issued a subpoena to Jennifer Leigh Moore, executive assistant director of human resources at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, demanding she answer questions from the select subcommittee on the so-called weaponization of the federal government.

    Russell Dye, Jordan’s spokesperson, claimed in a statement Monday that Moore “refused to answer questions” about the FBI’s alleged retaliation against conservatives during a previous transcribed interview with the panel.

    CNN has reached out to the FBI for comment.

    Jordan and his fellow Republicans say they have heard from “whistleblowers” who disclosed that the FBI is attempting to “purge” employees with conservative views.

    “We have received protected whistleblower disclosures that the FBI is engaging in a ‘purge’ of employees with conservative views by revoking their security clearances and indefinitely suspending these employees. Many of the formal notices for these adverse personnel actions have been signed by you,” Jordan, an Ohio Republican, wrote in his September letter to Moore.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House Oversight Committee quietly issues several new subpoenas as part of Biden family probe | CNN Politics

    House Oversight Committee quietly issues several new subpoenas as part of Biden family probe | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    House Oversight Chairman James Comer has quietly issued several subpoenas for documents and bank records as part of the Republican-led investigation into the financial dealings of President Joe Biden’s family, according to an internal memo shared among Democrats on the panel.

    The memo, obtained by CNN, reveals new details about the subpoenas issued by Comer as part of the ongoing probe, which has stoked the ire of Democratic members who have accused the Kentucky Republican of covertly investigating business dealings by the president’s son, Hunter Biden.

    “This memorandum serves to ensure that Committee Democrats have access to all relevant information, including the six document subpoenas issued to date,” it says.

    The memo comes a day after the committee’s top Democrat, Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, criticized committee Republicans for “shielding information” related to the panel’s investigations. House rules mandate that committee materials are shared between the majority and minority.

    “Committee Republicans’ decision to conduct this probe behind a veil of secrecy runs counter to the Committee’s traditional commitment to transparency and raises serious questions about the integrity of the investigation,” Democrats wrote in the memo.

    According to the Democrats’ memo, subpoenas have been sent to: Bank of America, Cathay Bank, JPMorgan Chase, HSBC USA N.A and Mervyn Yan, a former business associate of Hunter Biden. In most cases the subpoenas to the banks span 14 years and relate to six individuals and 10 different entities, House Democrats say. The business entities covered by the subpoenas include several with ties to China and the energy sector, according to those listed in the memo.

    The subpoena to HSBC was initially sent, and later reissued, after the bank requested an updated cover page, according to a person familiar with the matter. A spokesperson for HSBC declined to comment.

    CNN has reached out to JP Morgan Chase & Co., and an email address associated with Mervyn Yan for comment.

    “Cathay Bank, a NASDAQ-listed, U.S. financial institution for over 60 years, has cooperated with the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability’s request for information,” said a bank spokesperson. “The bank intends to continue to cooperate with the committee.”

    CNN first reported on Comer’s subpoena for Bank of America in March to compel the bank to turn over records relating to three of Hunter Biden’s business associates.

    The six subpoenas listed do not include “friendly” subpoenas Comer has issued to some witnesses, including former Twitter employees, who have testified before the committee.

    “Despite their vast efforts, Committee Republicans have failed to identify any evidence connecting President Biden to or implicating him in the foreign transactions under investigation,” according to the memo from Democrats.

    Comer slammed the Democrats’ memo in a statement on Friday. “Ranking Member Raskin has again disclosed Committee’s subpoenas in a cheap attempt to thwart cooperation from other witnesses,” Comer said. “No one should be fooled by Ranking Member Raskin’s games. We have the bank records, and the facts are not good for the Biden family.”

    Democrats also laid out what they called “inconsistencies” among the investigations that Comer and the panel’s Republican members are interested in pursuing, arguing they are only interested in probing the Biden family, but not do want to investigate similar issues pertaining to former President Donald Trump and his family.

    “To date, Chairman Comer has issued six subpoenas and sent 39 letters in the Biden family investigation alone. Notably, Mr. Comer has failed to issue a single document subpoena in any other Committee investigation this Congress,” Democrats wrote.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • EXCLUSIVE: Dozens of Mar-a-Lago staff, from servers to aides, are subpoenaed in classified documents probe | CNN Politics

    EXCLUSIVE: Dozens of Mar-a-Lago staff, from servers to aides, are subpoenaed in classified documents probe | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    At least two dozen people – from Mar-a-Lago resort staff to members of Donald Trump’s inner circle at the Florida estate – have been subpoenaed to testify to a federal grand jury that’s investigating the former president’s handling of classified documents, multiple sources familiar with the investigation told CNN.

    On Thursday, Trump’s communications aide Margo Martin, who worked in the White House and then moved with Trump to Florida, appeared before the grand jury in Washington, DC. One of special counsel Jack Smith’s senior-most prosecutors was involved in the interview.

    Martin, who is among a small group of former White House advisers who have remained employed by Trump after he left office, declined to answer any questions when approached by a CNN reporter.

    Smith has sought testimony from a range of people close to Trump – from his own attorneys who represent him in the matter to staffers who work on the grounds of Mar-a-Lago, including a housekeeper and restaurant servers, sources said.

    The staffers are of interest to investigators because of what they may have seen or heard while on their daily duties around the estate, including whether they saw boxes or documents in Trump’s office suite or elsewhere.

    “They’re casting an extremely wide net – anyone and everyone who might have seen something,” said one source familiar with the Justice Department’s efforts.

    For instance, federal investigators have talked to a Mar-a-Lago staff member seen on security camera footage moving boxes from a storage room with Trump aide Walt Nauta, who has already spoken with investigators.

    Many of the Mar-a-Lago staffers are being represented by counsel paid for by Trump entities, according to sources and federal elections records.

    The Justice Department has been investigating potential mishandling of national security records and possible obstruction for about a year. FBI agents recovered more than 100 classified documents during a search of Mar-a-Lago last summer. Since then, Trump’s legal team has turned over additional classified material.

    An aerial view of former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Fla., on Aug. 31, 2022.

    Classified docs found at Mar-a-Lago months after searches

    The federal probe previously subpoenaed top Trump advisers, such as former White House deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino and former Trump adviser and Pentagon official Kash Patel.

    Meanwhile, Smith continues to pursue Trump defense lawyer Evan Corcoran. In an earlier appearance before the grand jury, Corcoran declined to answer questions about his conversations with Trump related to the classified documents, citing attorney-client privilege. Prosecutors are asking a judge to find that he must answer because the conversations may have been part of advancing a crime or fraud.

    A ruling is expected from the DC District Court on Corcoran as early as this week.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Mike Pence asks judge to block subpoena for Jan. 6 testimony | CNN Politics

    Mike Pence asks judge to block subpoena for Jan. 6 testimony | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former Vice President Mike Pence has filed a motion asking a judge to block a federal grand jury subpoena for his testimony related to January 6 on the grounds that he is protected by the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause, according to a source familiar with the filing.

    Pence had publicly signaled that he planned to resist the subpoena, arguing it was “unconstitutional and unprecedented.” His legal team filed the motion Friday night, the same day former President Donald Trump’s attorneys asked a judge to block Pence from speaking to a grand jury about certain matters covered by executive privilege.

    The Pence motion – filed as part of sealed proceedings – seeks to stop testimony pertaining to his legislative functions around January 6, which could potentially include a broad swath of testimony. It is separate from Trump’s motion, which argues that the former president can shield former aides from sharing internal communications.

    Special counsel Jack Smith is seeking documents and testimony related to January 6, 2021, and wants Pence to testify about his interactions with Trump leading up to the 2020 election and the day of the attack on the US Capitol.

    But the former vice president asserts that because he was also acting as president of the Senate that day, he is shielded by the Speech or Debate Clause, which protects lawmakers from certain law enforcement actions targeted at their legislative duties.

    Pence has written a memoir detailing his interactions with Trump leading up to January 6, which could complicate efforts to resist the subpoena.

    His team previously indicated to the Justice Department that he’d be open to answering questions if they were limited to the matters he had previously discussed publicly, including in his book, a source told CNN.

    Pence’s legal team did not comment. The Justice Department also did not comment.

    Since taking over the investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election, Smith, who has a reputation for moving quickly, has accelerated the probe’s pace and began imposing tight deadlines on subpoenas. Smith also is simultaneously investigating Trump’s handling of classified documents after leaving office.

    Trump huddled with several members of his legal team at his Mar-A-Lago resort in Palm Beach last week to discuss Smith’s investigations, according to a source familiar with the meeting.

    Smith recently subpoenaed Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows and Trump’s former national security adviser Robert O’Brien in both of the Trump-related probes, and investigators have sat down with his former acting Department of Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf as part of the probe into 2020 election interference.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Steve Bannon’s ex-lawyers sue him over nearly $500,000 in unpaid legal bills | CNN Politics

    Steve Bannon’s ex-lawyers sue him over nearly $500,000 in unpaid legal bills | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A law firm that represented former Donald Trump strategist Steve Bannon during his fight against a subpoena from the House January 6 committee and other cases is suing Bannon for nearly $500,000 in unpaid legal bills.

    The lawsuit states that Davidoff Hutcher & Citron LLP worked for Bannon from November 2020 through November 2022 and represented him on several high-profile cases, including investigations into Bannon’s crowdfunding border-wall effort and the subpoena from the House select committee investigating the US Capitol attack on January 6, 2021.

    “This action simply seeks payment of an outstanding bill for legal services rendered in the amount of $480,487.87 in addition to scheduling a hearing on the reasonable attorneys’ fees DHC is contractually entitled to as the prevailing party in this litigation,” the law firm wrote.

    Bannon’s spokesman did not respond to a request for comment.

    While Trump pardoned Bannon in the federal border wall case, the Manhattan DA’s office announced an indictment last year charging Bannon with state charges of fraud, conspiracy and money laundering related to the effort. Bannon has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

    The lawyers representing him in that case – from a different firm – have sought to withdraw from representing him and said there were “irreconcilable differences.” Bannon is due in court next week to update the judge on his efforts to find new lawyers.

    In his criminal case related to the House January 6 investigation, a jury convicted Bannon of failing to turn over documents and appearing for testimony last summer. Bannon has appealed his contempt of Congress conviction for defying the committee’s subpoena.

    Robert Costello, an attorney at Davidoff Hutcher & Citron, had represented Bannon opposite the House subpoena, but became a witness in the case so Bannon had a different legal team at trial.

    The Davidoff firm said in the lawsuit that its “bills for fees and expenses totaled $855,487.87. Defendant paid only $375,000.00 of the total bill leaving a total of $480,487.87 outstanding.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Lawyers for Proud Boys member take steps to subpoena former President Trump in seditious conspiracy trial | CNN Politics

    Lawyers for Proud Boys member take steps to subpoena former President Trump in seditious conspiracy trial | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Lawyers for a Proud Boys member on trial for seditious conspiracy related to his alleged role in the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol are taking steps to subpoena former President Donald Trump to testify as a witness for the defense.

    It’s a longshot bid as judges have previously rejected subpoenas for Trump and arguments that rioters were obeying his orders in other trials of January 6 defendants. Trump’s lawyers also wouldn’t accept service of any subpoena for him unless they had extensive discussions about it first, according to a source familiar with the matter, and they have not decided on a Proud Boys trial subpoena.

    The Justice Department has not indicated in court, or in the email to defense attorneys, whether it plans to try to quash this subpoena.

    But DOJ has informed defense lawyers they can contact Trump’s attorney Evan Corcoran, according to an email reviewed by CNN. If he refuses to accept service, the Justice Department said they can reach out to the Secret Service’s Miami field office to facilitate the process, or ask the court to order the US Marshals Service to serve the subpoena.

    The subpoena asks for Trump to come to the federal courthouse in Washington, DC, on March 1, but bringing Trump into court is likely an uphill battle. Trump’s attorneys also could move to quash the subpoena, and federal prosecutors still have the ability to argue that his testimony isn’t relevant to the ongoing trial.

    A federal prosecutor on the case declined to comment.

    Norman Pattis, a lawyer who represents defendant Joseph Biggs, announced the subpoena in court last week and asked for the government’s assistance in serving the subpoena. Pattis told CNN on Wednesday that he had reached out to Corcoran about the subpoena and has not received a response. Pattis added that he also has reached out to the Secret Service in Miami.

    CNN has reached out to Corcoran for comment.

    Biggs and his four co-defendants are on trial for their alleged participation in the January 6 US Capitol insurrection, and all five have pleaded not guilty.

    Attorneys for the five defendants in this case, including Biggs, previously asked a federal judge to allow them to argue to a jury that Trump ordered their clients to storm the Capitol on January 6. District Judge Timothy Kelly rejected the argument, saying that Trump did not have the authority to order a mob to storm the Capitol.

    Pattis told CNN that serving Trump with the subpoena is “the first of many steps” in the process of getting the former president to testify in the high-profile sedition trial. Pattis also said he anticipates lawyers for Trump will move to stop the subpoena.

    “I presented to the United States government a signed subpoena requiring the presence of Donald J. Trump at the Proud Boy trial sometime in March,” Pattis said on his podcast “Law and Legitimacy” last week. “We’re hoping that Mr. Trump – ambitious as he is – recognizes that this is an opportunity for him to begin to explain to the public his position on ‘Stopping the Steal.’”

    “We have drawn the line,” Pattis continued. “We have asked Mr. Trump to join us, and our position is, Mr. President, you urged patriots to stop the steal in 2020 and early 2021. We have a simpler request: Take the stand.”

    Pattis added that they want to question Trump on the period between November 3, 2020 and January 6, 2021.

    Pattis has not said publicly what he would hope to elicit from Trump’s testimony, but several defense lawyers representing Proud Boys members have argued during this trial that their clients were called to action by the former president when he told the far-right group to “stand back and stand by” during a 2020 presidential debate, and that the Proud Boys believed they were acting at his behest on January 6.

    “You see Trump, President Trump, told them the election was stolen. It was Trump that told them to go [to the Capitol]. And it was Trump that unleashed them on January 6,” Sabino Jauregui, the attorney for former Proud Boys chairman Enrique Tarrio, told jurors during his opening statement last month.

    “It’s too hard to blame Trump,” Jauregui said. “It’s too hard to bring him in here with his army of lawyers. … Instead, they go for the easy target. They go for Enrique Tarrio.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Pence says he’s willing to take fight against DOJ subpoena in Trump probe to Supreme Court | CNN Politics

    Pence says he’s willing to take fight against DOJ subpoena in Trump probe to Supreme Court | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former Vice President Mike Pence said Wednesday that he is willing to take his fight against a subpoena for his testimony in the Justice Department’s 2020 election subversion investigation all the way to the Supreme Court.

    “I am going to fight the Biden DOJ subpoena for me to appear before the grand jury because I believe it’s unconstitutional and unprecedented,” Pence told reporters after making a speech in Iowa.

    He said he expects former President Donald Trump to bring his own challenge to the subpoena that will raise executive privilege claims. Pence, however, intends to fight the subpoena under the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause, which shields legislators from certain law enforcement actions targeting conduct related to their legislative duties.

    While other witnesses have raised Speech or Debate Clause argument in efforts to resist subpoenas in the DOJ probe and in the other investigations into January 6, 2021, Pence plans to invoke the clause in relation to his role as president of the Senate – which is believed to be untrod legal ground.

    In that role, he presided over Congress’ certification of the 2020 election results on January 6, 2021.

    “On the day of January 6, I was acting as President of the Senate, presiding over a Joint Session, described in the Constitution itself,” Pence said. “And so, I believe that that Speech and Debate Clause of the Constitution actually prohibits the executive branch from compelling me to appear in a court, as the Constitution says, or in any other place. And we’ll stand on that principle and we’ll take that case as far as it needs to go, if need be to the Supreme Court of the United States, because to me, it’s – it’s an issue of the separation of powers.”

    He said that over the last “several months,” his team had made it clear to the Justice Department that he believed the Speech or Debate Clause precluded a subpoena for his testimony.

    CNN previously reported on Pence’s plans to raise claims under the Speech or Debate Clause.

    Pence also noted that he has written and spoken publicly about the events leading up to the January 6 certification vote. But, he said, “if we were to accede to accept a subpoena for appearance before a grand jury or a trial, I believe that would diminish the privileges enjoyed by any future vice president, either Democrat or Republican. I simply will not do that.”

    Pence first spoke publicly about his plans to fight the subpoena at an event in Minneapolis earlier Wednesday, saying that his fight was about ” separation of powers” and “defending the prerogatives that I had as president of the Senate.”

    “My fight is on the separation of powers. My fight against the DOJ subpoena very simply is on defending the prerogatives that I had as president of the Senate to preside over the Joint Session of Congress on January 6,” Pence told reporters in Minneapolis.

    “For me this is a moment where you have to decide where you stand and I stand on the Constitution of the United States,” he added.

    Pence is one of several former members of Trump’s inner circle whose testimony federal investigators have sought, as they scrutinize the events leading up to and during the January 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol. That probe, as well as the federal investigation into Trump’s handling of documents from his White House that were found at Mar-a-Lago, have taken a more aggressive tack since special counsel Jack Smith took over both investigations.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Pence to fight subpoena on separation of powers grounds because he was president of Senate | CNN Politics

    Pence to fight subpoena on separation of powers grounds because he was president of Senate | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former Vice President Mike Pence is expected to fight a recent subpoena from the special counsel based on the grounds that he was president of the Senate at the time and therefore shielded from the order, sources familiar with the matter tell CNN.

    Pence is expected to address the subpoena and his response to it during a trip to Iowa on Wednesday, according to a source familiar with his plans.

    Pence has been subpoenaed by the special counsel investigating former President Donald Trump and his role in January 6, 2021, a source familiar with the matter told CNN. Special counsel Jack Smith’s office is seeking documents and testimony, the source said. Investigators want the former vice president to testify about his interactions with Trump leading up to the 2020 election and the day of the attack on the US Capitol.

    The subpoena marks an important milestone in the Justice Department’s two-year criminal investigation, now led by the special counsel, into the efforts by Trump and allies to impede the transfer of power after he lost the 2020 election. Pence is an important witness who has detailed in a memoir some of his interactions with Trump in the weeks after the election, a move that likely opens the door for the Justice Department to override at least some of Trump’s claims of executive privilege.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Safety investigators subpoena pilots over close call at JFK

    Safety investigators subpoena pilots over close call at JFK

    [ad_1]

    Federal investigators said Friday they issued subpoenas to force the pilots of an American Airlines jet to sit for recorded interviews about a close call with a Delta plane on a runway at New York’s Kennedy Airport last month.

    The National Transportation Safety Board said it attempted to interview the crew members three times, but a union representative said the pilots refused to have their statements recorded.

    “NTSB has determined that this investigation requires that the flight crew interviews be audio recorded and transcribed by a court reporter to ensure the highest degree of accuracy, completeness, and efficiency,” the agency said in a preliminary report. “As a result of the flight crew’s repeated unwillingness to proceed with a recorded interview, subpoenas for their testimony have been issued.”

    The three pilots have seven days to respond to the subpoenas, which direct them to appear for interviews at NTSB headquarters in Washington. American said they are not currently flying for the airline.

    NTSB investigators won’t get to hear any conversation that took place among the pilots in the cockpit during the incident — in some cases, a very valuable investigative tool. The recording was taped over when the crew took off for London shortly after the close call.

    The NTSB said the American Airlines Boeing 777 crossed an active runway on Jan. 13 without approval from air traffic controllers, and that led to a close call with a Delta Air Lines Boeing 737 that was taking off on the same runway.

    Disaster was averted when an air traffic controller, using an expletive, urgently told pilots of the Delta jet to stop their takeoff. Audio recordings show that the controller immediately communicated the severity of the situation to the American Airlines crew.

    The pilots have not been identified. The union that advised them not to sit for interviews said it objects that NTSB now records such interviews instead of merely taking notes, which the union says is accurate enough.

    “NTSB investigations are intended to be fact-finding proceedings with no adverse parties. We do not believe that this should be an adversarial issue,” the Allied Pilots Association said in a statement.

    The union said that changing the interviews from notes to recordings “discourages otherwise cooperative witnesses from participating in the fact-finding process” and runs against the purpose of promoting safety.

    The NTSB said that it has a long practice of recording some interviews, and that doing so is especially important in this case because the cockpit voice recording was overwritten.

    “It is unusual for pilots not to agree to be interviewed,” said John Cox, a former airline pilot and now a safety consultant.

    American, which is based in Fort Worth, Texas, said it was cooperating with the NTSB.

    The American crew took off shortly after the nighttime incident and completed its scheduled flight to London. The Delta pilots returned their plane to the gate. Delta put up passengers overnight, and the plane left the next morning for the Dominican Republic.

    The cockpit voice recordings in both planes were lost as a result. The devices typically capture a two-hour loop before being recorded over.

    The NTSB said an air traffic controller at JFK was alerted to the danger of the American jet crossing the wrong runway by a surveillance system that lets controllers track the movement of planes and vehicles on the ground.

    The board said the American Airlines Boeing 777 and the Delta Boeing 737 were separated by about 1,400 feet at the closest point — a bit farther apart than previously reported.

    Another close call occurred last weekend at the airport in Austin, Texas, when a FedEx cargo plane was cleared to land on the same runway from which a Southwest Airlines plane was taking off. The FedEx pilots were able to abort their landing and avoid a collision. The NTSB is also investigating that incident.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Pence subpoenaed by special counsel investigating Trump | CNN Politics

    Pence subpoenaed by special counsel investigating Trump | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former Vice President Mike Pence has been subpoenaed by the special counsel investigating Donald Trump and his role in January 6, 2021, a source familiar with the matter told CNN.

    Special counsel Jack Smith’s office is seeking documents and testimony related to January 6, the source said. They want the former vice president to testify about his interactions with Trump leading up to the 2020 election and the day of the attack on the US Capitol.

    The subpoena marks an important milestone in the Justice Department’s two-year criminal investigation, now led by the special counsel, into the efforts by Trump and allies to impede the transfer of power after he lost the 2020 election. Pence is an important witness who has detailed in a memoir some of his interactions with Trump in the weeks after the election, a move that likely opens the door for the Justice Department to override at least some of Trump’s claims of executive privilege.

    Pence’s attorney Emmet Flood is known as a hawk on executive privilege, and people familiar with the discussions have said Pence was expected to claim at least some limits on providing details of his direct conversations with Trump. Depending on his responses, prosecutors have the option to ask a judge to compel him to answer additional questions and override Trump’s executive privilege claims.

    ABC News first reported on the subpoena.

    Pence’s office declined to confirm he had been subpoenaed. A spokesman for the special counsel declined to comment to CNN on the matter.

    Months of negotiations preceded the subpoena to the former vice president, CNN has reported.

    Justice Department prosecutors had reached out to Pence’s representatives to seek his testimony in the criminal investigation, according to people familiar with the matter. Pence’s team had indicated he was open to discussing a possible agreement with DOJ to provide some testimony, one person said.

    That request occurred before the department appointed Smith to oversee two Trump-related investigations, the January 6-related probe and another into alleged mishandling of classified materials found at the former president’s Mar-a-Lago residence.

    In November, Pence published his memoir that detailed some of his interactions with Trump as the former president sought to overturn the results of his election loss to President Joe Biden. Pence and his team knew that the book’s publication would raise the prospect that the Justice Department would likely seek information about those interactions as part of its criminal investigation, people briefed on the matter told CNN.

    Pence rebuffed an interview request from the House select committee that investigated the January 6 insurrection, but allowed top aides to provide testimony in the House’s probe, as well as in the Justice Department’s criminal investigation. The DOJ successfully secured answers from top Pence advisers Greg Jacob and Marc Short in significant court victories that could make it more likely the criminal investigation reaches further into Trump’s inner circle.

    There are no plans for Trump’s team to challenge the grand jury subpoena of Pence at this time, according to a source familiar with its thinking. But it would still be possible for Trump to attempt to assert executive privilege over some conversations they had, if Pence declines to detail those conversations to the grand jury.

    So far, Trump’s team has lost those challenges when Pence’s deputies and two White House counsel’s office attorneys testified, following Chief Judge Beryl Howell’s rulings that they must answer questions they initially refused to because of confidentiality around the presidency.

    Howell’s tenure as chief judge of the DC District Court ends in mid-March, meaning a different federal judge, James Boasberg, could be the one to field privilege disputes in the continuing grand jury investigation.

    CNN reported earlier Thursday that Smith had also subpoenaed former Trump national security adviser Robert O’Brien in both of the Trump-related probes, according to a source familiar with the matter. O’Brien has been asserting executive privilege in declining to provide some of the information that prosecutors are seeking from him, the source said.

    Trump’s former acting Department of Homeland Security secretary was separately interviewed by Justice Department lawyers in recent weeks as part of the probe into 2020 election interference, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

    Rather than appearing before a federal grand jury, former acting secretary Chad Wolf was interviewed under oath by Justice Department lawyers and FBI officials, something one of the sources characterized as a “standard” first step for prosecutors.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • First on CNN: Trump’s former national security adviser subpoenaed in special counsel probes of classified documents, January 6 | CNN Politics

    First on CNN: Trump’s former national security adviser subpoenaed in special counsel probes of classified documents, January 6 | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former national security adviser Robert O’Brien has been subpoenaed by special counsel Jack Smith in both his investigation into classified documents found at former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence and the probe related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election, according to a source familiar with the matter.

    O’Brien has been asserting executive privilege in declining to provide some of the information that prosecutors are seeking from him, the source said.

    CNN has reached out to O’Brien for comment.

    O’Brien considered resigning from his post over Trump’s response to the violence on January 6, 2021, but ultimately decided to remain in the job, CNN previously reported. The National Security Council should have been involved in the handling of classified documents at end of the Trump presidency, and O’Brien may have knowledge of how those records ended up at Mar-a-Lago.

    Separately, Trump’s former acting Department of Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf was interviewed by Justice Department lawyers in recent weeks as part of the ongoing special counsel investigation related to 2020 election interference, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

    Rather than appearing before a federal grand jury, Wolf was interviewed under oath by Justice Department lawyers and FBI officials, something one of the sources characterized as a “standard” first step for prosecutors.

    Wolf declined to comment on his recent interview with federal investigators, which was first reported by Bloomberg. A spokesman for Smith also declined to comment.

    The interview comes after Wolf’s former deputy, Ken Cuccinelli, testified last month before a federal grand jury as part of Smith’s election interference probe. When Cuccinelli was asked at the time whether privilege claims arose, he said: “They did, and I didn’t say anything.”

    O’Brien, Wolf and Cuccinelli were previously interviewed by the House select committee that investigated the January 6 insurrection.

    For the time being, Smith has not sought testimony from a handful of other potentially relevant Trump administration officials, including former Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller or former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, two other sources tell CNN.

    In the days after the January 6 attack, Wolf urged Trump and all elected officials to condemn the violence on Capitol Hill, calling what transpired “tragic and sickening.”

    “While I have consistently condemned political violence on both sides of the aisle, specifically violence directed at law enforcement, we now see some supporters of the President using violence as a means to achieve political ends,” Wolf said at the time. “This is unacceptable.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • In new role, Sanders demands answers from Starbucks’ Schultz

    In new role, Sanders demands answers from Starbucks’ Schultz

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — As Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders settles into his new role as chairman of a committee that oversees health and labor issues, he says some corporations “should be nervous.” And the longtime liberal crusader’s first target is Howard Schultz, the interim CEO of Starbucks who has aggressively fought his workers’ efforts to unionize.

    Sanders and the 10 other Democrats on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee sent a letter to Schultz on Tuesday demanding he testify at a March 9 hearing on his company’s compliance with federal labor laws. If Schultz ignores or refuses the request, Sanders said, he’s willing to use the committee’s subpoena power to force him to appear.

    “This is corporate greed,” said Sanders, 81, who has run for president twice and spent a political lifetime fighting corporations and monied interests over policies that he says hurt the working class. “Workers have a constitutional right to organize. And even if you are a large, multinational corporation owned by a billionaire you don’t have the right to violate the law. And we intend to be asking Mr. Schultz some very hard questions.”

    Sanders’ demand for testimony from Schultz is an opening act in his new role as chairman of the HELP panel, which has expansive jurisdiction over issues that have been central to his more than four decades in public service. And thanks to Democrats adding a seat to their majority in last year’s election, Sanders can fully exercise the oversight powers of the gavel and potentially issue subpoenas without Republican support.

    Sanders said he’s not done challenging individual corporations, mentioning Amazon as another company he believes has acted illegally against unions. And “if you are a multinational pharmaceutical company that’s been ripping off the American people and charging us outrageously high prices, you should be nervous, because I’m going to hold you accountable,” he said in an interview with The Associated Press on Tuesday. “I’m going to do something about it.”

    It’s unclear how much he can accomplish in a divided Congress. While the committee will serve as a bully pulpit for the Senate’s most famous progressive, passing significant legislation through the Senate — not to mention the Republican-led House – will be a heavy-to-impossible lift over the next two years. And finding areas of consensus will be a new test for the cantankerous far-left senator as he is watched uneasily by the industries he regulates and members of his own committee from both parties.

    Sanders said he has “two roles”— one as chairman, with a more realistic focus on results, and another promoting his signature issues like “Medicare for All,” tuition-free college and paid child care, among others. He says he plans to take his “show on the road,” doing a series of town halls, roundtables and field hearings around the country. Next week, he’ll hold a town hall inside the Capitol, bringing teachers unions together to discuss teacher pay.

    “I am chairman of the committee and I want to accomplish as much as I can … that’s what I’m paid to do and I intend to do it,” he said. “On the other hand, there are issues out there that I do not expect will be passed in this Congress, but are very important and they have to be talked about.”

    Republicans are skeptical Sanders can make the kinds of deals necessary to push significant legislation through the committee.

    Utah Sen. Mitt Romney, a Republican on the panel, said Sanders’ style is “a lot of storm and fury” and light on real accomplishments, meaning “little will be done to get through the committee, and very little will reach the floor.”

    Sanders and his Democratic allies point to bipartisan deals he has made in the past, along with some of his unexpected relationships he’s made with Republicans who share slices of his interests. While he spends most of his time talking about his progressive goals, they said, he is also an 16-year veteran of the Senate with an ability to compromise.

    For his part, Sanders noted his deal with the late Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., to improve veterans’ benefits almost 10 years ago and his work with former rival President Joe Biden, who beat him in the 2020 Democratic primary, to pass COVID relief policy in 2021 and negotiate a massive package of social spending programs that next year. That legislation ultimately stalled.

    On the bipartisan veterans’ legislation, which aimed to improve access to health care after a series of controversies, “he put his heart and soul in it,” said Democratic Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, the previous chairwoman of the HELP committee and a member of the Veterans panel while Sanders and McCain were negotiating. “He learned, he listened, he compromised.”

    Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said Sanders often has a differing view than those in the caucus, “but he usually ends up where the team is.”

    Sanders ticked off Republicans he has worked with — moderate Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, for example, both of whom sit on the committee and have deep interest in rural health issues. He said he’s holding regular meetings with Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, the top Republican on the panel who is known for compromise.

    And this week, Sanders is holding a news conference with Sen. Mike Braun, an Indiana Republican who is on the panel, to demand that railroads provide workers with more sick days.

    Braun said he’s met with Sanders to discuss health care, and while they come at it from opposite angles — Sanders wants it to be government-run, Braun wants to reform the industry to lower costs — they fundamentally agree that there are problems. “When you take everything else away, people are still worried about the high cost of health care,” Braun said.

    Outside of the Capitol, health insurance industry experts are watching what moves Sanders might make around Medicare Advantage, an increasingly popular program where private companies offer plans that are reimbursed by the government for care. Others like health care worker unions are eager to work with Sanders as hospitals around the country grapple with staff shortages and health care worker burnout.

    With his new perch, Sanders seems inclined to stay in the Senate. He said he’s not interested in replacing the departing Labor Secretary, Marty Walsh, and refuses to talk about his own political future at all.

    “I intend to use this committee to address the real issues are facing working class people,” he said.

    ___

    Associated Press writers Amanda Seitz and Seung Min Kim in Washington and Dee-Ann Durbin in Detroit contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House Oversight chairman and former Twitter employees strike deal on subpoenas in exchange for testimony | CNN Politics

    House Oversight chairman and former Twitter employees strike deal on subpoenas in exchange for testimony | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer has subpoenaed three former Twitter employees who will testify before the panel in relation to their investigation into Twitter’s decision to temporarily suppress a New York Post story regarding Hunter Biden’s laptop, three sources familiar with the documents tell CNN.

    Twitter’s former Chief Legal Officer Vijaya Gadde, former Deputy General Counsel James Baker and former Head of Trust and Safety Yoel Roth requested they be subpoenaed in order to compel their testimony, the sources told CNN, given the legal complications of publicly sharing privileged information from Twitter before the committee.

    The hearing comes after Twitter’s CEO, Elon Musk, released some internal communications from Twitter staff about the decision to censor the New York Post story in the closing weeks of the 2020 presidential election campaign season.

    Comer, who met privately with Musk last month when the billionaire visited the Capitol, told CNN last week that the hearing may “incorporate some private conversations with some high-level people at Twitter” who support the belief that the US government may have played a role in the suppression of the New York Post story.

    When asked specifically if Musk has conveyed this sentiment to him, the Kentucky Republican told CNN: “I cannot answer that but that may come out in the hearing.”

    Comer’s belief that the government may have been involved in the suppression of the story is rooted in the so-called “Twitter files” that Musk made publicly available. Comer added his panel so far has only had access to the files that have been released publicly.

    “Americans deserve answers about this attack on the First Amendment and why Big Tech and the Swamp colluded to censor this information about the Biden family selling access for profit. Accountability is coming,” Comer said in a statement regarding the hearing.

    CNN has previously reported that allegations the FBI told Twitter to suppress the story are unsupported, and a half a dozen tech executives and senior staff, along with multiple federal officials familiar with the matter, all denied any such directive was given in interviews with CNN.

    Republicans on the panel are especially eager to grill Baker, who previously served as general counsel at the FBI during the investigation into whether former President Donald Trump had colluded with Russia. Baker joined Twitter just five months before the 2020 election.

    Gadde, Baker and Roth did not respond to CNN’s requests for comment.

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jim Jordan issues first subpoenas targeting Biden administration’s response to school board threats | CNN Politics

    Jim Jordan issues first subpoenas targeting Biden administration’s response to school board threats | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan on Friday subpoenaed the Department of Justice, the FBI and the Department of Education for documents as part of its investigation into whether a Justice Department strategy to address threats against teachers and school officials was abused to target conservative parents.

    The flurry of subpoenas are the first from the Judiciary’s subcommittee dedicated to investigating the alleged weaponization of the federal government and are an early indication that the newly minted chairman intends to aggressively pursue its probe into the Biden administration’s response to rising tensions and threats of violence surrounding school board meetings.

    The subpoenas set a document deadline of March 1. The panel sent the subpoenas after initially sending letters to the agencies for voluntary cooperation on January 17.

    The allegations being investigated date to 2021, when protests and some violence erupted at school board meetings across the country. Most of the anger came from conservative parents who wanted to repeal mask mandates, opposed anti-racism courses and had concerns about LGBTQ policies.

    With that backdrop, the National School Boards Association wrote to President Joe Biden asking for federal help to address the violence and threats against school administrators. The group said that “these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism” and encouraged the Justice Department to explore which laws, possibly including the Patriot Act, could be applied.

    The group soon apologized for “some of the language” in its letter. But it quickly drew backlash, particularly among conservatives.

    Attorney General Merrick Garland had issued a memo in response – which didn’t cite the letter, compare parents to “terrorists” nor invoke the Patriot Act. It merely told the FBI and federal prosecutors to step up collaboration with state and local law enforcement on the issue.

    According to a report Jordan released last year, emails show that the Biden White House consulted with the NSBA on the letter before the group made its letter public. An independent review by NSBA concluded, however, that there was no “direct or indirect evidence suggesting the Administration requested the Letter” or reviewed the contents before the letter was sent.

    Other emails also show that the Justice Department sent an advance copy of Garland’s memo to the NSBA.

    The FBI later established a “threat tag” to internally track cases about school board threats under the same categorization. Republicans have seized on the “threat tag” to accuse the FBI of carrying out Biden’s desire to stomp out conservative speech at school boards. But the creation of an internal database does not mean the FBI initiated any sort of crackdown against parents.

    Judiciary Republicans are requesting Garland provide a paper trail of the DOJ’s communications with the White House, intelligence agencies and members of the National School Boards Association about alleged violence at school board meetings.

    The subpoena also calls for a number of documents relating to Garland’s directive for FBI and US attorneys’ offices to meet with federal, state and local law enforcement partners to discuss strategies for addressing the issue, focusing specifically on what meetings took place and what recommendations were made.

    A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment. Three days after Jordan’s voluntary request to DOJ, a department official responded to the Ohio Republican that “we share your belief that congressional oversight is vital to our functioning democracy” and encouraged the committee to prioritize its document requests to elicit efficient responses, according to a letter obtained by CNN.

    The FBI subpoena specifically demands that Director Chris Wray produce a variety of documents, including communications related to meeting with US attorneys’ offices and “establishment of the Department of Justice’s task force.”

    Wray is also told to hand over all documents related to formal and informal recommendations created or relied upon by FBI employees in accordance with Garland’s October 2021 memo.

    The FBI said in a statement that the bureau “has never been in the business of investigating speech or policing speech at school board meetings or anywhere else, and we never will be,” adding that “attempts to further any political narrative will not change those facts.”

    “The FBI recognizes the importance of congressional oversight and remains fully committed to cooperating with Congress’s oversight requests consistent with its constitutional and statutory responsibilities. The FBI is actively working to respond to congressional requests for information – including voluntary production of documents,” the FBI statement read.

    Jordan’s subpoena to Education Secretary Miguel Cardona called on the Education Department to hand over any documents or communications related to a letter the National School Boards Association sent in September 2021.

    Jordan’s subpoena also called for any files related to Viola Garcia’s appointment to the National Assessment Government Board. Garcia was the president of the National School Boards Association and was one of two individuals who signed the September 2021 letter to Biden.

    An Education Department spokesperson told CNN that “the Department responded to Chairman Jordan’s letter earlier this week. The Department remains committed to responding to the House Judiciary Committee’s requests in a manner consistent with longstanding Executive Branch policy.”

    CNN has reached out to Garcia for comment.

    On Thursday, a day before the subpoena, the Education Department told Jordan’s team that the department played no role in crafting the letter from the National School Boards Association.

    “I would also like to reiterate – as the Department has repeatedly made clear – that the Secretary did not request, direct any action, or play any role in the development of the September 29, 2021, letter from the NSBA to President Biden,” Gwen Graham, assistant secretary for legislation and congressional affairs at the Education Department wrote in a letter obtained by CNN. Graham added that an independent review for counsel retained by the NSBA did not find any connection between the letter and Garcia’s appointment.

    Republicans gave Democrats on the committee a heads up that these subpoenas were coming, a source familiar told CNN. Democratic Del. Stacey Plaskett of the US Virgin Islands, the highest-ranking Democrat on the subcommittee on the weaponization of the federal government, said the subpoenas were underpinned by “conspiracy theories” and said she is confident that what the Republicans have asked for “will once again disprove this tired right-wing theory.”

    White House spokesperson for Congressional Oversight Ian Sams said in a statement to CNN, “Chairman Jordan is rushing to fire off subpoenas only two days after the Judiciary Committee organized, even though agencies already responded in good faith seeking to accommodate requests he made. These subpoenas make crystal clear that extreme House Republicans have no interest in working together with the Biden Administration on behalf of the American people and every interest in staging political stunts.”

    Since the uproar at school boards became a major political issue in late 2021, Republicans have pushed the baseless narrative that Biden, Garland and Wray have weaponized federal law enforcement to attack innocent parents who care about education.

    House Speaker Kevin McCarthy falsely claimed that “Biden used the FBI to target parents as domestic terrorists.” Jordan has said Garland tried “to use federal law enforcement tools to silence parents.” This claim even came up in the GOP response to last year’s State of the Union. These claims have been repeatedly debunked by fact-checkers from CNN and other outlets.

    For his part, Garland has aggressively pushed back against Republicans’ accusations. He previously testified to Congress that the Justice Department isn’t using counterterrorism resources against parents and said it was ridiculous to equate “angry” parents to “terrorists.”

    When GOP senators grilled Wray about the “threat tag” matter at an August hearing, he defended the FBI.

    “The FBI is not going to be in the business of investigating speech or policing speech at school board meetings,” Wray said. “We’re not about to start now. Threats of violence, that’s a different matter altogether. And there, we will work with our state local partners, as we always have.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Comparing the classified document discoveries plaguing Biden, Trump and Pence | CNN Politics

    Comparing the classified document discoveries plaguing Biden, Trump and Pence | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Washington – President Joe Biden, former President Donald Trump and former Vice President Mike Pence are all facing scrutiny regarding their potential mishandling of classified documents.

    In all three cases, sensitive government materials were found in places where they shouldn’t have ended up. But there are key distinctions that differentiate each situation, including how Biden, Trump and Pence responded to the discovery of documents and how aggressively the Justice Department is currently investigating.

    Here’s a breakdown of the similarities and differences between the Biden, Trump and Pence cases.

    The Biden and Pence situations are similar – their lawyers discovered the classified documents, alerted the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and turned over the papers. In Biden’s case, FBI agents later found additional documents when they searched his home in Wilmington, Delaware.

    Trump followed a different path. After he left the White House, NARA realized that materials were missing. In May 2021, they reached out to Trump’s lawyers who negotiated for months over the voluntary return of several boxes of important documents.

    The Justice Department obtained a subpoena in May 2022, a year after NARA’s initial flag, after suspecting that Trump was still holding onto some classified records. Trump gave back more files but didn’t return everything in his possession. The FBI later executed a search warrant at his Mar-a-Lago resort in August, where more documents were found. The search was the first time in American history that a former president’s home was searched as part of a criminal investigation.

    The exact number is unknown in Biden’s case. Approximately 20 classified documents had been recovered before the FBI searched Biden’s home in Wilmington. The FBI uncovered even more classified files during that search, but neither side has publicly disclosed the specific number of additional documents found.

    For Trump, more than 325 classified records have been recovered. This includes documents returned voluntarily to NARA, turned over to the Justice Department under subpoena, and found by the FBI.

    With Pence’s situation, CNN has reported that his team found about a dozen documents at his Indiana home.

    Some of Biden’s documents were marked “top secret,” which is the highest level of classification. Some of those documents had an “SCI” designation, which stands for “sensitive compartmented information” and refers to extremely sensitive material gleaned from US intelligence sources.

    At least 60 of the Trump documents were labeled “top secret,” including some files with SCI markings. There were also some documents with “SAP” designation, which stands for “special access programs” and is used for documents that are closely held with special protocols for who can access the material.

    A source who was briefed on some of the Pence documents previously told CNN that the government papers recovered from his home were “lower level” classification, without any SCI or SAP markings.

    Attorney General Merrick Garland brought on special prosecutors to investigate Biden and Trump. The Trump matter is being investigated by special counsel Jack Smith, who was appointed in November. And the Biden matter is being investigated by special counsel Robert Hur, who was appointed in January.

    CNN has previously reported that the FBI and Justice Department are conducting a review of the Pence documents and how they ended up at his home. This is less than a full-blown criminal probe.

    The Trump investigation has progressed the farthest. Federal prosecutors got a subpoena, demanded the return of all classified documents and tried to hold Trump in contempt when he didn’t fully comply. Investigators also got a judge to approve a search warrant for Mar-a-Lago and CNN has reported that there is an active grand jury based in Washington, DC, that recently heard testimony from witnesses.

    In this file image contained in a court filing by the Department of Justice on Aug. 30, 2022, and redacted by in part by the FBI, shows a photo of documents seized during the Aug. 8 search by the FBI of former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.

    There haven’t been any known subpoenas or search warrants in the Biden inquiry, though the FBI has conducted voluntary interviews with some of the people on Biden’s team who handled documents.

    There aren’t any known subpoenas, search warrants or FBI interviews in the Pence-related review.

    Biden and Pence both maintain that they engaged early with NARA to return missing documents and are cooperating fully with the Justice Department.

    Whether it was intentional or not, Trump repeatedly missed opportunities to return the documents to the government. Criminal prosecutors eventually concluded that there might have been intentional efforts to hold onto the documents, and Trump is now under investigation for potential obstruction.

    [ad_2]

    Source link