ReportWire

Tag: violence in society

  • January 6 defendant arrested for allegedly planning to kill FBI agents who had investigated him | CNN Politics

    January 6 defendant arrested for allegedly planning to kill FBI agents who had investigated him | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A Tennessee man already facing charges in connection with the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol was arrested for allegedly planning to kill FBI agents, including those who had been investigating him, the Justice Department announced Friday.

    Edward Kelley, who was previously charged with assaulting an officer during the Capitol riot, and Austin Carter, also from Tennessee, have been charged with conspiracy, retaliating against a federal official, interstate threats and solicitation to commit a crime of violence.

    According to an affidavit, Kelley and Carter had a list of names of 37 law enforcement members to assassinate.

    The list noted which officers were involved in Kelley’s arrest in May in Knoxville, Tennessee, on the January 6-related charges or present during the search of his home, and it included some of their phone numbers, according to the affidavit.

    An “acquaintance” of Kelley and Carter gave the list to police and began cooperating with investigators, according to the affidavit.

    CNN has reached out to Kelley’s attorney. Carter’s attorney, Joshua Hedrick, told CNN in a statement, “Our investigation is only just beginning, but we are looking forward to providing a zealous defense of Mr. Carter, who has asserted his innocence.”

    In a news release Friday, the Justice Department said Kelley not only discussed attacking law enforcement agents with Carter and their unnamed acquaintance, but also planned to attack the FBI’s Knoxville, Tennessee Field Office.

    “If I’m extradited to DC or you don’t hear about my status within 24 or 48 hours..if they are coming to arrest me again, start it,” Kelley told the acquaintance during a recorded call Wednesday, according to the affidavit. “You guys are taking them out at their office. What you and [Carter] need to do is recruit as many as you can…and you’re going to attack their office.”

    When the acquaintance asked if Carter was in support of part of Kelley’s plans, Carter told the individual that “this is the time, add up or put up” and “to definitely make sure you got everything racked, locked up and loaded.”

    Kelley and Carter will remain detained pending further hearings.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fact check: Republican congressman falsely claims Democratic congresswoman said pedophilia isn’t a crime | CNN Politics

    Fact check: Republican congressman falsely claims Democratic congresswoman said pedophilia isn’t a crime | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    On Thursday afternoon, Republican Rep. Ronny Jackson of Texas accused Democratic Rep. Katie Porter of California of having said that “pedophilia isn’t a crime.”

    But Porter did not say that. Jackson, like some conservative Twitter personalities, was wrongly describing Porter’s remarks.

    Jackson has more than 500,000 followers on Twitter. Here’s what he tweeted: “Katie Porter just said that pedophilia isn’t a crime, she said it’s an ‘identity.’ THIS IS THE EMBODIMENT OF EVIL! The sad thing is that this woman isn’t the only VILE person pushing for pedophilia normalization. This is what progressives believe!”

    Facts First: Jackson’s claim is false. Porter did not say that pedophilia isn’t a crime. Full video from a congressional hearing on Wednesday shows that Porter actually said that LGBTQ people are being falsely smeared on social media as being a “groomer” or “pedophile” merely because of their gender identity and sexual orientation. She did not defend pedophilia itself.

    In other words, Porter is being baselessly described as a supporter of pedophilia over comments in which she was denouncing how other people are being baselessly described as pedophiles.

    Jackson’s spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday afternoon.

    Porter made her remarks during a Wednesday hearing of the House Oversight and Reform Committee that was focused on violence and hate directed at lesbian, gay and transgender Americans. Porter was speaking to Kelley Robinson, president of an advocacy group called the Human Rights Campaign, about the group’s report on tweets the group said “mention the LGBTQ+ community alongside slurs such as ‘groomer’, ‘predator’ and ‘pedophile’.”

    Here is a transcript of the relevant portion of the exchange, which can be viewed at the 2:49:30 mark of this video.

    Porter: I wanted to start with Ms. Robinson, if I could. Your organization recently released a report analyzing the 500 most viewed, most influential tweets that identified LGBTQ people as so-called ‘groomers.’ The ‘groomer’ narrative is an age-old lie to position LGBTQ+ people as a threat to kids. And what it does is deny them access to public spaces, it stokes fear, and can even stoke violence. Ms. Robinson, according to its own hateful content policy, does Twitter allow posts calling LGBTQ+ people ‘groomers’?

    Robinson: No. I mean, Twitter, along with Facebook and many others, have community guidelines. It’s about holding users accountable to those guidelines, and acknowledging that when we use phrases and words like ‘groomers’ and ‘pedophiles’ to describe people – individuals in our communities that are mothers, that are fathers, that are teachers, that are doctors – it is dangerous. And it’s got one purpose. It is to dehumanize us. And make us feel like we are not a part of this American society. And it has real-life consequences. So we are calling on social media companies to uphold their community standards. And we’re also calling on any American that’s seeing this play out to hold ourselves and our community members accountable. We wouldn’t accept this in our families, we wouldn’t accept this in our schools. There’s no reason to accept it online.

    Porter: So – I mean, I think you’re absolutely right. And it’s not – this allegation of ‘groomer’ and of ‘pedophile,’ it is alleging that a person is criminal somehow, and engaged in criminal acts, merely because of their identity, their sexual orientation, their gender identity. So this is clearly prohibited under Twitter’s content. Yet you found hundreds of these posts on the platform.

    Nowhere did Porter say that pedophilia isn’t a crime. And the context of the exchange makes clear that she was criticizing false accusations of pedophilia that are based on a person’s identity, not saying that pedophilia is itself an identity.

    Inaccurate descriptions of Porter’s remarks spread on Twitter on Thursday with the help of videos that left out key parts of what she said.

    Jackson’s tweet used similar language as tweets earlier in the day from some other prominent accounts. For example, an account called Libs of TikTok, which has more than 1.6 million Twitter followers, wrote: “Rep Katie Porter (D) says pedophilia isn’t a crime – it’s an identity.”

    But the video that Libs of TikTok posted in support of this claim, which came from yet another conservative account, did not show the full exchange between Porter and Robinson. Specifically, it omitted Porter’s key initial comments – the ones in which she said she was talking about tweets “that identified LGBTQ people as so-called ‘groomers’” and in which she described the “groomer” accusation as “an age-old lie to position LGBTQ+ people as a threat to kids.” It also left out Robinson’s reply, in which Robinson also made clear that they were talking about groundless smears.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Sources: As DPS investigation of Uvalde response nears end, two officials face increased scrutiny | CNN

    Sources: As DPS investigation of Uvalde response nears end, two officials face increased scrutiny | CNN

    [ad_1]


    Austin, Texas
    CNN
     — 

    Texas Department of Public Safety investigators looking into the botched response at Robb Elementary School have become increasingly troubled by the actions of two officials – former Uvalde schools police chief Pedro “Pete” Arredondo and former Uvalde Police Lt. Mariano Pargas – according to law enforcement officials familiar with the investigation.

    The officials told CNN that this assessment comes after investigators reviewed hours of police body camera footage and interviewed hundreds of law enforcement personnel and witnesses.

    The DPS investigation is nearly complete and expected to be in the hands of Uvalde County’s district attorney any day, DPS Director Col. Steven McCraw told CNN Thursday. The district attorney, who will ultimately decide on any charges against law enforcement, has been meeting with victims’ families to update them on the investigation and autopsy results.

    Arredondo was fired as school police chief in August following criticism of his actions during the massacre on May 24, in which law enforcement waited more than an hour before entering the adjoining classrooms where the gunman was holed up. Nineteen students and two teachers were killed in the attack.

    Arredondo is seen on body-worn cameras giving orders and receiving information during the response, but he has said he did not see himself as the incident commander.

    CNN confronts Chief Pete Arredondo. See the interaction

    Pargas, who was acting city police chief that day, was placed on leave in July when videos from body-worn cameras raised questions about whether he had taken any action to assume command. CNN’s reporting demonstrated Pargas was aware students were alive and needed rescue during the shooting but failed to organize help. Pargas ultimately resigned.

    CNN has reached out to both Pargas and Arredondo this week to address questions about their roles and has not received responses.

    On Monday, Pargas, who is also a county commissioner, told a reporter at the commission meeting: “All I can say is a lot of the stuff that’s been put out there, that is not the way it happened.” When pressed by CNN for specifics, he would not explain what he meant.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • As House January 6 committee winds down, it is abandoning efforts to subpoena phone records | CNN Politics

    As House January 6 committee winds down, it is abandoning efforts to subpoena phone records | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The House select committee investigating the Capitol riot is dropping several of its pursuits for January 6-related phone records, according to court filings this week, as the panel winds down before it expires at the end of this year.

    The committee sent out dozens of subpoenas seeking call logs, including to major phone companies, as part of its investigation into Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election result. But several Trump allies sued, contesting the committee’s authority, and Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile agreed not to turn over any data to the House while those lawsuits were litigated in court. Few of the cases have been resolved.

    That means the House select committee will not be able to incorporate in its final report without some of the information it long sought about the communications of top witnesses around Donald Trump and the White House in late 2020 and January 2021. The panel plans to release the report next week.

    This week, the committee withdrew its phone-records subpoenas related to Trump adviser Sebastian Gorka, White House aide Stephen Miller, elections attorney Cleta Mitchell, conservative political activist Roger Stone, some January 6 Capitol riot defendants and Amy Harris, a photojournalist who spent time with top members of the Proud Boys around January 6, 2021, according to filings in seven House subpoena challenges that were pending in the DC District Court.

    “On December 12, 2022, Plaintiffs were informed by counsel for the Select Committee that the Select Committee will be withdrawing the subject subpoena issued by the Committee,” one court filing, from lawyers representing members of the Oath Keepers extremist group, wrote in one recent request to drop a lawsuit.

    Some of the subpoenas were issued a year ago.

    The committee declined to comment.

    While these witnesses and some others successfully blocked the committee from obtaining their phone records, the panel was able to access unprecedented amounts of information in their investigation, including through other phone records subpoenas, other document requests and witness interviews. Some of that information was on display in a series of public hearings over the summer.

    Even after the public hearings, the committee tried to collect more data as it wrapped up its work this year. For example, the committee won access to Arizona GOP Chairwoman Kelli Ward’s phone data after she lost a challenge in court and the Supreme Court declined to get involved.

    But they never got all of the phone records they sought from former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, who over the past year became one of the committee’s top pursuits.

    After turning over some 2,000 text messages to the committee, Meadows lost a court case challenging committee subpoenas for his phone records and for his testimony. Yet Meadows is still trying to challenge those subpoenas in court, leaving the House with little ability to force him to testify before the end of the Congress.

    Another subpoena target, Stop the Steal organizer Ali Alexander, said in a statement the committee had informed his lawyer it is withdrawing a subpoena for his phone records. He has been challenging the subpoena to Verizon for his phone logs since last December. Alexander noted that he did testify for hours before the committee and later before a federal grand jury investigating January 6 and efforts to overturn the election.

    “I did nothing wrong except to exercise my First Amendment rights to protest the fraud that occurred in the 2020 election,” Alexander said in the statement.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Congress has so much to do before Christmas | CNN Politics

    Congress has so much to do before Christmas | 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
     — 

    It is the most productive time of year on Capitol Hill – after the election and before Republicans take over the House of Representatives – when the current Congress tries to cram some of its most vital work into a few short weeks.

    The US government is up against some hard deadlines, a narrow timeline and a whole lot of unfinished business.

    Lawmakers need to avert a government shutdown, authorize Pentagon policy, decide what to do with former President Donald Trump’s tax returns and wrap up the work of the House January 6, 2021, committee.

    If they can find the time, lawmakers could also raise the debt ceiling and safeguard future elections.

    Here’s what to watch for in the twilight of 2022:

    First, the government runs out of authority to spend money on Friday, December 16. The House and Senate will have to act before then to avert a government shutdown.

    Second, the newly elected Congress will be sworn in on January 3. Republicans will then be in charge of the House, and Democrats will have a narrow 51-49 majority in the Senate. Everything resets in the new Congress, and lawmakers will have to start from scratch on anything they don’t finish up this month.

    Rather than pass a dozen funding bills in turn, lawmakers are poised to roll all the spending bills for the massive federal government into one bill that could approach or exceed $1.5 trillion.

    The problem is that they’re still negotiating, and Republicans and Democrats in the Senate have not reached an agreement on how much the government can spend, much less the specifics. They’re still $26 billion apart, according to Republican Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama. The most likely current scenario is the House and Senate each pass short-term, one-week funding bills to keep the lights on while they continue to hash out the larger funding bill.

    While officials have emphasized a government shutdown is unlikely, federal agencies have been warned to prepare for one per standard procedure.

    One major looming question is whether Senate Republicans and Democrats can agree on a bill to fund the government for a full year or whether they have to punt to the next Congress. Democrats will want to avoid that fate since the GOP-controlled House will likely insist on spending cuts as soon as it can. Read more in CNN’s full report that includes reporting from Capitol Hill and the White House.

    It’s not yet clear who will lead Republicans in the House next year, much less how they would react to an immediate funding fight if only a short-term spending bill can get through by January.

    The current GOP leader, Kevin McCarthy, does not yet have the votes of many of the most conservative Freedom Caucus Republicans, and he’s being encouraged to take more concrete stands against spending. Finding a funding agreement that can pass through the House and the Senate and get President Joe Biden’s signature gets much more difficult starting January 3.

    In addition to writing checks, Congress authorizes government activity through policy bills, including the must-pass National Defense Authorization Act, which authorizes $858 billion in annual defense spending.

    It’s a sprawling endeavor, and this year’s version passed by the House gives members of the military a 4.6% pay raise, gives new support to Ukraine and NATO, and retools US air power and land defense efforts. It also rescinds a Covid-19 vaccine requirement for service members, a move that Biden has opposed.

    Senators are expected to take up the bill this week. It should get bipartisan support, but will also eat up valuable time on the Senate floor, where Democrats also want to push through judicial nominees. Read more about the defense bill.

    One thing Democrats would like to do – but probably, at this point, cannot – is raise the debt ceiling.

    Republicans, particularly in the House, plan to use the nation’s borrowing limit as a bargaining chip to force spending cuts next year. The current debt ceiling of $31.4 trillion will likely be reached in the coming weeks, which means raising it will be a major fight early in 2023.

    How much more does the government spend than it takes in? This is from a CNN Business report Monday: “For fiscal year 2023, which started in October, the government is running a deficit of $336 billion, which is $20 billion narrower than the comparable year-ago period.”

    Republicans will shut down the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection when they take control in January. GOP lawmakers plan to flip the script and investigate the committee’s activity.

    But first, the committee, which features Democrats and two anti-Trump Republicans, will issue its much-anticipated report on December 21. Also look for the committee to recommend the Department of Justice prosecute Trump or members of his inner circle.

    Meanwhile, Jack Smith, the newly appointed special counsel, has been busy ramping up a pair of criminal probes involving the former president, all of which could explode into public view if charges are ultimately brought. Read the latest on Smith’s work.

    Now that the House Ways and Means Committee has six years of Trump’s tax returns, it must figure out what to do with them in just a few weeks.

    There’s probably no time for a thorough review, and Republicans will have little appetite for a Trump tax investigation when they take control of the House.

    Democrats could move to make some of Trump’s tax information public – on top of what was already published by The New York Times in 2020. But there could be a political cost to simply releasing the returns since Democrats obtained them in order to scrutinize IRS audit policy. Read more about Trump’s taxes.

    It’s a bipartisan idea to make some major clarifications to election law and cut down on the possibility of another January 6, 2021. Read here about what’s in the bill, which is specifically designed to guard against Insurrection 2.0.

    But there may be no time to pass the proposal – there are similar but competing versions in the House and Senate. The Senate version, in particular, has bipartisan support. Republicans in the House may not be interested in the legislation once they take control in January.

    If the Electoral Count Act can pass, it could be slipped into that massive spending bill. It hasn’t gotten the attention it deserves, but this could be a good example of lawmakers working together.

    But that’s a very open question, since that massive spending bill has not yet been put together.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Twitter disbands its ‘Trust and Safety Council’ that tackled harassment and child exploitation | CNN Business

    Twitter disbands its ‘Trust and Safety Council’ that tackled harassment and child exploitation | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Twitter on Monday night announced it was disbanding its “Trust and Safety Council,” according to an email the company sent to the councils’ members that was obtained by CNN.

    The company said in the email that it was “reevaluating how best to bring external insights into our product and policy development work. As part of this process, we have decided that the Trust and Safety Council is not the best structure to do this.”

    The move comes as Twitter’s new owner Elon Musk is undoing many of the policies and practices put in place before he took over the social media company.

    A page on Twitter’s website, which has now been removed, explained that the council was made up of external expert organizations that advised on issues including online safety, human and digital rights, suicide prevention, mental health, child sexual exploitation, and dehumanization.

    “Together, they advocate for safety and advise us as we develop our products, programs, and rules,” Twitter previously explained.

    Three members of the council resigned in protest last week, writing in a statement that “contrary to claims by Elon Musk, the safety and wellbeing of Twitter’s users are on the decline.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • State documents appear to indicate Uvalde Sheriff Nolasco has not completed active shooter training | CNN

    State documents appear to indicate Uvalde Sheriff Nolasco has not completed active shooter training | CNN

    [ad_1]


    Uvalde, Texas
    CNN
     — 

    Uvalde County Sheriff Ruben Nolasco does not appear to have completed an active shooter training course, according to documents CNN obtained Monday from the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement, the regulatory agency for peace officers in Texas.

    The information comes on the heels of a contentious Uvalde County Commission meeting, during which Richard Carter, an attorney with expertise in police actions, presented the results of an independent review – which the county hired him to conduct – of the Sheriff’s Office policies at the time of the Robb Elementary School massacre.

    According to Carter, the sheriff’s office did not have an active shooter policy on May 24, when a teenaged gunman with a semi-automatic rifle stormed the school and killed 19 students and two teachers.

    Active shooter training is not required by county or state rules for people who aren’t school-based law enforcement officers. And an active shooter response policy is not required by Texas law of law enforcement agencies, according to the report.

    County commissioners met behind closed doors for more than 90 minutes to review the report and meet with victims’ family members. Community members called for Nolasco’s ouster at the meeting following CNN’s reporting last week about his failure to mount a response at the school and his failure to share critical information about the shooter.

    Nolasco was one of the senior law enforcement officials on the scene of the massacre.

    After the meeting, Carter also appeared to indicate Nolasco hadn’t received active shooter training.

    “He has not taken the course that his officers – all but three of his officers – have. He plans on doing that in the immediate future,” Carter said. “What I understood was, he wanted to make sure that all of his people that might go out were trained,” before he received his own training.

    In an email to CNN that included Nolasco’s records, law enforcement commission spokesperson Gretchen Grigsby said that “active shooter training is only required for school-based law enforcement officers as part of a one-time certification,” but she expected the topic would be a subject of discussion during the next legislative session.

    CNN has reached out to Nolasco about the contents of the report but has not received a response.

    CNN has also reached back out to the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement to clarify the contents of Nolasco’s training history, and has not received a response.

    The conclusion of Carter’s review comes after months of reporting by CNN about the law enforcement response to the shooting, including that Nolasco had vital information about the shooter that was not shared as the incident unfolded. It was just the latest revelation of senior law enforcement officers not taking command or following protocol to stop an active shooter and get swift treatment to victims.

    Carter’s inquiry, which was conducted over about two months, dealt strictly with the sheriff’s office’s policies, he said Monday.

    The office has since adopted an active shooter policy, Carter said during the public portion of Monday’s meeting.

    But at the time of the shooting – the worst at a K-12 school in the US in nearly a decade – its handbook only defined “active shooter,” Carter said. And while there were “portions that dealt with critical incidences and how officers would respond,” it did not constitute an active shooter policy, he added.

    Whether the sheriff’s office had an active shooter policy, however, is “no excuse for what happened” the day of the shooting, one community member said in a public comment portion of the meeting Monday.

    “Our officers in Uvalde County, including the city, school, and county, don’t live under a rock,” Diana Olvedo-Karau said. “Active shooter incidents happen across our nation all too often… so to step back and give the impression that because there was no policy there’s no accountability, is unacceptable, inexcusable, and shameful.”

    Carter did not examine the actions of the agency’s personnel on the scene of the shooting, he said, which, along with the broader law enforcement response, have been highly scrutinized.

    The grandmother of shooting victim Amerie Jo Garza said she was in “total shock” the Sheriff’s Office didn’t have an active shooter policy in place.

    “I could not believe that with all the mass shootings that have taken place, just in Texas alone, that there was no policy in place. It was a total shock,” Berlinda Irene Arreola said on CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360.

    Arreola said it was difficult seeing Mariano Pargas, acting Uvalde police chief on the day of the shooting, at the meeting.

    “It was very hard, and It was very sad,” she said of Pargas, who has since resigned but is still a county commissioner.

    Arreola said that she believes he had plenty of time to take control of the incident but that “instead he ran in the other direction.”

    “So, seeing him for the first time was very, very hurtful,” she said.

    Arreola said the upcoming holidays are going to be a difficult time for her family without Amerie.

    “My son and my daughter-in-law just can’t keep it together to be able to enjoy the holidays. So it’s going to be different, definitely different this year and very sad. Very sad,” she said.

    In the months since the shooting, criticism of law enforcement’s response has focused on its failure to follow the main tenets of post-Columbine policies to immediately take down an active shooter. Instead, acting on the early and erroneous assessment that the gunman was barricaded, as opposed to an active shooter with his victims surrounding him inside two adjoining classrooms, police waited 77 minutes before confronting him.

    Much of the initial criticism focused on Uvalde School Police Chief Pedro “Pete” Arredondo, who had said he never considered himself in charge the day of the shooting. He was ultimately fired in August.

    In the months since the shooting, however, it’s become clear the failures that day went far beyond the scope of the small school police force. According to a preliminary report by a Texas House of Representatives investigative committee, 376 officers from local, state and federal agencies were on the scene of the massacre.

    Pargas, who remains an elected county commissioner, resigned from the police department after CNN reported he knew children needed rescuing and did not organize help.

    Separately, a Texas Ranger and a state police captain are under review for their actions or inaction the day of the shooting, and a state police sergeant was terminated. Another officer who quit the state police force and took a job with the Uvalde school district was also fired after CNN reported she was under investigation for her actions during the shooting.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The mass unbanning of suspended Twitter users is underway | CNN Business

    The mass unbanning of suspended Twitter users is underway | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN Business
     — 

    Thousands of previously banned Twitter users, including members of the far-right and users sharing blatant misinformation, have begun to have their accounts restored to the platform, according to an independent analysis.

    The mass restoration of accounts comes after new owner Elon Musk said late last month that he would offer “general amnesty” to many who had been removed from the platform. In following through on that commitment, however, Musk risks further alienating other users and advertisers, and exacerbating concerns among watchdog groups about the rise of hate speech on the platform under his ownership (a fact Musk has attempted to refute).

    Among those recently unbanned are a range of large and small accounts, including users promoting NFTs and cryptocurrencies, users tweeting about sports, many users tweeting in languages other than English, as well as both users that appear to be left-leaning and pro-Trump, according to observations by CNN.

    But the restored accounts also include far-right figures such as Andrew Anglin, a self-professed white supremacist who founded the neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer, and Patrick Casey, who is associated with the far-right group “America First” and was subpoenaed by the House January 6 committee for his involvement in the Capitol riot.

    A number of accounts restored in recent days, including many with thousands of followers, used their first tweets in years to thank Musk for allowing them back on the platform, according to a review of their posts by CNN. Some also quickly began sharing conspiracy theories about issues such as Covid-19 and the 2020 US Presidential election.

    A data set of many of the unbanned accounts compiled by researcher and software developer Travis Brown, who worked for Twitter for a year in 2014 and last year began a project tracking hate speech on the platform, shows dozens of users who have had their bans reversed are using QAnon-related phrases or hashtags in their account bios. The dataset was built using Twitter’s API and a tool Brown had originally built to observe and track high-profile Twitter suspensions.

    The accounts that have been restored includes “a really strange mix of accounts” that includes apparent far-right extremists and QAnon adherents, but also, for example, a Miley Cyrus fan account that has been repeatedly suspended and appears aimed mostly at growing a large following, Brown said.

    But Brown added that other accounts he has observed as part of his hate speech tracking project have yet to be reinstated, raising questions about the criteria Twitter is using to restore previously banned accounts, although it’s possible Musk’s reinstatement process will take time. Many users on Twitter have also raised questions about Musk’s move last week to again suspend Kanye West, who has made numerous antisemitic comments, while restoring the accounts of other white supremacists and Neo-Nazis. In another instance, Musk tweeted that he would not restore Alex Jones’s account because of a personal preference.

    “I’ve found it really hard … to generalize about how and why certain accounts are allowed back,” Brown said.

    Twitter, which has made substantial cuts to its public relations team, did not immediately respond to a request for comment and questions on the number of previously banned accounts restored or its process for doing so.

    Musk said last month that he would begin restoring most previously banned accounts to the platform, after having polled his Twitter followers about whether to offer “general amnesty to suspended accounts, provided that they have not broken the law or engaged in egregious spam.” The poll, which garnered more than three million votes, finished with more than 72% voting in favor of the proposition. It is not clear how Musk and Twitter’s remaining staff are sorting out which accounts were banned for spam or illegal activity.

    The new Twitter owner had already begun to restore the accounts of some prominent, controversial users that had previously been banned or suspended from the platform, most notably former President Donald Trump, as well as conservative Canadian podcaster and all-beef diet promoter Jordan Peterson and the right-leaning satire website Babylon Bee.

    Some of the accounts restored in the latest wave have already raised concerns from civil rights groups. The Anti-Defamation League on Monday described as “deeply disturbing” Twitter’s decision to allow Anglin back on the platform.

    “The return of extremists to the platform has the potential to supercharge the spread of extremist content and disinformation, and this in turn could lead to the increased harassment of users,” Yael Eisenstat, vice president of ADL’s Center for Technology and Society said in a statement to CNN. “Musk’s actions to date show that he is not committed to a transparent process that incorporates the best practices we have learned from civil society groups.”

    Before taking over Twitter, Musk said he disagreed with the platform’s policy of permanent bans, which were typically doled out only after a user had received a number of “strikes” for repeatedly violating Twitter’s policies, including those against Covid-19 or civic integrity misinformation.

    Shortly after acquiring the company, Musk said he would create a “content moderation council” prior to making major changes, but there is no evidence such a group was ever formed or involved in the decisions to bring back violative accounts. Instead, Musk has appeared to make the decisions himself.

    Musk and Twitter have repeatedly stressed that the platform’s rules have not changed, despite restoring accounts that had repeatedly violated its rules and ceasing enforcement of the company’s policy prohibiting Covid-19 misinformation. In a blog post last month, Twitter said that its trust and safety team “remains strong and well-resourced, and automated detection plays an increasingly important role in eliminating abuse.” Content that violates Twitter’s rules, it added, will be demoted on the platform.

    Yoel Roth, Twitter’s former head of trust and safety who left the company following Musk’s takeover, criticized the billionaire Twitter owner’s top-down approach to content decisions in an interview with journalist Kara Swisher last month, suggesting that the platform had started to be run by “dictatorial edict rather than by a policy.” He also raised concerns about layoffs that hit Twitter’s safety teams.

    Restoring additional, previously banned accounts could exacerbate several big issues Twitter is currently facing. It could further alienate Twitter’s advertisers, many of whom have fled the platform in the wake of the chaos since Musk took over and out of fear that their ads could end up running alongside objectionable content. Musk has said the departure of key Twitter advertisers in recent weeks has led to a “massive drop in revenue” for the company.

    Ads for major brands, including Kia, Amazon, Snap and Uber, have already begun to appear alongside tweets from reinstated accounts such as Anglin’s, according to reporting from the Washington Post and observations by CNN. (Kia told CNN it “continues to monitor the evolving Twitter environment and work closely with their teams on advertisement placement and usage.” The other brands did not immediately respond to CNN’s requests for comment.)

    It could also draw more attention from Apple, which Musk previously tweeted had threatened to remove Twitter from its app store. Musk later said that the concern had been resolved following a meeting with Tim Cook, but Apple has previously shown a willingness to remove social media platforms from its app store over concerns about their ability to moderate hate speech and other potentially harmful content. Getting booted from Apple’s app store would be detrimental to Twitter’s business by making it harder for the iPhone maker’s more than one billion global customers to access the app, and difficult if not impossible for iPhone users to receive app updates.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • January 6 committee ends meeting on criminal referrals | CNN Politics

    January 6 committee ends meeting on criminal referrals | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection concluded its meeting on Sunday where members discussed criminal referrals, multiple sources told CNN.

    The subcommittee tasked with investigating criminal referrals presented its recommendations to the full panel at a 1 p.m. ET virtual meeting, but it is unclear if those recommendations were officially adopted. A source described the meeting as “successful” but did not elaborate.

    “We are as a subcommittee, several of us that were charged with making the recommendations about referrals, going to be making that recommendation to the full committee today,” panel member Rep. Adam Schiff said prior to the meeting on CBS “Face the Nation.” Members on the committee would then need to approve the recommendations.

    The panel is weighing criminal referrals for former President Donald Trump and a number of other individuals, sources say, including former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, right wing lawyer John Eastman, former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark and Trump’s former lawyer Rudy Giuliani, as CNN previously reported.

    While the referrals would largely be symbolic in nature – as the Justice Department has already undertaken a sprawling investigation into the US Capitol attack and efforts to overturn the 2020 election – committee members have stressed that the move serves as a way to document their views for the record.

    The decision has loomed large over the committee. Members of the panel have been in wide agreement that Trump and some of his closest allies have committed a crime when he pushed a conspiracy to prevent the peaceful transfer of power, as they’ve laid out in their hearings. But they have long been split over what exactly to do about it.

    “We are in common agreement about what our approach should be. I’m not ready or authorized at this point to tell you what that is,” Schiff, a California Democrat, said. “I think we are all certainly in agreement that there is evidence of criminality here. And we want to make sure that the Justice Department is aware of that.

    Committee Chair Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, told reporters Friday he expected to reach a decision on criminal referrals at Sunday’s virtual meeting. But Schiff reiterated on Sunday that the committee will wait to announce its decision until December 21, when it plans to present the rest of its report.

    Schiff stressed his view on Sunday that criminal referrals from the committee make “an important statement, not a political one, but a statement about the evidence of an attack on the institutions for our democracy and the peaceful transfer of power that Congress – examining an attack on itself – is willing to report criminality.”

    “So I think it’s an important decision in its own right if we go forward with it,” he said. “And one that the Department ought to give due consideration to.”

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • At least 20 injured as protesters and police clash in Peru days after president’s ouster | CNN

    At least 20 injured as protesters and police clash in Peru days after president’s ouster | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    At least 20 people, including four police officers, were injured on Saturday in clashes between protesters and police in the southern Peruvian city of Andahuaylas in the Andes.

    The Ombudsman’s Office said on Twitter it was working with health personnel to verify if the injured had received “adequate medical care in the city hospital” but did not give details of the injuries.

    It said a number of people had been detained but did not say say how many.

    Meanwhile, the National Police reported that two police officers who were taken captive by the protesters had now been released and were being evaluated by medical personnel.

    The reason for Saturday’s protest is not yet clear, but Andahuaylas is one of several towns in the country where residents took to the streets this Friday in support of former President Pedro Castillo who was ousted earlier this week, according to information provided to the media by the Ministry of Interior.

    Castillo was removed from power on Wednesday after he attempted to dissolve Peru’s Congress and call for new elections. He was arrested for the alleged crime of rebellion and impeached by lawmakers in a single day.

    Peruvian lawmakers described the move as a coup, and a majority of the 130-person Congress voted to impeach Castillo on the same day, which ended with the swearing in of Dina Boluarte to the top position.

    Peru’s new President ruled out early elections on Thursday on her first day in office following the dramatic ousting and arrest of her predecessor.

    Castillo is also currently under a seven-day preliminary arrest ordered by the Supreme Court on Thursday after considering him as a flight risk.

    Castillo has faced a cascade of investigations on whether he used his position to benefit himself, his family and closest allies by peddling influence to gain favor or preferential treatment, among other claims.

    He has repeatedly denied all allegations and reiterated his willingness to cooperate with any investigation. He argues the allegations are a result of a witch-hunt against him and his family from groups that failed to accept his election victory.

    The Ombudsman Office reiterated its “call to the population not to resort to violent means during their protests” and asked the National Police that “any action to restore public order must be carried out within the framework of the law of use of force.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Buffalo grocery store mass shooter willing to plead guilty to federal charges if death penalty off the table, attorneys say | CNN

    Buffalo grocery store mass shooter willing to plead guilty to federal charges if death penalty off the table, attorneys say | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The gunman who killed 10 people and wounded three in a racist attack at a grocery store in a predominantly Black neighborhood of Buffalo, New York, would be willing to plead guilty to federal charges – including hate crimes – if prosecutors agree to take the death penalty off the table, his attorneys said Friday.

    Attorneys representing Payton Gendron made their statements during a court hearing on Friday, seven months after Gendron used an illegally modified semiautomatic rifle to carry out the mass shooting.

    Gendron, a 19-year-old White man, had faced multiple federal hate crime charges, which carry the potential for the death penalty, in addition to several firearms charges. He had pleaded not guilty to the federal charges.

    He pleaded guilty in a state court last month to one count of a domestic act of terrorism motivated by hate, 10 counts of first-degree murder, three counts of attempted murder and a weapons possession charge in the mass shooting at Tops Friendly Markets on May 14. Those charges come with a mandatory sentence of life in prison without the chance of parole.

    “Just as Payton Gendron entered a plea of guilty to the indictment in county court, he is prepared to enter a plea of guilty in federal court in exchange of the same sentence, which is the sentence of life in prison, without parole,” said his defense attorney Sonya Zoghlin.

    Magistrate Judge Kenneth Schroeder in court on Friday balked at giving attorneys more time to review the voluminous evidence connected with the case since Gendron has already pleaded guilty to state charges.

    Gendron’s defense team said in court they plan to take the first steps to meet with the US Attorney in Buffalo and the Assistant Attorney General from Washington so that they can make a formal presentation to as to why Gendron should not get the death penalty.

    The first meetings are scheduled after the new year, attorneys said in court on Friday.

    “There’s a lot to go through and I think that mitigation presentation, obviously, is highly important for them, in addition to the facts of the case, so that’s why we consented this time,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph Tripi.

    Judge Schroeder scheduled the next hearing for March 10, during which attorneys will give an update on how much of the evidence they’ve been able to review and if they can work out a deal with prosecutors.

    Meanwhile, Gendron will be sentenced on his state conviction on similar charges in February.

    The victims, including customers, employees and an armed security guard, ranged in age from 20 to 86. Eleven of the 13 people shot were Black and two were White, officials said.

    Social media posts and a lengthy document written by the gunman reveal he had been planning his attack for months and had visited the Tops supermarket several times previously. He posted that he chose Tops because it was in a particular ZIP code in Buffalo that had the highest percentage of Black people close enough to where he lived in Conklin, New York.

    The document outlined his goals for the attack, according to Flynn: “To kill as many African Americans as possible, avoid dying and spread ideals.”

    Gendron shot four people outside the grocery store and nine more inside before surrendering to Buffalo Police officers who responded to the scene, according to an indictment.

    New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said following the attack that the AR-15 style rifle used in the shooting was legally purchased in New York State, but was modified with a high-capacity magazine, which is not legal in the state.

    The earlier guilty plea ensured there will be no state trial and Gendron will not appeal, defense attorney Brian Parker said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jury deliberations in Harvey Weinstein’s 2nd sexual assault trial enter 6th day in Los Angeles | CNN

    Jury deliberations in Harvey Weinstein’s 2nd sexual assault trial enter 6th day in Los Angeles | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The second sexual assault trial of Harvey Weinstein, the former movie producer accused of using his Hollywood influence to lure women into private meetings and assault them, entered its sixth day Friday in the hands of a Los Angeles jury.

    Weinstein, behind bars in a medical unit, awaits a verdict on two counts of forcible rape and five counts of sexual assault involving four women – a model, a dancer, a massage therapist and a producer. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges against him.

    Jurors began deliberating Friday after hearing weeks of testimony from dozens of witnesses. As of Thursday evening, jurors have been in deliberation for about 20 hours.

    At trial, four of the original 11 charges against Weinstein tied to one of the Jane Does were dropped without explanation.

    Weinstein could face 60 years to life in prison, plus an additional five years, if the jury finds him guilty.

    Weinstein is already serving a 23-year sentence after being convicted of a criminal sex act and third-degree rape during a 2020 trial in New York. His attorneys have appealed the conviction.

    Weinstein’s publicist, Juda Engelmayer, told CNN the former producer is in a detention facility’s medical unit, and is anxious but “hoping for the best.”

    The trial in Los Angeles included testimony from the four accusers identified as Jane Does in court, and other witnesses, including experts, law enforcement, friends of accusers and former aides to Weinstein.

    Additionally, four women testified they were subjected to similar incidents by Weinstein in other jurisdictions.

    All the accusers were asked in court to recount the details of their allegations against Weinstein, provide details of meetings with the producer from years ago and explain their reactions to the alleged assaults.

    Jennifer Siebel Newsom, a filmmaker and the wife of California Gov. Gavin Newsom – identified by her attorneys as Jane Doe 4 – alleged Weinstein raped her in a hotel room in 2005.

    In closing arguments Wednesday, Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Marlene Martinez called Weinstein a “titan” who used his power in Hollywood to prey on and silence women.

    “Rapists rape. You can look at the pattern,” fellow prosecutor Paul Thompson told jurors.

    “You have irrefutable, overwhelming evidence about the nature of this man and what he did to these women,” Thompson said.

    Meanwhile, Weinstein’s attorneys have maintained the allegations are either fabricated or occurred consensually as part of a “transactional relationship” with the movie producer, repeatedly saying there is no evidence of assault.

    Defense attorney Alan Jackson called the accusers “fame and fortune seekers.”

    Each morning at trial, Weinstein was brought from a correctional facility and wheeled into the Los Angeles courtroom wearing a suit and tie and holding a composition notebook.

    His accusers all began their oftentimes emotional testimonies by identifying him in the courtroom as he looked on.

    “He’s wearing a suit, and a blue tie and he’s staring at me,” Siebel Newsom said last month, before what was one of the most emotional moments of the trial.

    On Thursday of last week, defense attorney Jackson asked jurors if they could “accept what (the Jane Does) say as gospel,” arguing what they said was a lack of forensic evidence supporting their claim.

    “Five words that sum up the entirety of the prosecution’s case: ‘Take my word for it,’” Jackson said. “‘Take my word for it that he showed up at my hotel room unannounced. Take my word for it that I showed up at his hotel room. Take my word for it that I didn’t consent. Take my word for it, that I said no.’”

    Siebel Newsom described an hourslong “cat-and-mouse period,” which preceded her alleged assault. She, like other accusers, described feeling “frozen” that day.

    Attorneys for Weinstein do not deny the incident occurred, but said he believed it was consensual.

    Jackson called the incident “consensual, transactional sex,” adding: “Regret is not the same thing as rape. And it’s important we make that distinction in this courtroom.”

    Women’s rights lawyer Gloria Allred, who is representing Jane Doe 2 in the case, told CNN she hopes the jury sees her client “has no motive at all to do anything but tell the truth.”

    “She never sought or received any compensation … She doesn’t live in California anymore. But she is testifying because she’s been asked to testify and I hope that they see her as the young woman that she was when she met Harvey Weinstein, and the woman that she is today approximately nine to 10 years later. Her life has changed,” Allred said.

    “To be willing to subject yourself to what could be a very brutal cross-examination. That takes a very special person to do that. And she is a special person. I’m very proud,” Allred said.

    In her closing arguments, Martinez also highlighted that the women who testified chose to do so despite knowing they would face tough conditions in court.

    “The truth is that, as you sit here, we know the despicable behavior the defendant engaged in. He thought he was so powerful that people would … excuse his behavior,” Martinez said. “That’s just Harvey being Harvey. That’s just Hollywood. And for so long that’s what everyone did. Everyone just turned their heads.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • A Virginia superintendent is fired after a state report into handling of sexual assaults at school is issued | CNN

    A Virginia superintendent is fired after a state report into handling of sexual assaults at school is issued | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A Virginia school superintendent was fired Tuesday, a day after a report from the state accused him of lying about a sexual assault involving a student in May 2021.

    The special grand jury report, conducted by the office of Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares, also criticized former school superintendent Dr. Scott Ziegler and other school officials for mishandling the investigation of an October sexual assault allegedly by the same student that year.

    The superintendent said of the May sexual assault “to my knowledge we don’t have any records of assaults occurring in our restrooms,” at a June 2021 school board meeting, according to the report. At the time, Ziegler said he misunderstood the question.

    The Loudoun County Public School Board voted unanimously to fire Ziegler Tuesday night, but provided no reason for the firing, school spokesman Wayde Byard told CNN.

    “The Special Grand Jury’s report contains important recommendations and information,” Miyares said in a statement to CNN Wednesday. “I’m glad to see that the school board is taking the report seriously, and hope it results in positive change for the LCPS community.”

    CNN has attempted to reach Ziegler for comment. Byard would not comment further regarding allegations into LCPS mishandling of the sexual assault cases outlined in the special grand jury report.

    A teenage student had been arrested for sexual battery and abduction of another student at a Loudoun County public school in October 2021, the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office said, according to the report.

    The teenager also allegedly sexually assaulted another student in May 2021, according to the report. In that assault, the grand jury report alleged that the sexual assault occurred in a women’s bathroom while the perpetrator was wearing a skirt.

    “National outrage focused on Loudoun County because the student was labeled as gender fluid, LCPS had recently passed a transgender policy to conform with the Virginia Department of Education’s model policy,” said the report.

    CNN could not find evidence substantiating that the student identified as transgender or gender-fluid.

    The 2021 Virginia Department of Education’s Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools outlined that transgender students should be allowed to use bathrooms and staff should use the personal pronouns that were most consistent with their gender identity.

    In 2022, under Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin, the Department of Education replaced the policy with an updated one stating that students should use bathrooms according to his or her sex.

    On his first day in office on January 15, Youngkin passed an executive order authorizing an investigation of Loudoun County Public Schools by the Attorney General. Youngkin had mentioned the sexual assault cases at Loudoun schools several times while campaigning for governor.

    “The special grand jury’s report on the horrific sexual assaults in Loudoun has exposed wrongdoing, prompted disciplinary actions, & provided families with the truth. I will continue to empower parents & push for accountability on behalf of our students,” Youngkin tweeted Wednesday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The latest on Donald Trump’s many legal clouds | CNN Politics

    The latest on Donald Trump’s many legal clouds | 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
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump has been campaigning in between his many different court appearances for much of the year.

    But his decision to attend the first day of his $250 million civil fraud trial in New York created another opportunity to appear on camera from inside a courtroom when the judge allowed photographers to document the moment before proceedings got underway.

    Keeping track of the dizzying array of civil and criminal cases is a full-time job.

    He is charged with crimes related to conduct:

    • Before his presidency – a hush money scheme that may have helped him win the White House in 2016.
    • During his presidency – his effort to stay in the White House by overturning the 2020 election.
    • After his presidency – his treatment of classified material and alleged attempts to hide it from the National Archives.

    Trump denies any wrongdoing and has pleaded not guilty in all of the criminal cases. He alleges a “witch hunt” against him. But each trial has its own distinct storyline to follow.

    Here’s an updated list of developments in Trump’s very complicated set of court cases, beginning with the one playing out in Manhattan this week.

    The civil fraud trial, unlike Trump’s multiple criminal indictments, does not carry the danger of a felony conviction and jail time, but it could very well cost him some of his most prized possessions, including Trump Tower.

    New York Attorney General Letitia James brought the $250 million lawsuit in September 2022, alleging that Trump and his co-defendants committed repeated fraud in inflating assets on financial statements to get better terms on commercial real estate loans and insurance policies.

    Judge Arthur Engoron has already ruled that Trump and his adult sons are liable for fraud for inflating the value of his golf courses, hotels and homes on financial statements to secure loans.

    The trial portion of the case, playing out in court in Manhattan, will assess what damages will be levied against Trump and how Engoron’s decision to strip Trump of his New York business licenses will play out.

    In May, a federal jury in Manhattan found Trump sexually abused former advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in a luxury department store dressing room in the mid-1990s and awarded her about $5 million.

    A separate civil defamation lawsuit will only need to decide how much money Trump has to pay her. That case for January 15 – the same day Iowa Republicans will hold their caucuses, the first date on the presidential primary calendar.

    In August, Trump was indicted by a federal grand jury in special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into the aftermath of the 2020 election. The former president was arraigned in a Washington, DC, courtroom, where he pleaded not guilty.

    The case is based in part on a scheme to create slates of fake electors in key states won by President Joe Biden.

    In late September, Judge Tanya Chutkan rejected Trump’s request that she recuse herself from the case. Chutkan, a Barack Obama appointee, has overseen civil and criminal cases related to the January 6, 2021, insurrection and has repeatedly exceeded what prosecutors have requested for convicted rioters’ prison sentences.

    Chutkan set the trial’s start date for March 4, 2024, the day before Super Tuesday, when the largest batch of presidential primaries will occur. The trial marks the first of Trump’s criminal cases expected to proceed.

    Trump has been charged in Manhattan criminal court with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to his role in a hush money payment scheme involving adult film actress Stormy Daniels late in the 2016 presidential campaign.

    The former president pleaded not guilty at his April arraignment in Manhattan.

    Prosecutors, led by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, accuse Trump of falsifying business records with the intent to conceal $130,000 in payments to Daniels made by former Trump attorney and fixer Michael Cohen to guarantee her silence about an alleged affair.

    Trump has denied having an affair with Daniels.

    The trial was originally scheduled to begin in late March 2024, but Judge Juan Merchan has suggested the date could move. The next court date is scheduled for February.

    Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is using racketeering violations to charge a broad criminal conspiracy against Trump and 18 others in their efforts to overturn Biden’s victory in Georgia.

    The probe was launched in 2021 following Trump’s call that January with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, in which the president pushed the Republican official to “find” votes to overturn the election results.

    The August indictment also includes how Trump’s team allegedly misled state officials in Georgia; organized fake electors; harassed an election worker; and breached election equipment in rural Coffee County, Georgia.

    One co-defendant, bail bondsman Scott Hall, has pleaded guilty to five counts in the case.

    Fulton County prosecutors have signaled they could offer plea deals to other co-defendants.

    Willis this week issued a subpoena to former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, a Trump ally, who in turn demanded an immunity deal in exchange for testimony.

    Trial for two co-defendants is expected to begin this month and could last three to five months. A trial date has not been set for Trump, who has pleaded not guilty.

    Federal criminal court in Florida: Mishandling classified material

    Trump has pleaded not guilty to 37 federal charges brought by Smith over his alleged mishandling of classified documents. Smith added three additional counts in a superseding indictment.

    The investigation centers on sensitive documents that Trump brought to his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida after his White House term ended in January 2021.

    The National Archives, charged with collecting and sorting presidential material, has previously said that at least 15 boxes of White House records were recovered from Mar-a-Lago, including some classified records.

    Trump was also caught on tape in a 2021 meeting in Bedminster, New Jersey, where the former president discussed holding secret documents he did not declassify.

    Smith’s additional charges allege that Trump and his employees attempted to delete Mar-a-Lago security footage sought by the grand jury investigating the mishandling of the records.

    Trial is not expected until May, after most presidential primaries have concluded.

    There are other cases to note:

    Trump’s namesake business, the Trump Organization, was convicted in December by a New York jury of tax fraud, grand larceny and falsifying business records in what prosecutors say was a 15-year scheme to defraud tax authorities by failing to report and pay taxes on compensation provided to employees.

    Manhattan prosecutors told a jury the case was about “greed and cheating,” laying out a scheme within the Trump Organization to pay high-level executives in perks such as luxury cars and apartments without paying taxes on them.

    Former Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg pleaded guilty to his role in the tax scheme. He was released after serving four months in jail at Rikers Island.

    Several members of the US Capitol Police and Washington, DC, Metropolitan Police are suing Trump, saying his words and actions incited the 2021 riot.

    The various cases accuse Trump of directing assault and battery; aiding and abetting assault and battery; and violating Washington laws that prohibit the incitement of riots and disorderly conduct.

    In August, Trump requested to put on hold the lawsuit related to the death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, citing his various criminal trials. The estate of Sicknick, who died after responding to the attack on the Capitol, is suing two rioters involved in the attack and Trump for his alleged role in egging it on.

    Other lawsuits have been put on hold while a federal appeals court considers whether Trump had absolute immunity as the sitting president.

    Former top FBI counterintelligence official Peter Strzok, who was fired in 2018 after the revelation that he criticized Trump in text messages, sued the Justice Department, alleging he was terminated improperly.

    In summer 2017, former special counsel Robert Mueller removed Strzok from his team investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election after an internal investigation revealed texts with former FBI lawyer Lisa Page that could be read as exhibiting political bias.

    Strzok and Page were constant targets of verbal attacks by Trump and his allies, part of the larger ire the then-president expressed toward the FBI during the Russia investigation. Trump repeatedly and publicly called for Strzok’s ouster until he was fired in August 2018.

    Trump is set to be deposed this month as part of the case, according to Politico.

    A federal judge dismissed Trump’s lawsuit against Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee, several ex-FBI officials and more than two dozen other people and entities that he claims conspired to undermine his 2016 campaign with fabricated information tying him to Russia.

    “What (Trump’s lawsuit) lacks in substance and legal support it seeks to substitute with length, hyperbole, and the settling of scores and grievances,” US District Judge Donald Middlebrooks wrote.

    Trump appealed the decision, but Middlebrooks also ruled that the former president and his attorneys are liable for nearly $1 million in sanctions for bringing the case.

    Trump launched a Hail Mary bid in July to revive the sprawling lawsuit, relying on a recent report from special counsel John Durham that criticized the FBI’s Trump-Russia probe.

    Trump’s former lawyer Cohen sued Trump, former Attorney General William Barr and others, alleging they put him back in jail to prevent him from promoting his upcoming book while under home confinement.

    Cohen was serving the remainder of his sentence for lying to Congress and campaign violations at home, due to Covid-19 concerns, when he started an anti-Trump social media campaign in summer 2020. Cohen said that he was sent back to prison in retaliation and that he spent 16 days in solitary confinement.

    A federal judge threw out the lawsuit in November. District Judge Lewis Liman said he was empathetic to Cohen’s position but that Supreme Court precedent bars him from allowing the case to move forward.

    Trump sued journalist Bob Woodward in January for alleged copyright violations, claiming Woodward released audio from their interviews without Trump’s consent.

    Woodward and publisher Simon & Schuster said Trump’s case is without merit and moved for its dismissal.

    Woodward conducted several interviews with Trump for his book “Rage,” published in September 2020. Woodward later released “The Trump Tapes,” an audiobook featuring eight hours of raw interviews with Trump interspersed with the author’s commentary.

    Trump-filed lawsuits: The New York Times, Mary Trump and CNN

    The former president is suing his niece and The New York Times in New York state court over the disclosure of his tax information.

    A New York judge dismissed The New York Times from Trump’s lawsuit regarding disclosure of his tax returns and ordered Trump to pay the newspaper’s legal fees. Trump is still suing his niece Mary Trump for disclosure of the tax documents. She had tried to sue him for defrauding her out of millions after the death of his father, but the suit was dismissed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • A man in New York has been arrested and charged with hate crime after Jewish father and son were targeted in BB gun shooting, official says | CNN

    A man in New York has been arrested and charged with hate crime after Jewish father and son were targeted in BB gun shooting, official says | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Police in New York have arrested a man accused of firing a BB gun at a Jewish father and son who were out grocery shopping, a law enforcement official told CNN.

    The alleged shooter, a 25-year-old man, is charged with assault as a hate crime, endangering the welfare of a child, reckless endangerment and assault, according to the official.

    The BB gun shooter was driving on a main thoroughfare on Staten Island Sunday afternoon when he spotted the 32-year-old father and his 7-year-old son shopping in front of a Kosher grocery store wearing yarmulkes, the official said.

    That is when the assailant allegedly opened fire, striking the boy in the right ear and the father in the chest, the official said.

    He then sped off in a Black Ford Mustang that did not have a license plate, the official said.

    Paramedics arrived at the scene a short time later and treated the pair for their injuries at the scene, the official said.

    In a Tuesday news conference, Staten Island District Attorney Michael McMahon said his office will continue working with police to bring justice to the victims.

    “We want our Jewish brothers and sisters to know in this instance that we stand with them just as we do with anyone who is a victim of a hate crime for any reason whatsoever,” McMahon told reporters on Tuesday.

    New York Mayor Eric Adams, speaking at the same news conference, said: “We are not going to allow hate to run our city.”

    The mayor added that New York has the largest Jewish population outside of Israel and that hate crimes have been on the rise across the country.

    “We need to stop what’s happening on social media, we need to stop the spreading of this hate, we need to combat it in a very real way,” Adams said.

    The alleged hate crime is the latest in a string of incidents in the city.

    The New York Police Department has seen an increase in overall hate crimes, led by a sharp increase in anti-Semitic incidents for the month of November. The NYPD reported 45 incidents in November, which is up from 20 crimes reported on November 2021, according to NYPD statistics.

    The increase in anti-Semitic incidents comes as the NYPD, along with other federal law enforcement agencies, thwarted a potential attack on a New York area synagogue last month, arresting and arraigning two men in connection with online threats.

    NYPD Commissioner Keechant Sewell said investigators from the FBI/NYPD Joint Terrorism Task Force and the NYPD Counterterrorism and Intelligence Bureau, in collaboration with law enforcement partners, uncovered “a developing threat to the Jewish community.”

    Authorities said they seized a number of weapons from the pair, who were also in possession of a swastika arm patch, according to a statement from Manhattan’s district attorney.

    New York state leads the nation in anti-Semitic incidents, with at least 416 reported in 2021, including at least 51 assaults – the highest number ever recorded by the Anti-Defamation League in New York. There were 12 assaults reported in 2020, the ADL said in an audit last month.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump’s call to terminate the Constitution is a fantasy, but it’s still dangerous | CNN Politics

    Trump’s call to terminate the Constitution is a fantasy, but it’s still dangerous | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Donald Trump’s call for the termination of the Constitution is his most extreme anti-democratic statement yet and seems oblivious to the sentiments of voters who rejected election deniers in the midterm elections.

    It may also reflect desperation on the part of the former president to whip up controversy and fury among his core supporters in order to inject some energy into a so-far lackluster 2024 White House bid.

    Trump’s comments on his Truth Social network – which should be easy for anyone to condemn – are exposing the familiar moral timidity of top Republicans who won’t disown the former president. But his latest tirade also plays into the arguments of some Republicans now saying that it’s time to move on from Trump’s fixation with the 2020 election.

    And while it is far too early to write off his chances in the 2024 GOP nominating contest, Trump’s behavior since announcing his third presidential bid also suggests his never-ending quest to shock and to fire up his base now means going so far right he ends up on the extremist fringe and almost in self-parody. In the short time he’s been a candidate, he’s expressed support for rioters who stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, and dined with a White nationalist Holocaust denier.

    Gabriel Sterling, the chief operating officer for Georgia’s Secretary of State Office, chuckled at the incredulity of Trump’s claim about the Constitution when it was described by CNN’s Pam Brown on Saturday.

    “It’s ridiculous, it’s insane, to suspend the Constitution. Come on man, seriously?” said Sterling, a Republican who helped oversee Georgia’s election in 2020, when President Joe Biden carried the state. “I think more and more Republicans, Americans are saying, ‘Ok I am good, I am done with this now, I’m going to move on to the next thing.’”

    The most immediate question raised by Trump’s latest controversy is what it says about a presidential campaign that has been swallowed up by one far-right authoritarian sideshow after another.

    Far from barnstorming the nation, making a case on the economy, health care and immigration or outlining a program for the future, Trump has given comfort to zealots and insurrectionists.

    He hosted Kanye West at Mar-a-Lago last month, at a time when the rapper now known as Ye is in the middle of a vile streak of antisemitism and praising Adolf Hitler. The far-right Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes was at also at that dinner. Trump claimed he didn’t know who Fuentes was but the former president still hasn’t criticized his ideology. Last week, Trump, in a fundraising video, praised the mob that invaded the Capitol in the worst attack on US democracy in modern times, again promoting violence as an acceptable response to political grievances.

    His social media assault on the Constitution appears to be proving the point of the House select committee probing January 6, which has portrayed him as a clear and present danger to American democracy and met on Friday to consider criminal referrals to the Justice Department.

    Wyoming GOP Rep. Liz Cheney, vice chair of the committee, tweeted on Sunday: “No honest person can now deny that Trump is an enemy of the Constitution.” Trump’s latest wild social media post could even deepen his legal exposure as the Justice Department seeks evidence of his mindset as it investigates his conduct before the attack on the Capitol.

    Trump’s doubling down on authoritarianism also follows a moment when much of the country, at least in crucial swing states, rejected his 2020 election denialism and anti-democratic chaos candidates he picked for the midterms – with a final test on Tuesday in Georgia’s Senate runoff. It appears to make it even more unlikely that the ex-president, even if he wins the Republican nomination, will be the kind of candidate who could win among the broader national electorate. After all, his message failed in two consecutive elections in 2020 and 2022. And even in the wilder reaches of the GOP, which Trump has dominated since 2015, a call to simply trash the Constitution might seem a stretch – and reflect the former president’s increasing distance from reality.

    One could argue that the most prudent response to Trump’s latest radical rhetoric might be to ignore it and his bid for publicity.

    But even if his idea of crushing the Constitution looks far-fetched, his behavior needs to be taken seriously because of its possible future consequences.

    That’s because Trump remains an extraordinarily influential force in the Republican Party. His acolytes hold outsized power in the new House majority set to take over in January, which they plan to use as a political weapon to promote his restoration in the White House. GOP leader Kevin McCarthy is appeasing this group in an increasingly troubled campaign for speaker. The California Republican also last week shielded Trump over criticism of the Fuentes dinner, saying that while such a person had no place in the party, Trump had condemned him four times – a false claim.

    Furthermore, in an electoral sense, the theory that Republican voters may be willing to move on from Trump – and to find a candidate who may reflect “America First” populism but not dine with antisemites – has not yet been tested. Trump’s claims that the 2020 election was stolen are still broadly accepted among GOP voters – only 24% of whom believe that Biden legitimately won in 2020, according to midterm election exit polls.

    And a GOP primary that includes multiple candidates competing with Trump for the presidential nomination could yet again splinter the vote against the former president and allow him to emerge at the top of a mostly winner-take-all delegate race, a vote that would put a prospective authoritarian who has already tried to dismantle the US system of democracy one step from a return to power.

    Ignoring or downplaying public evidence of extremism and incitement only allows it to become normalized. There is already proof that the ex-president’s rhetoric can cause violence – after he told his supporters to “fight like hell” to save their country on January 6. And the rhetoric of people like West and Fuentes, with whom Trump has associated, risks normalizing odious forces in society that will grow if they are not challenged. Fuentes, after all, has appeared with Republican lawmakers like Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene – an increasingly influential voice in the House GOP conference.

    Years of norm crushing and acceptance of extremists by the twice-impeached former president never convinced the party to purge him or his views. Were it not for principled, conservative Republicans like Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and former Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers, Trump’s election-stealing effort might have worked in 2020.

    As they work through an intense lame-duck session of Congress, Republican lawmakers are, for the umpteenth time, going to be asked this week about the tyrannical attitudes of the front-runner for their party’s presidential nod.

    One newly elected Republican, Michael Lawler – who picked up a Democratic-held House seat critical to the slim GOP majority – stood up for the Constitution on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday.

    “The Constitution is set for a reason, to protect the rights of every American. And so I certainly don’t endorse that language or that sentiment,” Lawler told Jake Tapper. “I think the former president would be well-advised to focus on the future, if he is going to run for president again.”

    Republican Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio, who serves on the House Intelligence Committee, said he “vehemently” disagreed with Trump’s statement and said his dinner with West and Fuentes was “atrocious” and that voters would take both incidents into consideration.

    But a fellow Ohio Republican, Rep. David Joyce, demonstrated the characteristic reluctance of members of his party to confront an ex-president who remains hugely popular among its grassroots. Regarding the threat to the Constitution, Joyce said on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, “You know he says a lot of things but that doesn’t mean that it’s ever going to happen,” adding that it was important to separate “fact from fantasy.”

    Joyce didn’t directly condemn Trump’s rhetoric and said he would support whomever the Republican Party nominates in 2024. The fact that Republicans are open to a potential president – who would be called upon to swear to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution but who has already called for its termination – speaks volumes about how much the GOP is still in Trump’s shadow.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Around 10 of the women who accused Deshaun Watson of sexual misconduct will attend his Cleveland Browns debut vs. Houston, attorney says | CNN

    Around 10 of the women who accused Deshaun Watson of sexual misconduct will attend his Cleveland Browns debut vs. Houston, attorney says | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Around 10 of the more than two dozen women who accused Cleveland Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson of sexual misconduct will be attending his game in Houston on Sunday, according to their attorney.

    Watson will return to the field for his first NFL regular season game in two years to play against his former team, the Houston Texans, after serving an 11-game suspension without pay following sexual misconduct allegations.

    “They thought it important to make clear that they are still here and that they matter. I was proud of them for that,” Tony Buzbee, the lawyer representing the accusers attending the game, told CNN in a statement. “I have made that opportunity available to them. I haven’t been to a Texans game in many years. But, because they are going, I will go too.”

    Before his suspension, 24 civil lawsuits were filed on behalf of women alleging Watson sexually harassed or assaulted them during private massage appointments during his time with the Houston Texans. Watson denied wrongdoing in those cases, and 23 of the lawsuits were settled confidentially. Two grand juries declined to charge Watson criminally.

    Less than two months after settling the lawsuits, a new civil suit was filed by another woman in October, alleging that Watson pressured her into sexual activity during a professional massage session. Despite the new lawsuit, the NFL said his status would remain “unchanged.”

    Watson has repeatedly denied the allegations against him and said he has no regrets about any of his actions. He spoke to the media for the first time Thursday since returning from suspension, declining to answer any non-football questions that were asked.

    “I understand you guys have a lot of questions, but with my legal team and my clinical team, there is only football questions that I can really address at this time,” Watson told reporters, adding that he was “excited” to be back with his team and thanked those who stood by his side.

    “I also want to thank the Browns organization, the ownership, my teammates in that locker room and all of the coaching staff for all of the support that they had for me, especially my time away,” he said.

    Watson violated the NFL’s personal conduct policy in private meetings with massage therapists while he was with the Houston Texans, according to the initial ruling by Sue L. Robinson, a judge jointly appointed by the NFL and the NFL Players Association (NFLPA) to decide on Watson’s punishment.

    Watson’s “pattern of conduct is more egregious than any before reviewed by the NFL,” Robinson said in her ruling, adding that Watson’s “lack of expressed remorse” was a factor in the discipline that she chose.

    When Watson plays at NRG Stadium in Houston against his former team on Sunday, among those watching him from the sidelines will be women who he allegedly sexually harassed and assaulted.

    “I think it’s important to note each of these women is different. You can’t paint them with a broad brush. I would never encourage any of them to attend,” Buzbee said. “Some never want to hear Watson’s name again. Others have put it in the past. Some are still angry. Others are defiant. Makes me proud they want to stand up and be counted rather than quietly go away.”

    The NFL and the Cleveland Browns did not respond to CNN’s request for comment regarding the accusers’ attendance.

    Despite denying the allegations, Watson, who started the preseason game against the Jacksonville Jaguars in August, said that he is “truly sorry to all of the women that I have impacted in this situation” during a pregame interview shared by the Browns on Twitter

    “My decisions that I made in my life that put me in this position I would definitely like to have back, but I want to continue to move forward and grow and learn and show that I am a true person of character and I am going to keep pushing forward,” Watson said.

    Women’s movement organizations and nonprofits dedicated to protecting victims of sexual assault and harassment have applauded the accusers for attending the game.

    “I’m proud of them for being strong enough to try and take some of the power back. Even today when survivors hear stories like this, they are triggered by it,” Donisha Greene, spokeswoman for local advocacy group the Cleveland Rape Crisis Center (RCC), told CNN. “By attending the game, the accusers are saying they are not willing to suffer in silence. What that says to other survivors is that you don’t have to suffer in silence either.”

    Christian Nunes, the president of women’s rights grassroots group National Organization for Women (NOW), echoed Greene’s sentiments.

    “What happens so often is people try to shame, victim blame, silence, and erase victims and survivors of violence and abuse,” Nunes told CNN. “For them to show up and say no, you wont erase me, is so powerful. I give them so much respect and admiration for standing up against him, letting him know nothing, including money, can or will silence them.”

    Despite Cleveland’s love for its NFL team, Greene says many in the local community have increased their support for advocacy organizations like the Cleveland RCC that support sexual abuse and rape survivors, promoting healing and prevention, and increasing education.

    “It’s a tough place to be in. We’re a huge football town, folks here have been lifelong fans of the Cleveland Browns,” Greene said. “It’s a big deal to try and straddle that fence between your fandom and recognizing you’re not comfortable with the story of Deshaun Watson.”

    Even with dozens of sexual misconduct allegations, the Browns traded three first-round picks with the Texans for Watson, then signed him to a 5-year, fully guaranteed $230 million contract, the most guaranteed money in NFL history.

    “It’s just like a big ‘screw you,’” Ashley Solis, one of Watson’s accusers, told HBO’s “Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel” following the news of his signing. “That’s what it feels like. That we don’t care. He can run and throw, and that’s what we care about.”

    The decision triggered outrage and inspired many to get involved, Greene said, adding that the Cleveland RCC received over $120,000 donations specifically related to Watson.

    “For those who are struggling with wanting to speak up for victims but also cheer for the Browns and find a medium can get involved with our work and mission,” she added. “Our place is with the survivors, We believe you, we hear you, we see you. Your stories and your experiences matter.”

    While the league has faced scrutiny in the past for its handling of sexual misconduct accusations, this was the NFL’s harshest punishment for someone accused of sexual assault.

    The NFL initially asked for a suspension covering its 17-game regular season and playoffs, but Robinson ruled on August 1 that Watson would receive a six-game suspension.

    No player accused of non-violent sexual assault, as Watson has been, has received a suspension longer than three games, Robinson said in her ruling, and the most common discipline for domestic or gendered violence and sexual acts is a six-game suspension.

    Unlike in the past, however, the NFL pushed for more – appealing the decision and seeking a full-season suspension. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell called Watson’s behavior “egregious” and “predatory.”

    When asked why the league continued to seek a harsher punishment for Watson, Goodell said: “Because we’ve seen the evidence. (Robinson) was very clear about the evidence, she reinforced the evidence that there was multiple violations here and they were egregious and it was predatory behavior.”

    Later that month, the NFL and NFLPA agreed to suspend Watson for 11 regular season games and fine him $5 million, plus an extra $1 million each from both the league and the Browns to go towards nonprofit organizations working to prevent sexual assault, support survivors and educate youth on healthy relationships.

    “We as an organization and as individuals, we have tremendous empathy for the women involved and we have an opportunity to make a difference in this community,” Susan “Dee” Haslam, co-owner of the Browns, said in August.

    Watson also underwent “a professional evaluation by behavioral experts” and followed their ” treatment program,” according to the agreement.

    Women advocacy groups argue none of that is enough.

    The NFL has issued longer suspensions for violations including alleged drug use and gambling – and under his latest contract with the Browns, the suspension will not cost much of his guaranteed money, according to ESPN.

    “His punishment is not enough,” Nunes said, arguing that Watson should be banned entirely from the league. “Although they’ve done all this performative work, essentially they’re saying they will choose profit over actually protecting women and survivors.”

    Jimmy Haslam, Dee Haslam’s husband and Browns co-owner, said, “People deserve second chances.”

    “Is he never supposed to play again? Is he never supposed to be part of society? Does he get no chance to rehabilitate himself? And that’s what we’re going to do,” he said, referring to Watson. “That doesn’t mean we don’t have empathy for people affected and we will continue to do so. We believe that Deshaun Watson deserves a second chance.”

    The team’s “refusal to prioritize protecting women sends a disgusting message” to survivors of sexual assault, Nunes said.

    “The fact that Watson can continue working, with no real accountability, is outrageous,” she said. “The NFL needs to stop harboring abusers and sexual predators.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former Trump White House counsel and his deputy testify to Jan. 6 criminal grand jury | CNN Politics

    Former Trump White House counsel and his deputy testify to Jan. 6 criminal grand jury | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone and deputy counsel Patrick Philbin testified to a federal grand jury for several hours in Washington, DC, on Friday, indicating the Justice Department had compelled the men to answer more questions in the January 6, 2021, criminal investigation despite challenges from Donald Trump’s legal team.

    The January 6 grand jury activity is the latest indication the investigation – now led by special counsel Jack Smith – has pushed in recent months to unearth new details about direct conversations with the former president and advice given to him after the election.

    Cipollone was first seen entering the grand jury area with his attorney, Michael Purpura, before 9 a.m., and he was there for more than five hours. Purpura has not responded to requests for comment. The grand jury proceedings themselves are confidential.

    Philbin, whom Purpura also represents, headed into the grand jury area just before the lunch hour on Friday, staying until about 4 p.m.

    Thomas Windom and Mary Dohrmann, prosecutors in the January 6 investigation who are now to be led by Smith, were also seen walking in with Cipollone.

    The investigators are looking at efforts to obstruct the transfer of power at the end of Trump’s presidency and have obtained testimony from several administration advisers closest to the former president after the election and as the Capitol was attacked by his supporters.

    CNN previously reported that Chief Judge Beryl Howell of the DC District Court, who oversees the federal grand juries in Washington, ordered Cipollone and Philbin to provide additional grand jury testimony this month, following up on their testimony in the fall. The judge has repeatedly rejected Trump’s privilege claims in the Justice Department’s criminal investigation of efforts to overturn the 2020 election, according to people briefed on the matter.

    Philbin and Cipollone were both key witnesses to Trump’s actions in the last days of his presidency. Cipollone repeatedly pushed back on efforts to overturn the 2020 election, and according to a Senate Judiciary Committee report, he and Philbin opposed a proposal to replace the attorney general with someone willing to look into false claims of election fraud.

    Previously, the Justice Department compelled top advisers from Vice President Mike Pence’s office to testify to the grand jury. They had sought to protect Pence in January 2021 from Trump’s pressure campaign to overturn the election.

    Earlier this week, Trump White House official Stephen Miller, who worked with Trump on his speech at the Ellipse, had his own day before the grand jury.

    On Thursday, another leg of Smith’s special counsel investigation – into the handling of documents at Mar-a-Lago after the presidency – was active in the courthouse. At least one Mar-a-Lago prosecutor was working in the secret grand jury proceedings, as three aides to Trump, Dan Scavino, William Russell and Beau Harrison, each appeared, according to sources familiar with them. Their attorney declined to comment.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • McCarthy demands January 6 committee preserve all records and vows to hold hearings next year | CNN Politics

    McCarthy demands January 6 committee preserve all records and vows to hold hearings next year | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy sent a letter to the House select committee investigating January 6, 2021, on Wednesday demanding that it preserve all records and transcripts and vowing to hold hearings next year on the security failures that led to the US Capitol breach.

    After winning the House majority earlier this month, Republicans made it clear they will prioritize investigating President Joe Biden and his administration on a variety of fronts. The latest warning from McCarthy, who is vying to be House speaker, signals that Republicans may also use some of their time in the next Congress attempting to rewrite the narrative of the insurrection.

    “It is imperative that all information collected be preserved not just for institutional prerogatives but for transparency to the American people,” wrote McCarthy, who did not comply with a subpoena to appear before the committee. “The American people have a right to know that the allegations you have made are supported by the facts.”

    Democratic Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson, chairman of the House select committee, told reporters Wednesday that he had not seen the California Republican’s letter to the committee, but that the panel planned to preserve everything. He added that McCarthy “had a chance to have members on the committee, he had a chance to come and testify before the committee, so, I think the horse has left the barn.”

    Thompson said, “We will do our work. We will end December 31. If he wants to conduct whatever he wants as speaker, it’s his choice.”

    McCarthy has signaled no interest in creating a Republican-led January 6 select committee, as some on the right have pushed to do. But McCarthy – who is scrambling to lock down speaker votes – is expected to give his members some room to re-litigate the Democrat-led select committee’s investigation. That effort is likely to be housed within existing committees.

    Earlier this year, Republicans on the House Administration Committee sent a similar preservation request to the select committee and also pledged to continue looking into January 6 security failures. The House GOP is planning to release its own report on the topic when the select committee releases its final report before the end of this year.

    Thompson reiterated Wednesday that not only does the panel plan to preserve everything, it’s also set to release as much as possible to the public through its final report as soon as the committee gets the report back from the printer.

    “A lot depends on when we can get it back once we get it to the printer and how that impacts the Christmas holidays,” Thompson said.

    Top House Republicans would much rather put January 6 in the rear view mirror, but McCarthy needs to win over hardline critics and keep former President Donald Trump happy if he wants to become speaker – and that group is eager to undermine the committee’s investigation, which has painted a damning portrait of Trump and his allies.

    Meanwhile, members of the select committee are scheduled to have a key meeting on Friday to discuss its final report as well as the possibility of making criminal referrals, CNN reported earlier Wednesday.

    A subcommittee of members is also expected to provide options to the full committee about a number of pressing issues including how to present evidence of possible obstruction, possible perjury and possible witness tampering as well as potential criminal referrals to the Department of Justice, according to multiple sources familiar with the committee’s work.

    Also under discussion in the Friday meeting will be how to handle the five Republican lawmakers who refused to cooperate with their subpoenas, which includes McCarthy.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Opinion: Why Kevin McCarthy may have the hardest job on Capitol Hill | CNN

    Opinion: Why Kevin McCarthy may have the hardest job on Capitol Hill | CNN

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: Patrick T. Brown is a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a conservative think tank and advocacy group based in Washington, DC. He is also a former senior policy adviser to Congress’ Joint Economic Committee. Follow him on Twitter. The views expressed in this piece are his own. View more opinion on CNN.



    CNN
     — 

    Like a treasure hunter who hacks his way to the heart of the jungle only to find an empty chest, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy thought he was on his way to achieving his goal of becoming speaker before a rebellion on his right flank put that dream very much in doubt.

    Currently, House Republicans are expected to hold a narrow majority in the next Congress – 222 seats to Democrats’ 213, if there are no changes to the projected winners. McCarthy, who recently was reelected as GOP leader, will need a majority, or 218, of the House representatives to vote for him on January 3 to become the next speaker.

    That leaves the California Republican with just a handful of votes to spare if he wants to win. And CNN’s Chris Cillizza has already tallied five Republican congressmen who have expressed their unwillingness to vote for McCarthy.

    With enough negotiations, concessions and wheeling and dealing, the most likely scenario is that McCarthy will squeak out just enough votes. But the uncertain start to his potential tenure, and the challenges he faces within his own caucus, reflect both the tumult of trying to lead a legislative body in an anti-institutional age and the fundamental uncertainty of what the Republican Party actually stands for.

    McCarthy, don’t forget, started his career as a reform-oriented “Young Gun,” posing for the cover of the Weekly Standard with fellow GOP wunderkinds (and now-former Reps.) Paul Ryan of Wisconsin and Eric Cantor of Virginia. The populist thrust in the party ultimately sidelined the other two, along with the magazine they appeared on, but McCarthy survived – in part by adopting the pose of an America First culture warrior.

    In spring 2021, while Democrats were passing an American Rescue Plan that put billions of dollars into states’ hands and ended up fueling inflation, McCarthy made headlines by reading “Green Eggs and Ham” to protest the Dr. Seuss estate’s decision not to continue publishing six older books due to racial stereotypes. (“Green Eggs and Ham” was not one of the six books in question.)

    McCarthy’s plans for the new Congress are far from ambitious. He boldly announced that each day will start with a prayer and the pledge of allegiance, something Congress already does. He also vowed to have the Constitution read aloud in its entirety – a nice gesture, but one Republicans have done in the recent past with little impact on the work of governing.

    Because the Republican Party struggles to put forward a cohesive governing agenda (McCarthy’s touted Commitment to America was better suited as an attack on President Joe Biden’s administration than a detailed list of proactive agenda items), the matters that have caused some Republicans to rebel against a potential McCarthy speakership may seem picayune.

    He has pledged to seek votes on removing Reps. Eric Swalwell and Adam Schiff, both of California, and Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota from certain congressional committees, nominally for various violations. But diehard partisans will certainly see it as payback for Democratic actions, such as stripping Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia of her committee assignments – the kind of DC insider red meat that leaves most voters cold.

    Other possible inside-baseball concessions are even more in the weeds. Reps. Bob Good of Virginia and Matt Rosendale of Montana, for example, have spoken about their desire to bring back the legislative maneuver known as the “motion to vacate the chair,” which would allow any member of Congress to seek a vote on removing the House speaker. That procedure, coupled with a razor-thin margin, would leave a future Speaker McCarthy on the proverbial hot seat.

    And many of the more Trump-supporting figures, like Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona, who challenged McCarthy for his leadership post, prefer a more MAGA-aligned speaker. Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, another “no” vote against McCarthy, has endorsed Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, partly stemming from his frustration that McCarthy had initially said the former president bore some responsibility for the riots on January 6.

    But more moderate Republicans would likely shy away from Jordan as a candidate, and a centrist candidate would be anathema to the more populist wing. So McCarthy’s path to the speaker’s chair may end up being the least objectionable option.

    Without a clear vision of what the Republican Party’s legislative priorities are, McCarthy’s presumptive speakership will mostly consist of oversight. And some aspect of feeding the political base is part of the game. His announced intentions to end proxy voting, which allowed lawmakers to cast their vote remotely, would be the right step, as would fully reopening the Capitol complex to visitors.

    But McCarthy’s travails illustrate how trying to lead in an era when parties and institutions are held captive by an anti-establishment mentality will be a continual exercise in frustration. Base-pleasing moves like investigating the president’s son, Hunter Biden, don’t do anything to solidify Republican support where it is needed – the middle-class suburbs, which voted decidedly against stunts and for normalcy in last month’s midterm elections.

    Fights over legislative committee assignments and empty culture war gestures may suck up political oxygen, but they don’t point the way forward to a more compelling argument for Republican control of Congress. Republicans who can hammer home an agenda that puts parents first, and is laser-focused on reducing crime and inflation, will be more attractive to an electorate that’s soured on MAGA candidates but also signaled displeasure with the Biden administration.

    Either Kevin McCarthy will figure that out, or he’ll be replaced.

    [ad_2]

    Source link