US Politics

Donald Trump has pleaded not guilty to charges that he conspired and engaged in racketeering activity to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in the state of Georgia, according to a court filing submitted by his lawyer in superior court in Atlanta.The former president also attested in the filing that he would waive his arraignment – the formal reading of the indictment handed up by a jury this month – meaning he will not need to appear for that proceeding next week.“As evidenced by my signature below,” said the two-page-filing submitted in Fulton county superior court by Trump’s lead lawyer, Steven Sadow, “I do hereby waive formal arraignment and enter my plea of NOT GUILTY to the Indictment in this case.”Trump’s Sharpie-written signature marks the fourth time in as many months that he has pleaded not guilty to criminal charges, after previously being indicted in a hush-money case in New York, in a classified documents case in Florida, and in a federal 2020 election subversion case in Washington.But it was no less momentous given the seriousness of the allegations in the sprawling 41-count Fulton county indictment, which alleges Trump and 18 co-defendants violated Georgia’s state Rico statute in pursuing a multi-pronged effort to undermine the results of a fair election.The conclusion of the plea and arraignment process starts the pre-trial phase of the case. No trial date has yet been set for Trump, though the Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, asked to try all 19 defendants together starting on 23 October after two ex-Trump lawyers sought a speedy trial.On Thursday, lawyers for Donald Trump moved to sever his case from two defendants who have asked for their own trials to be speeded up.“We’re in a huge state of flux right now,” attorney Bob Rubin told Georgia’s WABE. “The case involving these 19 defendants seems to be going in a lot of different directions all at the same time.”Trump’s lawyers have also been weighing whether to seek to have the case moved to federal court, according to two people familiar with the matter, and are expected to make a decision based on whether Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows is successful in his effort.To have the case moved to the US district court for the northern district of Georgia, Trump would have to show that the criminal conduct alleged in the indictment involved his official duties as president – he was acting “under color of office” – and cannot be prosecuted at the state level.The reasons to seek removal to federal court are seen as twofold: the jury pool would expand beyond just the Atlanta area – which skews heavily Democratic – and a federal judge might be less deferential to local prosecutors compared with judges in the Fulton county superior court.Regardless of the final trial venue and jurisdiction, Trump’s overarching legal strategy has been to delay. Even with the Georgia case, if Trump were to win re-election, he could theoretically have the case frozen while he assumes the presidency, legal experts have said.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionLast week, Trump surrendered at the Fulton county jail, where he was processed as any other criminal defendant. He had his fingerprints taken, his height and weight recorded, and submitted himself to a mugshot that the Guardian previously reported he had desperately sought to avoid.The booking came during the primetime viewing hours for the cable news networks, a time slot that Trump is said to have insisted his lawyers negotiate with prosecutors in an apparent effort to discredit the charges and distract from the indignity of the surrender.The strategy to turn the surrender into a made-for-television circus has been an effort to discredit the indictments, a person familiar with the matter said, as well as to capitalize on the information void left by prosecutors after the events to foist his own spin on the charges.And in a sign of the deeply interwoven nature of the Trump 2024 campaign and the legal team, his top political advisers at the very least explored whether Trump should appear for the arraignment and hold a press conference afterwards for “optics” reasons, the person said.The bond for Trump was agreed at $200,000, the highest amount of any of his co-defendants, including his former lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who turned himself in for booking a day earlier after his bond was set at $150,000 after being charged with principally the same counts. More

The US state of Mississippi has elected an openly gay person to its legislature for the first time ever.Fabian Nelson’s victory this week left Louisiana as the only American state never to have elected an LGBTQ+ person to its legislature. And it served up a salve of sorts to a wave of laws passed in Republican-controlled state legislatures that discriminate against LGBTQ+ people, including a ban in Mississippi on gender-affirming hormones or surgery for anyone aged 17 or younger.In an interview with the Associated Press on Wednesday, Nelson, a Democrat, called his election to the Mississippi house “a dream” and “shocking”. But Nelson, a foster father, also said: “Ultimately what won this campaign is the fact that I’m in touch with my community and the issues my community is facing.“At the end of the day, I put my suit on the same way every other person who walks in that statehouse does. I’m going to walk in there, and I’m going to be a sound voice … in the state of Mississippi.”Nelson, a 38-year-old realtor, won his seat by triumphing in a Democratic primary election runoff on Tuesday over Roshunda Harris-Allen, a local alderwoman and a professor of education at Tougaloo College, a historically Black institution. Tuesday’s race was necessary after neither Nelson nor Harris-Allen had secured a majority of the vote in a three-way primary on 8 August.Republicans did not run a candidate for the general election scheduled for the fall. So, by virtue of his win on Tuesday, Nelson has clinched the statehouse seat that had been up for grabs. He is scheduled to be sworn in ahead of Mississippi’s next legislative session in January.His district encompasses an area south of the state capital of Jackson. As he has told media outlets such as the Los Angeles Blade and LGBTQ Nation, Nelson’s priorities include pushing for an expansion of Mississippi’s Medicaid program as well as developing the economy and infrastructure for his district’s underserved areas.He is also hoping to impede Republicans’ anti-LGBTQ legislative measures and efforts to disenfranchise voters in and around Jackson, which is mostly Democratic.Nelson said his election accomplishes a goal he set for himself the day that he visited the state capitol building on an elementary school field trip and told his teacher he would eventually earn an office in the house.“I’m still trying to process it and take it in,” Nelson said.The state director of the Human Rights Campaign’s Mississippi chapter, which endorsed Nelson, said the election “sends a real message in a time when we are seeing attacks … against the LGBTQ+ community”.“The majority of people reject that kind of animus,” the director, Rob Hill, told the AP. “I think a lot of youth around the state who have felt like their leaders are rejecting them or targeting them won’t feel as lonely today.”The president of the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund, Annise Parker, added: “Voters in Mississippi should be proud of the history they’ve made but also proud to know they’ll be well represented by Fabian.”Though Louisiana now stands as the only state to have never chosen an LGBTQ+ person for a seat in its legislature, it did elect its first openly gay Black man to public office late last year.Davante Lewis won a New Orleans-based seat on Louisiana’s Public Service Commission in December after defeating a three-term incumbent.The Associated Press contributed reporting More

Donald Trump has been criminally charged by the Fulton county district attorney for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia.Prosecutors brought numerous counts against Trump and his associates, including forgery and racketeering, and soliciting a public official to violate their oath of office, among other charges. Prosecutors charged 18 other people, including Mark Meadows, Trump’s former White House chief of staff, and the lawyers Rudy Giuliani and John Eastman.The charges mark the second time Trump has been indicted in connection to his push to overturn the will of American voters after losing to Joe Biden in 2020.Unlike the federal charges filed by Jack Smith, the special counsel for the justice department, the Fulton county case will proceed in state court. That means that Trump would have less capacity to interfere with the case if he is elected president next year, and he could not pardon himself. Trump is essentially accused of leading an organized crime racket in Georgia via the varied efforts of a web of people collectively to achieve the overturning of his election loss there.In the indictment by the state of Georgia, the state wrote: “Trump and the other defendants charged in this indictment refused to accept that Trump lost, and they knowingly and willfully joined a conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump. That conspiracy contained a common plan and purpose to commit two or more acts of racketeering activity.”The group, the state charges, “constituted a criminal organization whose members and associates engaged in various related criminal activities including, but not limited to, false statements and writings, impersonating a public officer, forgery, filing false documents, influencing witnesses, computer theft, computer trespass, computer invasion of privacy, conspiracy to defraud the state, acts involving theft, and perjury”.Trump waived his right to appear in court for a formal arraignment on the charges, pleading not guilty on 31 August.What is this case about?Donald Trump lost Georgia to Joe Biden in the November 2020 presidential election. After the election, Trump and his allies made an aggressive but unsuccessful push to invalidate the election results in Georgia as part of an effort to overturn his defeat nationally.On 2 January 2021, Trump called Brad Raffensperger, the Republican who serves as Georgia’s top election official, and asked him to overturn the election. “All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state,” Trump said to Raffensperger on the call. Raffensperger refused.The call came as Trump and his allies, including Rudy Giuliani, were spreading outlandish lies about the election in Georgia in order to seed doubt about the results. Most notably, Giuliani and others amplified misleading surveillance video from State Farm Arena they claimed showed election workers taking ballots out from under a table and counting them after observers left for the evening. The claim was false – counting had not stopped for the evening when the ballots were tallied.Just as he did in other swing states, Trump convened a slate of fake electors in Georgia. The group of 16 people met discreetly in the Georgia capitol in December 2020 and signed a certificate affirming Trump’s purported victory that was sent to the National Archives. Some involved in the scheme have said they merely believed they were preserving Trump’s options amid pending litigation. The alternate slate of electors, both in Georgia and elsewhere, would later become a linchpin of Trump’s effort to overturn the election.One of those fake electors, Cathy Latham, also was involved in a separate incident in which Trump allies obtained unauthorized access to Dominion voting equipment. On 7 January 2021, Latham helped a firm hired by the Trump campaign get access to voting equipment in Coffee county, a rural county 200 miles south-east of Atlanta. The data was uploaded to a password-protected site, where other election deniers could download it as they sought to prove the baseless allegation that Dominion voting machines had been rigged and cost Trump the election.Why is this case taking place in Fulton county?Nearly all of the key events connected to Trump’s effort to overturn Georgia’s election results took place in Atlanta, the state capital, which is in Fulton county.Raffensperger was in Atlanta when he received the phone call from Trump urging him to overturn the election results. Trump and Giuliani targeted election workers in Atlanta and the fake electors convened at the state capitol in the city in December 2020.What is the Georgia Rico Act?Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (Rico) Act essentially allows prosecutors to link together different crimes committed by different people and bring criminal charges against a larger criminal enterprise. The law requires prosecutors to show the existence of a criminal enterprise that has committed at least two underlying crimes.Prosecutors have long used the federal Rico Act to go after the mafia. But Georgia’s version is even more expansive than the federal statute. It allows prosecutors in the state to bring racketeering charges if a defendant attempts or solicits a crime, even if they don’t bring charges for those crimes themselves.How is this case different from other criminal cases pending against Trump?This is the second case that has sought any kind of criminal accountability for Trump’s attempt to overturn the election. It is the fourth time the former president has been charged with a crime this year.Earlier in August, Smith filed four federal charges against Trump for trying to overturn the election. Trump has pleaded not guilty to those charges, and Smith has moved to set a trial date for 2 January. If Trump were elected president while the case was still pending, he would almost certainly move to fire Smith and get rid of the charges. He could also theoretically pardon himself if he has been convicted. The Georgia case is different because Trump cannot interfere in it, even if he is president, and cannot issue a pardon.In June, Smith charged Trump with illegally retaining national defense information under the Espionage Act and obstructing the government’s attempt to retrieve the documents. Trump pleaded not guilty.In March, Trump was charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in Manhattan. Those charges are connected to a $130,000 payment he made to Stormy Daniels, a porn star, with whom he is alleged to have had an extramarital affair. Michael Cohen, Trump’s attorney at the time, paid the money to Daniels through a shell company and Trump reimbursed him, cataloguing it as a legal expense. Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, said that amounted to falsifying business records. Trump has pleaded not guilty.Can Trump still run for president?Yes. The US constitution does not prohibit anyone charged with a crime, nor anyone convicted of one, from holding office.The 14th amendment, however, does bar anyone who has taken an oath to protect the United States and engaged in “insurrection or rebellion” from holding office. Relying on that provision, a slew of separate civil lawsuits in state courts are expected in the near future to try to bar Trump from holding office.Who is Fani Willis, the prosecutor bringing the charges in Fulton county?Willis, a Democrat, was elected Fulton county district attorney in 2020. She is the first Black woman to hold the office.She worked as the prosecutor in the Fulton county district attorney’s office from 2001 to 2018 and is no stranger to high-profile cases. In 2014, she led the prosecution against a dozen Atlanta educators who conspired to cheat on test scores in order to win funding. She is also prosecuting the rapper Young Thug as part of a broader indictment of the YSL gang. Willis relied on the Georgia Rico Act in both cases.How did the charges come about?In January of 2022, Willis requested that a Fulton county judge approve a special purpose grand jury to assist her investigation into Trump. A special purpose grand jury can issue subpoenas, hear testimony and ultimately issue a report recommending whether or not to charge someone. It cannot issue an indictment.A regular grand jury was convened in late July and ultimately voted to file criminal charges against Trump.Cast of charactersIn addition to Trump, Fani Willis has filed charges of violating the Georgia Rico Act and a variety of other laws against 18 co-defendants:Mark Meadows, former chief of staff heavily involved in efforts to keep Trump in office; Rudy Giuliani, an attorney to Trump who played a key role in national efforts to overturn the 2020 election results; John Eastman, an attorney to Trump and key to efforts to overturn the 2020 election result; Kenneth Chesebro, a legal adviser to the 2020 election campaign involved in the Georgia fake electors scheme; Jeffrey Clark, former justice department lawyer who became involved in efforts to overturn the Georgia result; Sidney Powell, a lawyer for Trump heavily involved in efforts to overturn the 2020 result; Jenna Ellis, an election campaign lawyer; Ray Smith, a Georgia lawyer implicated in the fake electors scheme; Robert Cheeley, a Georgia lawyer implicated in efforts to falsely show election fraud; Michael Roman, former aide in the Trump White House implicated in the fake electors scheme; David Shafer, former chairman of the Georgia Republican party who signed the fake official certificate to send to Congress declaring Trump won the state; Shawn Still, a senior Georgia Republican and state senator who also signed the fake certificate; Stephen Cliffgard Lee, a pastor accused of bullying election workers over fake fraud claims; Harrison William Prescott Floyd, director of Black Voices for Trump, accused of influencing witnesses; Trevian Kutti, a publicist accused of pressuring election workers; Cathy Latham, who as chair of Georgia’s Coffee county Republican party signed the false certificate claiming Trump won the state; Scott Hall, a bondsman accused with others of breaching voting machines in Georgia; Misty Hampton, accused of involvement in breaching voting machines while serving as Coffee county elections director. More

The New York Times described him as promising “to exert breathtaking power in ways that Donald Trump never did”. An article for Time magazine called him a “rockstar for those who think cancel culture is threatening every corner of American life”.

Well-spoken, polemical and supremely self-assured, it’s no surprise that the Trump-loving Vivek Ramaswamy has emerged as the new darling of the Republican presidential primary field.

Coming out of the first GOP debate in late August, where he oratorically dazzled (and also drew sharp criticism) after a combination of pre-scripted lines and impromptu take-downs, Ramaswamy is gaining ground in the polls — and is reportedly seeing a “surge of Iowans flock to his campaign stops,” ahead of the state’s important caucus, due on January 15 2024.

Nationally, Ramaswamy has now cruised into third place in the Republican race, at 10%, according to FiveThirtyEight polling averages, and is hoping to overtake Florida governor Ron DeSantis (14%), once seen as the prohibitive choice to rival Donald Trump. While still some 40 points out of first place, it’s a sudden uptick for a candidate who was, until recently, a virtual unknown.

But at just 38 years old, can this billionaire rookie politician of Indian descent, who — according to his own admission — is a “skinny guy with a funny last name,” crack Trump’s insurmountable lead, much less foil his coronation?

Ramaswamy is a self-styled “clear outsider” who’s never served in government. A graduate of Harvard and Yale Law School, he cut his teeth at a Wall Street hedge fund, before founding a multi-billion-dollar pharmaceutical firm. As “one of the richest thirty-somethings” in the nation, according to Forbes, Ramaswamy has lived, in his words, “the American dream”.

Ramaswamy, however, isn’t your typical socially liberal Ivy League graduate. He can rap like Eminem. And he’s called former US president Richard Nixon “the most underappreciated president of our modern history in this country, probably in all of American history”.

More importantly, he’s a chest-thumping, Maga-type who, despite praising Trump as “the best president of the 21st century,” is running to beat the ex-president so he can take the Trumpist agenda “much further”.

The anti-wokester

The author of Woke, Inc. and Nation of Victims, Ramaswamy brags that he’s the original anti-woke candidate. A self-branded “non-white nationalist” he speaks stridently against the modern progressive movement.

Ramaswamy declares that he would appeal to voters of all colours and is fond of paraphrasing John Roberts, US supreme court chief justice, who has said: “The right answer to stop discrimination on the basis of race … is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

Ramaswamy says that he’s running for president to unite the country under a new “American Revolution” based on “1776 ideals”. Many of his policies, like the revolution he seeks to provoke, are decidedly counter-establishment.

For instance, Ramaswamy waxes poetically about laying off 75% of the federal workforce, taking a sledgehammer to US government agencies like the FBI and the Department of Education, and defeating the “managerial class” that’s “spreading like a plague” across society.

Ramaswamy’s agenda also includes a number of political non-starters — for example, requiring every US citizen to pass the same civics exam that immigrants do in order to vote, before age 25.

Unlike most millennials, Ramaswamy has pilloried the climate change agenda as a “hoax”. “Drill, frack, burn coal, and embrace nuclear” is his unapologetic solution for America’s energy challenges.

On immigration, Ramaswamy favours ending America’s “green card” lottery system, which annually makes available 50,000 visas to migrants, and replacing it with “meritocratic admission”. He advocates hardening the US-Mexico border “where criminals are coming in every day” through the deployment of military resources.

Slash aid to Ukraine

Although not an isolationist, Ramaswamy is sceptical about an activist US foreign policy. He wants to slash aid to Ukraine, implying that what’s in America’s best interest isn’t necessarily what’s in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s worst interest.

To end the war, Ramaswamy proposes granting Russia “major concessions”, while “freezing … current lines of control in a Korean War-style armistice agreement”. In exchange, “Russia has to leave its treaty” and its joint military agreement with China.

In Asia, Ramaswamy champions a full-scale economic “decoupling” of the US from China. He also favours Washington more aggressively “driving a wedge” between Beijing and Moscow, which he calls “the single greatest military threat that we’re going to face”.

Ramaswamy’s response on Taiwan is short-term “strategic clarity,” insisting that he would defend the island “vigorously until the US achieves semiconductor independence,” then return to a policy of “strategic ambiguity”.

A Donald Trump supporter walks past a bus promoting Republican presidential contender Vivek Ramaswamy.
Tannen Maury/UPI Credit: UPI/Alamy

Creating Trump 2.0

Ramaswamy’s biggest potential strength, and liability, in the primaries is fusing himself to Trump’s hip. As “Trump 2.0,” his challenge is a delicate one: to please the right-wing base, while still separating himself enough from Trump to win over converts.

So far, Ramaswamy has leaned toward the former.

When pressed, he’s said that he would have certified the 2020 election results. Yet he’s also claimed that former vice president Mike Pence missed a “historic opportunity” to reform the electoral structure on January 6.

Ramaswamy has attacked criminal prosecutions of Trump as “politically motivated and setting an awful precedent. He’s pledged to pardon Trump if elected. He’s even hinted at hiring Trump as an “adviser” or “mentor” in his White House.

What’s next?

Political statistician Nate Silver has predicted that Ramaswamy will almost certainly make more headway in the polls, especially as his name recognition grows. Yet that publicity will also make him a target.

Already, he’s feeling the heat. Washington Post columnist George F. Will has derided him as “comparatively, a child”.

Trump holds a commanding lead and looks poised to dominate Iowa and New Hampshire, before running the table in the remaining primaries.

If that happens, Ramaswamy might be auditioning for a cabinet post or a 2028 replay. The odds of Trump choosing him as his vice-presidential running mate seem remote. Ramaswamy is too charismatic and Trump resists sharing the spotlight.

For now, the silver-tongued, dynamic newcomer to the Maga party will enjoy his 15 minutes. Whether there’s substance behind his candidacy — and whether he has independent staying power — are the big questions for #Vivek2024 to answer. More

On June 20, 2023, Hunter Biden, the second son of President Joe Biden, entered into a plea agreement with prosecutors related to tax-related charges and the illegal possession of a firearm.

On July 26, the plea agreement was challenged by the judge in the case. She wanted to know more about any immunity being offered, given that Hunter Biden is under several federal investigations.

After the prosecution and defense failed to renegotiate the deal, Attorney General Merrick Garland announced on Aug. 11 that U.S. Attorney David Weiss, the Donald Trump-appointed lead federal prosecutor for Delaware who had already been investigating the case, had been appointed as special counsel so that he would have “the authority he needs to conduct a thorough investigation and to continue to take the steps he deems appropriate independently, based only on the facts and the law.”

After the appointment, Sen. Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, praised Garland for being “committed to avoiding even the appearance of politicization at the Justice Department.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, however, attacked Weiss’ appointment as “a dumb political decision,” despite having previously supported it.

From my perspective as a political scientist, I believe that while special counsels are intended to be independent, in practice they aren’t entirely. Here’s why.

David Weiss, pictured here in 2009, has been a federal prosecutor in Delaware since 2007. He is now also a special counsel investigating Hunter Biden.
AP Photo/Ron Soliman

Independent and special counsels

Ensuring impartiality in the Justice Department can be difficult, as the attorney general is appointed by – and answerable to – a partisan president. This gives presidents the power to try to compel attorneys general to pursue a political agenda. President Richard Nixon did this during the investigation of the Watergate break-in, which threatened to implicate him in criminal acts.

On the evening of Oct. 20, 1973, Nixon ordered Attorney General Elliot Richardson to fire Archibald Cox, whom Richardson had appointed to lead the Watergate investigation. Richardson refused and resigned. Nixon then ordered Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus to fire Cox. Ruckelshaus also refused and resigned. Finally, Nixon ordered Solicitor General Robert Bork, the next most senior official at the Justice Department, to fire Cox. Bork complied.

This shocking series of events, often referred to as the Saturday Night Massacre, demonstrated how presidents could exercise political power over criminal investigations.

As a result of the Watergate scandal, Congress passed the Ethics in Government Act of 1978. This allowed for investigations into misconduct that could operate outside of presidential control.

After passage of this legislation, if the attorney general received “specific information” alleging that the president, vice president or other high-ranking executive branch officials had committed a serious federal offense, the attorney general would ask a special three-judge panel to appoint an independent counsel, who would investigate.

President Richard Nixon, here pointing to transcripts of White House tapes he agreed to turn over to congressional investigators, was an inspiration for the 1978 law that created truly independent counsels. It expired in 1999.
AP Photo

The Ethics in Government Act also disqualified Justice Department employees, including the attorney general, from participating in any investigation or prosecution that could “result in a personal, financial, or political conflict of interest, or the appearance thereof.”

In the decades since the law’s passage, independent counsels investigated Republicans and Democrats alike. In 1999, Congress let the Ethics in Government Act expire. That year, then-Attorney General Janet Reno authorized the appointment of special counsels, who could investigate certain sensitive matters, similar to the way independent counsels operated.

Robert Mueller, who was appointed in 2017 by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to investigate possible Russian interference in the 2016 elections and possible links between the Trump campaign and the Russian government, was a special counsel. Some Republicans accused him of bias, despite his long career serving under both Democratic and Republican presidents.

In 2020, John Durham – another veteran of the Justice Department – was appointed as special counsel to investigate the origins of the investigation that triggered Mueller’s appointment. Michael Sussmann, a former Democratic Party lawyer and target of that probe, accused Durham of political prosecution. Sussmann was later acquitted.

Politicizing the process

Although special counsels were meant to resemble independent counsels, there are notable differences.

For instance, while special counsels operate independently of the attorney general, both their appointment and the scope of their investigations are determined by the attorney general. In contrast, the appointment of independent counsels and the scope of their investigations were determined by a three-judge panel, which in turn was appointed by the chief justice of the United States.

Also, since Congress authorized independent counsels, presidential influence was limited by law. In contrast, since Justice Department regulations authorize special counsels, a president could try to compel the attorney general to change departmental interpretation of these regulations – or even just revoke them entirely – to influence or end a special counsel investigation.

For example, on at least one occasion, Trump sought to have Mueller dismissed. When his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, refused to comply, Trump fired him.

Sessions was later replaced by William Barr, who previously served as attorney general under President George H.W. Bush. Prior to his appointment, Barr sent an unsolicited memo to the Justice Department defending Trump by arguing that presidents have “complete authority to start or stop a law enforcement proceeding.”

In my own research, I have found that abuses of power are more common in situations in which the president and the attorney general are political allies.

For instance, after Mueller finished his report in 2019, Barr released a summary of its “principal conclusions.” Later, Barr’s summary was criticized for “not fully captur[ing] the context, nature, and substance” of Mueller’s work.

In 2020, a Republican-appointed judge ruled that Barr “failed to provide a thorough representation of the findings set forth in the Mueller Report” and questioned whether Barr had “made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse … in favor of President Trump.”

To be or not to be free of partisanship

The independence of the Justice Department rests, in part, on who occupies the offices of president and attorney general.

Trump, for example, saw himself as “the chief law enforcement officer of the country” and thought it was appropriate to “be totally involved.”

Meanwhile, Joe Biden has a long history of supporting the independence of Justice Department investigations, dating back to his 1987-1995 tenure as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Barr once argued that the attorney general’s role is to advance “all colorable arguments that can [be] mustered … when the president determines an action is within his authority – even if that conclusion is debatable.”

In contrast, Garland – a former U.S. circuit judge – insists that “political or other improper considerations must play no role in any investigative or prosecutorial decisions.”

Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has claimed the Biden administration is using the Justice Department unfairly.

Garland has served as attorney general for only 2½ years, yet at this point he has appointed more special counsels than any of his predecessors.

The first, Jack Smith, is overseeing investigations into former President Donald Trump’s role in the Jan. 6 insurrection, as well as Trump’s handling of classified government documents upon leaving office in 2021. The second, Robert Hur, is overseeing President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents after leaving office as vice president in 2017. Weiss’ investigation of Hunter Biden is Garland’s third special counsel appointment.

However, despite attempts by Garland to keep sensitive cases an arm’s length away, the reality is that special counsels – by design – are not as independent as the independent counsels of the past. As a result, the perception of political prosecution can be hard to avoid.

This is an updated version of an article published Jan. 13, 2023, which was an updated version of an article originally published Dec. 14, 2022. More

Nearly a year before the US supreme court eviscerated Roe v Wade, the court allowed an unprecedented abortion ban to take effect in Texas, serving as a harbinger of what was to sweep over the rest of the country.The most restrictive abortion law at the time, with no exception for rape, incest, or lethal fetal abnormality, Senate Bill 8 barred care after six weeks of pregnancy, and carried a private enforcement provision that empowered anyone to sue a provider or someone who “aids or abets” the procedure.The move successfully wiped out almost all abortion care in the second-most populous state in the US. When Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization hit, the state doubled down, criminally banning all care and solidifying itself as the largest state in the US to outlaw abortion.In the two years since, Texas abortion providers – some of the first in the US to experience a nearly post-Roe world – reflect on the devastating and lasting effect of the severe law, the trauma they felt denying patients care, and the struggle they faced when deciding whether or not to flee the state or stay put.Dr Jessica Rubino: ‘The law forced me to be a bad doctor’ When Senate Bill 8 took effect, Dr Rubino felt like she was on a “sinking ship”. The abortion provider and family medicine specialist was forced to turn away dozens of patients at Austin Women’s Health Center – including one who was experiencing kidney failure. At the same time, patients below the six-week mark were rushing to choose abortion care before it was too late, leaving thoughtful decision-making behind.“I had to tell people there’s nothing I can legally do for you, unless you’re on death’s doorstep,” said Rubino. “The law forced me to be a bad doctor.”“It was heartbreaking and soul-crushing,” she continued. “I was watching a healthcare disaster play out in real time, knowing that this law not only affects our state but is causing a ripple effect in every other state. With SB 8 – and even years before the law – we saw the writing on the wall with Roe and tried to warn everyone, but I’m not sure who was listening.”Rubino also recalled a conversation she had six months prior to SB 8 with colleagues across the state who appeared united, vowing to continue providing care despite the law’s consequences. People are going to die, she told them, we should take the “personal hit”. However, that wave of defiance never materialized. Rubino lacked critical mass.She soon fell into an “extreme” depression; it was difficult to get out of bed each day and she eventually sought mental health therapy and antidepressants. Her brain felt “broken”, she said. After Dobbs, she stopped performing abortion for nearly a year, exacerbating her gloom.“Having to deny patients the healthcare you are trained – and able – to give them is something you never get over. It’s not only medically unethical, it’s morally wrong,” said Rubino. “It was traumatizing, and it still haunts me.”SB 8, she said, was the tipping point for abortion providers in Texas like her who have been forced to navigate onerous laws over the years that compromise the care they give, including a mandatory sonogram and 24-hour waiting period that incorporates relaying erroneous medical information, bans on insurance coverage for care, restrictions on minors’ access to abortion, and more.In May, under the advice of attorneys and those closest to her, Rubino and her family left Texas with no plans to return. She worked at a clinic in Bristol, Virginia, where she largely served patients in banned southern states, before moving to DC in late August to help expand abortion services at a reproductive health clinic there.Rubino still struggles with the decision to flee Texas, while also acknowledging the legal inability to continue her calling.“There is a sense of guilt, of letting down the community I serve. Sometimes I feel like I gave up on these people,” she said.She also worries that a national abortion ban could once again pull her away from the community she now treats. She considers one day working in the UK or New Zealand.Rubino feels deeply anxious about the fate of the patients she has left behind and mentioned a recurring patient, a victim of domestic violence, whose partner blocked her access to birth control.“She’s going to call and I’m not going to be there,” said Rubino. “She’s not in a safe situation and we know staying pregnant can lead to more abuse, and even death by an abusive partner. The safest thing for her would be to get an abortion but now she’s not going to have that choice.”Dr Ghazaleh Moayedi: ‘Inhumane and illogical’ Testifying before Congress three separate times to oppose abortion bans and uplift the right to access, Dr Ghazaleh Moayedi has made her mark as an outspoken and passionate reproductive justice advocate for Texans.But the road wasn’t always clear for the doctor: unsure of what to do after graduating college, Moayedi’s friend recommended she take a nanny job. Her boss was Amy Hagstrom-Miller, the head of a network of abortion clinics and then major figure in Texas reproductive rights who would go on to lead several legal challenges against the state, including a 2016 US supreme court victory. Moayedi began working in Miller’s clinic, where she saw her interests collide.As a “brown, Muslim” n Iranian American woman who grew up in Texas, Moayedi quickly realized the majority of state abortion doctors – largely white men – did not reflect the diversity of the patients they treated, and vowed to fix that.“I could feel a palpable racial and cultural divide,” she said. “None of the doctors looked like the people we take care of. I wanted to be a provider that helped represent the communities we serve. I decided to go to medical school with that goal as a driving force.”Moayedi has worked in Texas abortion care since 2014, weathering the roller coaster of state abortion laws, including a 2020 order to ban abortion under the pretense of the Covid emergency, which, at the time, upended her plans to start her own practice.After SB 8, she transitioned her care to Oklahoma. When Oklahoma’s abortion law took effect, she switched gears, providing ultrasounds in Texas to those traveling to and from out-of-state abortion care. Moayedi then became uncertain if she could safely venture to states where abortion was still legal, as the Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, encouraged local prosecutors to go after providers shortly after Roe fell. She and abortion funds sued the state for legal protection, and paused their services in the meantime.After securing a court victory, Moayedi has worked to build an abortion and miscarriage telemedicine practice, still in the process of getting off the ground. She is now licensed in 20 states – but only half allow abortion telemed. She also travels to Kansas, a safe haven state, to provide care.“I’ve had to really pivot quite a bit. It’s been absolutely wild,” she said. “My practice doesn’t look anything like I thought it would. For now, my goal is to stay in Texas but we’ll see what happens.”Moayedi says the law’s “inhumane and illogical” impact is especially pronounced when she is treating a patient in another state only to discover they’re from not just the same city as her, but the same neighborhood.“Here we both are, hundreds of miles away from our home and support system, just to receive healthcare,” she said. “Moments like those just hit you in the gut.”As a complex family planning specialist, Moayedi constantly worries for patients with “potentially catastrophic” high-risk pregnancies, especially as the Texas law offers only vague medical emergency exceptions, leading patients to near-death experiences. She receives calls from colleagues wondering if pregnant patients with complications, like C-section scar ectopic pregnancies, can receive care in Texas. She often refers them out of state to be safe.“I really don’t have words to describe the deep, deep pain I feel,” said Moayedi. “These laws are insulting, disgusting, cruel, and absolutely pointless.”The provider and advocate expresses disappointment with the federal administration, who she feels has failed to meaningfully protect abortion providers and patients since SB 8 took effect.“The Biden administration’s response has been a limp handshake,” she said. “We want to see tangible, bold action to restore or at least prevent the further erosion of reproductive rights. We need unwavering support – not a leader who can barely say the word ‘abortion’.”Kathy Kleinfeld: ‘SB 8 was meant to be a fear tactic that paralyzed care’ Kathy Kleinfeld will never forget the desperation that swept over Houston Women’s Reproductive Services after SB 8 took effect. Anxious patients begged her and her staff to perform abortion care past the six-week mark, even offering money under the table and other favors.“They were crying and pleading with us, saying ‘I’ll do whatever you want,’” said Kleinfeld. “It was so heartbreaking, there was nothing we could do.”Patients – as well as clinic staff – held their breath during each ultrasound, hoping the pregnancy would fall under the state-mandated time frame. For those past the mark, Kleinfeld and colleagues became “dystopian travel agents” connecting patients with out-of-state care.After 30 years of providing abortion in Houston, Kleinfeld had never experienced anything so chaotic and devastating. Then Dobbs hit.“It felt like everything we experienced with SB 8 was magnified – it was like SB 8 on steroids,” said Kleinfeld. “The intensity, the confusion, the chaos all became so overwhelming.”While she was forced to halt abortion care, Kleinfeld did not want to leave her patients behind. One month after the fall of Roe, she regrouped, considerably downsizing her 5,000 sq-ft clinic and cutting her staff by more than half. She now provides pre- and post- abortion ultrasounds for those traveling out of state, as well as abortion clinic referrals. Her clinic is only one of two former independent abortion providers in Texas – and just a handful across the US – that have not closed or moved away.“We did not want to completely abandon pregnant people in Houston,” said Kleinfeld. “We felt it was still really important to adapt and provide this necessary service. It feels absolutely awful to not be able to offer abortion care, but at the same time, we feel grateful to be able to still help patients in whatever way we can.”Her clinic received around 1,200 visits this year, with most traveling to and from New Mexico, Colorado and Kansas.The fear unleashed by SB 8 two years ago still lingers today: Patients are scared to disclose that they want or have had an abortion; they are fearful to bring a partner or family member with them to a procedure out-of-state or even to the ultrasound at Kleinfeld’s clinic, worrying that a loved one may be in legal trouble for “aiding or abetting” care.“We still have to explain to patients all the time that it is not illegal to help someone obtain a legal abortion,” said Kleinfeld. “SB 8 was meant to be a fear tactic that paralyzed care and instilled anxiety in patients, and even after Dobbs, we are still seeing its impact.”Dr Alan Braid and Andrea Gallegos: ‘Waving our hands hands on top of a burning building’As a medical resident in 1972, Dr Alan Braid will never forget treating a 15-year-old girl in a San Antonio emergency room who was suffering from sepsis – a life-threatening blood infection – after a botched and illegal abortion, her vaginal cavity packed with rags. Braid and doctors did everything they could but the infection was so severe, she died a few days later from massive organ failure. That year, he saw another two teenagers die from illegal abortions.It was then that Braid realized that abortion care was vital and medically necessary, an inextricable component of overall healthcare. One year later, Roe would help solidify and protect Braid’s mission.For the next 45 years, he provided ob-gyn and abortion care in Texas. When Senate Bill 8 hit, it felt like 1972 all over again, he said.“To repeat history and expect a different outcome is insanity. Women will be injured and women will die – again – without access to healthcare,” said Braid.With a passion for reproductive rights, Andrea Gallegos joined her father’s practice as manager of Alamo Women’s Reproductive Services a few years ago. She describes the impact of SB 8 as “devastating” to patients, many of whom were saddled with multiple barriers to care. Even when staff would offer to pay for travel or the procedure itself, patients – still bound by the inability to find child care or time off work – couldn’t make the journey out of state.Braid felt like he had to fight back. In an act of overt defiance, the provider performed an abortion on a patient beyond the six-week limit. He was not only acting out of medical duty but hoped to invoke a legal challenge that would eventually halt SB 8.“I don’t think any of us really thought SB 8 would last – it’s so blatantly unconstitutional and just crazy, we figured the courts – even a court as conservative as the fifth circuit – would recognize the law needs to be stopped,” said Gallegos.While Braid’s intentional act of resistance attracted an outpouring of nationwide support, the lawsuits against him ultimately failed to halt SB 8, leaving the provider feeling largely defeated.He and his team continued to navigate the draconian law, routinely sending patients to their Tulsa, Oklahoma, clinic, where the caseload tripled within the first couple of months, placing a strain on the out-of-state provider.When Oklahoma’s governor signed into law an abortion ban – modeled after Texas’s SB 8 – in April 2022, Braid was forced to shutter the critical pipeline for Texans.“It felt like we were waving our hands on top of a burning building, trying to warn everyone else that this is what it’s going to look like for the rest of the country soon,” said Gallegos. “While we see the lack of access, the forced travel, the domino effect on surrounding clinics now everyday post-Dobbs, in Texas we were experiencing it first.”Following Roe’s demise, Braid was forced to close the doors to his San Antonio clinic and stopped practicing abortion care in Texas after nearly five decades. In May, he officially moved to Albuquerque, New Mexico, where he has set up a clinic in the safe haven state.Gallegos relocated to Carbondale, Illinois, in July, a spot nestled between abortion-hostile states, to oversee a new clinic there.Leaving Texas – and friends and family behind – is deeply “bittersweet” for the father-daughter duo: there is a sense of “abandonment” but also a recognition that the move was necessary.“It’s not easy to completely start over but I know this is where I’m supposed to be,” said Gallegos.For the abortion providers, it’s also a painful reminder of the growing inequity of reproductive healthcare across the US.“It hits me hard knowing geography has played such a significant role in privilege to access to what I consider basic healthcare,” said Gallegos. “Geography should not determine if you can have a safe or dangerous pregnancy. We are living in a devastating reality.”Braid, now in his late 70s, describes working in New Mexico as “refreshing”, as he can “just be a doctor” and not “have to call attorneys” for guidance every step of the way, as he did in Texas.However, he has left his home state – and the place where he learned to be a physician so many years ago – with a tinge of regret, wishing he not only provided one abortion in violation of SB 8, but several more, convinced that the act of rebellion would have eventually led to a successful court battle that brought down the law. His daughter seeks to allay his remorse.“I remind my dad that the law was so unprecedented, so hard to predict and navigate, none of us knew what would happen,” said Gallegos. “In the end, the whole point of SB 8 was to elicit fear in abortion providers and sadly, that’s exactly what it did.” More

From 2h agoGeorgia governor Brian Kemp has issued a state of emergency for the state that is set to last until 11.59pm on 8 September.“We are taking every precaution ahead of Hurricane Idalia’s landfall tomorrow, and I am taking this additional executive action to ensure state assets are ready to respond,” Kemp said on Tuesday ahead of Idalia.“Georgians in the expected impact area can and should take necessary steps to ensure their safety and that of their families. We are well positioned to respond to whatever Idalia may bring,” he added.The executive order said that Idalia “has the potential to produce severe impacts to citizens throughout south-central and southeast coastal Georgia”, and that potential flooding, downed trees, power lines, and debris may render “Georgia’s network of roads impassable in affected counties, isolating residences and persons from access to essential public services.”The Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, warned potential looters seeking to steal from people’s homes following the storm, saying: “You loot, we shoot.”“I’ve told all of our personnel at the state level, you protect people’s property and we are not going to tolerate any looting in the aftermath of a natural disaster. I mean, it’s just ridiculous that you would try to do something like that on the heels of an almost category 4 hurricane hitting this community,” DeSantis said in a press conference on Wednesday.
“Also, just remind potential looters that even you never know what you’re walking into. People have a right to defend the property. [In] this part of Florida, you got a lot of advocates [who] are proponents of the second amendment and I’ve seen signs in different people’s yards in the past after these disasters and I would say probably here: ‘You loot, we shoot.’”
World Central Kitchen, a non-profit founded by the celebrity chef and restaurateur José Andrés, mobilized its teams across western Florida ahead of Hurricane Idalia making landfall earlier today.WCK teams have prepared hundreds of sandwiches to provide immediate relief for residents.The Florida division of emergency management has issued a warning on hidden dangers of floodwaters.“Please do NOT walk, wade or drive through floodwaters as they can hide a variety of dangers,” the division said.Here are some graphics created by the Guardian’s visuals team on Hurricane Idalia’s path and direction:The Guardian has published an explainer on storm surges and the threat from storm surges from Hurricane Idalia.For the full story, click here:Here are some images of Hurricane Idalia coming through the newswires:The South Carolina governor, Henry McMaster, said that he does not think Hurricane Idalia will be as detrimental as other hurricanes that have swept through the state.“This is not as bad as some that we’ve seen. We don’t think it’s going to be as disruptive as some but it is going to be disruptive. There’s going to be high winds, a lot of water,” McMaster said at a press briefing on Wednesday.He added that the state is not going to have any evacuations, saying:
“We are not going to have any evacuations. We’re not have any closing of state agencies … This does not appear to be one that requires any evacuation orders or closing of state agencies but some of the schools are closed. Some of the schools are closed, we’re urging them to try to get back open back up as quickly as possible …
We’ve been through this before. We’ve been through a lot worse than this one appears to be, so we are ready.”
Georgia governor Brian Kemp has issued a state of emergency for the state that is set to last until 11.59pm on 8 September.“We are taking every precaution ahead of Hurricane Idalia’s landfall tomorrow, and I am taking this additional executive action to ensure state assets are ready to respond,” Kemp said on Tuesday ahead of Idalia.“Georgians in the expected impact area can and should take necessary steps to ensure their safety and that of their families. We are well positioned to respond to whatever Idalia may bring,” he added.The executive order said that Idalia “has the potential to produce severe impacts to citizens throughout south-central and southeast coastal Georgia”, and that potential flooding, downed trees, power lines, and debris may render “Georgia’s network of roads impassable in affected counties, isolating residences and persons from access to essential public services.”The Guardian’s Ankita Rao has tweeted photos of what she describes as “some of the worst flooding” in Tarpon, Florida, that her parents and friends have seen as a result of Hurricane Idalia.According to Rao, the access to and from one of her friend’s home has been flooded entirely.Other residents can be seen kayaking across the flood waters.Idalia has brought heavy flooding and damage to the state’s Gulf coast after it made landfall slightly before 8am ET on Wednesday as a category 3 storm.“I found them all to be laser focused on what their needs were and I asked them, but I think they’re reassured that we’re going to be there for whatever they need, including search and rescue off the shore,” Biden said of the governors of North and South Carolina, as well as Georgia, as he reffirmed federal assistance to southeastern states currently enduring Hurricane Idalia.“How can we not respond? My god, how can we not respond to those needs?” Biden said in response to whether he can assure Amricans that the federal government is going to have the emergency funding that they need to get through this hurricane season.“I’m confident even though there’s a lot of talk from some of our friends up in the Hill about the cost. We got to do it. This is the United States of America,” he added.“I don’t think anybody can deny the impact of a climate crisis anymore. Just look around. Historic floods. I mean, historic floods. More intense droughts, extreme heat, significant wildfires have caused significant damage,” Biden said.He added that he has directed the Federal Emergency Management Agency to redeploy resources, including up to 1,500 personnel and 900 Coast Guard personnel throughout the south-eastern states.Biden said that he approved an early request of an emergency declaration by Florida governor Ron DeSantis “in advance” of Hurricane Idalia’s arrival.He added that he spoke with the governors of Georgia and South Carolia and let each of them know that “if there’s anything the states need right now, I’m ready to mobilize that support.”President Joe Biden is speaking now about Hurricane Idalia.We will bring you the latest updates.Anthony White is in Perry, Florida where the small city is seeing widespread destruction as a result of Hurricane Idalia.He reports for the Guardian:Driving into Perry, a small, historic city with a population of just more than 7,000 on Wednesday morning, about 15 miles inland from the coast where Hurricane Idalia made landfall, the scene of destruction was jaw-dropping.Many residents had evacuated, especially after it was announced that some emergency shelters in the region would need to close because even they may not be able to withstand the impact of the storm.Approaching from Tallahassee, the state capital, 50 miles inland, where I left on Tuesday evening at the urging of relatives – having originally planned to ride out the hurricane – more and more streets and highways were blocked by fallen trees on the approach to Perry.There were power lines down all over the place and poles leaning, flood waters in some parts, and trees blocking even several lanes on both sides of the four-lane highway, forcing people to drive in the median. There was danger everywhere.For the full story, click here: More

From 8h agoSince the start of the year, Donald Trump has appeared at arraignments in courthouses in New York City, Miami and Washington DC, but reportedly may decide to skip a court appearance in Georgia and enter his plea in writing.Court access rules vary across the country, but Trump’s previous arraignments have generated a variety of scenes – all of which are unprecedented, since no other former president has faced similar criminal charges.Here are some of the images that emerged from his previous arraignments:All that said, Trump’s brief visit to the Fulton county jail last week to be formally arrested already produced its own iconic image:A federal judge found Rudy Giuliani liable for defaming two Georgia election workers by spreading unfounded conspiracy theories about their work around the time of the 2020 election. While the exact monetary damages he will pay remain to be determined, the judge has already ordered Giuliani to cough up tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fee reimbursements and penalties in the case. Separately, another judge rejected a key part of former Donald Trump aide Peter Navarro’s defense against his indictment for contempt of Congress, and jury selection in his trial will begin next week.Here’s what else went on today:
Top Senate Republican Mitch McConnell froze up during a press conference today, his second public health scare in as many months. The 81-year-old had sustained a concussion earlier this year that kept him away from Capitol Hill for weeks.
Sentencing for members of the Proud Boys militia group was delayed after a judge fell ill. The five defendants convicted on charges related to the January 6 insurrection will now be sentenced starting tomorrow.
Was Giuliani drunk when he was advising Trump around the time of his 2020 election defeat? Federal prosecutors reportedly want to know.
A Texas judge blocked a law passed by its Republican-dominated state government that would have blocked a host of local ordinances, including those mandating water breaks for some workers.
Trump is considering skipping his arraignment in the Georgia election subversion case next week, and instead opting to enter his plea in writing.
At the first debate of the Republican primary process last week, Florida governor Ron DeSantis sidestepped a pointed question from the moderators about his stance on abortion by telling the story of “Penny,” a woman who had survived an abortion.“She survived multiple abortion attempts. She was left discarded in a pan. Fortunately, her grandmother saved her and brought her to a different hospital,” said DeSantis, who is placing a distant second in most polls to Donald Trump for the GOP’s presidential nomination.The governor did not provide more details on Penny’s circumstances, but the Associated Press has partially unraveled the tale, which doesn’t quite line up with DeSantis’s recounting.Here’s more from their story:
The woman is 67-year-old Miriam “Penny” Hopper, a Florida resident who has been told that she survived multiple abortion attempts when she was in the womb. The first, she said in an interview, was by her parents at home and the second by a local doctor who instructed a nurse to discard her in a bedpan after inducing her birth at just 23 weeks gestation.
Hopper said she learned through her father that her parents tried to end the pregnancy at home. There were complications, and they went to the hospital. As the story goes, the doctor did not hear a heartbeat, gave her a shot and instructed the nurse to discard the baby “dead or alive.”
Hopper said she was born and made a squeaky noise but was put on the back porch of the hospital. She said her grandmother discovered her there alive the following day, wrapped in a towel, and she was rushed to another hospital. Hopper was told she stayed there for three-and-a-half months and survived with the help of an incubator. Nurses nicknamed her “Penny” because of her copper-red hair.
“My parents had always told me all my life, ‘You’re a miracle to be alive,’” she said.
Hopper has used her story to partner with anti-abortion organizations nationwide. But doctors who reviewed the story said her birth did not appear to be an attempted abortion and questioned the accuracy of the presumed gestational age.
When Hopper was born in the 1950s, before major advances in care for premature infants, babies born at 23 weeks would have had very little chance of surviving. Even into the early part of this century, the generally accepted “edge of viability” remained around 24 weeks. A pregnancy is considered full-term at 39 to 40 weeks.
Several OB-GYNs said it appears the case was treated as a stillbirth after a doctor was not able to detect a heartbeat. Because the fetus was presumed dead, the procedure performed in the hospital would not be considered an abortion, said Leilah Zahedi-Spung, a maternal fetal medicine physician in Colorado.
A newspaper article documenting Hopper’s miraculous recovery in 1956, the year after her birth, also complicates the tale. The story in the Lakeland Ledger says doctors at a hospital in Wauchula “put forth greater efforts” in keeping the 1 pound, 11 ounce baby alive before she was escorted by police to a larger hospital. She was admitted and placed in an incubator.
“It sounds very much like they anticipated a stillbirth. And when she came out alive, they resuscitated that baby to the best of their abilities and then shipped her off to where she needed to be,” Zahedi-Spung said.
Another news article from The Tampa Tribune said “doctors advised incubation which was not available at Wauchula,” leading to her transfer.
Hopper disputes that doctors initially tried to save her: “I don’t think there was any effort really put forth.”
OB-GYNs who reviewed the details also raised questions about Hopper’s gestational age at birth, saying her recorded birth weight more likely matches a fetus several weeks further along, around 26 or 27 weeks. They said the lungs are not developed enough to breathe at 23 weeks without intense assistance, making it improbable such an infant could survive abandonment for hours outdoors.
Here’s video of Joe Biden’s brief remarks about Mitch McConnell’s health scare today:At his ongoing press conference addressing the federal government’s response to Hurricane Idalia in Florida and the wildfire that destroyed Lahaina in Hawaii, Joe Biden said he would reach out to Mitch McConnell after he appeared to freeze up while addressing reporters today.“Mitch is a friend, as you know,” said the president, who served a senator for decades. “People don’t believe that’s the case, we have disagreements politically, but he’s a good friend. So I’m going to try to get in touch with him later this afternoon.”Biden spoke to McConnell last month after the top Senate Republican suffered a similar health scare.Ted Goodman, a political adviser to Rudy Giuliani, has released a statement in response to today’s federal court ruling that the former attorney for Donald Trump is liable for defaming two Georgia election workers.“This is a prime example of the weaponization of the justice system, where the process is the punishment. This decision should be reversed, as Mayor Giuliani is wrongly accused of not preserving electronic evidence that was seized and held by the FBI,” Goodman said.A judge in Texas has blocked a state law that would override a host of regulations passed by communities in the state – including ordinances in two cities that would mandate workers receive water breaks to protect them from worsening heatwaves.The city of Houston had sued over the law, and according to Bloomberg Law, Travis county district court judge Maya Guerra Gamble ruled it violated the state constitution and blocked its enforcement.Should Texas’s Republican-controlled government appeal, their petition would be considered by the state supreme court, where GOP justices control all nine seats.Here’s more from Bloomberg Law:
The law (HB 2127), which its opponents nicknamed the “Death Star” for its potential to broadly kill off local regulations, attempts to override the local governing authority that the Texas Constitution gives to cities with more than 5,000 residents, the City of Houston argued in its lawsuit challenging the measure. It would have been implemented starting Sept. 1.
Ruling from the bench following a Wednesday hearing, Judge Maya Guerra Gamble (D) of the Travis County District Court granted Houston’s request for summary judgment and blocked the preemption law, also denying the state’s motion to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction.
Republicans in the statehouse advanced the preemption measure earlier this year with support from business and industry groups, who said it would spare businesses from having to comply with a patchwork of local laws.
But it faced vocal opposition, including from worker advocates and LGBTQ+ rights groups. Its opponents said it would preempt safety protections such as Austin and Dallas laws requiring water breaks for outdoor workers as well as local nondiscrimination ordinances that prevent bias in employment, housing, and public accommodations.
The law creates a private enforcement mechanism, inviting businesses and individuals to sue cities to challenge ordinances they believe are preempted by state law. It bars local regulation in eight broadly defined policy areas unless specifically authorized by the state: agriculture, finance, insurance, labor, natural resources, property, business and commerce, and occupations.
Texas already specifically preempts cities from certain kinds of ordinances, such as minimum wages that apply to private businesses. Houston argued the Texas Constitution allows the state to preempt local regulations only where there’s a clear conflict between the state and local law.
Concerns have been mounting about the health of top Senate Republican Mitch McConnell over the past months.In March, the 81-year-old fell and sustained a concussion which kept him away from Capitol hill for weeks. Last month, he appeared to freeze up during a press conference, before being led away by other Republican senators.After that episode, reports emerged that McConnell, who has represented Kentucky since 1985 and led the Senate when Republicans held the majority from 2015 to 2021, fell earlier in July while disembarking from a plane at the airport. Here’s more on those episodes, from the Guardian’s Martin Pengelly:
Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the US Senate, suffered an initially unreported fall earlier this month, before a very public health scare this week revived questions about his age and fitness.
On Wednesday, while speaking to reporters at the US Capitol, the 81-year-old appeared to freeze for nearly 20 seconds. Another Republican senator, John Barrasso of Wyoming, a doctor, then escorted his leader away from the cameras.
Only four months ago, McConnell, who suffered from polio as a child, affecting his gait, fell and sustained a concussion, leading to a prolonged absence from Capitol Hill.
On Wednesday, he returned to work and told reporters he was “fine” shortly after his incident. An aide told reporters McConnell “felt lightheaded and stepped away for a moment. He came back to handle Q and A.”
But NBC News then reported that McConnell also tripped and fell earlier this month, suffering a “face plant” while disembarking a plane at Reagan airport, according to an anonymous witness.
Another source told NBC McConnell now uses a wheelchair as a precaution in crowded airports. McConnell did not comment on the NBC report.
As Republicans relentlessly claim Joe Biden, 80, is too old to be president, McConnell’s freeze and news of another fall revived questions about his own age.
Fox News has more details from top Senate Republican Mitch McConnell’s office on his apparent freezing up during a press conference this afternoon:“We are stopping the flow at the border,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in response to a question on New York City mayor Eric Adams’ comments he made about “any plan that does not include stopping the flow at the border is a failed plan.”
“What the president has been able to do on his own, without the help of Republicans in Congress, something that he had to do on his own again because Republicans refuse to give the funding necessary to deal with the situation, a broken immigration system that has been broken for decades.
What they choose to do is play politics,” Jean-Pierre said, referring to Republicans.
Earlier this week, Adams issued harsh words surrounding the increasing number of migrants in New York City, saying, “We have no more room.” In recent months, Republican state leaders have been shuttling migrants to larger Democratic-led cities including Los Angeles and New York City in opposition to current border policies.“We should take politics out of any type of disaster we see that the American people are having to suffer or deal with … This is not about politics,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said at a press briefing when asked about Hurricane Idalia.“[President Joe Biden] is going to be closely watching this, getting updated regularly to make sure that the people in Georgia, in South Carolina, in Florida are getting exactly what they need,” Jean-Pierre added.Additional updates on Hurricane Idalia can be found at our separate live blog here:Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell froze while speaking to reporters in Covington, Kentucky, on Wednesday.McConnell, 81, stopped for over 30 seconds after he was asked whether he would seek re-election.At one point, an aide approached McConnell and asked, “Did you hear the question, senator?” McConnell continued to remain unresponsive before he appeared to re-engage again, only to have several questions repeated to him multiple times, NBC reports.Last month, McConnell froze for 19 seconds while speaking to reporters on Capitol Hill before being escorted away temporarily.Democratic representative Ro Khanna of California has said that court dates interferring with Donald Trump’s campaign schedule is unfair.In an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt on Tuesday, Khanna said:
“My instinct on all of this is they’re not going to have trials in the middle of something that’s going to compromise a candidate’s ability to have a fair fight…
I just don’t see that happening in our country…
You can’t just say OK, because someone was president or someone is a candidate, that you’re above the law. Everyone is under the law, and that allegations, the evidence needs to be pursued. But what we’re discussing is the timing.
Trump, who turned himself into Fulton county jail last week in Atlanta, Georgia is currently facing 91 criminal charges across four indictments over interference with the 2020 presidential election results, illegal retention of confidential documents from the White House and hush-money payments.For the full story, click here:A federal judge has found Rudy Giuliani liable for defaming two Georgia election workers by reciting unfounded conspiracy theories about their work around the time of the 2020 election. While exact damages remain to be determined, the judge has already ordered Giuliani to pay tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fee reimbursements and penalties in the case. Separately, another judge rejected a key part of former Donald Trump aide Peter Navarro’s defense against his indictment for contempt of Congress, and jury selection in his trial will begin next week.Here’s what else has gone on today:
Sentencing for members of the Proud Boys militia group was delayed after a judge fell ill. The five defendants convicted on charges related to the January 6 insurrection will now be sentenced starting tomorrow.
Was Giuliani drunk when he was advising Trump around the time of his 2020 election defeat? Federal prosecutors reportedly want to know.
Trump is considering skipping his arraignment in the Georgia election subversion case next week, and opting instead to enter his plea in writing.
In an interview with a conservative commentator yesterday, the Guardian’s Martin Pengelly reports that Donald Trump made clear what he would do if he wins next year’s presidential election:
Donald Trump says he will lock up his political enemies if he is president again.
In an interview on Tuesday, the rightwing broadcaster Glenn Beck raised Trump’s famous campaign-trail vow to “lock up” Hillary Clinton, his opponent in 2016, a promise Trump did not fulfill in office.
Beck said: “Do you regret not locking [Clinton] up? And if you’re president again, will you lock people up?”
Trump said: “The answer is you have no choice, because they’re doing it to us.”
Trump has encouraged the “lock her up” chant against other opponents but he remains in considerable danger of being locked up himself.
Under four indictments, he faces 91 criminal charges related to election subversion, retention of classified information and hush-money payments to a adult film star. He denies wrongdoing and claims to be the victim of political persecution. Trials are scheduled next year.
Earlier this month, Politico calculated that Trump faced a maximum of 641 years in jail. After the addition of 13 racketeering and conspiracy charges in Georgia, Forbes upped the total to more than 717 years.
Trump is 77.
Both sites noted, however, that if convicted, the former president was unlikely to receive maximum sentences. Nor would convictions bar Trump from running for president or being elected. On that score, Trump dominates national and key state polling regarding the Republican presidential nomination.
Politico has obtained the full schedule for the sentencing of the Proud Boys militia group members convicted of seditious conspiracy over their roles in the January 6 attack:Enrique Tarrio, the group’s former leader, and Joseph Biggs, a self-described Proud Boys organizer, were to be sentenced today, but the hearing was called off when the judge fell ill, the Associated Press reports. Prosecutors are requesting some of the highest sentences yet in any of the January 6 prosecutions for members of the group:Rolling Stone reports that prosecutors from special counsel Jack Smith’s office have been asking witnesses if Rudy Giuliani was drinking while giving advice to Donald Trump around the time of the 2020 election:
Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office has repeatedly grilled witnesses about Rudy Giuliani’s drinking on and after election day, investigating whether Donald Trump was knowingly relying on an inebriated attorney while trying to overturn a presidential election.
In their questioning of multiple witnesses, Smith’s team of federal investigators have asked questions about how seemingly intoxicated Giuliani was during the weeks he was giving Trump advice on how to cling to power, according to a source who’s been in the room with Smith’s team, one witness’s attorney, and a third person familiar with the matter.
The special counsel’s team has also asked these witnesses if Trump had ever gossiped with them about Giuliani’s drinking habits, and if Trump had ever claimed Giuliani’s drinking impacted his decision making or judgment. Federal investigators have inquired about whether the then-president was warned, including after Election Night 2020, about Giuliani’s allegedly excessive drinking. They have also asked certain witnesses if Trump was told that the former New York mayor was giving him post-election legal and strategic advice while inebriated.
Stories about Giuliani’s drinking have circulated for a while, but as the Rolling Stone report makes clear, whether or not he was inebriated while advising Trump during the period when he sought to overturn his election defeat may prove crucial to the former president’s ability to defend himself from Smith’s indictment:
Federal prosecutors often aren’t interested in investigating mere alcohol consumption. But according to lawyers and witnesses who’ve been in the room with special counsel investigators, Smith and his team are interested in this subject because it could help demonstrate that Trump was implementing the counsel of somebody he knew to be under the influence and perhaps not thinking clearly. If that were the case, it could add to federal prosecutors’ argument that Trump behaved with willful recklessness in his attempts nullify the 2020 election — by relying heavily on a lawyer he believed to be working while inebriated, and another who he bashed for spouting “crazy” conspiracy theories that Trump ran with anyway.
And if federal prosecutors were to make this argument in court, it could undermine Trump and his legal team’s “advice of counsel” defense. To avoid legal consequences or even possible prison time, the ex-president is already wielding this legal defense to try to scapegoat lawyers who advised him on overturning the election — even though these attorneys were only acting on Trump’s behalf, or doing what Trump had instructed them to do.
“In order to rely upon an advice of counsel defense, the defendant has to, number one, have made full disclosure of all material facts to the attorney,” explains Mitchell Epner, a former Assistant United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey. “That requires that the attorney understands what’s being told to them. If you know that your attorney is drunk, that does not count as making full disclosure of all material facts.”
In July, Rudy Giuliani admitted in a court filing that he had made false statements about Ruby Freeman and her daughter Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, the two Georgia election workers who were suing him for defamation.But as the Guardian’s Michael Sainato reported at the time, an attorney for Giuliani said the admission was just part of their legal strategy.“Mayor Rudy Giuliani did not acknowledge that the statements were false but did not contest it in order to move on to the portion of the case that will permit a motion to dismiss,” Goodman said. “This is a legal issue, not a factual issue. Those out to smear the mayor are ignoring the fact that this stipulation is designed to get to the legal issues of the case.”That strategy appears to have backfired today, after a judge found Giuliani liable for defaming them and issued a summary judgment against him, which could result in the former Donald Trump attorney paying substantial damages.In a hearing before the January 6 committee last year, Moss and Freeman detailed how the campaign against them upended their lives. Here’s the report from the Guardian’s Martin Pengelly on their testimony:
In powerful and emotional testimony about the sinister results of Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election, a mother and daughter who were Georgia elections workers described how Trump and his allies upended their lives, fueling harassment and racist threats by claiming they were involved in voter fraud.
Testifying to the January 6 committee in Washington, Shaye Moss said she received “a lot of threats. Wishing death upon me. Telling me that I’ll be in jail with my mother and saying things like, ‘Be glad it’s 2020 and not 1920.’”
That was a reference to lynching, the violent extra-judicial fate of thousands of Black men in the American south.
Moss also said her grandmother’s home had been threatened by Trump supporters seeking to make “citizen’s arrests” of the two poll workers.
No Democratic presidential candidate had won Georgia since 1992 but Joe Biden beat Trump by just under 12,000 votes, a result confirmed by recounts. More