Biden, Joseph R Jr

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Investigators See No Criminality by E.P.A. Officials in Case on Biden-Era Grants

      by

      A contentious investigation that questioned the legality of E.P.A. grants has found very little to suggest government employees violated the law.A politically fraught investigation opened by the Trump administration into a Biden-era Environmental Protection Agency grant program has so far failed to find meaningful evidence of criminality by government officials, according to people familiar with the matter.The criminal investigation, initiated by Ed Martin, then the interim U.S. attorney in Washington, was cheered by Republicans, who have made unsubstantiated claims that the multibillion-dollar program, intended to fund climate and clean energy initiatives, was a political slush fund. The program, part of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, was one of President Biden’s most significant actions on the environment.Internal disagreements over the merits of the investigation raised alarms among current and former Justice Department officials, who were concerned that the Trump administration was misusing the vast power of federal law enforcement to discredit people, policies and programs President Trump disliked, such as clean energy projects.While the investigation of some entities that received money through the program is continuing, agents and prosecutors see little evidence of any criminal conduct by E.P.A. officials who oversaw the funding. The vendor portion of the inquiry has yet to yield any strong evidence of criminal conduct, according to people with knowledge of the investigation who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.Prosecutors and agents have shared their findings with senior political leaders at the Justice Department, according to people familiar with the matter.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      New Biden Book Points to His Decline and Democrats’ Cowardice: 6 Takeaways

      by

      The book, “Original Sin,” describes how Mr. Biden’s aides quashed concerns about his age. But the anonymous accounts show that many Democrats are still afraid to discuss the issue publicly.A forthcoming book that promises explosive new details on former President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s mental and physical decline while in the White House has revived the subject of how his aides and top Democrats handled his decision to run for re-election.The book, “Original Sin,” by Jake Tapper of CNN and Alex Thompson of Axios, chronicles how Mr. Biden’s advisers stomped out discussion of his age-related limitations, including internal concerns of aides, external worries of Democratic allies and scrutiny by journalists. Mr. Biden had long been gaffe-prone, but as he forgot familiar names and faces and showed his physical frailty, the authors write, aides wrapped him in a protective political cocoon.At the same time, the book is so reliant on anonymous sourcing — very few aides or elected officials are quoted by name — that it reveals the enduring chill that Mr. Biden’s loyalists have cast over a Democratic Party still afraid to grapple publicly with what many say privately was his waning ability to campaign and serve in office. Already, Mr. Biden has begun pushing back against reporting on the end of his presidency, re-emerging for interviews to try to shape his legacy.The book does not contain any astonishing revelation that changes the broad perception of whether Mr. Biden, now 82, was fit to serve as president. Instead, it is a collection of smaller occurrences and observations reflecting his decline. The authors write about a “cover-up,” though their book shows a Biden inner circle that spends more time sticking its collective head in the sand about the president’s diminishing abilities than it does scheming to hide evidence of his shortcomings.The New York Times obtained a copy of the book, which is set for release next Tuesday. Here are six takeaways.Biden forgot names, even of people he had known for years.During his 2020 campaign and throughout his presidency, Mr. Biden forgot the names of longtime aides and allies, according to the book.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Biden Is Being Evaluated for a ‘Small Nodule’ in His Prostate

      by

      It is common for a man of Mr. Biden’s age to experience prostate issues. His spokesman declined to elaborate on any details about his care.Former President Joseph R. Biden Jr. spent last Friday at a hospital in Philadelphia after a “small nodule” was discovered on his prostate that required “further evaluation,” according to a spokesman.It is common for a man of Mr. Biden’s age — he is 82 — to experience prostate issues, and his spokesman declined to elaborate on any additional details about his care.Mr. Biden left office as the oldest serving president in American history. He was dogged throughout his presidency by concerns about his age and his health, which ultimately led him to abandon his re-election campaign.In February 2024, when Mr. Biden was still president, his longtime doctor declared him “fit to serve” after he underwent a routine physical at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.Mr. Biden has kept a relatively low profile since leaving office in January, but he sat for two interviews last week after Mr. Trump’s first 100 days in office. The day before Mr. Biden was at the hospital in Philadelphia, he and the former first lady, Jill Biden, were in Manhattan for a joint interview on “The View.” Mr. Biden defended his record as president and his mental acuity.“They are wrong,” Mr. Biden said of reports that he had declined in his final year in office. “There’s nothing to sustain that.” More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Holocaust Museum Board Member Condemns Silence on Trump Firings

      by

      Board members clashed over email after a Biden appointee sent a scathing letter invoking the Holocaust as he denounced the museum’s silence on President Trump’s firings of board members.A member of the board that oversees the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum wrote a blistering letter to the other board members on Friday condemning the institution’s silence after President Trump’s recent firings and invoking the Holocaust as he warned about the dangers of not speaking out.In late April, Mr. Trump fired a number of board members appointed by former President Joseph R. Biden Jr., including Doug Emhoff, the husband of former Vice President Kamala Harris, as well as other former senior administration officials.The firings were widely criticized as an effort to politicize an organization dedicated to educating the world about one of the worst atrocities in history. But the museum’s statement at the time made no mention of the terminations and instead emphasized an eagerness to work with the Trump administration.Kevin Abel, who was appointed to the museum’s board by Mr. Biden in 2023, wrote in his letter on Friday that Mr. Trump’s “campaign of retribution” had been met with troubling “public silence” by the museum.Mr. Abel wrote that while it was “understandable” that museum leaders might fear speaking out at the risk of losing funding, it was vital to do so.“At this juncture of rising threats and a swirling atmosphere of hatred, it is ever more imperative that the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, the one institution that can most credibly call out the administration’s attack of its Council for what it is, not choose to remain silent,” Mr. Abel wrote, invoking Martin Niemöller’s words “about the danger of not speaking out,” which he noted were “inscribed on the wall of the Museum’s permanent exhibition.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      House Votes to Block California Plan to Ban New Gas-Powered Cars in 2035

      by

      Republicans, joined by a handful of Democrats, voted to eliminate California’s electric vehicle policy, which had been adopted by 11 other states.The House on Thursday voted to bar California from imposing its landmark ban on the sale of new gasoline-powered vehicles by 2035, the first step in an effort by the Republican majority to stop a state policy designed to accelerate the transition to electric vehicles.The 246-to-164 vote came a day after Republicans, joined by a few Democrats, voted to block California from requiring dealers in the state to sell an increasing percentage of zero-emission, medium and heavy-duty trucks over time. And, lawmakers also voted on Wednesday to stop a state effort to reduce California’s levels of smog.All three policies were implemented under permissions granted to California by the Biden administration. They pose an extraordinary challenge to California’s longstanding authority under the 1970 Clean Air Act to set pollution standards that are more strict than federal limits.And the legality of the congressional action is in dispute. Two authorities, the Senate parliamentarian and the Government Accountability Office, have ruled that Congress cannot revoke the waivers.California leaders condemned the actions and promised a battle.Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, called the move “lawless” and an attack on states’ rights. “Trump Republicans are hellbent on making California smoggy again,” Governor Newsom said in a statement.“Clean air didn’t used to be political,” he said, adding, “The only thing that’s changed is that big polluters and the right-wing propaganda machine have succeeded in buying off the Republican Party.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Judge Rejects Efforts to Free F.B.I. Informant Who Lied About Hunter Biden

      by

      The Trump administration had signaled it might try to undo the guilty plea and six-year prison sentence for Alexander Smirnov.A federal judge on Wednesday rejected a bid by the Justice Department to free a former F.B.I. informant who had pleaded guilty to lying about Hunter Biden and evading his taxes, saying that nothing about the facts of the case had changed and the man might still flee if released.The longtime informant, Alexander Smirnov, pleaded guilty in December in exchange for a six-year prison sentence, admitting that he had lied to the government when he claimed to have information about a multimillion-dollar bribery scheme involving President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter.Before Mr. Smirnov was charged and eventually admitted his guilt, Republican lawmakers had promoted his false claims about the Bidens in their push to try to impeach President Biden. During the 2024 presidential campaign, Mr. Smirnov’s allegations were also amplified by the Trump supporter Kash Patel, who is now the director of the F.B.I.Then, in an abrupt reversal this month, the Justice Department that had sent Mr. Smirnov to prison filed court papers seeking to have him released early, saying it was taking a second look at the case. That request was filed under instructions from senior Justice Department officials in Washington, according to people familiar with the decision who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal discussions.In Los Angeles on Wednesday, a U.S. District Court judge, Otis D. Wright II, rejected that request, saying neither prosecutors nor Mr. Smirnov’s lawyers had presented any evidence that Mr. Smirnov was any less of a flight risk than when he was arrested. The judge also pushed back on what he said were inaccurate claims by the lawyers about the precise terms of his plea deal.The parties in the case, the judge wrote, “present no new facts in their papers that would alter the court’s conclusion that Smirnov is a flight risk, let alone provide ‘clear and convincing evidence’ that he is not one.”The Smirnov case was an offshoot of the federal investigation into Hunter Biden, and the plea deal was negotiated by David C. Weiss, the special counsel who led the inquiry and then stepped down in January.During the Biden administration, the Justice Department argued against the release of Mr. Smirnov, who had been arrested at the Las Vegas airport after returning to the United States from overseas.In the department’s filing earlier this month, prosecutors said that “clear and convincing evidence for defendant’s nonviolent offenses of conviction shows that defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to the safety of any other person.”The judge’s order said that the government’s new argument was unconvincing, writing that “the fact remains that Smirnov has been convicted and sentenced to 72 months in prison, providing ample incentive to flee.” More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Fact-Checking Trump’s False Claims in His First 100 Days in Office

      by

      The president’s dizzying efforts to reconfigure the global economy, reshape the federal government and restrict immigration have been undergirded by a nonstop distortion of facts.President Trump, intent on enacting an expansive agenda, has moved at a dizzying pace in the first 100 days of his term, issuing a barrage of executive actions and seeking to expand the scope of his presidential power.Underlying those efforts is a nonstop distortion of basic facts as Mr. Trump has sought to reconfigure the global economy, reshape the federal government and restrict immigration.To justify his executive actions and policies, Mr. Trump has relied on false, misleading and hyperbolic claims, deflecting blame for catastrophes, boasting about purported achievements and trying to seek leverage with Ukraine in negotiating a peace deal with Russia.Here is a fact-check of Mr. Trump’s often-repeated claims.Federal CutsImmigrationTrade and the EconomyMilitary and International ConflictsFederal CutsIn his breakneck effort to transform the federal bureaucracy, Mr. Trump has offered misleading justifications. He has often echoed dubious claims about so-called fraud made by Elon Musk, the billionaire leading the cost-cutting initiative known as the Department of Government Efficiency.What Was Said“Could you mention some of the things that your team has found, some of the crazy numbers, including the woman that walked away with about $30 million?”— in a February appearance with Mr. MuskWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      U.S. Reverses Itself, Saying U.N.’s Gaza Agency Can Be Sued in New York

      by

      The Justice Department and the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office told a judge that an immunity law did not apply. A group of Israelis had accused the agency of assisting Hamas.Reversing a Biden administration position, President Trump’s Justice Department argued that a lawsuit could proceed in Manhattan that accuses a United Nations agency of providing more than $1 billion that helped to enable Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel.The lawsuit says that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency allowed Hamas to siphon off the organization’s funds to help build a terrorist infrastructure that included tunneling equipment and weapons that supported the attack, in which about 1,200 people were killed and roughly 250 were taken hostage.The Biden administration argued last year that UNRWA could not be sued because it was part of the United Nations, which enjoys immunity from such lawsuits.But the Justice Department told a federal judge in Manhattan on Thursday that neither UNRWA nor the agency officials named in the lawsuit were entitled to immunity.“The complaint in this case alleges atrocious conduct on the part of UNRWA and its officers,” the department wrote in a letter to Judge Analisa Torres of Federal District Court, adding, “The government believes they must answer these allegations in American courts.”“The prior administration’s view that they do not was wrong,” the department said.The letter was submitted by Yaakov M. Roth, a senior Justice Department official, and Jay Clayton, the interim U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More