More stories

  • in

    Two Chinese spies charged with trying to obstruct US Huawei investigation, Garland says – as it happened

    Two Chinese intelligence agents have been charged with attempting to disrupt the prosecution of a Chinese telecommunications firm, US attorney general Merrick Garland has announced.While he did not name the company, the Associated Press reports it is likely Huawei, the giant Chinese manufacturer of cellphones, routers and other communications devices.“Over the past week, the justice department has taken several actions to disrupt criminal activity by individuals working on behalf of the government of the People’s Republic of China,” Garland said in a speech.He announced charges against “two PRC intelligence officers with attempting to obstruct influence and impede a criminal prosecution of a PRC-based telecommunications company.”Here’s more on the case from the AP:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}The two men, Guochun He and Zheng Wang, are accused of trying to direct a person with the U.S. government whom they believed was a cooperator to provide confidential information about the Justice Department’s investigation, including about witnesses, trial evidence and potential new charges. One of the defendants paid about $61,000 for the information, the Justice Department said.
    The person the men reached out to began working as a double agent for the U.S government, and his contact with the defendants was overseen by the FBI.
    The company is not named in the charging documents, though the references make clear that it’s Huawei, which was charged in 2019 with bank fraud and again the following year with new charges of racketeering conspiracy and a plot to steal trade secrets. The justice department announced charges in three cases alleging Chinese intelligence officers attempted to steal technology, pressured a naturalized US citizen to return to the country and interfered with the prosecution of telecommunications giant Huawei, while warning Beijing against continued wrongdoing in the United States. Meanwhile, a prominent journalist who interviewed Trump 20 times warned he wasn’t only dangerous for democracy, he was also incompetent.Here’s what else happened today:
    Polls show tight races for Senate in Ohio and Wisconsin, and a Democrat in the lead in Pennsylvania as the party hopes to maintain its majority in Congress’ upper chamber.
    Supreme court justice Samuel Alito told a top Democratic senator he considered Roe v Wade settled law during his confirmation hearing in 2005 – then voted to overturn it 17 years later.
    Areas represented in Congress by 2020 election deniers tend to have seen their white population share decline, and be less well off and well educated than elsewhere, a New York Times analysis found.
    Republican senator Lindsey Graham’s subpoena compelling his appearance before a special grand jury investigating the campaign to meddle with Georgia’s election results two years ago is on hold thanks to conservative supreme court justice Clarence Thomas.
    Almost 17 years before he wrote the supreme court’s opinion overturning Roe v Wade, Samuel Alito told a prominent Democratic senator he considered the case guaranteeing abortion access nationwide settled law, The New York Times reports.“I am a believer in precedents”, Alito, then a federal judge, told Edward Kennedy. In a reference to one of the core justifications for the original Roe decision, he told Kennedy, “I recognize there is a right to privacy,” and “I think it’s settled.”The new details were taken from Kennedy’s private diary, portions of which will be published in the book “Ted Kennedy: A Life” set for release Tuesday, and reported by the Times. The senator was skeptical of Alito’s repeated statements indicating he wouldn’t try to overturn Roe, and also didn’t buy Alito’s explanation that he had written a memo outlining his opposition to Roe because he was seeking a promotion while working as a lawyer in the administration of Republican president Ronald Reagan. Kennedy voted against confirming Alito to the supreme court, and died in 2009. Last June, Alito helmed the five-justice majority that overturned Roe, and allowed states to ban abortion completely – in an apparent contradiction of what he told Kennedy.The state department has responded to the letter from progressive lawmakers urging the Biden administration to redouble efforts to find a negotiated solution to the war in Ukraine.According to CNN, the department’s spokesman Ned Price said Ukraine would be willing to engage in dialogue with Russia, but Moscow appears unwilling. Here’s more from his briefing:State Dept spokesperson Ned Price’s response to this today: “In order for diplomacy to take place, there have to be parties ready and willing to engage in diplomacy. Right now, we have heard from our Ukrainian partners repeatedly that this war will only end through diplomacy… https://t.co/jRkkGqtRcd— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) October 24, 2022
    …and dialogue. We have not heard any reciprocal statement or refrain from Moscow that they are ready in good faith to engage in that diplomacy and dialogue.”— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) October 24, 2022
    Hugo Lowell was at Merrick Garland’s press conference in Washington earlier and is filing updates to his Guardian report, which you can find here. Hugo’s report begins…Two Chinese intelligence officers tried to bribe a US law enforcement official as part of an effort to obtain inside information about a criminal case against the Chinese telecommunications company Huawei, federal prosecutors alleged in an indictment unsealed on Monday.The move to unmask the espionage operation – and charge the two agents with obstruction of justice – amounts to an escalation by the US justice department after it accused Huawei in February 2020 of conducting racketeering and conspiracy to steal trade secrets.“This was an egregious attempt by PRC intelligence officers to shield a PRC-based company from accountability and to undermine the integrity of our judicial system,” the attorney general Merrick Garland said at a news conference unveiling the indictment.The report in full:US accuses Chinese spies of plot to steal secrets in Huawei investigationRead moreIssue One Action, a “nonpartisan advocacy organization dedicated to uniting Republicans, Democrats and independents in the fight to fix our broken political system”, has released a report in which it names “the nine most dangerous anti-democracy candidates running to administer US elections”.Included are Jim Marchant of Nevada, running for secretary of state; Mark Finchem of Arizona, running for secretary of state; and Doug Mastriano of Pennsylvania, running for governor.For a story published by Guardian US today, Adam Gabbatt went to Pennsylvania to look at Mastriano’s campaign. He writes:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Mastriano is, by most measures, an extremist.
    As a state senator in Pennsylvania, he said women who violated a proposed six-week abortion ban should be charged with murder. Mastriano frequently attacks trans people, and has said gay marriage should be illegal, and that same-sex couples should not be allowed to adopt children.
    At an event this summer, organized by a pair of self-described prophets, Mastriano told his supporters: “We have the power of God with us.” He added that Jesus Christ is “guiding and directing our steps”. While working at the Army War College, an academy for military members, Mastriano posed for a faculty photo wearing a Confederate uniform.
    And as a key schemer in Trump’s bid to overturn the presidential election, Mastriano spent thousands of dollars chartering buses to Washington DC on January 6, where images showed him close to the violence as Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol.
    None of this stopped Mastriano, who was endorsed by Trump, from winning the Republican nomination for governor in May.Here’s Adam’s full piece:Doug Mastriano: is the Trump-backed election denier too extreme to win?Read moreSwitching focus for a moment from China to Ukraine, 30 liberal Democrats in Congress have signed a letter to Joe Biden, in which they call for Joe Biden to change course on the matter of the Russian invasion, to couple current economic and military support for Kyiv with a “proactive diplomatic push, redoubling efforts to seek a realistic framework for a ceasefire”.The lawmakers continue:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}This is consistent with your recognition that ‘there’s going to have to be a negotiated settlement here’, and your concern that Vladimir Putin ‘doesn’t have a way out right now, and I’m trying to figure out what we do about that.’ .css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}We are under no illusions regarding the difficulties involved in engaging Russia given its outrageous and illegal invasion of Ukraine and its decision to make additional illegal annexations of Ukrainian territory. However, if there is a way to end the war while preserving a free and independent Ukraine, it is America’s responsibility to pursue every diplomatic avenue to support such a solution that is acceptable to the people of Ukraine.The signatories are led by Pramila Jayapal, the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and prominent progressives including Cori Bush, Ro Khanna, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Jamie Raskin.As the Washington Post points out, “the appeal for a shift in strategy comes amid some of the most significant US-Russian diplomatic engagement in some time, as Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin recently talked with his Russian counterpart, Sergei Shoigu, for the first time in months. The two spoke by phone Friday and again on Sunday at Shoigu’s request, Austin wrote on Twitter.”Austin said he “rejected any pretext for Russian escalation & reaffirmed the value of continued communication amid Russia’s unlawful & unjustified war against Ukraine”.The Chinese government’s alleged misdeeds go beyond attempts to counter the prosecution of Huawei. Garland announced charges in two other cases – one involving technology theft and intimidation, and the other involving a pressure campaign to get a naturalized US citizen to return to China against his will.In the first, federal prosecutors in New Jersey indicted four people, including three Chinese intelligence officers, with using “the cover of a purported Chinese academic institute to target, co-opt and direct individuals in the United States to further the PRC intelligence mission” over 10 years from 2008, Garland said.They also attempted “to procure technology and equipment from the United States and to have it shipped to China,” and “stop protected First Amendment activities, protests here in the United States, which would have been embarrassing for the Chinese government,” Garland said.The second case involves seven people charged with undertaking “a multi-year campaign of threats and harassment to force a US resident to return to China,” Garland said. Two of the individuals indicted in the eastern district of New York were arrested yesterday, he said.“Defendants threatened the victim saying that, ‘coming back and turning herself in is the only way out,’” Garland said. “They showed up at the home of the victim’s son in New York. They filed frivolous lawsuits against the victim and his son and said it would be ‘endless misery for the defendant and son to defend themselves.’ And they made clear that their harassment would not stop until the victim returned to China.”“These cases demonstrate the government of China sought to interfere with the rights and freedoms of individuals in the United States and to undermine our judicial system that protects those rights,” Garland said. “The Justice Department will not tolerate attempts by any foreign power to undermine the rule of law upon which our democracy is based.”Two Chinese intelligence agents have been charged with attempting to disrupt the prosecution of a Chinese telecommunications firm, US attorney general Merrick Garland has announced.While he did not name the company, the Associated Press reports it is likely Huawei, the giant Chinese manufacturer of cellphones, routers and other communications devices.“Over the past week, the justice department has taken several actions to disrupt criminal activity by individuals working on behalf of the government of the People’s Republic of China,” Garland said in a speech.He announced charges against “two PRC intelligence officers with attempting to obstruct influence and impede a criminal prosecution of a PRC-based telecommunications company.”Here’s more on the case from the AP:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}The two men, Guochun He and Zheng Wang, are accused of trying to direct a person with the U.S. government whom they believed was a cooperator to provide confidential information about the Justice Department’s investigation, including about witnesses, trial evidence and potential new charges. One of the defendants paid about $61,000 for the information, the Justice Department said.
    The person the men reached out to began working as a double agent for the U.S government, and his contact with the defendants was overseen by the FBI.
    The company is not named in the charging documents, though the references make clear that it’s Huawei, which was charged in 2019 with bank fraud and again the following year with new charges of racketeering conspiracy and a plot to steal trade secrets. President Joe Biden is right now speaking at Democratic National Committee headquarters in Washington, where he’s warning about the consequences of a Republican takeover of Congress.Here’s the latest from Politico’s reporter on the scene:Fifteen days before the midterms, President Biden visits DNC headquarters in Washington and acknowledges that his party is running “against the tide” and casts doubt on the polls – but predicts a final surge for the Democrats pic.twitter.com/cMr6efUqi4— Jonathan Lemire (@JonLemire) October 24, 2022
    More Biden at DNC, about Republicans:”They’ll shut down the government, they say, and send the nation into default, which raises the price for everyone if we do not cut social security and Medicare. *dramatically whispers*”I ain’t going to do it.”— Jonathan Lemire (@JonLemire) October 24, 2022
    There’s a reason why Biden and the Democrats are quick to mention Social Security and Medicare. The two programs are relied by older Americans, who tend to be reliable voters, and any changes to them are considered politically perilous.Six years ago, liberal documentary filmmaker Michael Moore correctly predicted Donald Trump’s election win. Today, he’s calling the upcoming midterms for the Democrats, and explains why in an interview with The Guardian’s Edward Helmore:For the past month, Academy Award-winning documentary maker Michael Moore has been emailing out a daily missive “Mike’s Midterm Tsunami of Truth” on why he believes Democrats will win big in America’s midterm elections next month.Moore calls it “a brief honest daily dose of the truth – and the real optimism these truths offer us”. It also – at this moment in time – flies in the face of most political punditry, which sees a Republican win on the cards.Making predictions is a risky undertaking in any election cycle, but especially in this round with Democrats banking they can hitch Republican candidates to an unpopular supreme court decision to overturn federal guarantees of a woman’s right to abortion. Republicans, meanwhile, are laser-focused on high inflation rates, economic troubles and fears over crime rates.But political forecasting has become Moore’s business since he correctly called that Donald Trump would win the national elections in 2016 against common judgment of the media and pollsters businesses.The thrust of his reasoning that this will be “Roe-vember” is amplified daily in the emails. In missive #21 (Don’t Believe It) on Tuesday, he addressed the issue of political fatalism, specifically the media narrative that the party in power necessarily does poorly in midterm elections.“The effect of this kind of reporting can be jarring – it can get inside the average American’s head and scramble it,” Moore wrote. “You can start to feel deflated. You want to quit. You start believing that we liberals are a bunch of losers. And by thinking of ourselves this way, if you’re not careful, you begin to manifest the old narrative into existence.”‘I’m deadly serious’: why film-maker Michael Moore is confident of a Democratic midterm winRead moreWe’re awaiting an announcement from attorney general Merrick Garland about a “significant national security matter” that could involve another country. He’s set to speak alongside FBI director Christopher Wray at a press conference beginning at 1:30 pm eastern time.Here’s what else has happened today:
    Polls show tight races for Senate in Ohio and Wisconsin, and a Democrat in the lead in Pennsylvania as the party hopes to maintain its majority in Congress’ upper chamber.
    Areas represented in Congress by 2020 election deniers tend to have seen their white population decline, and be less well-off and well educated than elsewhere, a New York Times analysis found.
    Republican senator Lindsey Graham’s subpoena compelling his appearance before a special grand jury investigating the campaign to meddle with Georgia’s election results two years ago is on hold thanks to conservative supreme court justice Clarence Thomas.
    Rightwing supreme court justice Clarence Thomas has placed a temporary hold on a Georgia grand jury’s subpoena compelling the testimony of Republican senator Lindsey Graham as part of its investigation into efforts by Donald Trump’s allies to meddle in the state’s election results:BREAKING: Justice Clarence Thomas, acting unilaterally, issues a “shadow docket” ruling for Sen. Lindsey Graham, agreeing to temporarily halt Graham from testifying in probe of pro-Trump election interference in Georgia— John Kruzel (@johnkruzel) October 24, 2022
    Thomas is one of the court’s most conservative justices, but the move is not unusual, according to CNN supreme court analyst Steve Vladeck:To be clear, Justice Thomas issued an “administrative stay,” which blocks the Eleventh Circuit ruling only temporarily while the full Court decides whether to block it pending appeal.Such a ruling is *not* predictive of how the full Court (or even Thomas) will vote on the stay. https://t.co/CSrBaDg9JP— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) October 24, 2022
    Indeed, there are lots of recent examples of the Circuit Justice issuing such a temporary ruling and then the full Court *declining* to make it permanent.Folks will surely overreact anyway, but this isn’t a big deal — yet.— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) October 24, 2022
    Appeals court pauses order for Graham to testify before Atlanta grand juryRead moreThe Democrats’ two best hopes for stemming their losses in the Senate or even expanding their majority are in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and CNN has just released a poll indicating tight races in both.The states are home to the perhaps two best pick up opportunities for Democrats this year, with Republican senator Ron Johnson defending his seat in Wisconsin, while Pennsylvania’s is vacant after GOP senator Pat Toomey opted to retire.CNN’s new poll indicates Johnson has a slight edge over Democrat Mandela Barnes in Wisconsin, where 50% of voters back his candidacy against 49% for his challenger.In Pennsylvania, Democratic lieutenant governor John Fetterman is at 51% support against Republican Mehmet Oz, who was polling at 45%.The poll otherwise confirmed dynamics that have become well-known this election cycle. The economy is far and away voters’ top issue, with abortion a distant second. President Joe Biden is also unpopular with voters in both states, the survey finds.Districts whose congressional representatives have embraced conspiracy theories about the 2020 election tend to be poorer, less educated and have experienced declines in their white population, according to an analysis published by The New York Times today.The report suggests that racial anxiety is a major factor in voters’ willingness to embrace Donald Trump’s baseless claims of fraud in Joe Biden’s election win, in addition to economic stagnation and social maladies like the opioid epidemic. The report is a sprawling look at corners of the country that have grown so alienated they’re willing to support lawmakers who object to the certification of the 2020 election, despite fears the campaign poses a mortal threat to American democracy.Here’s more from the Times:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}When Representative Troy Nehls of Texas voted last year to reject Donald J. Trump’s electoral defeat, many of his constituents back home in Fort Bend County were thrilled.
    Like the former president, they have been unhappy with the changes unfolding around them. Crime and sprawl from Houston, the big city next door, have been spilling over into their once bucolic towns. (“Build a wall,” Mr. Nehls likes to say, and make Houston pay.) The county in recent years has become one of the nation’s most diverse, where the former white majority has fallen to just 30 percent of the population.
    Don Demel, a 61-year-old salesman who turned out last month to pick up a signed copy of a book by Mr. Nehls about the supposedly stolen election, said his parents had raised him “colorblind.” But the reason for the discontent was clear: Other white people in Fort Bend “did not like certain people coming here,” he said. “It’s race. They are old-school.”
    A shrinking white share of the population is a hallmark of the congressional districts held by the House Republicans who voted to challenge Mr. Trump’s defeat, a New York Times analysis found — a pattern political scientists say shows how white fear of losing status shaped the movement to keep him in power.
    The portion of white residents dropped about 35 percent more over the last three decades in those districts than in territory represented by other Republicans, the analysis found, and constituents also lagged behind in income and education. Rates of so-called deaths of despair, such as suicide, drug overdose and alcohol-related liver failure, were notably higher as well.The January 6 committee is likely finished with its public hearings into the deadly attack on the Capitol, and The Guardian’s Tom Ambrose surveyed readers about whether the committee’s work changed their mind about what happened that day, and Trump’s role in it. Here’s what one had to say:I think that hearings solidified what most people thought already: that Donald Trump and his allies coordinated to assault the foundations of democracy on January 6 because they were unhappy with the result of the 2020 election. The juxtaposing of previously aired and unaired video clips helped provide clearer and fuller picture of the chaos that unfolded that day.I believe that anyone who tuned into the hearings with an open mind saw January 6 for what it was: a disgraceful attack on American democracy that amounts to treason. I believe the committee was convincing in their effort to show premeditation by the president and his followers.I am worried that those who believe January 6 was justified will use this committee as an example as of how “the Democrats/liberals” are out to get the president and his followers. They demonstrate this belief daily as they continue to call for violence against elected officials and refuse to believe the truth that Joe Biden won the 2020 election.It feels like that their position is: either we won, or we were cheated. I fear that the upcoming elections in November will only be a taste of what kinds of vitriol await during the 2024 election. Patrick, 29, public school teacher from Chicago‘Trump should be held accountable’: Guardian readers on the Capitol attack hearingsRead more More

  • in

    Jury acquits Russian analyst of lying to FBI in Trump dossier case

    Jury acquits Russian analyst of lying to FBI in Trump dossier caseThis was the third case brought by special counsel John Durham in FBI’s own investigation into Russian collusion claims A jury on Tuesday acquitted a thinktank analyst accused of lying to the FBI about his role in the creation of a discredited dossier about Donald Trump.The case against Igor Danchenko was the third and possibly final case brought by the special counsel John Durham as part of his investigation into how the FBI conducted its own inquiry into allegations of collusion between the 2016 Trump campaign and the Kremlin.Sources in Russian analyst’s Trump dossier fabricated, prosecutors argueRead moreThe first two cases ended in an acquittal and a guilty plea with a sentence of probation.Danchenko betrayed no emotion as the verdict was read. His wife wiped away tears after the clerk read the final “not guilty” to the four counts he faced.The jury reached its verdict after roughly nine hours of deliberations over two days.The acquittal marked a significant setback for Durham. Despite hopes among Trump supporters that the prosecutor would uncover a sweeping conspiracy within the FBI and other agencies to derail his candidacy, the three-year investigation failed to produce evidence that met those expectations.The Danchenko case was the first of the three to delve deeply into the origins of the “Steele dossier”, a compendium of allegations that Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign was colluding with the Kremlin.Most famously, it alleged that the Russians could have blackmail material on Trump for his supposed interactions with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel. Trump derided the dossier as fake news and a political witch-hunt when it became public in 2017.Danchenko, by his own admission, was responsible for 80% of the raw intelligence in the dossier and half of the accompanying analysis, though trial testimony indicated that Danchenko was shocked and dismayed about how Steele presented the material and portrayed it as factual when Danchenko considered it more to be rumor and speculation.Prosecutors said that if Danchenko had been more honest about his sources, the FBI might not have treated the dossier so credulously. As it turned out, the FBI used material from the dossier to support applications for warrantless surveillance of a Trump campaign official, Carter Page, even though the FBI never was able to corroborate a single allegation in the dossier.Prosecutors said Danchenko lied about the identity of his own sources for the material he gave to Steele.The jury began deliberations Monday afternoon after hearing closing arguments on four counts. On Friday, the US district judge Anthony Trenga threw out a fifth count, saying prosecutors had failed to prove it as a matter of law.Trenga nearly threw out all of the charges before the trial began, citing the legal strength of Danchenko’s defense, but allowed the case to proceed in what he described as “an extremely close call”.TopicsFBIDonald TrumpUS elections 2016US politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    FBI was reportedly warned agents were ‘sympathetic’ to Capitol rioters – as it happened

    A top FBI official was warned that a large number of bureau employees were sympathetic to Capitol rioters who threatened the lives of law makers. NBC News reported that Paul Abbate, number two at the FBI, was warned about agents within the bureau showing sympathy to 6 January participants.The email, sent from an unnamed person, read: .css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}There’s no good way to say it, so I’ll just be direct: from my first-hand and second-hand information from conversations since January 6th there is, at best, a sizable percentage of the employee population that felt sympathetic to the group that stormed the Capitol… Several also lamented that the only reason this violent activity is getting more attention is because of ‘political correctness.The email also added that several agents felt that the Capitol riots were no different than racial justice protests that happened in summer 2020. Abbate responded to the email with: “Thank you [redacted] for sharing everything below.”The FBI declined to comment on the email, reported NBC. Washington continues to feel the aftershocks from yesterday’s January 6 committee hearing, and its vote to send a subpoena to Donald Trump. The congressional panel claims he was the singular figure responsible for the attack on the Capitol – but the summons is more of statement than an actual legal strategy. Nonetheless, it’s possible the former president may actually appear before the lawmakers. Reports indicate he would be open to doing so, but Trump has not publicly weighed in, yet.Here’s what happened today:
    The FBI’s No 2 waswarned that a number of its agents were sympathetic to the January 6 rioters. It’s unclear what impact that has had on the investigation into the attack.
    A new book argues that Democratic leaders missed an opportunity to get some Republicans onboard when they first impeached Trump in 2019, setting the stage for him to try to overturn the election the following year.
    Top lawmakers scrambled for help from the department of defense, the governor of Virginia and other parties after the Capitol was overrun on January 6, according to gripping footage shown at the congressional inquiry yesterday.
    The January 6 committee is investigating communications between a Secret Service agent and members of the Oath Keepers militia group, some of whom are currently on trial for seditious conspiracy charges in Washington.
    Congress may finally repeal the authorizations justifying American involvement in the Gulf war and the invasion of Iraq.
    A Democratic member of the January 6 committee said it will continue to wait for a response from Donald Trump to the subpoena it approved yesterday, which could compel his testimony before the panel investigating the Capitol attack.In a tweet, Adam Schiff rejected a letter Trump had sent to the committee’s chair that attacked its work and reiterated a number of baseless theories about alleged fraudulent conduct in the 2020 election:Trump’s unsworn “statement” about the work of @January6thCmte is not a substitute for testimony under oath.We await a serious response from the former president.Seven previous presidents have honored their responsibility to appear before Congress. Trump should do the same.— Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) October 14, 2022
    Trump has not said if he will honor the subpoena, though reports have emerged that he is open to speaking to lawmakers. Should he choose to fight it, it’s unlikely the court battle would be resolved before the committee’s mandate runs out at the end of the year.Trump and his allies’ attempts to interfere with the election in Georgia is the subject of yet another investigation ensnaring the ex-president, and CNN reports one of his operatives has testified as part of the inquiry.Last week, Scott Hall spoke for more than three hours to a special grand jury empaneled by district attorney Fani Willis in Fulton county, Georgia to investigate the meddling campaign, CNN said. While it’s not known what he told the jurors, Hall, a Republican poll watcher in Fulton county, was part of a group who may have improperly accessed voter information in another county.Here’s more from CNN:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}On January 7, 2021, the day after the attack on the US Capitol, Hall and others connected to Trump lawyer Sidney Powell spent hours inside a restricted area of the Coffee County elections office, where they set up computers near election equipment and appeared to access voting data.
    Willis’s criminal investigation recently expanded to include the breach of voting systems in the deeply-red Coffee County by operatives working for Powell.
    Hall did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
    According to court documents obtained by CNN, Hall’s role investigating supposed voter fraud in Georgia is also referenced in a November 2020 email that the head of Trump’s election day operations in Georgia received from the state’s Republican Party Chairman.
    “Scott Hall has been looking into the election on behalf of the President at the request of David Bossie. I know him,” David Shafer, the Georgia Republican Party chairman wrote on November 20, 2020, to Robert Sinners, the head of Trump’s Georgia election day operations.
    Shafer, who was among the 16 individuals who served as a fake Trump elector in Georgia, has been informed he is a target in the Fulton County DA’s criminal investigation.Trump has broadcast plans to run for president again in 2024 practically since leaving the White House last year, and many fear he would steamroll his opponents in the primaries to win the GOP nomination, as he did in 2016.But unlike the campaign that delivered his shock victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton six years ago, Trump is a known quantity by now, and some Republicans think he’s simply unelectable, no matter how popular he may be among a segment of the party. Republican former speaker of the house Paul Ryan made that very argument yesterday in an interview for the Teneo Insights Series:VIDEO: Former Speaker Paul Ryan says former President Donald Trump won’t be the Republican nominee in 2024, when the RNC gathers in Milwaukee: “We all know he’s much more likely to lose the White House than anybody else running for president on our side of the aisle.” pic.twitter.com/JCE2TsHu7A— Jason Calvi (@JasonCalvi) October 14, 2022
    The January 6 committee made clear in its hearing yesterday that it continued to have reservations about the Secret Service’s candor with its investigation.The agency tasked with protecting the president and other top officials has been under scrutiny ever since it was revealed it permanently deleted all of agents’ text messages from around the time of the insurrection, citing a pre-planned technology upgrade.MSNBC has a good rundown of the lawmakers’ comments about the Secret Service:Today, there was pushback, of sorts, from a spokesman for the agency, Politico reports:Some pushback from the Secret Service to yesterday’s 1/6 hearing and allegations witnesses weren’t forthcoming. Spox says they’re continuing to cooperate with the committee More on @politicongress: https://t.co/G4pTLfxAaT pic.twitter.com/yEbjvdSRB9— Nicholas Wu (@nicholaswu12) October 14, 2022
    Speaking of books, former vice-president Mike Pence will release a memoir about his time serving under Donald Trump on 15 November.The New York Times has obtained the book’s description included on its jacket, which pretty much lines up with what is known about his relationship with the former president:A day after the J6 hearing went over again the danger Pence was in that day, the jacket copy from his upcoming book is revealed. Includes this bit: pic.twitter.com/TiHtZOgVTD— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) October 14, 2022
    In August, Vermont’s Democratic senator Patrick Leahy – the most senior lawmaker in all of Congress – published a memoir reflecting on his decades in Washington politics.That included the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, which he opposed. Longtime Washington journalist Garrett M. Graff read Leahy’s book and noted that the senator’s opposition to the invasion had won the attention of some mysterious, like-minded individuals who sought the senator out:1) In the midst of the Iraq War debate, Leahy was one of the few Senators pushing back against the Bush admin race to war and the threats of WMDs. He’d been reading the classified intel that the Bush admin was providing to Congress and had real doubts that it justified war….— Garrett M. Graff (@vermontgmg) October 14, 2022
    2) The Sunday after he read the intel, he was out walking with his wife in his McLean neighborhood when “two fit joggers trailed behind us. They stopped and asked what I thought of the intelligence briefings I’d been getting.”…— Garrett M. Graff (@vermontgmg) October 14, 2022
    3) The joggers asked Leahy if the briefers had showed him “File Eight”? Leahy writes, “It was obvious from the look on my face that I had not seen such a file. They suggested I should and that I might find it interesting.”….— Garrett M. Graff (@vermontgmg) October 14, 2022
    4) Leahy went back to the intel officers at the Capitol SCIF and requested “File Eight,” and it contradicted what the Bush administration was saying publicly about the WMDs….— Garrett M. Graff (@vermontgmg) October 14, 2022
    5) A few days later, Leahy and his wife are out walking in the neighborhood again and the same two joggers pass by, stop, and say, basically, “We heard you read Five Eight. Isn’t it interesting? Now you should ask for File Twelve” ….— Garrett M. Graff (@vermontgmg) October 14, 2022
    6) [[Leahy explained to me when I asked him about this incident this month that “File Eight” and “File Twelve” are pseudonyms for specific secret codeword names the joggers told him to ask for.]] ….— Garrett M. Graff (@vermontgmg) October 14, 2022
    7) The next day, Leahy again goes to the Capitol SCIF and asks for “File Twelve.” It again contradicts what VP Cheney was saying publicly. Leahy decides to vote against the war based on these secret reports and tips…— Garrett M. Graff (@vermontgmg) October 14, 2022
    8) I asked @senatorleahy about this incident when I interviewed him at @bearpondbooks earlier this month, if he knew the joggers ever, and he said, “You don’t understand—I didn’t *want* to know who they were.” …— Garrett M. Graff (@vermontgmg) October 14, 2022
    A movement is gathering in the Senate to repeal Congress’ authorizations allowing the United States to attack Iraq.Democratic senator Tim Kaine and Republican senator Todd Young are backing a renewed effort to pass a bill repealing the two Authorizations for Use of Military Force enacted in 2002 and 1991, which gave legal justification for America’s involvement in the Iraq and Gulf wars, respectively. On October 16, 2002, Congress voted to authorize the use of military force against the regime of Saddam Hussein.As we mark the 20th anniversary, @TimKaine and I are calling for repeal of the 2002 AUMF, which the United States no longer requires. https://t.co/6zkMPx34o2— Senator Todd Young (@SenToddYoung) October 14, 2022
    The current war authorities are outdated, unnecessary, and could be subject to misuse by future presidents.Our bipartisan legislation will repeal the 1991 and 2002 AUMFs and reinstate Congress’ constitutionally-mandated oversight role of declaring and ending wars.— Senator Todd Young (@SenToddYoung) October 14, 2022
    We owe it to our nation’s service members, military families, and veterans to pass this legislation repealing the 2002 AUMF and formalize the end of the Iraq War.— Senator Todd Young (@SenToddYoung) October 14, 2022
    A similar attempt passed the House last year and had Joe Biden’s support, but ultimately didn’t make it through the Senate. The latest effort is expected to be included in a defense spending bill that will be a top priority when both houses of Congress reconvene next month.Few have embraced the baseless conspiracies about the 2020 election like Donald Trump, and he’s widely expected to run again for the presidency in 2024. The big question is: when will he announce it? Democrats hope he does so before the midterm elections, so they can refocus voters’ attention on all that went on during his administration.Politico reports that the former president is keeping it vague:Trump said at a Mar-a-Lago fundraiser last night that a ‘24 announcement was coming “very soon” and that people would be “very happy,” per two attendees— Alex Isenstadt (@politicoalex) October 14, 2022
    Meanwhile, Republican senators Tom Cotton and Tim Scott have both taken steps indicating they are contemplating a 2024 run, according to Politico.More than two-thirds of Republicans seeking office this November have cast doubt on the results of the 2020 election, reported the New York Times..css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}They include candidates for the U.S. House and Senate, and the state offices of governor, secretary of state and attorney general — many with clear shots to victory, and some without a chance. They are united by at least one issue: They have all expressed doubt about the legitimacy of the 2020 election. And they are the new normal of the Republican Party.
    More than 370 people — a vast majority of Republicans running for these offices in November — have questioned and, at times, outright denied the results of the 2020 election despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, according to a monthslong New York Times investigation. These candidates represent a sentiment that is spreading in the Republican Party, rupturing a bedrock principle of democracy: that voters decide elections and candidates accept results.Read the full article here.Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden released a statement on a Thursday shooting in Raleigh, North Carolina, where five people were killed and two were injured.The suspect, a 15-year old white male, is in custody and in critical condition.From the White house press office:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Jill and I are grieving with the families in Raleigh, North Carolina, whose loved ones were killed and wounded in yet another mass shooting in America. We are thinking of yet another community shaken and shattered as they mourn the loss of friends and neighbors, including an off-duty police officer.As we mourn with the people of Raleigh, we are grateful for the law enforcement and other first responders, including federal law enforcement who were on the scene last night and into this morning. My Administration is working closely with Governor Cooper to assist local authorities in this investigation to the fullest extent needed. Enough. We’ve grieved and prayed with too many families who have had to bear the terrible burden of these mass shootings. Too many families have had spouses, parents, and children taken from them forever. This year, and even in just the five months since Buffalo and Uvalde, there are too many mass shootings across America, including ones that don’t even make the national news.
    For the lives we’ve lost and the lives we can save, I took historic action to stop gun violence in our nation, including signing the most significant gun safety law in nearly 30 years. But we must do more. We must pass an assault weapons ban. The American people support this commonsense action to get weapons of war off our streets. House Democrats have already passed it. The Senate should do the same. Send it to my desk and I’ll sign it. May God bless our fellow Americans we lost and their families and may He grant the wounded the strength to recover in Raleigh, North Carolina.A top FBI official was warned that a large number of bureau employees were sympathetic to Capitol rioters who threatened the lives of law makers. NBC News reported that Paul Abbate, number two at the FBI, was warned about agents within the bureau showing sympathy to 6 January participants.The email, sent from an unnamed person, read: .css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}There’s no good way to say it, so I’ll just be direct: from my first-hand and second-hand information from conversations since January 6th there is, at best, a sizable percentage of the employee population that felt sympathetic to the group that stormed the Capitol… Several also lamented that the only reason this violent activity is getting more attention is because of ‘political correctness.The email also added that several agents felt that the Capitol riots were no different than racial justice protests that happened in summer 2020. Abbate responded to the email with: “Thank you [redacted] for sharing everything below.”The FBI declined to comment on the email, reported NBC. Washington continues to feel the aftershocks from yesterday’s January 6 committee hearing, and its vote to send a subpoena to Donald Trump. The congressional panel claims he was the singular figure responsible for the attack on the Capitol – but the summons is more of statement than an actual legal strategy. Nonetheless, it’s possible the former president may actually appear before the lawmakers. Reports indicate he would be open to doing so, but Trump has not publicly weighed in, yet.Here’s what has happened today so far:
    A new book argues that Democratic leaders missed an opportunity to get some Republicans onboard when they first impeached Trump in 2019, setting the stage for him to try to overturn the election the following year.
    Top lawmakers scrambled for help from the department of defense, the governor of Virginia and other parties after the Capitol was overrun on January 6, according to gripping footage shown at the congressional inquiry yesterday.
    The January 6 committee is investigating communications between a Secret Service agent and members of the Oath Keepers militia group, some of whom are currently on trial for seditious conspiracy charges in Washington.
    Many people testified to the January 6 committee. Doing so did not come without costs.Here’s what Alyssa Farah, a former communications director in the Trump White House, said on “The View” about happened after the panel aired her testimony:”When I spoke out: death threats, harassment, I’ve been called a whore … It was young women that stepped up and came forward and gave the facts.”— “The View” co-host and former Trump Communications Director Alyssa Farah details her experience testifying before 1/6 Committee pic.twitter.com/mG2roFTDov— The Recount (@therecount) October 14, 2022
    And here is what she told the committee:”He was looking at the TV and he said, ‘Can you believe I lost to this fucking guy?'”— Former Trump Communications Director Alyssa Farah recalling what she says Trump said to her about a week after the election was called. pic.twitter.com/ckRbuiyYBs— The Recount (@therecount) October 13, 2022
    Did the January 6 committee’s hearings change your mind about what happened that day?Were you surprised by the evidence presented? Or are you wondering what the big deal is?Whatever your answers to these questions, the Guardian’s community team is looking for readers’ input, and has a survey you can fill out at the link below:US residents: share your views of the January 6 hearingsRead more More

  • in

    Sources in Russian analyst’s Trump dossier fabricated, prosecutors argue

    Sources in Russian analyst’s Trump dossier fabricated, prosecutors argueIgor Danchenko, who played a vital role in creating the Steele dossier, has been indicted on five counts of lying to the FBI A Russian analyst who played a major role in the creation of a flawed dossier about Donald Trump fabricated one of his own sources and concealed the identity of another when interviewed by the FBI, prosecutors said Tuesday.The allegations were aired during opening statements in the trial of Igor Danchenko, who is indicted on five counts of making false statements to the FBI.US justice department says Trump didn’t turn over all documents – reportRead moreThe FBI interviewed Danchenko on multiple occasions in 2017 as it tried to corroborate allegations in what became known as the “Steele dossier”.That dossier, by the British spy Christopher Steele – commissioned by Democrats during the 2016 presidential campaign – included allegations of contact between the Trump campaign and Russian government officials, as well as allegations that the Russians may have held compromising information over Trump in the form of videos showing him engaged in salacious sexual activity in a Moscow hotel.Specifically, prosecutors say, Danchenko lied when he said he obtained some information in an anonymous phone call from a man he believed to be Sergei Millian, a former head of the Russian American Chamber of Commerce.The prosecutor Michael Keilty told jurors in US district court in Alexandria that Danchenko had never spoken with Millian and that phone records showed he had never received an anonymous phone call at the time Danchenko claimed it occurred.Prosecutors also say Danchenko lied when he said he never “talked” with a man named Charles Dolan about the allegations contained in the dossier. Prosecutors say there is evidence that Danchenko “spoke with Mr Dolan over email” about very specific items that showed up in the dossier.The FBI needed to know that Dolan was an important source for Danchenko, Keilty said, because Dolan is a Democratic operative who has worked on the presidential campaign of every Democratic candidate since Jimmy Carter, and thus would have had motivation to fabricate or embellish allegations against Trump.“Those lies mattered,” Keilty said.But Danchenko’s attorney, Danny Onorato, told jurors that his client had been completely truthful with the FBI.He pointed out that Danchenko had never said he was certain that Millian was the source of the anonymous call but that he had good reason to believe it. The government’s case required jurors to become “mind readers” to assess Danchenko’s subjective belief about the source of the phone call, Onorato said.And while phone records might not show a call, Onorato said, the government had no idea whether a call could have been placed with a mobile app rather than a traditional telephone provider. Indeed, Onorato said, it made more sense that such a call would have occurred using an internet app because so many of them conceal the source of the call, and the caller wanted to be anonymous.As for the allegations about his discussions with Dolan, Onorato said, Danchenko had answered the question truthfully because the two had not “talked” – but rather had conducted a written exchange. If the FBI had wanted to know about email exchanges, it should have asked a different question, Onorato said.“The law doesn’t let you rewrite the dictionary,” Onorato said.Keilty, in his opening, acknowledged to jurors that evidence would show the FBI made errors in conducting its investigations, but he said that shouldn’t exonerate Danchenko.“A bank robber doesn’t get a pass just because the security guard was asleep,” Keilty said.The first prosecution witness was the FBI analyst Brian Auten, who testified that information from the Steele dossier had been used to support a surveillance warrant against a Trump campaign official, Carter Page.Under questioning from Durham, Auten testified that the dossier had been used to bolster the surveillance application even though the FBI couldn’t corroborate its allegations.Auten said the FBI had checked with other government agencies to see if they had corroboration but nothing had come back. Auten and other FBI agents had even met with Steele in the United Kingdom in 2016 and offered him as much as $1m if he could supply corroboration for the allegations in the dossier, but none had been provided.Danchenko is the third person to be prosecuted by the special counsel John Durham, who was appointed to investigate the origins of “Crossfire Hurricane” – the designation given to the FBI’s 2016 investigation into Trump’s Russia connections. It is also the first of Durham’s cases that delves deeply into the origins of the dossier, which Trump derided as fake news and a political witch-hunt.TopicsFBIDonald TrumpDemocratsRussiaUS elections 2016US politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    DoJ pushes back on Trump’s claims it planted evidence at Mar-a-Lago

    DoJ pushes back on Trump’s claims it planted evidence at Mar-a-Lago Agency files slightly amended list of seized materials and an affidavit that the list reflects what was taken during search The Department of Justice has pushed back on the unsubstantiated claims from Donald Trump that the agency planted evidence during its search of Mar-a-Lago, submitting a slightly amended list of seized materials and an affidavit that the list reflects what was taken during the 8 August search.The FBI submitted a first version of the inventory list several weeks ago. It only had one business day to compile the first list but had more time to submit the most recent version, reported CNN.The agency also said that, in the updated version, it filtered out potentially privileged items.“I am not aware of any documents or materials seized from the Premises on that date by the FBI that are not reflected in the Revised Detailed Property Inventory … other than materials that the Privilege Review Team has not provided to the Case Team,” wrote an FBI agent in the affidavit.The unnamed agent noted that changes between the two versions were “minor”.Judge Raymond Dearie, the special master appointed to review the documents case, requested that the FBI submit an inventory to provide a “full and accurate” picture of what was obtained in the search.Dearie’s request came after Trump and several allies claimed, without evidence, that the FBI planted items during its search of the Florida mansion.Dearie has given Trump’s lawyers until Friday to provide any evidence to back up the accusation that the agency is “incorrectly describing” any materials. “This submission shall be Plaintiff’s final opportunity to raise any factual dispute as to the completeness and accuracy of the Detailed Property Inventory,” Dearie wrote.TopicsDonald TrumpMar-a-LagoUS politicsFBInewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Trump: US justice department appeals judge’s Mar-a-Lago investigation hold

    Trump: US justice department appeals judge’s Mar-a-Lago investigation holdDoJ seeks to continue reviewing a batch of classified documents seized during an FBI search of Donald Trump’s Florida home The justice department asked a federal appeals court on Friday to lift a judge’s order that temporarily barred it from reviewing a batch of classified documents seized during an FBI search of former president Donald Trump’s Florida home last month.The department told the 11th circuit US court of appeals in Atlanta that the judge’s hold, imposed last week, had impeded the “government’s efforts to protect the nation’s security” and interfered with its investigation into the presence of top-secret information at Mar-a-Lago. It asked the court to remove that order so work could resume, and to halt a judge’s directive forcing the department to provide the seized classified documents to an independent arbiter for his review.Special master in Trump documents case described as fair and no-nonsenseRead more“The government and the public would suffer irreparable harm absent a stay” of the order, department lawyers wrote in their brief to the appeals court.US district judge Aileen Cannon’s appointment of a so-called special master to review the documents, and the resulting legal tussle it has caused, appear certain to slow by weeks the department’s investigation into the holding of classified documents at the Florida property after Trump left office. The justice department has been investigating possible violations of multiple statutes, including under the Espionage Act, but it remains unclear whether Trump, who has been laying the groundwork for a potential presidential run, or anyone else might be charged.The FBI says it took about 11,000 documents, including roughly 100 with classification markings found in a storage room and an office, while serving a court-authorized search warrant at the home on 8 August. Weeks after the search, Trump lawyers asked a judge to appoint a special master to conduct an independent review of the records.Cannon granted the request last week, assigning a special master to review the records and weed out any that may be covered by claims of attorney-client or executive privilege. She directed the department to halt its use of the classified documents for investigative purposes until further court order, or until the completion of the special master‘s work.On Thursday night, she assigned Raymond Dearie, the former chief judge of the federal court based in Brooklyn, to serve in the role. She also declined to lift her earlier order, citing ongoing disputes about the nature of the documents that she said merited a neutral review by an outside arbiter.“The Court does not find it appropriate to accept the Government’s conclusions on these important and disputed issues without further review by a neutral third party in an expedited and orderly fashion,” she wrote.The justice department on Friday night told the appeals court that Cannon’s injunction “unduly interferes with the criminal investigation”, prohibiting investigators from “accessing the seized records to evaluate whether charges are appropriate”. It also prevents the FBI from using the seized records in its criminal investigation to determine which documents, if any, were disclosed and to whom, the department said.Though Cannon has said investigators are free to do other investigative work that did not involve a review of the documents, the department said on Friday that that was largely impractical. Noting the discovery of dozens of empty folders at Mar-a-Lago marked classified, it said the judge’s hold appeared to bar it from “further reviewing the records to discern any patterns in the types of records that were retained, which could lead to identification of other records still missing”.The department also asked the appeals court to reject Cannon’s order that it provide the newly appointed special master with the classified documents, suggesting there was no reason for the arbiter to review highly sensitive records that did not involve questions of legal privilege.“Plaintiff has no claim for the return of those records, which belong to the government and were seized in a court-authorized search,” department lawyers wrote. “The records are not subject to any possible claim of personal attorney-client privilege. And neither Plaintiff nor the court has cited any authority suggesting that a former President could successfully invoke executive privilege to prevent the Executive Branch from reviewing its own records.”Cannon has directed Dearie to complete his work by 30 November and to prioritize the review of the classified documents. She directed the justice department to permit the Trump legal team to inspect the seized classified records with “controlled access conditions” something government lawyers said on Friday was needless and harmful.On Friday, Dearie, a former federal prosecutor, scheduled a preliminary conference with Trump lawyers and justice department lawyers for Tuesday afternoon.TopicsDonald TrumpUS politicsTrump administrationFBIMar-a-LagonewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Judge proposed by Trump named special master in Mar-a-Lago records case

    Judge proposed by Trump named special master in Mar-a-Lago records caseJudge Cannon appointed Judge Raymond Dearie to vet documents and denied the DoJ’s plea to continue reviewing the seized records A federal judge has named Raymond Dearie, a senior US district judge with experience handling US national security matters, as an independent arbiter to vet records seized by the FBI from Donald Trump’s Florida estate in an ongoing criminal investigation.Mar-a-Lago documents: Trump delaying tactics causing ‘irreparable harm’ – DoJRead moreFlorida-based US district judge Aileen Cannon on Thursday appointed Dearie to serve as a special master in the legal fight between Trump and the Department of Justice over government documents the former president kept at his Florida resort.Dearie was one of two candidates for the post proposed by the former president, and the US justice department had said it would not oppose his appointment.In her order, Cannon also rejected the justice department’s demand that prosecutors would be allowed to continue their review of the seized records while the dispute is ongoing, and their assertion that the investigation is urgent due to the highly classified and sensitive material in the records.“The court does not find it appropriate to accept the government’s conclusions on these important and disputed issues without further review by a neutral third party in an expedited and orderly fashion,” Cannon said in the ruling.Dearie, who is 78 and based in Brooklyn, is tasked with deciding whether any of the documents seized by the FBI during the August search are privileged – either due to attorney-client confidentiality or through a legal principle called executive privilege – and should be off limits to federal investigators.Dearie has until 30 November – after the midterms – to finish the review. Trump will be required to pay costs associated with the special master.Earlier this month, Cannon had granted a request by Trump’s lawyers to name a special master to vet the seized records. Mar-a-Lago a magnet for spies, officials warn after nuclear file reportedly foundRead moreTrump is under investigation by the justice department for retaining government records – some of which were marked as highly classified, including “Top Secret” – at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach after leaving office in January 2021. During a search of the property, FBI agents seized more than 11,000 records and 48 empty folders marked classified.The justice department also is looking into possible obstruction of the investigation after it found evidence that records may have been removed or concealed from the FBI when it sent agents to the property in June to try to recover all classified documents.Dearie served as US attorney in Brooklyn before being appointed to the federal bench there by Republican president Ronald Reagan in 1986, and was chief judge of that court from 2007 to 2011. He assumed what is called senior status – a sort of semi-retirement with a reduced case load – in 2011, a role in which he continues to serve.The justice department had said in a court filing on Monday that Dearie’s experience as a judge qualified him for the special master role, but opposed the other candidate proposed by Trump’s team, private attorney Paul Huck. Trump’s lawyers opposed the two retired federal judges proposed by the department.On the bench, Dearie was one of multiple judges presiding over cases against several men accused in 2009 of plotting to bomb New York City’s subway system at the direction of al-Qaida leaders.Dearie was appointed in 2011 to the foreign intelligence surveillance court, which reviews warrant applications from the US government on matters of national security, where he served until 2019.In 2017, he was one of four federal judges who approved warrants used to surveil former Trump campaign aide Carter Page amid concern about Trump campaign contacts with Russians, according to papers released to media outlets that sued for the records. The justice department had opposed Trump’s request for a special master to review the seized documents to see if any should be withheld from investigators as privileged. In ruling in favor of Trump’s request for a special master, Cannon rejected the department’s arguments that the records belong to the government and that because Trump is no longer president he cannot claim executive privilege. Cannon was appointed to the bench by Trump in 2020.The documents probe is one of several federal and state investigations Trump is facing from his time in office and in private business as he considers another run for the presidency in 2024.TopicsDonald TrumpMar-a-LagoFloridaFBIUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell has phone seized by FBI at fast-food outlet

    My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell has phone seized by FBI at fast-food outletProminent proponent of Donald Trump’s stolen election lie says he was questioned about Colorado electoral official Tina Peters Mike Lindell, the pillow salesman who became an enthusiastic mouthpiece for Donald Trump’s lie about a stolen election, has said he was forced to hand his phone to FBI agents who surrounded him at a fast-food drive-through.Trump says Pence is out as potential running mate, book revealsRead moreThe incident happened on Tuesday as Lindell, chief executive of My Pillow, was in line at a branch of Hardee’s in Mankato, Minnesota, his home town, following a hunting trip.“Cars pulled up in front of us, to the side of us, and behind us and I said those are either bad guys or the FBI,” the conspiracy theorist said on his internet show, the Lindell Report. “Well, it turns out they were the FBI.”Lindell said the agents questioned him about Tina Peters, a fellow election denier facing criminal charges in Colorado for tampering with voting machinery as a county clerk, and who in June lost a Republican primary to become the state’s top election official.Lindell campaigned for Peters, who in May was removed by a judge from running elections in Mesa county.An FBI spokesperson confirmed agents were “at that location executing a search warrant authorized by a federal judge” but would not give other details.Lindell, a close Trump ally, is one of the loudest proponents of Trump’s false claims that his 2020 defeat by Joe Biden was rigged, and has been widely ridiculed for his frequent claims that he has enough “evidence” to see Trump reinstated to the presidency.Lindell admitted earlier this month that he had spent up to $40m of his own money in the pursuit, including underwriting lawsuits in numerous states to try to eliminate voting machines he insists were to blame for Trump’s defeat.There is no evidence to support his allegations and Lindell has lost numerous legal challenges over machines manufactured by Smartmatic and Dominion.In April, he was sued for defamation by a Dominion Voting Systems employee, who claimed Lindell was engaged in “efforts to undermine faith in American democracy and enrich himself in the process”.Lindell said on Tuesday the FBI demanded his phone, which he handed over only after consulting his attorney.“They surrounded me at a Hardee’s and took my phone that I run all my business, everything with,” he said. “What they have done is weaponise the FBI, it’s disgusting. I don’t have a computer, that phone, everything was on everybody.”In a later interview with CNN, Lindell said he was surprised when the agents started asking questions about Peters, having assumed they were about to serve him a subpoena as part of the justice department investigation into the 6 January insurrection and other attempts to reverse Trump’s election defeat.“I said, ‘Come on, bring me to January 6. I want to be part of that show’,” he said he told them.“They thought they were there to intimidate me. They won’t intimidate me.“I want to say this for the record, they were pretty nice guys. None of them had an attitude.”TopicsUS newsUS elections 2020FBInewsReuse this content More