More stories

  • in

    New York probation officers to interview Trump prior to his criminal sentencing

    Donald Trump is scheduled to be interviewed by New York probation officials Monday, a required step before his July sentencing in his criminal hush-money case, according to three people familiar with the plan.The former president will do the interview via a computer video conference from his residence at the Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, the people told the Associated Press. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to disclose the plans publicly.One of Trump’s lawyers, Todd Blanche, will be present for the interview. People convicted of crimes in New York usually meet with probation officials without their lawyers, but the judge in Trump’s case, Juan Merchan, said in a letter Friday that he would allow Blanche’s presence.The usual purpose of a pre-sentencing probation interview is to prepare a report that will tell the judge more about the defendant, and potentially help determine the proper punishment for the crime.Such reports are typically prepared by a probation officer, a social worker or a psychologist working for the probation department who interviews the defendant and possibly that person’s family and friends, as well as people affected by the crime.Present reports include a defendant’s personal history, criminal record and recommendations for sentencing. It will also include information about employment and any obligations to help care for a family member. It is also a chance for a defendant to say why they think they deserve a lighter punishment.A jury convicted Trump of falsifying business records at his own company as part of a broader scheme to buy the silence of people who might have told embarrassing stories about him during the 2016 presidential campaign. One $130,000 payment went to adult film actor Stormy Daniels, who claimed to have had a sexual encounter with Trump, which he denied.Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, says he is innocent of any crime and that the criminal case was brought to hurt his chances to regain the White House.Following Trump’s historic conviction, a New York Times/Siena College post-verdict analysis of nearly 2,000 interviews with voters found that Trump’s advantage over Joe Biden narrowed from three to one point.Trump’s campaign spokesperson, Steven Cheung, said in a statement Sunday that the president’s Democratic party allies “continue to ramp up their ongoing Witch-Hunts, further abusing and misusing the power of their offices to interfere in the presidential election”.“President Trump and his legal team are already taking necessary steps to challenge and defeat the lawless Manhattan DA case,” he said.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionMerchan has scheduled Trump’s sentencing for 11 July. He has discretion to impose a wide range of punishments, ranging from probation and community service to up to four years in prison.In his first rally earlier this week following his conviction, Trump, who is appealing his conviction, issued foreboding threats.“Those appellate courts have to step up and straighten things out, or we’re not going to have a country any longer,” Trump said at a Turning Point Action event in Phoenix, Arizona.Meanwhile, reports have emerged of New York police planning to revoke Trump’s license to carry a gun as a result of his conviction.Speaking to CNN anonymously, a New York police department official said that it will complete its investigation “that will likely lead to revocation of his license”. More

  • in

    Trump to escalate blame on trial judge Juan Merchan if sentenced to prison

    Donald Trump is determined to avoid jail, but if he does get handed a prison sentence after his conviction on 34 felony counts in New York last week, the former president’s inner circle is certain he will lay the blame squarely at the judge’s feet, sources familiar with the matter said.The precise way Trump might blame the judge, Juan Merchan, remains unclear because Trump has been avoidant of the issue and the matter was not resolved when he huddled with his top advisers at a Trump Tower meeting immediately after the verdict on Thursday, the sources said.But Trump is likely to double down on his attacks against Merchan, directing his supporters at rallies and in Truth Social posts to take up their grievances with the judge, one of the sources added.The consequences of Trump’s likely rhetoric are difficult to predict. Trump has been railing against Merchan for months as being unfair and in conspiracy cahoots with the Biden administration to prevent him from campaigning – and nothing concrete has happened.Still, Trump’s supporters have a history of making threats against judges Trump has assailed, including death threats to Tanya Chutkan, the US district judge who is presiding in his federal 2020 election interference case, and to the chambers of the New York judge who oversaw his civil fraud trial.Trump believes – correctly – that the ultimate decision with sentencing rests with Merchan, who has wide discretion to sentence him to fines or probation on the low end, to a carceral sentence on the high end, regardless of what prosecutors might request.That reasoning would be the basis for Trump to hold the judge responsible for any fallout, in the event he hands down a jail term days before the Republican national convention – even if the sentence would almost certainly be stayed pending appeal.Trump has already spent weeks railing against Merchan, taking advantage of the fact that the judge himself is not protected by the gag order. Both before and during the trial, Trump slammed the judge’s rulings as unfair and biased, and falsely suggested he was trying to stop him campaigning.Just one day after the trial, Trump appeared to open a new front against Merchan in freewheeling remarks at a news conference at Trump Tower, where he suggested Merchan looked like an “angel” but was really the “devil”.If a jail sentence does come, one of the sources said, they expected Trump to lash out in anger. But Trump has also been careful to not explicitly threaten or make foreboding warnings against Merchan to stave off prison.On Fox News Sunday, Trump said the public would not stand for him being sent to prison. “I’m not sure the public would stand for it. I think it would be tough for the public to take. At some point, there’s a breaking point”, he said, though the campaign was quick to clarify he was talking about the election.To some degree, Trump has managed to put Merchan exactly where he wants him.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTrump was in effect found guilty of using an unlawful hush-money scheme to influence the outcome of the 2016 election, which means if Merchan sentences him to anything less than jail, it could spark backlash that it did not encapsulate the gravity of Trump’s criminal conduct.But if Merchan does actually sentence Trump to jail, the judge would be thrust forward by Trump as responsible for any fallout and any unrest from his supporters who have a history of engaging in political violence merely on the former president airing grievances.At sentencing, Merchan will have the additional decision of whether to punish Trump not just for the conviction but also his clear lack of remorse and his repeated violations of the gag order, which would be reflected in Trump’s pre-sentencing report.In New York, defendants convicted of felonies or serious misdemeanors are required to meet with a probation officer, who conducts a lengthy investigation and compiles a pre-sentencing report that the judge uses to determine what sentence to issue.The pre-sentencing report is typically one major opportunity that defendants have to make a good impression on the judge, including by expressing contrition. Trump has suggested none of that since his conviction, including by attacking the verdict the very next day. More

  • in

    Hunter Biden gun trial: key takeaways from the first week

    Federal prosecutors rested their case against Hunter Biden on Friday morning after days of testimony that revealed deeply personal and grim details about his struggles with drug addiction.Hunter Biden, the only surviving son of Joe Biden, faces three felony charges tied to a 2018 firearm purchase while using narcotics. He is accused of making false statements on a gun-purchase form when he said he was not illegally using or addicted to drugs, and then unlawfully possessing the gun for 11 days.Hunter Biden has pleaded not guilty. If convicted, he could face up to 25 years in prison, though such a sentence would be highly unusual given that he would be a first-time offender. It is unclear whether the presiding judge, Maryellen Noreika, would give him time behind bars. Hunter Biden also faces a separate federal trial in California on charges of failing to pay $1.4m in taxes.Here are some key takeaways from the trial’s first week’s proceedings:1. Jury selection centered on the toll of the US drug epidemicA jury of 12 – six men and six women– and four alternates was seated from a pool of more than 60 people on Monday. Potential jurors were quizzed individually by Noreika about their knowledge of the case and views on gun ownership to determine whether they could be fair and impartial.Among the questions asked of potential jurors was whether they, or anyone close to them, had struggled with substance abuse or addiction. Many said they did, as stories of loved ones’ battles with addiction unravelled over the course of the day. One said they had a childhood best friend who died from a heroin overdose, one had a daughter who was a recovering addict, and another had a brother addicted to PCP and heroin.Drug addiction plays a central role in the case, as prosecutors have delved into Hunter Biden’s battle with drug use after the death of his older brother, Beau Biden, as they seek to prove that he knowingly lied on a form to buy a Colt Cobra revolver at a Wilmington gun store in October 2018.Hunter Biden has been open about his battle with crack cocaine, and the defense is hoping that the jury will see in him a familiar and sympathetic story reflected in their own lives. A study published this month found that one in three Americans know someone who has died of a drug overdose; nearly 20% said the person they knew who died was a family member or close friend.2. Prosecutors used Hunter Biden’s memoir against himThe jury heard long excerpts from the audiobook of Hunter Biden’s 2021 memoir, Beautiful Things, narrated by the president’s son himself, detailing his descent into drug addiction leading up to and after the gun purchase.Hunter Biden and his family listened for more than an hour on Tuesday as a lead prosecutor for the special counsel, Derek Hines, played extracts from the memoir detailing how crack cocaine plunged the president’s son into the “darkest recesses of your soul”, including a story of how he tried to buy drugs from a homeless woman in Franklin Park in Washington DC.Prosecutors pointed to how Hunter Biden detailed his four-year addiction to crack cocaine that would cover the time period when he bought the firearm to argue that he was a high-functioning drug addict who lied to friends and family and ultimately broke the law. “Addiction may not be a choice, but lying and buying a gun is a choice,” Hines said. “Nobody is above the law.”Hunter Biden’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, argued that his client did not “knowingly” lie when filling out forms to buy a weapon. Pointing to a two-week rehab visit in August 2018, Lowell suggested that Hunter Biden was not using drugs at the time he bought the gun.3. Witnesses called to the stand included Hunter Biden’s exes and daughterProsecutors said part of their case would come from the testimony of several women from Hunter Biden’s past, including his ex-wife, Kathleen Buhle, and two girlfriends, Zoe Kestan and Hallie Biden, who is also the widow of Hunter Biden’s brother Beau.Buhle was married to Hunter Biden for nearly 25 years and shares three daughters with him. Buhle testified about her ex-husband’s long battle with addiction, and how his drug use and infidelity fueled the collapse of their marriage.Kestan, who was involved with Hunter Biden around 2017-2018, told jurors about his near-constant crack cocaine use at lavish hotels. “He would want to smoke as soon as he woke up,” she testified, and described meetings with a “scary” drug dealer and hunting for instructions on the internet to cook powder cocaine into crack.Hunter Biden’s daughter, Naomi Biden, gave emotional testimony on Friday as the defense’s witness, telling jurors that she was “proud” to see her father in rehab in 2018. As she left the stand, she stopped to give her father an embrace and was seen wiping her eyes.4. Widow of Beau Biden testified about finding gun in Hunter Biden’s truckThe prosecution’s most important witness, Hunter Biden’s sister-in-law turned girlfriend, Hallie Biden, took to the stand on Thursday. The pair had a brief romantic relationship after Beau Biden, Hallie Biden’s husband and Hunter Biden’s brother, died of brain cancer in May 2015.Hallie Biden is a central part of the prosecution case because she discovered the gun that Hunter Biden had bought and threw it out. The purchase of the Colt revolver by Hunter Biden – and Hallie Biden’s disposal of it – are the fulcrum of the case against him.Hallie Biden told jurors that she “panicked” when she discovered the gun and ammunition in his truck, and described how she put it into a leather pouch, stuffed it into a shopping bag and tossed it into a trash can outside a market near her home. “I didn’t want him to hurt himself, and I didn’t want my kids to find it and hurt themselves,” she said.Early in her testimony, Hallie Biden testified to using drugs, saying that Hunter Biden introduced her to crack cocaine in 2018. She testified she stopped using drugs in August 2018, but that Hunter Biden continued smoking crack cocaine. “It was a terrible experience that I went through, and I’m embarrassed and ashamed, and I regret that period of my life,” she said.5. Biden family turned out for trialHunter Biden’s family and close friends have attended the trial en masse to show their support, even as their father’s presidential campaign and the White House strive to distance themselves out of fear of handing political grist to Republicans searching for a distracting issue in the wake of Donald Trump’s 34-count conviction last week.The first lady, Jill Biden, was seated in the Delaware courtroom behind her stepson for the first three days of the trial until leaving late on Wednesday to attend a D-day commemoration ceremony in France. Joe Biden’s sister, Valerie Biden Owens, flew in from the west coast to take the first lady’s seat in court on Thursday, next to Hunter Biden’s wife, Melissa Cohen-Biden. Hunter Biden’s sister, Ashley Biden, has appeared in court as have several of his close friends.In contrast, several members of the Trump family steered clear of the New York courthouse during the former president’s hush-money trial. Most notably, Trump’s wife, Melania Trump, and daughter, Ivanka Trump, were conspicuously absent.Joe Biden, who is in France this week for the 80th anniversary of the D-day landings, has indicated he will not pardon his son if he is convicted at his federal gun trial. “Jill and I love our son, and we are so proud of the man he is today. Hunter’s resilience in the face of adversity and the strength he has brought to his recovery are inspiring to us,” Biden said in a statement on Monday. More

  • in

    Joe Biden says he will not pardon son Hunter if convicted in gun trial

    Joe Biden has indicated that he will not pardon his son Hunter if he is convicted at his federal gun trial, where the prosecution rested its case on Friday in Delaware and Naomi Biden took the stand in defense of her father.When the US president was asked in an interview with ABC News on Thursday if he is prepared to accept whatever outcome arises from Hunter Biden’s trial, he replied: “Yes.”The president is still in France to make a speech on democracy in Normandy on Friday, as part of the events to mark the 80th anniversary of D-day, the allies’ turning point in the war against Nazi Germany in 1944.The first lady, Jill Biden, returned to the US on Thursday after having accompanied her husband in France and arrived in court to support her stepson, as federal prosecutors began wrapping up their gun case against him.Two more witnesses testified on Friday as prosecutors continued their effort to prove to jurors that Hunter Biden lied on a mandatory gun purchase form when he said he wasn’t “an unlawful user of, or addicted to” drugs.Prosecutors called an FBI forensic chemist, Jason Brewer, who tested a residue found on the leather pouch that contained Hunter Biden’s gun. It came back positive for cocaine, though the amount was minimal, he told jurors.A Drug Enforcement Administration agent testified about text messages Hunter Biden sent to alleged dealers.It came towards the end of a week that has been largely dedicated to highlighting the seriousness of his drug problem, which escalated out of control after his elder brother, Beau Biden, died of brain cancer in 2015 at the age of 46.But on Friday afternoon, Hunter Biden’s daughter Naomi testified in her father’s defense that he seemed to respond well to drug treatment in the weeks before he bought a gun. Prosecutors say he obtained it illegally by failing to disclose his addiction on forms applying for a Colt Cobra revolver in 2018 and illegally possessing the weapon for 11 days.Naomi Biden, 30, told the jury she saw her father in California around that time and “he seemed really great”.On cross-examination, she was shown that she had been messaging and calling Hunter Biden and unable to reach him.“I can’t take this,” she texted her father several days after he purchased the gun. “I miss you so much and I just want to hang out.”Hunter Biden has been charged with three felonies: lying to a federally licensed gun dealer, making a false claim on the application by saying he was not a drug user and illegally having the gun for 11 days. It would be more usual for such an offense to be settled with a plea deal if the defendant admits it occurred, but an earlier deal for Hunter was unexpectedly thrown out last summer.He was subsequently indicted on the three felony gun charges, which he denies. He also faces a trial scheduled for September on felony charges alleging he failed to pay at least $1.4m in taxes over four years.The court finished its work on Friday afternoon and will resume on Monday when the defense will announce whether Hunter Biden, 54, will testify.The Associated Press contributed reporting More

  • in

    The Alito flag scandal and the supreme court’s ethics problem – podcast

    Reports surfaced a few weeks ago that the supreme court justice Samuel Alito had flown an upside-down US flag outside his home days after insurrectionists flew similar flags when they stormed the Capitol on 6 January 2021. Alito has blamed his wife, saying he wanted her to take down the flag down after a dispute with neighbours.
    Democrats want Alito to recuse himself from any supreme court case involving 6 January, but he has refused to do so. Jonathan Freedland speaks to Amanda Marcotte of Salon about whether this latest scandal is proof that the supreme court is incapable of being unbiased

    How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know More

  • in

    Steve Bannon vows to appeal jail sentence and says order about ‘shutting down the Maga movement’ – as it happened

    Speaking outside the courthouse, Steve Bannon vowed to appeal his jail sentence to the supreme court, and accused the justice department of pursuing him as a way to retaliate against Donald Trump.“They’re not going to shut up Trump, they’re not going to shut up Navarro, they’re not going to shut up Bannon, and they’re certainly not going to shut up Maga,” said Bannon. He was referring to Peter Navarro, a former Trump White House trade adviser, who is serving a similar prison sentence on contempt of Congress charges.Bannon went on to predict an overwhelming victory in the November presidential election:
    All of this is about one thing. This is about shutting down the Maga movement, shutting down grassroots conservatives, shutting down President Trump. Not only are we winning, we are going to prevail, and every number and every poll shows that. There’s nothing that can shut me up and nothing that will shut me up … There’s not a prison built, or a jail built that will ever shut me up.
    All victory to Maga. We’re going to win this, we’re going to win at the supreme court, and more importantly, we’re going to win on November 5 an amazing landslide, with the Senate, the House and also Donald J Trump back as president United States.
    Almost two years after he was first found guilty of contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena from the January 6 committee, a federal judge today ordered Steve Bannon, an influential figure in Donald Trump’s Maga movement, to begin serving his four-month sentence by 1 July. In a defiant speech outside the courthouse, he accused the justice department of using his case to retaliate against Trump, and predicted a big win for Republicans in the November presidential election. Speaking of Trump, the former president gave an interview to Fox News last night, where he argued he “would have every right to go after” political adversaries like Joe Biden, if he is returned to the White House. In response, the Biden campaign said Trump was “visibly rattled” by his conviction last week on felony business fraud charges.Here’s what else happened today:
    The supreme court released a new batch of opinions, which did not include much-awaited decisions on Trump’s petition for immunity from federal prosecution over his 2020 election meddling, and two cases dealing with abortion access.
    The American Civil Liberties Union is suing Milwaukee over restrictions on protesters ahead of the Republican National Convention.
    Trump called for the supreme court to overturn his conviction on felony charges connected to falsifying documents related to hush-money payments made ahead of the 2016 election.
    Hunter Biden’s federal gun charges trial continues in Delaware, with testimony from the widow of his late brother, Beau Biden.
    The NAACP civil rights group asked Biden to halt all shipments of weapons to Israel.
    Joe Biden does not do too many sitdown interviews with reporters, but took questions from ABC News during his visit to France for the D-day anniversary.He was asked about his recent decision to allow Ukraine to use US-supplied weaponry to strike inside Russia. Here’s what he had to say:Here’s more on the president’s decision, which comes as Russia steps up attacks aimed at the city of Kharkiv:The American Civil Liberties Union said this morning it has filed a lawsuit against the city of Milwaukee over restrictions on protesters at the Republican National Convention that it says violate the first amendment.The convention, beginning on 15 July, will see thousands of delegates converge on the city’s Fiserv Forum and culminate in Donald Trump formally accepting the party’s nomination. Various groups have already announced plans to protest the event, and the ACLU claims the city’s restrictions on where they can do that are not in line with the constitution.Here’s more:You’re not hearing too much about Joe Biden on this blog today, because the US president is in France to mark the anniversary of D-day, and call for support for Ukraine. The Guardian’s Leonie Chao-Fong has the scoop:Joe Biden has marked the 80th anniversary of the D-day landings in Normandy with an impassioned call to western allies to continue supporting Ukraine in the face of the “unending struggle between dictatorship and freedom”.Speaking on Thursday at a ceremony at the Normandy American cemetery attended by his French counterpart, Emmanuel Macron, and dozens of surviving veterans from the second world war, Biden drew parallels between the Allied troops who fought to free Europe and the alliance of nations that came together to defend Ukraine against Russian aggression.The president warned that democracy was under great threat than at any time since the end of second world war. Describing Vladimir Putin as a “tyrant bent on domination”, Biden said the Russian leader and “the autocrats of the world are watching closely to see what happens in Ukraine, to see if we let this illegal aggression go unchecked.“To surrender to bullies, to bow to dictators, is simply unthinkable,” Biden said. “If we do, Ukraine will be subjugated and it will not end there, Ukraine’s neighbours will be threatened, all of Europe will be threatened.”Joe Biden criticized the international criminal court last month, after its chief prosecutor, Karim Kham, requested arrest warrants for two of Israel’s top leaders over their actions during the war in Gaza.That did not sit well with actor George Clooney, whose wife, Amal Clooney, worked on the case. He called up the White House to make his displeasure known, the Washington Post reports:
    Clooney called Steve Ricchetti, counselor to the president, to express concern about Biden’s denunciation of arrest warrants sought by ICC prosecutors for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, especially his use of the word “outrageous.” The prosecutors also sought warrants for top Hamas leaders.
    The actor was also upset about the administration’s initial openness to imposing sanctions on the ICC because his wife might be subject to the penalties, the people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a private conversation.
    Clooney’s call came just weeks before he is set to appear at a fundraiser for Biden’s reelection campaign next Saturday in Los Angeles. His concerns spread throughout Biden’s orbit, leaving some officials to worry that the high-profile actor would withdraw from participating in the marquee fundraiser, which will also feature former president Barack Obama, late-night TV host Jimmy Kimmel and actress Julia Roberts.
    Biden has supported Israel’s response to the 7 October 2023 Hamas attack, despite a wave of protests from activists upset by the civilian toll caused the invasion of Gaza. Here’s more about why the president objected to the ICC chief prosecutor’s arrest warrant application:Johnson’s statement comes after a recent report from the Washington Post which revealed that Israeli fighter jets used US munitions to strike a UN school located in Gaza on Thursday.Two weapons experts verified the weapons’ type to the Post, using footage of debris from the attack.Here’s more from the Post’s Louisa Loveluck, Niha Masih, Hajar Harb, Kyle Melnick and Miriam Berger:
    Israeli fighter jets appear to have used US-made munitions in a strike that killed dozens of people inside a UN school in the central Gaza Strip on Thursday, according to two weapons experts who examined verified footage from the debris.
    The nose cones of two GBU-39 small diameter bombs were visible in footage taken by an eyewitness, Emad Abu Shawish, in the aftermath of the strike in the Nuseirat refugee camp. His images were verified by Storyful and independently geolocated by the Washington Post.
    An Israel Defense Forces spokesman said the strikes targeted a gathering of militants at the school. But the facility was also packed with thousands of civilians displaced by the war, according to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which aids Palestinian refugees.
    The Gaza Health Ministry said 40 people were killed, including 14 children and nine women, and 74 others were wounded. Khalil al-Degran, spokesman for the al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital in nearby Deir al-Balah, said that the bodies of children killed in the strike were brought to his facility.
    Read the full article here (paywall).Johnson’s demand for Biden came after Israel launched airstrikes against a refugee camp in Rafah during the Memorial Day weekend, an attack that killed dozens of people and was widely condemned by the international community.Here are Johnson’s full remarks, available here:
    The NAACP has, and continues to express our profound sympathy to civilians whose lives have been unjustly impacted in the crossfire of conflict. What happened on October 7 was a tragedy, and it is our hope that those with loved ones still in captivity are reunited as expeditiously as possible.
    As the nation’s leading civil rights organization, it is our responsibility to speak out in the face of injustice and work to hold our elected officials accountable for the promises they’ve made. Over the past months, we have been forced to bear witness to unspeakable violence, affecting innocent civilians, which is unacceptable. The most recent statement from the Biden administration is useful but does not go far enough. It is one thing to call for a ceasefire, it is another to take the measures necessary to work towards liberation for all. Decades of conflict reflect that factions inside Israel and Hamas actively work against resolution of the conflict. The latest proposal must clarify the consequences of continued violence. The United States and the international community must be willing to pull the levers of power when appropriate to advance liberation for all.
    The Middle East conflict will only be resolved when the US government and international community take action, including limiting access to weapons used against civilians. The NAACP calls on President Biden to draw the red line and indefinitely end the shipment of weapons and artillery to the state of Israel and other states that supply weapons to Hamas and other terrorist organizations. It is imperative that the violence that has claimed so many civilian lives, immediately stop. Hamas must return the hostages and stop all terrorist activity. Israel must commit to an offensive strategy that is aligned with international and humanitarian laws. Peace and security for Israelis and Palestinians can only align when the humanity and common needs of people within the region are respected. Centuries of conflict reflect that violence results in more violence. The spillover effect in the United States is more racism, antisemitism and Islamophobia.
    The president of the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) has asked Joe Biden to end the shipment of all weapons and artillery to Israel, in a new post to X.Derrick Johnson, who has led the civil rights organization since 2017, made the demand as more than 35,000 Palestinian people have been killed by Israel’s attacks against the territory.Johnson said:
    We’re calling on [Biden] to draw the red line and end the shipment of all weapons and artillery to Israel. It is imperative that the violence that has claimed so many civilian lives comes to an end immediately.
    Almost two years after he was first found guilty of contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena from the January 6 committee, a federal judge today ordered Steve Bannon, an influential figure in Donald Trump’s Maga movement, to begin serving his four-month sentence by 1 July. In a defiant speech outside the courthouse, he accused the justice department of using his case to retaliate against Trump, and predicted a big win for Republicans in the November presidential election. Speaking of Trump, the former president gave an interview to Fox News last night, where he argued he “would have every right to go after” political adversaries like Joe Biden, if he is returned to the White House. In response, the Biden campaign said Trump was “visibly rattled” by his conviction last week on felony business fraud charges.Here’s what else has happened today so far:
    The supreme court released a new batch of opinions, which did not include much-awaited decisions on Trump’s petition for immunity from federal prosecution over his 2020 election meddling, and two cases dealing with abortion access.
    Trump called for the supreme court to overturn his conviction on felony charges connected to falsifying documents related to hush-money payments made ahead of the 2016 election.
    Hunter Biden’s federal gun charges trial continues in Delaware, with testimony from the widow of his late brother, Beau Biden.
    Speaking outside the courthouse, Steve Bannon vowed to appeal his jail sentence to the supreme court, and accused the justice department of pursuing him as a way to retaliate against Donald Trump.“They’re not going to shut up Trump, they’re not going to shut up Navarro, they’re not going to shut up Bannon, and they’re certainly not going to shut up Maga,” said Bannon. He was referring to Peter Navarro, a former Trump White House trade adviser, who is serving a similar prison sentence on contempt of Congress charges.Bannon went on to predict an overwhelming victory in the November presidential election:
    All of this is about one thing. This is about shutting down the Maga movement, shutting down grassroots conservatives, shutting down President Trump. Not only are we winning, we are going to prevail, and every number and every poll shows that. There’s nothing that can shut me up and nothing that will shut me up … There’s not a prison built, or a jail built that will ever shut me up.
    All victory to Maga. We’re going to win this, we’re going to win at the supreme court, and more importantly, we’re going to win on November 5 an amazing landslide, with the Senate, the House and also Donald J Trump back as president United States.
    After a federal judge revoked Steve Bannon’s bail and ordered him to begin serving his prison term by 1 July, he held a brief press conference outside Washington DC’s federal courthouse.Before he began speaking, a protester holding up a sign reading “lock him up” shouted “Get out of my way” at Bannon’s security guards, who were keeping him away from the former Donald Trump White House adviser.A federal judge has ordered Steve Bannon, a far-right strategist and Donald Trump ally, to report to prison by 1 July to begin serving his sentence for contempt of Congress, Reuters reports.Bannon was convicted in 2022 for ignoring a summons from the bipartisan House committee that investigated the January 6 insurrection, and his four-month sentence was upheld by an appeals court last month. Here’s more on the long-running legal saga:This post has been corrected to note that Bannon must begin serving his sentence by 1 July, not on 1 July.Meanwhile, in Congress, Donald Trump has orchestrated the appointment of two allies to the House intelligence committee, which deals with some of the most sensitive information the US government possesses. Here’s more, from the Guardian’s Robert Tait:Two far-right Republicans have been appointed to the highly sensitive House of Representatives intelligence committee at the direction of Donald Trump, a move likely to antagonise the security establishment.Representatives Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and Ronny Jackson of Texas, known for their fierce loyalty to Trump and vocal support of his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election result, were installed by the House speaker, Mike Johnson, ahead of other qualified GOP members and apparently without consulting the body’s chair, Mike Turner.Turner has sought to restore the committee’s bipartisan character following years of bitter party infighting between Republicans and Democrats.The appointments of Perry and Jackson to a committee that helps to shape US foreign policy and oversees intelligence agencies such as the FBI and the CIA has caused consternation on Capitol Hill. It also signals Trump’s hostility to organisations that he has vowed to purge if he is re-elected.Adam Kinzinger, a former Republican congressman who served on the House select committee that investigated the 6 January 2021 attack on the US Capitol, called the move “insane” on a social media post.The pair were appointed to slots opened up by the resignations from Congress of Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin and Chris Stewart of Utah.Joe Biden is also dealing with some unwelcome legal attention. His son, Hunter Biden, is on trial in Delaware on federal gun charges, and the Associated Press reports that the widow of the president’s late son Beau Biden took the stand today:Testifying in Hunter Biden’s federal gun trial, Hallie Biden – the widow of Joe Biden’s oldest son, Beau – described panicking after finding a gun in his truck.“I panicked and I wanted to get rid of them,” she testified about finding a gun and ammunition in the console of Hunter Biden’s truck in October 2018.Prosecutor Leo Wise asked why she panicked, and Hallie responded: “Because I didn’t want him to hurt himself, and I didn’t want my kids to find it and hurt themselves.”Hallie said she considered hiding the gun but thought her kids might find it. She then decided to throw it away.“I was afraid to touch it. I didn’t know if it was loaded,” Hallie said.She put the gun in a leather pouch, stuffed it in a shopping bag, and tossed it in a trash can outside an upscale grocery market near her house.The prosecution played surveillance footage showing Hallie dumping the gun in the trash.While Donald Trump’s felony business fraud trial in New York concluded last week with a guilty verdict, other prosecutions of the former president have stalled. Yesterday, an appeals court in Georgia put his trial on election fraud charges on hold, likely until after the 2024 election, the Guardian’s George Chidi reports:The Georgia court of appeals has put a hold on the trial of Donald Trump and other defendants while it considers whether to disqualify the Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, the lead prosecutor in the case.Trump had appealed an order by the Fulton county superior court judge Scott McAfee that declined to disqualify Willis after bombshell revelations about a romantic relationship with her chosen special prosecutor. As part of their effort to dismiss the case, Trump and his co-defendants alleged Willis’s relationship meant she should be recused from the case.On Monday, the appeals court selected a three-judge panel to hear the appeal and docketed the case to be heard in October. Then on Wednesday, the court paused the case while this argument plays out.Both Trump’s attorney Steve Sadow and a spokesperson for Willis’s office declined to comment on the court’s order.The order staying the case in Fulton county essentially ensures that the former president will not be tried on charges of election interference and racketeering in Georgia before the November election.“The history books will look back on what the country lost by not having a televised trial before November 2024 and historians will wonder what Fani Wills was thinking. And they’ll just scratch their heads,” said Anthony Michael Kreis, a constitutional law professor in Georgia and a close observer of the case. “I don’t know how much Judge McAfee could have done between now and the appeal’s pendency anyway. But the real loss is McAfee’s ability to deal with the question of presidential immunity and the supremacy clause over the summer.” More

  • in

    The fake elector defense: what Trump allies are saying to justify the 2020 scheme

    Three allies of Donald Trump were charged in Wisconsin Tuesday for their roles in advancing the fake electors plan, but the 10 fake electors themselves have not yet been criminally charged.That might be because the Wisconsin fake electors, like other fake electors across the US, have said in media interviews they were misled to believe their documents could only be used if court challenges went for the former president. Others have said they were following lawyers’ advice when they signed on.Wisconsin attorney general Josh Kaul’s office has said it is still investigating and hasn’t ruled out charges against the individual electors, who have faced a civil suit they settled by agreeing not to serve as electors for Trump again.In April, 18 people were charged in Arizona in that state’s inquiry into the fake elector scheme. Defense attorneys representing some of those charged in Arizona have used similar justifications, saying they were following lawyers’ advice when they signed on.One told the Arizona Republic that his client, Jim Lamon, was relying on “lawyers from back east” who said the slates would only be used if the state’s results changed. Another told the paper that there wouldn’t be any evidence of their client’s intent to commit fraud or forgery because they got legal advice from Trump’s lawyers that led them to believe they weren’t doing anything wrong.These claims pop up frequently by fake electors and those involved in the scheme to overthrow the 2020 election results, as do other defenses relying on historical precedent and changing election law. Defenders of the fake electors cite a 1960 election in Hawaii and changes to congressional procedure to count electoral votes among their justifications..Some of the defenses have shown up in legal motions in Georgia, which is further along in its case against some fake electors there. But the justifications are largely happening online as the cases move more slowly than the internet, with rightwing influencers saying the scheme had a historical precedent and wasn’t illegal.Edward Foley, an election law expert at Ohio State University, has started to see the false electors in two tiers: those who were clearly in “cahoots with Trump” and intended to subvert the election’s outcome, and others who were duped. Andy Craig, director of election policy at the Joseph H Rainey Center, has come around to this idea as well, saying it depends heavily on the facts in each fake elector’s case, but some of them did seem misled.“I do think, to my mind, it’s fair to say that some of these fake electors are the victims of Trump’s fraud and [Rudy] Giuliani’s fraud,” Foley said. “They were relatively low-level political operatives who were trying to do something for the team and were doing it because the leader of their team was asking them to. That doesn’t justify what they did, but I’m not sure I would think criminal punishment would be appropriate for them because again, I think they’re the victims of the crime, not the perpetrators.”In Georgia, prosecutors granted many of the fake electors, nearly all of them little-known party loyalists, immunity from prosecution. Only three of the 16 have been charged criminally, all of whom appear to have a more hands-on role in the scheme.And in Pennsylvania and New Mexico, for example, the fake electoral certificates contained a caveat that they would only be considered valid if courts eventually ruled in Trump’s favor and deemed him the legitimate winner. Fake electors in those states have not faced prosecution in large part because of that language.As a reminder, the US doesn’t elect presidents via a popular vote. Instead, voters in each state turn out at the polls, which dictates a slate of electoral votes that get sent to Congress, called the electoral college. Whichever candidate wins the electoral vote wins the presidency, and this is sometimes different from who wins the popular vote. At issue in the fake electors scheme is that Trump supporters signed falsely that Trump had won their states’ votes, when in reality Biden had won.Other defensesLegal experts say the fake electors’ other defenses hold less water – the 2020 scheme is much different than the 1960 Hawaii election, and any changes in the Electoral Count Reform Act don’t affect the illegality of what the false electors did.The 1960 Hawaii election, which involved two slates of electors, is a long-running justification on the right for the fake electors. In 1960, Nixon narrowly led Kennedy initially in Hawaii, though the margin was so small it kicked off a recount. Before the recount could be completed, the state had to send its electoral votes to Congress for counting, so electors for both Kennedy and Nixon signed separate documents saying they were the state’s electors and sent them off.After the recount, the results showed Kennedy actually won the state, and so Kennedy’s electors met again to sign that he won. Nixon, who was presiding over the electoral count in Congress as vice-president, accepted this final submission. No one got in trouble for the previous slates, though it was also possibly illegal for the Democrats to have met and signed as though Kennedy won before the recount concluded. Hawaii’s votes didn’t affect who won the presidency, as Kennedy had already clinched the win.“Hawaii is a very odd situation because it ultimately ended with then vice-president Nixon, who was one of the candidates, being willing to accept the Kennedy slate, which didn’t matter one way or the other, wasn’t going to affect the outcome of the electoral college majority” Foley said. “It was sort of like a politician trying to be magnanimous.”Influencers like Charlie Kirk, the leader of rightwing youth organization Turning Point USA, brought up Hawaii after the Arizona charges. In a post on X, Kirk cited the “precedent created by Democrats” in Hawaii in 1960.“The Arizona Trump electors were doing what they thought was a legally necessary step as part of a wider political and electoral dispute,” Kirk wrote. “They acted in the belief that Donald Trump was the true winner of Arizona in the 2020 election.”The major difference: there was a legitimate, ongoing, good faith debate over who won in Hawaii, and a razor-thin margin of less than 200 votes that led to a full recount. By contrast, the margins in the seven states involved in the 2020 plan were much higher, and legal avenues to overturn results had largely run out.“All of these states were won by bigger margins, far beyond what any kind of recount or litigation was ever realistically going to overturn,” Craig said. “And so there was no good basis to believe that the results would legitimately flip in these states.”Another line of defense, used less frequently, revolves around changes to the electoral count process after the fake electors scheme in 2020.Rightwing commentator Mike Cernovich said after the Arizona changes that “multiple electors were LEGAL until the law was recently amended”, presumably a reference to the changes to the Electoral Count Act.The original Electoral Count Act stemmed from the contentious mess of the 1876 election, where there were multiple competing slates of electors and no consensus over who had won the election. It spelled out the process and deadlines for how states would send electoral votes and how Congress would count them.“What the Electoral Count Act did and still continues to do is to furnish Congress with a procedure to evaluate competing claims by competing slates of electors,” said Jim Gardner, an election law expert at the University at Buffalo School of Law. “And that’s all it does. So it is a piece of congressional self-regulation. It does not in any way regulate the behavior of other parties outside Congress.”The 2022 reform act makes clear that the vice-president, when presiding over the count, can’t use their role to get involved in disputes over electors – stemming from the effort to pressure then vice-president Mike Pence to throw out the Biden electors in key states.It also says that governors must certify the electors and send them to Congress. None of the Trump fake electors were certified by their states’ governments, a required part of the process for Congress to accept a slate.These changes, though, aren’t evidence that fake electors were allowed under the act before it was amended, legal experts say. Additionally, the charges these electors face in some states are violations of state-level laws against forging documents or committing fraud – not violations of a federal law to count electoral votes.“I don’t think it’s correct to say that somehow it’s an acknowledgement that any fake submission before this was not criminal,” Foley said.Sam Levine contributed reporting More

  • in

    Trump-appointed judges strike down fund for Black female entrepreneurs

    A US federal court of appeals panel has suspended Fearless Fund, an Atlanta-based, Black woman-owned venture capitalist firm, from continuing the firm’s Fearless Strivers Grant Contest, a grant program for Black female business owners.In the 2-1 ruling, the panel of three judges, two appointed by Donald Trump and one appointed by Barack Obama, ruled that the grant program “is substantially likely to violate” section 1981 of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1866, which prohibits the use of race in making contracts. The act aimed to fully integrate formerly enslaved Black Americans as citizens, give them the full rights of American citizenship and to make it illegal to deprive any Americans of rights “on the basis of race, color, or prior condition of slavery or involuntary servitude”.American Alliance for Equal Rights, founded by Edward Blum, the conservative activist who led the supreme court case that ended affirmative action in college admissions, brought the case against Fearless Fund last August. The fund is one of several firms, organizations and government institutions that have been targeted by conservative, rightwing groups working to make it illegal for public and private entities to pursue diversity initiatives.Less than than 1% of venture capital funding goes to Black and Hispanic women-owned businesses, according to Digitalundivided, a non-profit advocacy organization. The group found that firms started by Black women received only .0006% of VC funding raised by startups between 2009 and 2017. And in 2019, a report found that “Black entrepreneur’s loan requests are three times less likely to be approved than white entrepreneurs”.Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which was referenced in the ruling, guarantees citizens the right “to make and enforce contracts … and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens”.The panel of judges ruled that Fearless Fund is unlikely to enjoy first amendment protection and that its program “inflicts irreparable injury”.The Fearless Fund CEO and founder Arian Simone expressed disappointment at the ruling.“I am shattered for every girl of color who has a dream but will grow up in a nation determined not to give her a shot to live it,” she said in a statement. “On their behalf, we will turn the pain into purpose and fight with all our might.”The ruling is a victory for conservative groups that continue to target diversity initiatives, but it may not be a cut and dry harbinger of what’s to come. Last week, a federal judge in Ohio dismissed a lawsuit against the insurance company Progressive and the fintech platform Hello Alice, which jointly offer a grant program that helps Black-owned small businesses purchase commercial vehicles.In a statement, Simone vowed that the ruling against Fearless Fund was “the beginning of a renewed fight.“We are committed more than ever to advocating for equity, pushing forward with resilience, and ensuring that women of color receive the opportunities they rightfully deserve,” the statement reads. Fearless Fund and the organization’s legal representatives have indicated that they are evaluating all options to fight the lawsuit. More