More stories

  • in

    People vs Donald Trump review: Mark Pomerantz pummels Manhattan DA

    ReviewPeople vs Donald Trump review: Mark Pomerantz pummels Manhattan DAProsecutor who helped convict John Gotti thinks Alvin Bragg let Trump slip from the hook. His memoir proves controversial Mark Pomerantz is a well-credentialed former federal prosecutor. As a younger man he clerked for a supreme court justice and helped send the mob boss John Gotti to prison. He did stints in corporate law. In 2021, he left retirement to join the investigation of Donald Trump by the Manhattan district attorney. Pomerantz’s time with the DA was substantive but controversial.Trump porn star payment a ‘zombie case’ that wouldn’t die, ex-prosecutor says in bookRead moreIn summer 2021, he helped deliver an indictment for tax fraud against the Trump Organization and Alan Weisselberg, its chief financial officer. At the time, Cy Vance Jr, the son of Jimmy Carter’s secretary of state, was Manhattan DA. Pomerantz also interviewed Michael Cohen, Trump fanboy turned convicted nemesis, pored over documents and clamored for the indictment of the former president on racketeering charges.For Pomerantz, nailing Trump for his hush money payment to Stormy Daniels, the adult film star who claims an affair Trump denies, didn’t pass muster. But that avenue of prosecution was a “zombie case” that wouldn’t die. It still hasn’t: a Manhattan grand jury again hears evidence.Pomerantz saw Trump as a criminal mastermind aided by flunkies and enforcers. He believed charges ought to align with the gravity of the crimes. But as Pomerantz now repeatedly writes in his memoir, Alvin Bragg, elected district attorney in November 2021, did not want to move against Trump. In early 2022, Bragg balked. In March, Pomerantz quit – and leaked his resignation letter.“I believe that Donald Trump is guilty of numerous felony violations of the penal law,” Pomerantz fumed. “I fear that your decision means that Mr Trump will not be held fully accountable for his crimes.”Now comes the memoir, People vs Donald Trump: An Inside Account. It is a 300-page exercise in score-settling and scorn. Pomerantz loathes Trump and holds Bragg in less than high regard. He equates the former president with Gotti and all but dismisses the DA as a progressive politician, not an actual crime-fighter.In a city forever plagued by crime and political fights about it, Bragg’s time as DA has proved controversial: over guns, trespassing, turnstile jumping, marijuana and, yes, the squeegee men.Bragg is African American. This week, a group of high-ranking Black officials protested against Pomerantz’s attacks. In response, Pomerantz called Bragg “respected, courageous, ethical and thoughtful” but said: “I disagreed with him about the decision he made in the Trump case.”In his resignation letter, Pomerantz wrote: “I have worked too hard as a lawyer, and for too long, now to become a passive participant in what I believe to be a grave failure of justice.”Trump, he now writes, “seemed always to stay one step ahead of the law”. That may conjure up images of Road Runner and Wile E Coyote but Pomerantz is serious. “In my career as a lawyer, I had encountered only one other person who touched all of these bases: John Gotti, the head of the Gambino organised crime family.”The Goodfellas vibe is integral to Trumpworld. In The Devil’s Bargain, way back in 2017, Joshua Green narrated how Trump tore into Paul Manafort, his then campaign manager, shouting: “You treat me like a baby! Am I like a baby to you … Am I a fucking baby, Paul?” It was if Trump was channeling Joe Pesci.With the benefit of hindsight, Pomerantz concludes that the US justice department is better suited to handle a wholesale financial investigation of Trump than the Manhattan DA. Then again, the attorney general, Merrick Garland, has a lot on his plate. An insurrection is plenty.Pomerantz’s book has evoked strong reactions. Trump is enraged, of course. On Truth Social, he wrote: “Crooked Hillary Clinton’s lawyer [Pomerantz says he has never met her], radically deranged Mark Pomerantz, led the fake investigation into me and my business at the Manhattan DA’s Office and quit because DA Bragg, rightfully, wanted to drop the ‘weak’ and ‘fatally flawed’ case. This is disgraceful conduct by Pomerantz, especially since, as always, I’ve done nothing wrong!”Really?In December, a Manhattan jury convicted the Trump Organization on 17 counts of tax fraud and the judge imposed a $1.6m fine. Alan Weisselberg pleaded guilty and testified against his employer. Trump and three of his children – Ivanka, Don Jr and Eric – are defendants in a $250m civil lawsuit brought by Letitia James, the New York attorney general, on fraud-related charges. That case comes to trial in October 2023, months before the presidential primary. Sooner than that will be the E Jean Carroll trial, over alleged defamation and a rape claim Trump denies.Significantly, state prosecutors say Pomerantz may have crossed an ethical line.“By writing and releasing a book in the midst of an ongoing case, the author is upending the norms and ethics of prosecutorial conduct and is potentially in violation of New York criminal law,” J Anthony Jordan, president of the District Attorneys Association of the State of New York, announced.Never Give an Inch review: Mike Pompeo as ‘heat-seeking missile for Trump’s ass’Read moreBragg accused Pomerantz of violating a confidentiality agreement. Pomerantz is unbowed. “I am comfortable that this book will not prejudice any investigation or prosecution of Donald Trump,” he states on the page. No formal ethics complaint has appeared.Pomerantz also offers a window on personalities that crossed his path. Cohen receives ample attention. Pomerantz lauds Trump’s former fixer for his cooperation but reiterates that Cohen pleaded guilty to perjury.His conduct left Pomerantz shaking his head. Cohen’s liking for publicity could be unsettling. So was his Oval Office tête-a-tête with Trump over the payment to Daniels. Pomerantz was disgusted. Trump and Cohen, he writes, defiled America’s Holy of Holies, its “sanctum sanctorum”.No harm, no foul. Cohen’s lawyer, Lanny Davis, announced: “Mr Cohen will continue to cooperate with DA Bragg and his team, speaking truth to power – as he has always done.” On Wednesday, Cohen met the Manhattan DA for the 15th time. Pomerantz is gone. The show goes on.
    People vs Donald Trump: An Inside Account is published in the US by Simon & Schuster
    TopicsBooksDonald TrumpUS politicsUS taxationRepublicansPolitics booksLaw (US)reviewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Mike Pence subpoenaed in Trump special counsel investigations – reports

    Mike Pence subpoenaed in Trump special counsel investigations – reportsFormer vice-president and former Trump official Robert O’Brien issued subpoena though nature of requests is not known Former US vice-president Mike Pence and the former national security adviser Robert O’Brien have been subpoenaed by the special counsel leading investigations into classified documents found at former president Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence and efforts to overturn the 2020 election result, according to media reports on Thursday.Pence was issued a subpoena by special counsel Jack Smith, though the nature of the request was not immediately known, ABC News reported, citing sources. The action follows months of negotiations involving federal prosecutors and Pence’s lawyers.Judge who told Pence not to overturn election predicts ‘beginning of end of Trump’Read moreO’Brien has been asserting executive privilege in declining to provide some of the information that prosecutors are seeking from him, according to CNN.Pence’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Smith’s office declined to comment on both reports from CNN and ABC.Trump’s former acting Department of Homeland Security secretary, Chad Wolf, was interviewed by justice department lawyers in recent weeks as part of the ongoing special counsel investigation related to 2020 election interference, the report added, citing sources.The US attorney general, Merrick Garland, named Smith as special counsel in November to oversee investigations of Trump, shortly after Trump said he would seek the Republican nomination for president again in 2024.The first investigation involves Trump’s handling of highly sensitive classified documents he retained at his Florida resort after leaving the White House in January 2021.The second investigation is looking at efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election’s results, including a plot to submit phony slates of electors to block Congress from certifying Democrat Joe Biden’s victory.Grand juries in Washington have been hearing testimony in recent months for both investigations from many former top Trump administration officials.Last month, Garland named a separate special counsel, Robert Hur, to probe the improper storage of classified documents at Biden’s home and former office.In late January, Pence said he was not aware though he takes “full responsibility” after classified documents were found at his Indiana home.The documents were discovered after a review of his personal records was conducted in the wake of classified material being found at Biden’s home in Delaware.TopicsUS newsMike PenceDonald TrumpMar-a-LagoLaw (US)US politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    January 6 rioter with Confederate flag sentenced to three years

    January 6 rioter with Confederate flag sentenced to three yearsKevin Seffried threatened a Black police officer with a pole attached to a Confederate flag during the Capitol attack A Delaware man who threatened a Black police officer with a pole attached to a Confederate battle flag as he stormed the US Capitol was sentenced on Thursday to three years in prison.Kevin Seefried, 53, tearfully apologized for his participation in the 6 January 2021 riot before US district judge Trevor McFadden sentenced him.“I never wanted to send a message of hate,” Seefried said.McFadden said it was deeply troubling that Seefried wielded the flagpole as a weapon against the officer. “Bringing a Confederate flag into one of our nation’s most sacred halls was outrageous,” the judge said.McFadden allowed Seefried to remain free until he must report to prison at a date to be determined.Justice Department prosecutors had recommended a prison sentence of five years and 10 months for Seefried, a drywall mechanic from Laurel, Delaware.Seefried and his adult son, Hunter, stormed the Capitol together after attending the “Stop the Steal” rally, where then President Donald Trump addressed thousands of supporters in Washington. Kevin Seefried was the 12th rioter to set foot inside the building that day, according to prosecutors.In October, McFadden sentenced Hunter Seefried to two years of imprisonment.Widely published photographs showed Kevin Seefried carrying his Confederate flag inside the Capitol after he and his son, then 22, entered the building through a broken window.Kevin Seefried told an FBI agent that he did not view the Confederate flag as a symbol of racist hate. FBI agents said they did not find any evidence linking him or his son to any far-right extremist groups.Seefried is embarrassed and ashamed that many may view him as a racist, his lawyers said in a court filing.“He had brought the flag as a symbol of protest, but had not considered the logic of those who see the flag as a symbol of American racism,” they wrote. “Now that photos of him with the flag have become iconic symbols of the horror of January 6, Mr. Seefried completely understands the harm he has caused.”Within a minute of entering the building, Kevin Seefried jabbed his flagpole at Capitol Police officer Eugene Goodman and joined other rioters in chasing the officer up a flight of stairs, a harrowing scene captured on video. Seefried was the first rioter to encounter Goodman near the base of the staircase, prosecutors said.Goodman, who testified at the Seefrieds’ trial, said Seefried cursed at him and jabbed at him with the base of his flagpole three or four times without making contact. Goodman recalled that Seefried asked where members of Congress were counting the votes and said: “You can shoot me, man, but we’re coming in.”“That flagpole was not only a weapon capable of causing serious injury; a Confederate Battle flag was affixed to it and it was brandished by a man standing at the front of a volatile, growing mob towards a solitary, Black police officer,” prosecutors wrote in a court filing.Goodman led rioters away from the Senate chamber as senators and then Vice-President Mike Pence were being evacuated. He also directed Senator Mitt Romney to turn around and head away from the mob.McFadden convicted the father and son of riot-related charges in June after hearing two days of trial testimony without a jury.Nearly 1,000 people have been charged with federal crimes related to the January 6 riot. More than 500 of them have pleaded guilty, mostly to misdemeanors. Approximately 400 have been sentenced, with over half getting terms of imprisonment ranging from seven days to 10 years.TopicsUS Capitol attackLaw (US)newsReuse this content More

  • in

    California moves to disbar Trump’s lawyer John Eastman over 2020 election

    California moves to disbar Trump’s lawyer John Eastman over 2020 electionFormer president’s attorney charged with misleading courts and making false statements about voter fraud in election California attorney regulators said on Thursday they will seek to disbar attorney John Eastman over his involvement in former US president Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election.The state bar of California charged Eastman, a former personal lawyer to Trump, with 11 counts of ethics violations, including misleading courts and making false public statements about voter fraud in the 2020 election.Eastman participated in a strategy “unsupported by facts or law” to obstruct the count of presidential electors in Congress following Democrat Joe Biden’s election victory, the bar’s complaint said.George Cardona, the bar’s chief trial counsel, said his office will ask a court to revoke Eastman’s law license.An attorney for Eastman, Randall Miller, disputed the allegations on Thursday, saying it was Eastman’s responsibility as a lawyer to provide Trump with a range of legal options to contest the election results.Eastman, a former law professor at Chapman University in California, drafted legal memos suggesting then vice-president Mike Pence could refuse to accept electoral votes from several swing states when Congress convened to certify the 2020 vote count. Pence rebuffed his arguments, saying he did not have legal authority.Eastman also represented Trump in a long-shot lawsuit at the US supreme court seeking to invalidate votes in four states where Trump had falsely claimed evidence of widespread voter fraud.Eastman repeated many of those claims at a rally outside the White House on 6 January 2021, after which a mob of Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol and delayed the congressional certification of the election.A state bar court will weigh the charges against Eastman and recommend any discipline. The California supreme court would need to approve disbarring or suspending Eastman.TopicsDonald TrumpLaw (US)CaliforniaUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Quebec woman pleads guilty to mailing poisonous ricin to Donald Trump

    Quebec woman pleads guilty to mailing poisonous ricin to Donald TrumpPascale Ferrier made the toxic substance herself and sent it with letters to Trump and Texas law enforcement officials in 2020 A French-Canadian woman has pleaded guilty to mailing ricin to Donald Trump.Pascale Ferrier, 55, admitted to making the poison at her residence in Quebec in September 2020, the US Department of Justice announced.Ferrier placed the ricin in envelopes that included letters addressed to Trump at the White House and to eight Texas law enforcement officials associated with detention facilities where Ferrier had been held.Ricin, a deadly poison, can be made from waste material produced in the processing of castor beans. It can be produced as a powder, mist or liquid, or in pellet form.‘These are conditions ripe for political violence’: how close is the US to civil war?Read moreIn each letter, Ferrier wrote that she included a “special gift”, adding that if it “doesn’t work, I will find a better recipe for another poison”. She also wrote: “or I might use my gun when I will be able to come” and concluded: “Enjoy.”According to court documents, the letter to Trump also stated: “You ruin USA and lead them to disaster. I have US cousins, then I don’t want the next four years with you as president. Give up and remove your application for this election.”The nine envelopes were intercepted in Texas and Washington DC. The Secret Service informed the FBI about the letter to Trump.“Special weapons of mass destruction coordinators and hazardous material experts were required to deploy to various locations where the letters were received, due to the presence of the ricin toxin powder in the envelopes,” court documents said.The letters were sent to a facility in Maryland for further testing.Shortly after the letters were intercepted, Ferrier drove to a border crossing in Buffalo, New York, where she was arrested. According to court documents, asked by border officials if she was OK, Ferrier said she was wanted by the FBI over the ricin letters.Authorities found in her car a loaded firearm, hundreds of rounds of ammunition, two knives, a stun gun, pepper spray, a truncheon and a false ID document.Ferrier pleaded guilty to violating federal prohibitions with respect to biological weapons. As part of a plea deal, she is expected to serve 262 months in prison. A sentencing hearing is scheduled for 26 April.The case comes amid a concerning rise in political violence towards lawmakers which experts warn endangers the health of US democracy.“There is no place for political violence in our country, and no excuse for threatening public officials or endangering our public servants,” the US attorney for the District of Columbia, Matthew M Graves, said in a statement.“We hope this resolution will serve as a warning that using our mail system to send a toxic substance and other threats of this type will cost you your freedom for many years.”Last November Joe Biden urged Americans to take a stand against political violence.“We are facing a defining moment,” the president said. “We must with one overwhelming, unified voice speak, as a country, and say there’s no place for voter intimidation or political violence in America.”TopicsDonald TrumpPoisonUS crimeUS politicsLaw (US)newsReuse this content More

  • in

    US jury convicts man pictured with feet on Pelosi’s desk during Capitol attack

    US jury convicts man pictured with feet on Pelosi’s desk during Capitol attackRichard Barnett was found guilty of felony obstruction of official proceedings, civil disorder and theft of government property A jury has convicted the man who invaded the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, with a mob of extremist Donald Trump supporters and was pictured with his foot up on a desk in then House speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office.Richard Barnett, from Gravette, Arkansas, was found guilty on all counts after the jury deliberated for about two hours on Monday, including felony obstruction of an official proceeding, civil disorder and theft of government property after he took an envelope from Pelosi’s desk.Barnett became infamous after pictures and video circulated of him lounging at a desk in Pelosi’s office during the riots.He spoke to a New York Times reporter shortly after storming Congress, where thin security was breached as hundreds charged the building following a rally where outgoing president Donald Trump encouraged the crowd to go to the Capitol in an attempt to overturn his election defeat to Joe Biden.Barnett recounted taking the envelope.“I didn’t steal it,” Barnett told the reporter. “I put a quarter [25c] on her desk, even though she ain’t fucking worth it, and I left her a note on her desk that says, ‘Nancy, Bigo [his nickname] was here, you bitch.’” He was arrested two days later.Bigo Barnett testified in his own defense. It was, at times, combative and there were some vulgarities. He directly addressed jurors during testimony.. with seeming attempts at humor & when seemingly caught in contradictionsJury returned guilty verdict with lightning speed— Scott MacFarlane (@MacFarlaneNews) January 23, 2023
    Barnett testified in his own defense and directly addressed the jury, though evidently failing to persuade them of his innocence. He had outbursts in court, at one point shouting “it’s not fair” but was silent upon the announcement of the verdict on Monday.US district judge Christopher Cooper is scheduled to sentence Barnett on 3 May. The judge agreed to let him remain free on certain conditions until his sentencing.NEW: Capitol riot defendant Jacob Therres has just pleaded guilty to assaulting/resisting police. He admits throwing 4×4 wooden plank and striking officer in the head. And he admits deploying chemical spray. Estimated sentencing range: 6-7 years in prison pic.twitter.com/WjZCqaaSlW— Scott MacFarlane (@MacFarlaneNews) January 23, 2023
    In another case, Jacob Therres, 25, of Fallston, Maryland, pleaded guilty to the felony charge of assaulting, resisting or impeding officers, using a dangerous weapon. He was arrested last November.Court documents declared that among multiple assaults on law enforcement officers on 6 January 2021, he sprayed chemicals and threw a long, heavy plank at a line of police officers outside the Capitol and the wood struck an officer’s head. Therres will be sentenced on 24 April.TopicsUS Capitol attackLaw (US)US politicsNancy PelosinewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Roe v Wade: US women win abortion rights – archive, January 1973

    Roe v Wade: US women win abortion rights – archive, 197323 January 1973: The supreme court rules that a woman has a near-absolute right to an abortion, but only in the first three months of her pregnancy Washington, 22 JanuaryIn a long awaited decision the United States supreme court ruled today that a woman has a near-absolute right to an abortion, but only in the first three months of her pregnancy. During the later stages the State has an increasing power of intervention, the court ruled by a seven to two majority; and during the last trimester can refuse to allow the operation.The decision, which came today as part of a lengthy ruling which declared the Texas and Georgia anti-abortion laws unconstitutional, has been generally welcomed by liberal groups here. Mrs Lee Giddings, of the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws, said today she was “absolutely thrilled.”US supreme court overturns abortion rights, upending Roe v WadeRead moreBut one of the two dissenting supreme court justices, the Nixon appointee Justice Byron White (the other dissenting justice was also a Nixon appointee, Mr William Rehnquist), later criticised the verdict as “improvident, extravagant, and an exercise of raw judicial power.”In his ruling, Justice Harry Blackmun said that during the first three months of a pregnancy “the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the woman’s doctor.” After that, the State “In promoting its interest in the mother’s health” may regulate the abortion procedure by among other things, making laws, regulating the doctor’s terms of reference.Only in the third three-month period, when a foetus could presumably live, if there was a premature birth, can the State “regulate or even forbid abortion.” The justices ruled the State could intervene thus “where it was necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of life or the health of the mother.”The one dissenting voice raised today at the supreme court ruling came from the Women’s National Abortion Action Committee, which condemned the “artificial and arbitrary” time limits imposed by judges. A spokesperson, as they say here, says that “a woman should always have an absolute right to determine what happens to her own body.” Harsh reaction is also expected, of course, from the Roman Catholic church and other anti-abortion lobby groups.This is an edited extract. Read the article in full.TopicsAbortionFrom the Guardian archiveRoe v WadeUS supreme courtReproductive rightsLaw (US)WomenUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    ‘I see things now that I’ve never seen before’: the Maricopa county attorney fighting false election claims

    Interview‘I see things now that I’ve never seen before’: the Maricopa county attorney fighting false election claimsRachel LeingangTom Liddy, a lifelong Republican, is a target of his own party for fending off lawsuits against the county over blatant election lies Down the hall from Tom Liddy’s office in downtown Phoenix, a whiteboard tracks all the election law cases filed against Maricopa county, where he works as civil division chief. Liddy has defended the county against dozens of claims, including that the 2020 election was stolen and that only hand-counted ballots can be trusted.In his office, he keeps ammunition in a safe to protect himself should a threat, which have become more frequent, become reality at work. At his desk, he’s surrounded by photos of his family, who have also become a target.Republicans have already filed dozens of bills to restrict voting in 2023Read moreLiddy is the son of G Gordon Liddy, the longtime political operative who was sentenced to prison for his role in the Watergate scandal. The 15-year veteran of the Maricopa county attorney’s office has run for Congress, hosted a conservative radio show, and defended the county in high-profile trials, including a racial profiling case that became a national flashpoint.The lifelong Republican, who calls himself a “student of politics”, still maintains his conservative principles, despite the pushback from members of his own party who have sued the county and made him a central character in their attacks. Before his work at the county, he worked as an attorney for the Republican National Committee.In recent years, he’s seen more cases based on flimsier facts. A barrage of suits after the 2022 election, when Democrats won key statewide races, contended that that year’s election was stolen as well. The county has succeeded in the courts – though it has come at a political cost for the largely Republican elected officials who run the county.As a result of his work defending Maricopa county, Liddy became the subject of a leaked video shared on social media by allies of Kari Lake, the failed Republican candidate for Arizona governor, which he says led to death threats. The FBI recently filed charges against a Texas man who threatened Liddy and his children.Known for his fiery comments and strongly worded legal letters, Liddy isn’t one to shy away from a fight.“I would hope that my friends would have kind things to say about me and the people who crossed me would be still pissed off about it,” he said.The Guardian spoke to Liddy about the rise in election lawsuits and how he’s protecting his family from violent threats against them.This interview has been edited for length and clarity.There were even more post-election lawsuits after the 2022 election than in 2020. Why do you think that is?In 2020, we saw a lot of lawsuits filed that would never have been filed before. I think it opened up the eyes of a lot of people. ‘Hey, you can contest these elections more often than if you just lose by 510 votes.’ What’s different is when you lose by more than a little bit, and you sue not to canvass or re-canvass or recount or contest, but just throw the spaghetti on the wall and see what sticks.What we’re seeing now, which I never saw before, is folks not just contesting the election, but rather demonizing county officials or state officials or entrepreneurs who are in the business of creating voting systems or voting machines. Prior to the end of the cold war, the Soviets were trying to convince the world that our system of government was no good and was no better than theirs. And now, I think that there are folks in this country that are starting to feel that way, or at least, trying to persuade others of that. I see things now that I’ve never seen before.In a few of the election lawsuits in 2022, Maricopa county asked for lawyers’ fees or sanctions – a rare move. What’s the thought process there?When lawyers go into the court, be it a state court or federal court, you may only bring facts forward and you’re obligated to do an investigation to determine that the facts that you’re getting ready to present to the court are true. We’ve been hearing a lot of stuff in 2020, 2021 and 2022 said in court that are not true. If somebody goes into court and says something that’s not true, egregiously so, the court has the power to call them on it.When we asked for sanctions, we got sanctions in federal court. The plaintiffs went in and said, ‘The elections Maricopa county is running are unconstitutional because they don’t use paper ballots.’ What? How can you say we don’t use paper ballots? The plaintiffs were two individuals that were running for office at the time. Each had voted for themselves on paper ballots for at least the last 10 years. So we asked for sanctions.I think the courts have a responsibility as well. We are a nation of laws. We adjudicate our differences peacefully in court. You can’t do it by lying to the judge or lying to the jury. If you think that’s the right way to do it, then you’re a Pino: Patriot In Name Only.Candidates have filed lawsuits over their losses even when the margins were wide. You mentioned two candidates, Mark Finchem and Kari Lake, who tried to outlaw tabulation machines. Can you seek sanctions against the plaintiffs themselves or is that atypical?Atypical, but there is a method to do it. Generally, sanctions are against the attorneys, not just because they should know better, but they must know better. It’s their obligation. There are rules of the court and rules of civil procedure. One of the rules is that if you make claims before court, you have to do at least a basic investigation to ensure that those facts are true. You can’t just be hired by a plaintiff, the plaintiff says, ‘up is down, down is up, black is white, white is black,’ and you write it in your brief and tell the court. The standards are not that high, but we’ve been hearing some things that aren’t even close to true in some of these lawsuits for three years. Somebody’s got to stop it. The courts have an obligation, in my view.Are you still a Republican?Oh, yeah.Most of the people filing these egregious lawsuits are Republicans. Has this affected how you see your politics or your beliefs?No. I’ve been a Republican since long before I could vote. One of the proudest days of my life was my 18th birthday when I went and registered to vote. I’m a real Republican and I will not change. I will be when they bury me. Now, other folks that come in here and claim to be Republican or claim to be conservative, they don’t even know what conservative is, really. I not only want smaller government, lower taxes, more personal responsibility, greater protections for the private ownership of firearms, I’m pro-life. Being a Republican and being a Democrat has never really been about being for one candidate. It’s always been for a basket of ideas.But that’s me, Tom Liddy the person, speaking, not Tom Liddy the government lawyer. My political beliefs don’t influence what I do. I defend my clients and my client is Maricopa county. I’m happy and pleased to do that. I think it would be an abuse of the public trust to hijack government power to benefit one party or the other. I just would never do that.How much does it cost the county to defend itself against these lawsuits? You mentioned that before the 2020 election, you helped the county bolster its election law team, increasing from one specialized lawyer to about eight people who dedicate at least some of their time on elections. It seems like it’s been expensive.No doubt that it’s expensive. I don’t have that figure. The real expense, much, much larger than just the legal expenses, is the time that the county employees, be they in the recorder’s office or in the elections office or support of the board of supervisors, have to put into it, because normally they’re doing the government’s business. My salary is what my salary is, whether I’m in court duking it out with somebody defending the county or not. These other folks have jobs to do. So you’ve got to ask yourself what they could have done that they weren’t able to do. The dollars and cents is a lot but I think the opportunity cost is much, much higher.The video that captured your phone conversation with the Lake campaign …[Interrupts] Captured 2min and 8sec of a 12-minute phone call.The video showed a heated conversation between you and lawyers for Lake and the Republican National Committee. It was posted online and spread among rightwing channels to imply you weren’t being helpful or transparent with the attorneys. Has something like that happened to you before?That’s an ethical violation for a lawyer to tape a conversation with another lawyer without telling the lawyer. So somebody put that on the internet and said that a Kari Lake campaign volunteer called me – that’s not true. I called a lawyer who was working for the Lake campaign and other candidates. We had many phone calls a day leading up to that. One of the other lawyers there was – and I didn’t know at the time – a lawyer for the Republican National Committee. After we’d had a conversation and they had asked me maybe three or four questions, I said, ‘let me go get the answers for you.’ And then this other guy came on the line and said, ‘Now it’s really important that we get these questions answered quickly … because there’s a lot of angry people out there that want to take to the streets, and I don’t want to have to tell them that Tom Liddy has not been cooperative.’I said, ‘That sounds like a threat.’ I said, ‘Tell them whatever you want to tell them, but if you’re not happy working with me, then don’t work with me, don’t call me, don’t ask me questions. But don’t think for a minute you could intimidate me, because you cannot, and you can’t intimidate Maricopa county, either.’ I admit I used colorful language. It was recorded, and they took only the last two minutes and put it out on the internet.Since then, I’ve been getting death threats. One of those death threats is very real, very specific. The Dallas field office of the FBI notified me of it. The FBI came in and met with my employer and my employer told me to arm myself and that the ammunition I had was not the correct ammunition. They issued me this [pulls out a box of bullets from a safe in his office] – that’s a hollow point. That’s a man-stopper. They issued me and my four children body armor, because this son of a bitch from Texas specifically threatened to kill my four children.The Texas man who made those threats was just charged recently, right?Arrested and denied bail in Lubbock, Texas. That’s the one who threatened to kill my four children, but there are plenty others that were not specific. That makes it difficult for my family to enjoy Thanksgiving, when I’ve got 24-hours-a-day armed security around my home, cameras all over my home and body armor for my kids, and I gotta pack iron everywhere I go. Listen, I’m a second amendment guy – I got plenty to protect myself, all sorts of different calibers. Come at me from up close or far away, I’m prepared. But that’s not how you want to live. That’s not how you want to celebrate Christmas and Thanksgiving. So this guy was arrested I think shortly after Christmas, but that’s what my family had to deal with.Did it give you any sense of relief when he was arrested?Definitely a sense of relief, but also just happiness that the system works, somebody’s going to pay the piper. Now, he’s entitled to defense counsel, he’s entitled to a trial, a jury of his peers. I’m looking forward to flying to Texas to testify against him. I’ll be happy to do it because that’s the way the system works.Do you still have security at your home?I’m not going to comment on that. This office will provide me whatever my family needs to keep us safe. I will say, the threat level has changed since this guy was not only arrested, but denied bail. But there are still security at my home, and we still have body armor, and I still carry a firearm with me.Is it accurate to say that this was not happening before the past couple of years? Or have you experienced similar levels of threats at other times in your career?I have experienced levels of threats before in my career, but nowhere near this volume. This is the only time that the FBI contacted me.Elections have become so polarized, with threats against elections officials and lawyers like yourself and endless lawsuits after a candidate loses. What gets us out of this situation as a country?I would say the same thing that got us out of previous problems that we’ve had. Sometimes the troublemakers are either held responsible, or they fade away, or they disappear in a flash. I think there’ll be more than just lawsuits to change it. I am very optimistic that we will come together again, and we will move forward, and our best days are ahead of us. But I’m not so naive as to think we can solve this problem by one lawsuit here, one Bar complaint there.Do you think things will get better or worse in the short term, in terms of the amount of misinformation and disinformation after elections?I think better. I think that a lot of the stuff we saw in 2020 was very chaotic. Some of the stuff we have seen in 2022 was a little bit more organized. Not necessarily well founded, but a little bit more organized. My fear is that this sort of thing becomes an industry and that if people can make a name for themselves or make money, then that’s an incentive to keep doing it. Election contests are an important part of the law, but just suing for the sake of suing, and suing so you can say you’re suing and then set up a defense fund and raise millions of dollars – that’s not healthy for our society.TopicsUS newsThe fight for democracyRepublicansArizonaUS elections 2020US midterm elections 2022Donald TrumpLaw (US)interviewsReuse this content More