More stories

  • in

    Trump lawyer refused to report all Mar-a-Lago records had been turned in

    Trump lawyer refused to report all Mar-a-Lago records had been turned inTrump told lawyer to report to National Archives that he had given them all the documents, but lawyer was ‘not sure’ that was true A lawyer for Donald Trump refused to report to the National Archives that the former president had turned over all Oval Office documents as required out of concern that the claim was a lie.Earlier this year, Trump returned 15 boxes of federal government records from his Mar-a-Lago resort home to the National Archives, and he directed one of his lawyers, Alex Cannon, to inform the agency that the boxes contained all the documents taken from his time in office.Cannon, who was facilitating the records’ return, refused Trump’s request because he “told others he was not sure if other documents were still at the [Florida resort] and would be uncomfortable making such a claim”, The Washington Post reported.Faced with Cannon’s refusal, Trump later directed a statement in February to aides saying that all his documents from his time in office had been returned to the National Archives and Records Administration. But federal agents later learned Trump still had government documents at Mar-a-Lago, including some records marked with the highest level of classification.The FBI seized those documents during its 8 August search of Mar-a-Lago.On Monday, the National Archives released a letter that revealed they had alerted lawyers for Trump in May 2021 that the former president’s correspondence with Kim Jong-un, North Korea’s leader, were missing along with two dozen boxes of other records.The US justice department has been investigating whether Trump’s unauthorized retention of such government secrets violated multiple laws, including the Espionage Act.Trump’s aides turned over a set of documents in June to the justice department. The August search of Mar-a-Lago produced the seizure of thousands of documents, among them dozens of classified records.When archives officials opened the initial 15 boxes they recovered in January, they found a large volume of documents with classified markings and notified the justice department, which set off the chain of events leading the criminal investigation into Trump.Legal wrangling between the justice department and Trump’s lawyers has slowed that investigation down.Trump has claimed, without evidence, that the FBI planted evidence during its search of Mar-a-Lago residence. The federal judge presiding over those claims, Aileen Cannon, granted Trump’s request for an independent official known as a “special master” to review the seized documents before the case proceeded further.That review process is expected to last until between the end of November and the middle of December.TopicsDonald TrumpMar-a-LagoUS 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

    ‘He’s done’: how Donald Trump’s legal woes have just gotten a lot worse

    ‘He’s done’: how Donald Trump’s legal woes have just gotten a lot worseNew York civil lawsuit accusing Trump family of ‘staggering’ fraud could derail presidential bid, experts say Donald Trump’s legal perils have become insurmountable and could snuff out the former US president’s hopes of an election-winning comeback, according to political analysts and legal experts.On Wednesday, Trump and three of his adult children were accused of lying to tax collectors, lenders and insurers in a “staggering” fraud scheme that routinely misstated the value of his properties to enrich themselves.The civil lawsuit, filed by New York’s attorney general, came as the FBI investigates Trump’s holding of sensitive government documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida and a special grand jury in Georgia considers whether he and others attempted to influence state election officials after his defeat there by Joe Biden.The former US president has repeatedly hinted that he intends to run for the White House again in 2024. But the cascade of criminal, civil and congressional investigations could yet derail that bid.01:13“He’s done,” said Allan Lichtman, a history professor at American University, in Washington, who has accurately predicted every presidential election since 1984. “He’s got too many burdens, too much baggage to be able to run again even presuming he escapes jail, he escapes bankruptcy. I’m not sure he’s going to escape jail.”Allen Weisselberg, Trump Organization financial chief, pleads guilty to tax fraudRead moreAfter a three-year investigation, Letitia James, the New York attorney general, alleged that Trump provided fraudulent statements of his net worth and false asset valuations to obtain and satisfy loans, get insurance benefits and pay lower taxes. Offspring Don Jr, Ivanka and Eric were also named as defendants.At a press conference, James riffed on the title of Trump’s 1987 memoir and business how-to book, The Art of the Deal.“This investigation revealed that Donald Trump engaged in years of illegal conduct to inflate his net worth, to deceive banks and the people of the great state of New York. Claiming you have money that you do not have does not amount to ‘the art of the deal’. It’s the art of the steal,” she said.Her office requested that the former president pay at least $250m in penalties and that his family be banned from running businesses in the state.James cannot bring criminal charges against Trump in this civil investigation but she said she was referring allegations of criminal fraud to federal prosecutors in Manhattan as well as the Internal Revenue Service.Trump repeated his go-to defence that the suit is “another witch hunt” against him and again referred to James, who is Black, as racist, via his Truth Social platform, also calling her “a fraud who campaigned on a ‘get Trump’ platform, despite the fact that the city is one of the crime and murder disasters of the world under her watch!”But critics said the suit strikes at the heart of Trump’s self-portrayal as a successful property developer who made billions, hosted the reality TV show The Apprentice and promised to apply that business acumen to the presidency.Laurence Tribe, a constitutional law professor at Harvard University, noted that the civil component “involves things of particular significance to Trump and his family and his organisation, namely their ability to defraud the public, to defraud banks, to defraud insurance companies, and to continue to subsist through corruption. Without all of that corruption, the entire Trump empire is involved in something like meltdown.”Tribe added: “Trump is probably more concerned with things of this kind than he is with having to wear an orange jumpsuit and maybe answer a criminal indictment … As a practical matter, this is probably going to cause more sleepless nights for Mr Trump than almost anything else.”No previous former president has faced investigations so numerous and so serious. Last month FBI agents searched Mar-a-Lago and seized official documents marked Top Secret, Secret and Confidential. Trump faces possible indictment for violating the Espionage Act, obstruction of a federal investigation or mishandling sensitive government records.As so often during his business career, Trump sought to throw sand in the legal gears. He bought time by persuading a court to appoint a judge, Raymond Dearie, as a special master to review the documents. But so far Dearie appears to be far from a yes-man. On Tuesday he warned Trump’s lawyers: “My view is you can’t have your cake and eat it too.”Special master in Trump case appears skeptical of declassification claimsRead moreThe ex-president also faces a state grand jury investigation in Georgia over efforts to subvert that state’s election result in 2020.The justice department is investigating his role in the deadly January 6 attack on the US Capitol by a mob of his supporters intent on preventing the certification of Biden’s election victory. Its efforts have been boosted by the parallel investigation by a House of Representatives committee, whose hearings are set to resume next week.In addition, the Trump Organization – which manages hotels, golf courses and other properties around the world – is set to go on trial next month in a criminal case alleging that it schemed to give untaxed perks to senior executives, including its longtime finance chief Allen Weisselberg, who alone took more than $1.7m in extras.In a further setback on Wednesday, arguably Trump’s worst-ever day of legal defeats, a federal appeals court permitted the justice department to resume its review of classified records seized from Mar-a-Lago as part of its criminal investigation.The former president, meanwhile, insisted that he did nothing wrong in retaining the documents. “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” he told the Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying: ‘It’s declassified’.”“Even by thinking about it, because you’re sending it to Mar-a-Lago or to wherever you’re sending it … There can be a process, but there doesn’t have to be.”Trump says you can declassify documents by just thinking about it pic.twitter.com/cFbQ1zclnq— Acyn (@Acyn) September 22, 2022
    Despite it all, Trump has been laying the groundwork for a potential comeback campaign and has accused Biden’s administration of targeting him to undermine his political prospects.Asked by a conservative radio host what would happen if he was indicted over the classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, Trump replied: “I think you’d have problems in this country the likes of which perhaps we’ve never seen before. I don’t think the people of the United States would stand for it.”Kurt Bardella, an adviser to the Democratic National Committee, said: “If the best defence you have for your conduct is: if you hold me accountable, there will be violence, that sounds like someone who has no business being either in public service or being outside of jail.”Bardella expressed hope that, at long last, Trump would be held to account. “Everything about Donald Trump has always been about the grift. It’s always been about the con. And now his unmasking is at hand.”TopicsDonald TrumpLaw (US)New YorkIvanka TrumpDonald Trump JrMar-a-LagoUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Trump legal team admits possibility that ex-president could be charged

    Trump legal team admits possibility that ex-president could be chargedLawyers tell special master reviewing Mar-a-Lago case he should not have to say which documents he may have declassified Donald Trump’s legal team has acknowledged the possibility that the former president could be indicted amid the investigation into his retention of government secrets at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.Despite Trump’s claiming days earlier that he couldn’t imagine being charged, his lawyers made the stark admission that he could be in a court filing on Monday proposing how to conduct an outside review of documents that were seized by the FBI in August.80s hits and nuclear secrets: security concerns plague Trump’s Mar-a-LagoRead moreA “special master” – a court official appointed to help administer the review process, the federal judge Raymond Dearie – had previously asked Trump to detail any materials stored at Mar-a-Lago that he may have decided to declassify.In the court filing, Trump’s lawyers – who had successfully pushed for the special master’s appointment – said that requiring him to do so could hurt any possible defense should he later be charged, and that he should not have to “fully and specifically disclose a defense to the merits of any subsequent indictment without such a requirement being evident” during the review.Dearie was set to have his first meeting with Trump’s lawyers and their opponents in the case, the US justice department’s prosecutors, on Tuesday in federal court in Brooklyn. He reportedly rejected the Trump side’s request to delay asserting what materials he may have classified.As of Tuesday, Trump’s lawyers had contended he could have declassified any of the documents if he wished, but they have stopped short of saying he actually did.The former president so far has been loth to publicly consider the possibility that he could be criminally charged following the FBI’s search of his resort. In a 15 September interview with the conservative radio host Hugo Hewitt, Trump said, “I can’t imagine being indicted, I’ve done nothing wrong” – in either the classified documents case or the investigation into his efforts to undermine the results of the 2020 presidential election, which he lost to Joe Biden.Trump also said, “I don’t think the people of the United States would stand for it,” and that charges wouldn’t deter him from running for the White House again in 2024 if he wanted.Justice department prosecutors filed their own proposal for the outside review of the seized documents, with key differences: while Trump’s team wanted Dearie to make the seized documents reviewable within days, the justice department maintained that he should first check with the federal agency in charge of managing government records.Dearie was appointed to his role by the Florida-based federal judge Aileen Cannon, who is overseeing the document-review process made necessary by the Mar-a-Lago search.Cannon gave Dearie a deadline of 30 November to review the documents.The FBI said its search of Trump’s resort came after agents developed compelling evidence that the former president was storing secret government materials there. According to officials, agents seized about 11,000 documents as well as nearly 50 empty folders emblazoned with classified markings.Trump and his associates have also been under congressional investigation for their actions before, during and after the deadly US Capitol attack that a mob of his supporters staged on 6 January 2021.The attack aimed to stop the US House and Congress from certifying Biden’s victory in the previous year’s race for the Oval Office. Among other things, Trump is accused of ignoring pleas to call off his supporters on the day of the siege.TopicsDonald TrumpUS politicsMar-a-LagonewsReuse 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

    Trump lawyers reject US government’s arguments against special master – as it happened

    Lawyers for former president Donald Trump have submitted their counterargument to the justice department’s attempt to halt a federal judge’s order preventing them from reviewing documents taken from Mar-a-Lago.The filing is the latest in the squabble over the special master Trump wants appointed to sift through the documents, which the government has objected to because it stops them from reading the materials seized from the former president’s south Florida estate.You can read the filing here. The legal battle over documents seized by the government from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort continued, with the former president’s lawyers rejecting the justice department’s efforts to convince a federal judge to let them continue reviewing the materials. The filing avoided questions of whether what was taken was indeed protected – despite Trump’s assertions that he had declassified everything that was found before leaving office.Here’s a rundown of what else happened today:
    Trump also rejected the justice department’s nominees for special master, though declined to say why publicly.
    Republicans are considering investigating the security failures that led up to the January 6 attack if they win control of the House.
    Democratic candidates are polling strongly in some swing states – but an analysis from The New York Times warns it could be an illusion.
    A new poll indicates sizable minorities of Americans would be ok with unelected leaders, and many would also be ok with the government overruling minority ethnicities and religions.
    Democrats have spent almost $19 million across eight states in controversial efforts to promote rightwing Republican candidates, believing them to be weaker in the November midterm elections.
    Meanwhile in Congress, lawmakers may be back in Washington but not much has happened – yet.The Senate will soon confirm president Joe Biden’s 80th judicial nominee, CNN reports, as Democrats look to make their mark on the federal judiciary:After Salvador Mendoza is confirmed today to the Ninth Circuit, he will be the 80th Biden judicial nominee confirmed — something Schumer just said amounts to more than Trump, Obama, George W. Bush at similar points in their presidencies— Manu Raju (@mkraju) September 12, 2022
    The chamber’s Democratic leader Chuck Schumer has also confirmed that work is ongoing on a new government funding bill, and on finding 10 GOP senators willing to sign on to a bill codifying same-sex marriage rights, according to Politico:Schumer updates: Senate on verge of confirming 80th judge of Biden presidencyBipartisan group still working on same-sex marriage bill, trying to get GOP votesWork ongoing on bill to fund government past Sept. 30— Burgess Everett (@burgessev) September 12, 2022
    “If you thought Fulton was a good county to bring your crime to, to bring your violence to, you are wrong.” So declares Fani Willis, the district attorney in Georgia’s Fulton County, in the opening lines of a profile published in The New York Times. While the statement was made in the context of a gang racketeering case, the piece makes clear it could also be said about Donald Trump and the people from Georgia and elsewhere who helped in his attempt to meddle with the state’s 2020 election result. Willis has convened the special grand jury that is investigating that campaign, which has subpoenaed Trump allies including attorney Rudy Giuliani, Republican senator Lindsey Graham and others. The piece doesn’t contain much new details about what the grand jurors have learned, but it makes clear the scope of the ongoing investigation, which some analysts have warned is a source of legal peril for the former president.Here’s more from the profile:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}In recent weeks, Ms. Willis has called dozens of witnesses to testify before a special grand jury investigating efforts to undo Mr. Trump’s defeat, including a number of prominent pro-Trump figures who traveled, against their will, from other states. It was long arm of the law stuff, and it emphasized how her investigation, though playing out more than 600 miles from Washington, D.C., is no sideshow.
    Rather, the Georgia inquiry has emerged as one of the most consequential legal threats to the former president, and it is already being shaped by Ms. Willis’s distinct and forceful personality and her conception of how a local prosecutor should do her job. Her comfort in the public eye stands in marked contrast to the low-key approach of another Trump legal pursuer, Attorney General Merrick B. Garland.
    Ms. Willis, 50, a Democrat, is the first Black woman to lead Georgia’s largest district attorney’s office. In her 19 years as a prosecutor, she has led more than 100 jury trials and handled hundreds of murder cases. Since she became chief prosecutor, her office’s conviction rate has stood at close to 90 percent, according to a spokesperson.
    Her experience is the source of her confidence, which appears unshaken by the scrutiny — and criticism — the Trump case has brought.There’s been a new development in the ongoing legal wrangling over the FBI’s search of Mar-a-Lago and the documents found there. As The Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reports, Trump’s attorneys have objected to the candidates for special master proposed by the justice department:New: Trump objects to proposed Special Master candidates proposed by DOJ — says it would offer rationale to judge privately https://t.co/1zfTaUzUt6— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) September 12, 2022
    Trump objects even to former US district court judge Barbara Jones, who was the special master in the Michael Cohen case in 2018 and Rudy Giuliani in 2021— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) September 12, 2022
    Last week, a federal judge granted Trump’s request for a special master to review documents taken by the FBI from Mar-a-Lago to screen for privileged material. The decision stopped the government’s ability to review the seized documents, and the justice department is appealing it.Twenty-one years after 9/11, CBS News reports that five of the defendants held at Guantanamo Bay for alleged involvement in the attacks are negotiating plea deals with the government.The defendants have been incarcerated for years due to disputes over what evidence can be used in the court and, more recently, the Covid-19 pandemic. Plea deals would resolve several of their cases and likely result in lengthy jail sentences, but CBS reports some relatives of those killed in the attack oppose such agreements. “The families are outraged,” said Debra Burlingame, whose brother was among those killed when hijackers steered his plane into the Pentagon.Here’s more from CBS:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}The chief defendant is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-described architect of 9/11. The other four defendants are Ramzi Binalshibh, Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi, Walid bin Attash and Ammar al-Baluchi.
    The possibility of a plea deal has angered the families of some 9/11 victims, including Debra Burlingame, whose brother, pilot Charles “Chic” Burlingame, was killed when al Qaeda terrorists took over his plane, American Airlines Flight 77, and crashed it into the Pentagon.
    “We didn’t have remains for weeks,” his sister Debra Burlingame told CBS News. “We were constantly saying to each other, ‘What would Chic want? What would Chic do?’”
    Burlingame said she has been in touch with other 9/11 families.
    “The families are outraged,” she said of the possibility of plea deals. “They don’t want closure, they want justice.”
    Another group, 9/11 Families for Peaceful Tomorrows, has said that a guilty plea and agreement not to appeal the sentence “would be partly in recognition of the torture each of the defendants experienced” and bring “some measure of judicial finality.”
    “All five defendants and the government are all engaged in good faith negotiations, with the idea of bringing this trial which has become a forever trial to an end,” said James Connell, a defense attorney for al-Baluchi.
    “Mr. al-Baluchi’s number one priority is obtaining medical care for his torture,” Connell continued. “In order to get that medical care, he is willing to plead guilty to a substantial sentence at Guantanamo in exchange for a guarantee of medical care and dropping the death penalty.The Democratic candidate for Senate in Pennsylvania has put abortion at the center of his pitch to voters, in the latest sign the party is banking on the supreme court’s overturning of Roe v Wade to drum up support in the midterms. Richard Luscombe reports:John Fetterman has placed abortion rights at the top of his agenda to capture Pennsylvania’s Senate seat in November, telling supporters at a raucous rally on Sunday: “Women are the reason we can win. Don’t piss off women.”The Democrat was targeting comments made by his Republican opponent Mehmet Oz in May that abortion at any stage of pregnancy was “murder”.Oz, in keeping with a recent trend among Republican candidates, has attempted to soften his extremist position as the fall’s midterm elections draw closer, insisting that he now believes in exceptions for rape, incest and the health of the woman.But Oz’s rival was uncompromising in his criticism during Sunday’s rally at a community college in rural Pennsylvania attended by several thousand supporters, including a large number of women in pink “Fetterwoman” T-shirts.‘Women are the reason we can win,’ John Fetterman says at Pennsylvania rallyRead moreThe justice department has brought charges against a Texas woman who left threatening voice messages on the phone of a judge involved in disputes around documents taken by the FBI from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort, Reuters reports.“Donald Trump has been disqualified long ago, and he’s marked for assassination. You’re helping him, ma’am,” said one of the voicemails, which was allegedly left by Tiffani Shea Gish of the Houston area for Aileen Cannon, a US district judge in Fort Pierce, Florida. Cannon, who was appointed to the bench by Trump, last week granted his request for a special master to review documents taken from Mar-a-Lago as part of the government’s investigation into whether the former president unlawfully retained government secrets.Here’s more from Reuters’ report:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Gish faces two criminal charges – influencing a federal official by threat and interstate communications with a threat to kidnap or injure.
    Cannon, who was appointed to the bench in 2020 by Trump, ruled last week that she was granting the former president’s request over the Justice Department’s objections to install a “special master” to review the seized records to weed out possibly privileged materials.
    The complaint said that on Sept. 3, Cannon forwarded three separate voicemails from Gish, who referred to herself in some of them as “Evelyn Salt,” to the U.S. Marshals Service.
    “Donald Trump has been disqualified long ago, and he’s marked for assassination. You’re helping him, ma’am,” one of the voicemails said, according to the complaint.
    “He’s marked for assassination and so are you,” the caller also said, while including an expletive.
    After FBI agents identified a cellphone number associated with the voicemails, they interviewed Gish at her home, the complaint stated. The FBI said she admitted to leaving the voicemails and confirmed that the number belonged to her and no one else had access to the cellphone.One of the most controversial electoral tactics Democrats have deployed recently is spending money to elevate rightwing candidates in Republican primaries, the logic being that more extreme nominees will hurt the GOP in the November midterm elections.The Washington Post has tallied the money spent on these candidates in an analysis released today, and found it adds up to almost $19 million across eight states, but could go up to $53 million if spending in Illinois is factored in. In that state, Democrats spent massively to help a Republican who said party leaders in the state should not have told Donald Trump to leave the White House when his term was up.The tactic is controversial because it could backfire and result in Republicans who hold extreme views – such as that the 2020 election was stolen – elected to major offices in the November midterms.Here’s more from the Post’s story:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}The approach often involves TV ads suggesting that a far-right GOP candidate is too conservative for a state or district and drawing attention to the candidate’s hard line views on abortion, guns and former president Donald Trump — messages that resonate with conservative primary voters. In other cases, Democrats have run ads attacking GOP candidates seen as tougher to defeat in general elections in ways that could erode support for them in Republican primaries.
    Total Democratic spending rises to roughly $53 million when a ninth state, Illinois, is added. There, the Democratic Governors Association and the campaign of Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) spent a combined $34.5 million successfully elevating a GOP candidate who has said it was “appalling” that party leaders in Illinois wanted Trump to concede the 2020 election.
    Some Democrats explain their actions by saying they are simply getting a jump on attacking Republican candidates for the general election, while others openly acknowledge trying to secure weaker competition in the fall. But there is little dispute about the effect of altering the Republican primaries in ways that could affect the November matchups.
    As primary season nears its Tuesday endpoint, Democrats are giving the strategy one more try in New Hampshire, in two congressional races. In the Republican Senate primary, Senate Majority PAC, a group aligned with Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), is spending $3.2 million on ads that effectively enhance the candidacy in the GOP primary of ret. Gen. Don Bolduc, by portraying his more moderate rival, state Senate President Chuck Morse, who has trailed in GOP primary polls to Bolduc, as beholden to the party establishment.Neck and neck in Ohio senateIt is only one poll but a recent survey in the Ohio senate race shows Democrat Tim Ryan basically level with right-wing Trump ally and famous author JD Vance. Ohio is a state has has been drifting more red and so the news fits in with a revival of Democrat fortunes over the past month.The Hill has more details: A USA TODAY Network Ohio/Suffolk University poll released Monday found 47 percent of Ohio general election voters said they would vote or lean toward Ryan if the Senate election were held today, while 46 percent said they could back Vance.Six percent of respondents in the poll said they were undecided, while 1 percent said they would support someone else. The slim margin between the two leading candidates falls within the poll’s margin of error of 4.4 percentage points.The legal battle over documents seized by the government from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort continued, with the former president’s lawyers rejecting the justice department’s efforts to convince a federal judge to let them continue reviewing the materials. The filing avoided questions of whether what was taken was indeed protected – despite Trump’s assertions that he had declassified everything that was found before leaving office.Here’s a rundown of what else happened today:
    Republicans are considering investigating the security failures that led up to the January 6 attack if they win control of the House.
    Democratic candidates are polling strongly in some swing states – but an analysis from The New York Times warns it could be an illusion.
    A new poll indicates sizable minorities of Americans would be ok with unelected leaders, and many would also be ok with the government overruling minority ethnicities and religions.
    Ukraine is planning to ask Washington for more long-distance weapons to continue its offensive into Russian-held territory, including a missile system its ally had held off on providing for fears it could provoke Moscow, The Wall Street Journal reports.Citing a document shared with US lawmakers, the Journal reports Ukraine will ask for 29 types of weapons and ammunition systems, including anti-ship missiles, drones and tanks. It will also ask for the Army Tactical Missile System, a long-range weapon that Washington fears could be used to strike Russian territory and start a war with Ukraine’s western allies.Here’s more from the Journal’s report:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}The Biden administration, which has dispatched more than $15 billion worth of weapons and other security assistance to Ukraine, has declined to provide that system over concerns Ukraine could use it to strike Russian territory and spark a wider conflict with the West.
    Ukraine’s list of requirements for “offensive operations” includes 29 types of weapon systems and ammunition. Among them are tanks, drones, artillery systems; more Harpoon antiship missiles; and 2,000 missiles for the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, or Himars, which the United States began providing earlier this year.
    Ukraine’s requests come as its forces have routed Russian troops in northeastern Ukraine.
    It follows the recent publication of a strategy statement by Valeriy Zaluzhny, the commander in chief of Ukraine’s force, and Mykhailo Zabrodsky, a member of the Ukrainian parliament and a senior military officer who led the most significant Ukrainian counterattack in the 2014 war with Russia.
    They argued that Russia has long-range cruise missiles that greatly outdistance the systems in the Ukrainian inventory. A turning point could come if the Ukrainians also had longer-range systems, they argued, specifically mentioning the ATACMS.Trump may be in hot water, legally speaking, for allegedly taking government secrets with him when he left the White House, but as Ramon Antonio Vargas reports, a new book reveals he never wanted to leave in the first place:In the days after Joe Biden defeated him in the 2020 election, Donald Trump told an aide he was “just not going to leave” the White House, according to a new book on his presidency and its chaotic aftermath.“We’re never leaving,” he vowed to another aide, says the book from New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman titled Confidence Man: The Making of Donald Trump and the Breaking of America. “How can you leave when you won an election?”CNN, where Haberman also serves as a political analyst, said Monday it reviewed reporting for the book – set for a 4 October release – and published new details on Trump’s insistence that he intended to stay at the White House despite his electoral loss to Biden.Trump threatened not to leave White House after election loss, book saysRead more More

  • in

    Senate intelligence chair urges judge to allow briefing on Trump Mar-a-Lago search

    Senate intelligence chair urges judge to allow briefing on Trump Mar-a-Lago searchDemocrat says clarification from judge urgently needed and the mishandling of state secrets could have disastrous consequences The Democratic chair of the US Senate intelligence committee has demanded that a federal judge allows the committee to be briefed on the FBI’s search of Mar-a-Lago and the potential damage caused by Donald Trump hoarding top secret documents at his private club.Mark Warner, the US senator from Virginia, said that there was confusion over whether the Department of Justice (DoJ) and the FBI were allowed to brief the Senate committee on their review of classified documents held at the former president’s club-resort and residence in Palm Beach, Florida.The FBI searched the property on 8 August, retrieving more than 100 classified documents.Last week a Trump-appointed judge, Aileen Cannon of the federal district court for thesouthern district of Florida, sided with Trump and ordered a “special master” to oversee the documents. The DoJ is appealing the decision, but its criminal investigation of Trump’s removal of state secrets from the White House has been halted by the court’s action.Warner told CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday that clarification from the judge was urgently needed, and the mishandling of state secrets could have disastrous consequences.“Some of the documents involved human intelligence, and if that information got out people will die. If there were penetration of our signals intelligence, literally years of work could be destroyed.”Warner added that if information in the documents had been obtained from foreign intelligence services, then “the willingness of our allies to share intelligence could be undermined”.Hillary Clinton, the former presidential candidate who lost to Trump in 2016, argued that he should be liable to criminal prosecution. She told CNN on Sunday: “No one is above the law, no one should escape accountability … He is not the president and so I do think, just like any American, if there is any evidence that should be pursued.”The White House has stayed aloof from the DoJ’s actions..US vice-president Kamala Harris declined to answer in an NBC interview whether Trump’s status as a possible presidential candidate in 2024 should be taken into account in the DoJ’s criminal investigation.“I wouldn’t dare tell the Department of Justice what to do,” she said. “The president and our administration, unlike the previous administration, have been very, very careful to make sure there is no question about any kind of interference.”Pressed on whether it would be too divisive to prosecute a former president, Harris signaled that Trump should be held accountable, saying: “Our country has gone through different periods of time where the unthinkable has happened, and where there has been a call for justice, and justice has been served…people are going to demand justice, and they rightly do.”TopicsDonald TrumpMar-a-LagoFBIUS politicsnewsReuse this content More