More stories

  • in

    Federal prosecutors subpoena Giuliani over Trump campaign payments

    Federal prosecutors subpoena Giuliani over Trump campaign paymentsThe order, issued in November, also asks the former New York mayor to provide testimony Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor, who helped to amplify Donald Trump’s false claims about widespread fraud in the 2020 election, has been subpoenaed by federal prosecutors seeking documents about payments he received from Trump or his presidential campaign, a person familiar with the matter said on Monday.Grand jury in Georgia’s Trump 2020 election investigation finishes workRead moreThe subpoena, which was issued in November, also asks Giuliani to provide testimony, said the person, who declined to be identified as they were not authorized to speak publicly on the matter.The nature of the inquiry by the US attorney in Washington DC, which began before special counsel Jack Smith was appointed to oversee investigations into Trump, remains largely under wraps.Giuliani, who has served as Trump’s personal attorney, did not respond to requests by Reuters for comment.A spokeswoman for the US attorney for the District of Columbia did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The source said the subpoena sought, among other things, copies of any retainer agreements between Trump and Giuliani, or the Trump campaign and Giuliani, and records of payments and who made those payments.In December, a District of Columbia attorney ethics committee said Giuliani violated at least one attorney ethics rule in his work on a failed lawsuit by Trump challenging the 2020 election results.Giuliani’s New York state law license was suspended in June 2021 after a state appeals court found he had made “demonstrably false and misleading” statements that widespread voter fraud undermined the 2020 election won by his Democratic opponent, Joe Biden.TopicsRudy GiulianiDonald TrumpWashington DCNew YorkUS elections 2020newsReuse this content More

  • in

    In Santos’s district, reactions to brazen lies remain mixed: ‘I might let him slide’

    In Santos’s district, reactions to brazen lies remain mixed: ‘I might let him slide’In the New York Republican’s district, some people defend the serial fibber, while others are adamant George Santos must quit It was only after George Santos was elected to Congress that the news broke: the New York Republican had told lies during his campaign.But these weren’t just little lies, or white lies. Santos appears to have lied brazenly, with abandon, about almost everything it’s possible to lie about: his career, his education, his faith, his relationships, his finances, 9/11.Santos, who in his telling is a real estate magnate and animal charity founder who graduated in economics and previously worked for Goldman Sachs – none of this is true – has refused to step down from the House of Representatives, despite calls for him to resign and criticism from his own party.But in Santos’s congressional district, which covers part of Queens, in New York City, and much of the neighboring Nassau county, in Long Island, the reaction has been more varied. Some people have defended the serial fibber, while others are adamant Santos must quit.“If you lie about one thing, that is OK,” said Gary Dhindsa, who owns One Stop Cards and Convenience in Farmingdale, Nassau county.“Anybody can expect that – maybe he misspoke or something. But if you lie about 100% of everything, people cannot expect that.“Politicians, when they speak they try to embellish their things. But not like this, when everything they tell you is totally bullshit.”It was the New York Times, in December, which broke the story of Santos’s web of deceit.Santos claimed that he graduated from Baruch College and New York University, only to later admit he hadn’t. He said he had worked for Citigroup and Goldman Sachs, but after both firms said they had no record of his employment, Santos said he had “never worked directly” for either institution. Santos tweeted in February 2021 that he and his family owned 13 properties, before confessing to the New York Post that he does not own any properties.During his campaign, Santos had referred to himself as a “proud American Jew”, but later said he had “never claimed to be Jewish”, only “Jew-ish”. He said four of his employees were killed during the 2016 mass shooting at Pulse nightclub in Florida, but the New York Times found that “none of the 49 victims appear to have worked at the various firms named in [Santos’s] biography”.Santos also claimed to have founded a charity called Friends of Pets United, but according to the Times: “The Internal Revenue Service could locate no record of a registered charity with that name.”The Republican had also claimed his mother was “in her office in the South Tower” in New York on the day of the 9/11 attacks, and that she died a few years later: “9/11 claimed my mother’s life,” he wrote on Twitter in July 2021. His mother had actually died in 2016, and the New York Times could find no evidence that she worked at the World Trade Center.“People are betrayed,” Dhindsa said.“They are feeling betrayed because he told complete lies. He manipulated everything. Not one or two things. Everything.”Santos had visited Farmingdale in the run-up to the election, and posted an Instagram photo of him enjoying an ice-cream at Charlotte’s, a couple of doors down from One Stop Cards and Convenience.On Wednesday, the owner of Charlotte’s remembered Santos as “very nice”, but had some questions.“On the surface of it, it sounds like he should resign,” Nick DeVito said.“He made up a bunch of stuff and got his job under false pretenses. That’s what it sounds like. But I would like to just hear him, you know, give us his side of the story, I guess, and after I heard that I would make my determination,” he said.DeVito said he had offered the ice-cream to Santos for free, but Santos had insisted on paying. DeVito voted for Santos a few days later, but said the newly elected politician needs to fully address the fabrication controversy.“If they are bold-faced lies, then I think he should resign and somebody else should take the spot. If he’s got some kind of an explanation, even a half-assed explanation. I might let him slide.”In the meantime, DeVito said: “He’s welcome back here. But I don’t know if I would give him anything for free.”Further along Farmingdale’s Main Street, florist Emily Ring was more dead-set in her Santos support.“There’s so many liars with politicians, it’s like: they all do, to a certain degree. But he got caught,” Ring said.“I don’t think he should resign.”Ultimately, it might not be Santos’s choice as to whether his political career continues. The Republican, who was due to be sworn in on Tuesday only for the GOP’s bonfire in the House to cause a delay, will take office amid a swarm of investigations.Federal prosecutors in New York are investigating Santos’s finances, while a local investigation in Nassau county began examining Santos in late December. The New York Times reported that “questions remain” about how Santos was able to loan his campaign $700,000.“I made a mistake, and I think humans are flawed and we all make mistakes,” Santos said in an interview with Fox News on 27 December.“The reality is that I remain committed to doing everything I set forward in my campaign. I’m not a fraud. I’m not a fake.”Asked if he feels “no shame” about telling “blatant lies” to the electorate, Santos said:“I can say the same thing about the Democrats and the party, look at Joe Biden. Joe Biden has been lying to the American people for 40 years, he’s the president of the United States,” he said.That excuse didn’t carry much weight with Marylou Albertini, a resident of the affluent Port Washington neighborhood in Long Island.“I think he’s a crumb,” Albertini said.“It’s really like he’s saying it’s OK to do it. Which is really wrong.”Albertini said she believed most politicians to be “crooks”, but said Santos’s actions went further than the usual political obfuscations.“​​I heard him say basically: ‘Why should that matter, because other politicians lie,’” Albertini said.“Well this isn’t about them. It’s about you, stupid.”TopicsNew YorkUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    George Santos scandal: Democratic predecessor calls him a ‘con man’

    George Santos scandal: Democratic predecessor calls him a ‘con man’Tom Suozzi, Santos’s forerunner for New York’s third district, says the Republican winner should be ‘removed by Congress’ The Democrat who vacated the US House seat won by the controversial Republican George Santos said on Tuesday Congress was letting in “a con man”.George Santos: Brazil reactivates fraud case against fabulist congressman-electRead moreTom Suozzi won New York’s third district, which covers parts of Long Island and Queens, in 2016, but stepped down in 2022 in order to run for governor. Santos lost to Suozzi in 2020 but beat Robert Zimmerman for the vacant seat.Since Santos’s victory, almost every part of his campaign biography has been called into question.Intense scrutiny has been applied to his claims about his education and career in business and to elements of his personal story, including his supposed descent from Holocaust survivors and a claim that his mother died as a result of the 9/11 attacks. Santos has admitted to some inaccuracies.But even after prosecutors in Brazil reactivated a criminal fraud investigation regarding the use of a stolen chequebook, and amid reports that federal prosecutors in New York are examining Santos’s background and financial dealings, Republicans in Congress have not acted.On Tuesday, as the new Congress gathered, Suozzi pointed out in a column for the New York Times that on being sworn in, Santos would take “an oath to ‘bear true faith’ to the constitution and [to] take this obligation without any ‘purpose of evasion’”.Suozzi wrote: “I’ve lost track of how many evasions and lies Mr Santos has told about himself, his finances and his history and relationship with our stretch of Long Island and north-eastern Queens.”Santos being seated in Congress, Suozzi said, would “diminish our Congress, our country and … his constituents.“It saddens me that after 30 years of public service rooted in hard work and service to the people of this area, I’m being succeeded by a con man.”When Santos arrived on Capitol Hill, he ignored questions from a scrum of reporters. Before being sworn in, he supported Kevin McCarthy for speaker. He could not be formally sworn in until the speakership had been decided. That process was delayed until Wednesday at least, an overnight adjournment having followed three inconclusive votes.Suozzi said Santos could still be held to account by “our democracy, our free press and the rule of law” as well as “the voters of the third district”.Those voters, he wrote, “believe in the rule of law, in playing by the rules. They like authenticity in their leaders and pride themselves on having a good BS detector.“The fact is that Mr Santos’s behavior went beyond BS: he fabricated the basics of his biography to an extent that most voters wouldn’t have thought possible. The shame would be too great, right?”Lamenting the rise of political shamelessness, Suozzi pointed to Donald Trump’s famous 2016 claim that “he could ‘shoot somebody’ on Fifth Avenue and still not lose supporters”.Suozzi wrote: “If we are going to subdue the tyranny of unchecked liars and their lies then Mr Santos must be held accountable: he must be removed by Congress or by prosecutors, because there is no indication that he will be moved by conscience to voluntarily resign.”Suozzi likened Santos to Sam Bankman-Fried and Bernie Madoff, the former a cryptocurrency magnate who has pleaded not guilty to charges of fraud, the latter sentenced to 150 years in 2009 over the largest Ponzi scheme in history.Top Republicans remain silent over George Santos campaign liesRead moreSuozzi said: “Not unlike them, [Santos] appears to have conducted his finances in highly unusual, if not unlawful, ways. But I have to wonder, having seen his delight for attention and his self-regard, if he loves that everyone now knows his name – even though it’s because of yet another big lie.”Suozzi insisted Santos would be held accountable.“The people of my district are holding rallies, signing petitions and calling on the Republican leadership to act,” he wrote.Calling the district “a model for moderation … a 50-50 district with constituents who embrace a get-it-done attitude” and “value tell-it-like-it-is leadership”, Suozzi said those voters now found themselves “saddled with a slippery, inexperienced liar who tells it like it isn’t”.Such New Yorkers, Suozzi said, were now “counting on the press to keep digging in, law enforcement to keep investigating and the political pressure to keep building on the House”, in order to remove Santos from Congress.TopicsUS newsUS CongressNew YorkUS politicsHouse of RepresentativesnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    ‘Do you have no shame?’: Tulsi Gabbard grills congressman-elect George Santos

    ‘Do you have no shame?’: Tulsi Gabbard grills congressman-elect George SantosThe former presidential candidate called resume-inflating Santos’s claims ‘blatant lies’ in Fox News interview In a Fox News interview with former presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard on Tuesday, Republican congressman-elect George Santos claimed he is not a “fraud” when questioned about the recent revelations – and his eventual admission – that his claims about his career and identity are riddled with lies and fabricated records.First Gen Z congressman Maxwell Frost says he’s part of the ‘mass shooting generation’Read moreThe Fox interview came the same day as fresh allegations that he falsely claimed a Jewish identity.Even though Santos told the New York Post that he never claimed to be Jewish, there is documentation proving otherwise. Santos had been loud about his identity as a “proud American Jew”, and enjoyed coverage in Jewish media where he was celebrated as the “only Jewish Republican member of New York’s House delegation”.He regularly attended events with rabbis and campaigned in Jewish neighborhoods, according to the New York Times.When asked about this, Santos told Gabbard that he has Jewish heritage but was raised Catholic. He said he has joked that he is “Jew-ish”.Santos, who has also admitted to lying about graduating from Baruch College and working at Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, said he was not “a fake” and that “everybody wants to nitpick” at him now.But Gabbard put Santos on the spot by asking him how he defines “integrity”.Santos initially talked about the role of integrity for politicians, but Gabbard pushed back: “What does it mean though? … Because the meaning of the word actually matters in practice.”In Tuesday’s interview, he claimed he was courageous to be admitting this on national television, but fell short of an apology.He insisted that somehow this “courage” in his admission would make him fit to serve his district, to which Gabbard asked: “Do you have no shame?”“Do you have no shame [inaudible] the people who are now you’re asking to trust you to go and be their voice for them, their families and their kids in Washington?” she asked, after clarifying that what he keeps referring to as “embellishments” on his resume are much bigger, “blatant lies”.Santos responded, once again deflecting the answer, this time to Democrats and Joe Biden, who he claimed has been “lying to the American people for 40 years”.When Gabbard confronted him further about his lies regarding his work at Citigroup and Goldman Sachs, and how he can expect his constituents to trust him, Santos said the lies on his resume are “debatable” and “not false at all”.He added that he could easily explain how things such as private equity work.“We can have this discussion that can go way above the American people’s head”, he said, “but that’s not what I campaigned on”.“Wow,” Gabbard responded. “You just kind of highlighted, I think my concerns and the concerns people at home have – you’re saying that this discussion will go way above the heads of the American people, basically insulting their intelligence.”As of Wednesday morning, Santos’s website no longer had information about his relations with Baruch College, Goldman Sachs or Citigroup.TopicsRepublicansHouse of RepresentativesNew YorkUS politicsUS CongressnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    New York congressman-elect admits lying about college and work history

    New York congressman-elect admits lying about college and work historyRepublican George Santos, elected to represent parts of Long Island and Queens, admits ‘embellishing résumé’ George Santos, the New York Republican congressman-elect at the center of a storm over his apparently fabricated résumé, has admitted he lied about his job experience and college education during his successful US House campaign.I’m a Pulse survivor. Rightwing anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric made the Club Q massacre inevitableRead moreSantos first ran for Congress in 2020. In November this year he was elected to represent parts of northern Long Island and north-east Queens.His exaggerations were first identified by the New York Times, which questioned claims including that he had worked at two prominent Wall Street banks; had obtained degrees in finance and economics from two New York colleges; that he was Jewish; and that four employees of his company were killed in the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida, in June 2016.On Monday, Santos told the New York Post: “My sins here are embellishing my résumé. I’m sorry.”Santos, 34, also said he “campaigned talking about the people’s concerns, not my résumé … I intend to deliver on the promises I made during the campaign”.But he acknowledged he “didn’t graduate from any institution of higher learning. I’m embarrassed and sorry for having embellished my résumé. I own up to that. … We do stupid things in life”.Democrats including the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, have suggested Santos is unfit to sit in Congress. Some have called for him to resign his seat before taking it.Ted Lieu, a California Democrat, said on Twitter: “George Santos, who has now admitted his whopping lies, should resign. If he does not, then [Kevin McCarthy, the Republican House leader] should call for a vote to expel” him.Joaquin Castro, from Texas, said allowing Santos to enter office would set a dangerous precedent.“We’ve seen people fudge their résumé but this is total fabrication,” Castro said, suggesting Santos “should also be investigated by authorities”.Hakeem Jeffries, the incoming Democratic House leader, has said Santos “appears to be a complete and utter fraud”.Republican officials began to publicly respond to Santos’ remarks on Tuesday. Joe Cairo, chairman of the Nassau county GOP on Long Island, said the congressman had “broken the public trust” but “must do the public’s will in Washington”.Santos, Cairo said, “has a lot of work to do to regain the trust of voters and everyone who he represents in Congress”.Santos said he worked for Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. Neither company could find relevant records. Santos told the Post he “never worked directly” for either firm and had used a “poor choice of words”. He said LinkBridge, an investment company where he was a vice-president, did business with both.The Times also uncovered Brazilian court records showing Santos was once charged with fraud for using a stolen checkbook.“I am not a criminal here – not here or in Brazil or any jurisdiction in the world,” Santos told the Post. “Absolutely not. That didn’t happen.”Santos said he experienced financial difficulties that left him owing landlords and creditors.Another news outlet, the Jewish American site the Forward, questioned a claim on Santos’s website that his grandparents “fled Jewish persecution in Ukraine, settled in Belgium and again fled persecution” during the second world war.“I never claimed to be Jewish,” Santos said. “I am Catholic. Because I learned my maternal family had a Jewish background I said I was ‘Jew-ish’.”Cairo said: “The damage that his lies have caused to many people, especially those who have been impacted by the Holocaust, is profound.”The Daily Beast has reported that Santos, who has identified as gay, was divorced from a woman in September 2019.“Though the past marriage isn’t necessarily at odds with his sexuality,” the site noted, Santos has never acknowledged that relationship and his biography says he lives with his husband, Matt, and four dogs.“I dated women in the past. I married a woman. It’s personal stuff,” Santos told the Post, adding that he was “OK with my sexuality. People change”.Revising claims that a company he worked for “lost four employees” in the Pulse nightclub shooting, Santos said the four were in the process of being hired.TopicsRepublicansHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsNew YorknewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Republicans lead charge to ban noncitizens from voting in local elections

    Republicans lead charge to ban noncitizens from voting in local electionsEight states have passed laws against ballot access, even as some progressive cities are extending local voting rights Louisiana voters recently approved a constitutional amendment barring anyone who is not a US citizen from participating in elections, becoming the eighth state to push back against the growing number of progressive cities deciding to allow noncitizens to vote in local elections.Conservative donors pour ‘dark money’ into case that could upend US voting lawRead moreWhile noncitizens are prohibited from voting in federal elections and no states allow noncitizens to vote for statewide office, ambiguous language in constitutions has allowed localities to pass statutes legalizing noncitizen voting in local or school board elections. A short but expanding list of cities include two cities in Vermont, almost a dozen in Maryland, and San Francisco.Other cities are trying to join that list, including Boston and Washington DC, where the latter city’s council in October passed legislation allowing noncitizens who have lived in the city for at least 30 days to vote in local elections. New York City’s council also passed a measure in December to allow close to 900,000 green card holders and those with work authorization to vote in local elections, but a state trial court struck it down in June, finding it violated the state constitution. The ruling is currently being appealed.The potential for major cities like DC and New York to expand their electorates prompted backlash from Republican lawmakers.“This vote sends a clear message that the radical election policies of places like San Francisco, New York City and Washington, DC have no place in Louisiana,” Kyle Ardoin, the Republican secretary of state, said in a statement after the passage of the constitutional amendment, which he said will “ensure the continued integrity of Louisiana’s elections”.Louisiana law already prohibits anyone who is “not a citizen of the state” from voting, so voting rights advocates say the new amendment is an effort by Republicans in the state to limit voting based on false allegations that noncitizens are committing voter fraud by participating in elections.Louisiana’s amendment made it on to the 10 December ballot after it was passed by both chambers of the state legislature. Over 73% of Louisiana voters approved it, making Louisiana the latest in a series of states moving to explicitly write bans into their constitutions.Before 2020, just Arizona and North Dakota specifically prohibited noncitizens from voting in local and state elections, but voters in Alabama, Colorado and Florida all approved constitutional amendments in 2020 and Ohio approved one in November.Ohio’s amendment came after one town in the state, Yellow Springs, passed an initiative in 2019 to allow noncitizens to vote, giving voting rights in local elections to just a few dozen people in the small town. A few years later in 2022, Republican lawmakers proposed what would eventually become the constitutional amendment banning the practice and revoking the right from noncitizens in Yellow Springs.Fulvia Vargas-De Leon, senior counsel at LatinoJustice PRLDEF, a New York-based immigrant rights group, said the movement for ballot amendments is just one way that some lawmakers are trying to restrict voting rights.“It is a response to the expansion of the right to vote, and our concern is that since 2020, we’ve seen such attacks on the right to vote,” she said, adding that the pushback was coming because of an anti-immigrant sentiment “but also a larger effort to try to ban who has access to the ballot”.The United States allowed noncitizens to vote for much of its early history. From the founding of the country through 1926, noncitizens could vote in local, state and federal elections. But anti-immigrant sentiment led to lawmakers in most states to push for an end to the practice.“Resurgent nativism, wartime xenophobia, and corruption concerns pushed lawmakers to curtail noncitizen voting, and citizenship became a voting prerequisite in every state by 1926,” William & Mary professor Alan H Kennedy wrote in a paper published in the Journal of Policy History this year.In 1996, Congress passed a law prohibiting noncitizens from voting in federal elections, making illegal voting punishable by fines, imprisonment and deportation.But on the local level, the subject has re-emerged as a topic for debate in recent decades, as the populations of permanent noncitizen immigrants has grown in many cities.Advocates for noncitizen voting argue that documented immigrants pay taxes and contribute to their local communities and should have their voices heard when it comes to local policy.“We should have a representative democracy, where everyone who is part of the fabric of the community, who is involved, who pays taxes, should have a say in it,” said Vargas-De Leon, whose group intervened in the New York litigation and has filed the appeal.But conservative groups say that allowing noncitizens to vote dilutes the votes of citizens. Republican strategist Christopher Arps started the Missouri-based Americans for Citizen Voting to help states amend their constitutions to explicitly say that only US citizens can vote. He said that people who want to vote should “at least have some skin in the game” by completing the citizenship process.“We’ve been hearing for the past five, six years about foreign interference, Russia and other countries,” he said. “Well to me, this is a type of foreign interference in our elections.”It would also be a “bureaucratic nightmare”, he said, for states to have to maintain two separate voter rolls for federal and local elections, and could lead to illegal voting if noncitizens accidentally vote in a federal election.Though noncitizen voting still has not been signed into law in DC, Republicans in Congress have already introduced legislation to block it. One bill, introduced by the Texas senator Ted Cruz last month, would bar DC from using federal funds to facilitate noncitizen voting.“Allowing noncitizens and illegal immigrants to vote in our elections opens our country up to foreign influence, and allows those who are openly violating US law or even working for hostile foreign governments to take advantage and direct our resources against our will,” Cruz said in a statement.But Vargas-De Leon pointed to the benefits of expanding the electorate to include the country’s 12.9 million legal permanent residents and other documented immigrants.“All we’re trying to do here is ensure that everyone has a say in our government,” she said.TopicsUS newsThe fight for democracyUS politicsLaw (US)LouisianaOhioFloridaVermontfeaturesReuse this content More

  • in

    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is subject of House ethics investigation

    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is subject of House ethics investigationSpokesperson for New York Democrat ‘confident’ undisclosed matter ‘will be dismissed’ The New York Democratic congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is under investigation by the House of Representatives’ ethics committee, the leaders of the panel said.Republicans reflect and blame after Trump-backed candidate Walker losesRead moreThe Democratic acting chair, Susan Wild of Pennsylvania, and acting ranking member, Michael Guest, a Mississippi Republican, released a statement on Wednesday.They said: “The matter regarding Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez … was transmitted to the committee by the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) on 23 June.”The subject of the investigation was not revealed.The committee said: “The mere fact of a referral or an extension, and the mandatory disclosure of such an extension and the name of the subject of the matter, does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred, or reflect any judgment on behalf of the committee.”A spokesperson for Ocasio-Cortez said: “The congresswoman has always taken ethics incredibly seriously, refusing any donations from lobbyists, corporations, or other special interests. We are confident that this matter will be dismissed.”The House ethics committee said it would announce its “course of action” after the new Congress convenes in January.Ocasio-Cortez won her seat in Congress in 2018, after a shock primary victory over Joe Crowley, a senior House Democrat. She has since emerged as a leading figure among progressives, widely known as AOC and the target of rightwing invective and harassment.In September 2021, the American Accountability Foundation filed an ethics complaint against Ocasio-Cortez “for accepting an impermissible gift” to attend the Met Gala.Ocasio-Cortez made a splash at the $35,000-a-ticket New York society event, wearing a dress emblazoned with the slogan “Tax the Rich”. A spokesperson said: “She was invited as a guest of the Met. She also did not get to keep the dress.”In 2019, in a slightly bizarre twist, it was reported that Donald Trump had become “enamored” and “starstruck” by a politician half his age and his ideological opposite, and had compared her to a historical figure made famous in America at least by a Broadway musical.Trump calls Ocasio-Cortez ‘Evita’ in new book American CarnageRead more“I called her Eva Perón,” Trump said, according to the book American Carnage by Tim Alberta. “I said, ‘That’s Eva Perón. That’s Evita.”Perón, an actor married to the Argentinian president Juan Perón, championed working-class and female voters but died of cancer in 1952, aged 33.Outside Argentina she is largely known through Evita, a musical by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice which premiered in London in 1978 and on Broadway in 1979 and which Trump has said is his favourite show, having seen it six times.Ocasio-Cortez responded: “I know that, like every woman of the people, I have more strength than I appear to have.”TopicsAlexandria Ocasio-CortezUS politicsHouse of RepresentativesUS CongressDemocratsNew YorknewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Jurors in Trump Organization tax fraud trial set to begin deliberations

    Jurors in Trump Organization tax fraud trial set to begin deliberationsProsecutors say former president knew of and sanctioned alleged scheme that enriched executives with off-the-books benefits Jurors in New York were on Monday set to deliberate their verdict in the trial of the Trump Organization, accused of running a criminal tax fraud scheme enriching executives with off-the-books benefits including property and luxury vehicles.While Donald Trump himself is not on trial, prosecutors have said the former president knew of – and sanctioned almost every aspect of – the fraud, as head of the eponymous company handling his real estate and other dealings.“This whole narrative that Donald Trump was blissfully ignorant is just not real,” Manhattan assistant district attorney Joshua Steinglass told the jury during Friday’s closing arguments. But he added it did not really matter if they believed he was aware or not, because it was the company that was on trial in New York state court.Prosecutors described a 15-year scheme in which the Trump Organization reduced its tax liability in various ways, including by reducing payroll and giving executives other perks to make up the difference in their salaries.The jury in New York’s state court heard that Trump signed a document in which one executive, Matthew Calamari, asked for a salary reduction equivalent to his untaxed compensations.Defense lawyers have attempted to paint the company’s longtime chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg, who was a key prosecution witness, as a “greedy” and rogue employee determined to blame his own fraud on others.Weisselberg, 75, pleaded guilty to tax fraud and other charges under a plea agreement earlier this year, and he is expected to be sentenced to five months in jail. He was emotional on the witness stand as he admitted greed had motivated him to falsify records, cheat on taxes and betray the Trump family’s trust.The company was charged in July last year after investigators looked into why some salaried Trump Organization executives were also receiving benefits as if they were independent contractors. The trial began in October.The company has pleaded not guilty to nine counts of criminal fraud and faces up to $1.6m in fines if convicted.TopicsDonald TrumpUS politicsNew YorknewsReuse this content More