More stories

  • in

    Kash Patel Would Bring Bravado and Baggage to F.B.I. Role

    President-elect Donald J. Trump’s choice to run the F.B.I. has a record in and out of government that is likely to raise questions during his Senate confirmation hearings.Few people tapped for any top federal post, much less a job as vital as F.B.I. director, have come with quite so much bravado, bombast or baggage as Kash Patel.On Saturday, Mr. Patel, 44, a Long Island-born provocateur and right-wing operative, was named by President-elect Donald J. Trump to lead the F.B.I., an agency he has accused of leading a “deep state” witch hunt against Mr. Trump. The announcement amounted to a de facto dismissal of the current director, Christopher A. Wray, who was appointed to the job by Mr. Trump and still has almost three years left on his 10-year term.Mr. Patel’s maximum-volume threats to exact far-reaching revenge on Mr. Trump’s behalf have endeared him to his boss and Trump allies who say the bureau needs a disrupter to weed out bias and reshape its culture.But his record as a public official and his incendiary public comments are likely to provoke intense questioning when the Senate weighs his nomination — and determines whether he should run an agency charged with protecting Americans from terrorism, street crime, cartels and political corruption, along with the threat posed by China, which Mr. Wray has described as existential.Here are some of the things Mr. Patel has said and done that could complicate his confirmation.He was accused of nearly botching a high-stakes hostage rescue.In October 2020, Mr. Patel, then a senior national intelligence official in the Trump administration, inserted himself into a secret effort by members of SEAL Team Six to rescue Philip Walton, an American who was 27 at the time and had been kidnapped by gunmen in Niger and taken to Nigeria.Mr. Patel, whose involvement broke with protocol, assured the State and Defense Departments that the Nigerian government had been told of the operation.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    End of Trump Cases Leaves Limits on Presidential Criminality Unclear

    Donald J. Trump is set to regain office without clarity on the scope of presidential immunity and with a lingering cloud over whether outside special counsels can investigate high-level wrongdoing.The end of the two federal criminal cases against President-elect Donald J. Trump on Monday left momentous, unsettled questions about constraints on criminal wrongdoing by presidents, from the scope of presidential immunity to whether the Justice Department may continue to appoint outside special counsels to investigate high-level wrongdoing.Both cases against Mr. Trump — for his attempt to overturn the 2020 election and his later hoarding of classified government documents and obstruction of efforts to retrieve them — were short-circuited by the fact that he won the 2024 election before they could be definitively resolved.Jack Smith, the special counsel who brought both cases against Mr. Trump, asked courts on Monday to shut them down. The prosecutor cited the Justice Department’s longstanding view that the Constitution implicitly grants temporary immunity to sitting presidents, lest any prosecution distract them from their official duties.The result is not just that Mr. Trump appears set to escape any criminal accountability for his actions. (Mr. Smith left the door open to, in theory, refiling the charges after Mr. Trump leaves office, but the statute of limitations is likely to have run by then.) It also means that two open constitutional questions the cases have raised appear likely to go without definitive answers as Mr. Trump takes office.One is the extent of the protection from prosecution offered to former presidents by the Supreme Court’s ruling this summer establishing that they have a type of broad but not fully defined immunity for official acts taken while in office.The other is whether, when a president is suspected of committing crimes, the Justice Department can avoid conflicts of interest by bringing in an outside prosecutor to lead a semi-independent investigation into the matter.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Georgia Poll Workers Defamed by Giuliani Receive Some of His Assets

    Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, the two Georgia poll workers defamed by Rudolph W. Giuliani after the 2020 election, received his watch collection, a ring and his vintage Mercedes-Benz on Friday.The deliveries, which Mr. Giuliani’s lawyer, Joseph Cammarata, reported to the court on Friday, were a long time coming for the women, who are mother and daughter. It was also a small down payment on what the former New York City mayor owes them.In the aftermath of the 2020 election, Mr. Giuliani spread lies about the women, asserting without evidence that they tried to steal the election from former President Donald J. Trump. At the time, Mr. Giuliani was working as Mr. Trump’s personal attorney and was helping to lead the effort to overturn the 2020 election results. Mr. Giuliani’s false statements about the women led to a torrent of threats and harassment, upending the women’s lives and sending them into hiding. Mr. Giuliani, who has about $11 million in assets, has taken nearly a year to get to this point. He filed for bankruptcy after a federal jury returned with a $148 million defamation judgment last December. But his bankruptcy case was dismissed about eight months later because he refused to cooperate with basic court orders. Last month, Judge Lewis J. Liman of Federal District Court in Manhattan ordered Mr. Giuliani to hand over his car, his Madison Avenue apartment and his valuable collection of jewelry and sports memorabilia within seven days to a receivership controlled by Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss. That would enable them to start selling those items, the proceeds of which would serve as partial payment of the $148 million judgment against Mr. Giuliani.Mr. Giuliani missed that deadline and subsequent others.Earlier this week, Mr. Giuliani’s lawyers asked the judge for permission to withdraw as his counsel, citing ethical concerns. This threw into question, once again, when Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss would receive the assets, the bulk of which come from his apartment in New York and his condo in Florida. Mr. Trump owes Mr. Giuliani about $2 million in unpaid legal fees. Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss are looking to collect that as well. A trial set for January in New York is to determine whether Mr. Giuliani can claim his $3.5 million Palm Beach condo as his primary residence, which, under Florida law, would keep it from being seized by Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss. In the letter to the court on Friday, Mr. Cammarata requested a delay for the trial so that his client could attend President-elect Trump’s inauguration on Jan. 20. “There would be no harm to the plaintiffs by a delay of a few days in the trial schedule,” Mr. Cammarata wrote. More

  • in

    Proud Boys Leader Convicted of Sedition for Role in Jan. 6 Attack Asks Trump for Pardon

    A leader of the Proud Boys who was convicted last year of seditious conspiracy for his role in the storming of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, on Wednesday asked President-elect Donald J. Trump for a pardon.The Proud Boys leader, Joseph Biggs, who is serving a 17-year prison term, was the first of dozens of Proud Boys members found guilty in connection with Jan. 6 to formally request clemency for the part he played in the Capitol attack. Other high-ranking members of the extremist organization, including its former chairman, Enrique Tarrio, who was sentenced to 22 years in prison in his Jan. 6 case, have also signaled they intend to ask Mr. Trump for pardons.Mr. Biggs’s lawyer, Norm Pattis, sent a letter to Mr. Trump on Wednesday requesting clemency for his client that opened by praising Mr. Trump for his “re-election to the presidency.” Mr. Pattis quickly pivoted to asking the president-elect for “a complete pardon” for Mr. Biggs, suggesting that exonerating Mr. Biggs would serve “the broader public interest” in much the same way that the clemency granted to thousands of Confederate supporters helped to heal the nation in the years that followed the Civil War.“These are divisive times,” Mr. Pattis wrote. And he brought up the 2020 election, which many of Mr. Trump’s supporters were challenging on the day of the attack on the Capitol. “Suspicions and bitterness about the election lingers to this day,” he added.“A pardon of Mr. Biggs,” Mr. Pattis went on, “will help close that wound and inspire confidence in the future.”While Mr. Trump repeatedly promised during his recent campaign to pardon the more than 1,500 people charged so far in connection with the Capitol attack, his transition team has not yet put in place a formal policy about how to handle clemency requests like Mr. Biggs’s.Many of the rioters, their families and some outside activists who have supported their cause have been pushing Mr. Trump and his allies to create a formal protocol that would offer a broad version of amnesty to the defendants.Those who support such a move have privately expressed concern about hundreds of Jan. 6 rioters deluging the president-elect’s administration with pardon requests. They would rather see a systemic approach to the issue of pardons worked out in advance of Mr. Trump taking office. More

  • in

    Chris Wallace to Quit CNN After 3 Years

    The 77-year-old veteran anchor told The Daily Beast that he planned to venture into streaming or podcasting.Chris Wallace, a veteran TV anchor who left Fox News for CNN three years ago, announced on Monday that he was leaving his post to venture into the streaming or podcasting worlds.Mr. Wallace, 77, told The Daily Beast that he was leaving the network to pursue independent content creation, where, he told the outlet, “the action seems to be.” He mentioned he was still unsure what form of content he would make, but said his career in broadcasting was over.He said his decision to leave CNN at the end of his three-year contract did not come from discontent. “I have nothing but positive things to say. CNN was very good to me,” he said.One of the network’s most recognizable faces, Mr. Wallace started in 2022 as an on-screen commentator and hosted a weekly talk show called “Who’s Talking to Chris Wallace?” He also anchored CNN’s coverage of the U.S. presidential election last week.Before joining CNN, Mr. Wallace worked at Fox News for 18 years and hosted “Fox News Sunday.” He turned heads at the conservative news outlet when he spoke out against President Trump’s “direct, sustained assault on freedom of the press” in 2020. He moderated an unruly presidential debate in 2020 between President Trump and Joseph R. Biden Jr.Mr. Wallace had initially joined the network to be part of its new CNN+ service, which imploded just weeks after its much-promoted release.CNN’s chief executive, Mark Thompson, confirmed Mr. Wallace’s departure in a statement posted by the network.A representative for Mr. Wallace did not respond immediately to a request for comment. More

  • in

    There Were Two Huge Problems Harris Could Not Escape

    Sarah Isgur, a longtime Republican campaign operative — and my friend and a senior editor at The Dispatch — has a brilliant sports analogy for the process of campaigning. She compares it to … curling.For those unfamiliar with the sport (which enjoys 15 minutes of fame every Winter Olympics), it involves sliding a very large, heavy “rock” toward a target on the ice. One person “throws” a 44-pound disc-shaped stone by sliding it along the ice, sweepers come in and frantically try to marginally change the speed and direction of the rock by brushing the ice with “brooms” that can melt just enough of the ice to make the rock travel farther or perhaps a little bit straighter.The sweepers are important, no doubt, but they cannot control the rock enough to save a bad throw. It’s a matter of physics. The rock simply has too much momentum.What does this have to do with politics? As Isgur writes, “The underlying dynamics of an election cycle (the economy, the popularity of the president, national events driving the news cycle) are like the 44-pound ‘stone.’ ” The candidates and the campaign team are the sweepers. They work frantically — and they can influence the stone — but they don’t control it.One of the frustrating elements of political commentary is that we spend far too much time talking about the sweeping and far too little time talking about the stone. Political hobbyists in particular (and that includes journalists!) are very interested in ad campaigns, ground games and messaging.Those things do matter, but when facing an election defeat this comprehensive, you know it was the stone that made the difference.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Arab American Voters in Dearborn, Michigan, Heard Trump’s Case 

    After supporting Joe Biden in 2020, the majority-Arab American city outside Detroit delivered an unlikely win for Donald Trump, who promised to bring peace to the Middle East.Ameen Almudhari was one of thousands of people in the majority-Arab community of Dearborn, Mich., who helped Joe Biden win the city and defeat Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election.Four years later, Mr. Almudhari had had enough.This week, he joined thousands of other Dearborn residents in voting for Mr. Trump, helping him score a stunning win in a place that seemed an unlikely source of support in the former president’s bid to return to the White House.Standing next to his 10-year-old son outside an elementary school on the north side of Dearborn on Tuesday evening, Mr. Almudhari, 33, explained his change of heart, part of a remarkable turnabout in Dearborn, which is just outside Detroit.He was, he said, fed up with Mr. Biden’s support of Israel and Ukraine and said the death and destruction being underwritten by the United States drove his decision to back Mr. Trump.“The first time we vote for Joe Biden, but what we see right now, he didn’t stop the genocide in Gaza,” said Mr. Almudhari, a Yemeni American, who faulted the president for spending American money to support the wars in Gaza and Ukraine. His son, Khaled, interrupted him with a smiling comment: “Trump will end the war!”Indeed, Mr. Trump has said as much, and the promise was among a host of reasons cited by voters in Dearborn for the wave of support from Arab and Muslim Americans for Mr. Trump.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    There Will Always Be a Trump. That’s Only Part of the Problem.

    Because we forget history, we forget that the American experiment cannot succeed without constant, courageous leadership. Our nation is not inherently good and our high ideals are often eclipsed by our baser nature. This has been true since our founding, and it is true now.We also know that if American ideals depend on a single party for their protection, then that effort is doomed to fail. It’s not that America is one election from extinction. Our nation is not that fragile. But it can regress. It can forsake its ideals. And millions of people can suffer as a result.I’m writing those words in the context of a presidential contest that already represents a national failure. Even if Kamala Harris wins on Tuesday, there should be relief, not lasting joy. The United States will have come within an eyelash of electing a man who tried to overturn an election to cling to power.While Donald Trump’s individual actions were unprecedented, the idea that a critical mass of Americans would embrace a demagogue should not be a surprise.Last week, I helped host a fireside chat with Susan Eisenhower, the founder and expert in residence at the Eisenhower Institute at Gettysburg College. She’s also Dwight D. Eisenhower’s granddaughter. During our conversation, she told a story that I’d forgotten — one with direct relevance to the present moment.In the aftermath of World War II, there was intense interest in General Eisenhower’s potential political career. He’d never voted before he left the Army in 1948. Both parties courted him, but the Republican Party needed him.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More