US crime

Subterms

    More stories

    • 200 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Paul Manafort admits indirectly advising Trump in 2020 but keeping it secret in wait for pardon

      by

      Paul Manafort admits indirectly advising Trump in 2020 but keeping it secret in wait for pardon In new book, obtained by Guardian, 2016 campaign manager convicted of tax fraud says he was ‘very careful’ to hide advice Paul Manafort indirectly advised Donald Trump’s 2020 campaign while in home confinement as part of a seven-year sentence for offenses including tax fraud – advice he kept secret as he hoped for a presidential pardon.Murdoch told Kushner on election night that Arizona result was ‘not even close’Read more“I didn’t want anything to get in the way of the president’s re-election or, importantly, a potential pardon,” Trump’s 2016 campaign manager writes in his new book.In May 2020, as Covid-19 ravaged the prison system, Manafort was released to home confinement. He stayed in an apartment in northern Virginia. From there, he re-established contact with Trumpworld.“There was no contact with anyone in the Trump orbit when I was in prison,” he writes. “And I didn’t want any, especially if it could be exploited by the MSM [Mainstream Media, a derogatory term in rightwing circles].“But when the re-election campaign started kicking off, I was interacting, unofficially, with friends of mine who were very involved. It was killing me not to be there, but I was advising indirectly from my condo.”The startling admission is spelled out in Political Prisoner: Persecuted, Prosecuted, but Not Silenced, a memoir that will be published in the US next month. The Guardian obtained a copy.Throughout the book, Manafort, 73, strenuously denies collusion with Russia and ridicules investigations by the special counsel, Robert Mueller, Congress and the US intelligence community.But in Virginia in August 2018, in a case arising from Mueller’s investigation of Russian election interference and links between Trump and Moscow, Manafort was found guilty on eight counts: five of tax fraud, two of bank fraud and one of failure to report a foreign bank account.In March 2019, he was sentenced to 43 months in prison. Later that month, in Washington DC, Manafort was sentenced to an additional three-and-a-half-year term, having pleaded guilty to conspiracy including money laundering and unregistered lobbying and a count related to witness tampering.Manafort was also found to have violated an agreement with Mueller, by lying.In his memoir, Manafort describes his travels through the US prison system – including a stay in a Manhattan facility alongside the financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and the Mexican drug baron Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán.In another startling passage, Manafort writes that during one transfer between facilities, at a private airfield “somewhere in Ohio”, the sight of “prisoners … being herded in long lines and then separated into other buses and on to … transport planes … reminded me of movies about the Holocaust”.Manafort ran Trump’s campaign between May and August 2016, when he resigned shortly after the arrival of Steve Bannon as campaign chairman and amid a scandal over alleged evidence of payments connected with consulting work in Ukraine.In his book, Manafort denies wrongdoing in connection with the so-called “black ledger” but writes: “My resignation only deflected attention from the Russian collusion story for a short period of time.”Describing his informal advice to the Trump campaign in 2020, after four years of scandal, trial and imprisonment, he writes: “I didn’t have any prohibition against it, but I didn’t want it to become an issue.”He continues: “I still had no promise of a pardon, but I had an expectation. My fear was that if I got in the way of the campaign and Trump lost, he might blame me, and I did not want that to happen.”Trump lost to Joe Biden – an outcome Manafort, whose career in politics began as an adviser to President Gerald Ford, puts down to Biden’s campaign understanding Trump’s limitations better than Hillary Clinton.But he also flirts with Trump’s lie about electoral fraud being the cause of his defeat, writing: “I believed there were patterns that were irregular. The results in battleground states were close enough that the fraud could be the difference between winning and losing.”Trump chief of staff ‘shoved’ Ivanka at White House, Kushner book saysRead moreAfter Trump lost, Manafort writes, he held off “making phone calls the day after to start working for a pardon” and instead waited on Trump.Manafort says the news he would be pardoned came via an intermediary, “a very good doctor friend, Ron, who is also close to Donald and Melania” and “was always one of the judges” at Miss Universe pageants when Trump ran them.The friend spoke to Kellyanne Conway, a senior Trump adviser, who relayed the good news. Manafort was pardoned on 23 December 2020 – two weeks before the culmination of Trump’s attempt to overturn the election, the deadly US Capitol attack, an event Manafort does not address.“It was like a switch was pressed,” Manafort writes, of telling his wife, Kathy, that he had been pardoned.“We hugged and cried. I was free.”TopicsBooksPaul ManafortDonald TrumpUS elections 2020US elections 2016US politicsRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Uvalde survivor, 11, tells House hearing she smeared herself with friend’s blood

      by

      Uvalde survivor, 11, tells House hearing she smeared herself with friend’s blood Miah Cerrillo recounts at gun violence hearing how she watched as her teacher and friends were shot and acted quickly to save herself01:59An 11-year-old survivor of the elementary school massacre in Uvalde, Texas testified before the House oversight committee on Wednesday, as lawmakers continued to try to reach a compromise on gun control legislation after a series of devastating mass shootings.‘It all happened too fast’: injured Uvalde teacher recounts school shootingRead moreThe House hearing came two weeks after an 18-year-old opened fire at Robb elementary school, killing 19 children and two teachers, and three weeks after 10 people were killed at a supermarket in Buffalo, New York.Miah Cerrillo, a fourth-grader at the Uvalde school, recounted how she watched as her teacher and friends were shot and acted quickly to save herself. Miah covered herself in a friend’s blood and played dead until she was able to reach her teacher’s phone and call police.In her recorded testimony, Miah said she no longer felt safe at school.“Because I don’t want it to happen again,” she said.The slow police response to the Uvalde shooting has been the focus of intense scrutiny and criticism.Miah was joined by other families affected by gun violence, including Felix and Kimberly Rubio, whose daughter Lexi died in Uvalde, and Zeneta Everhart, whose son Zaire Goodman was injured in Buffalo. Ten people were killed there, in a supermarket by another gunman with an AR-15-style rifle.“We don’t want you to think of Lexi as just a number,” Rubio told the committee. “She was intelligent, compassionate and athletic. So today we stand for Lexi, and as her voice we demand action.”Gun control experts and New York mayor Eric Adams also testified at the hearing on the need to restrict access to firearms and, by extension, reduce violent crime.“It is high noon in America, time for every one of us to decide where we stand on the issue of gun violence,” Adams said. “I am here today to ask every one of you, and everyone in this Congress, to stand with me to end gun violence and protect the lives of all Americans.”But the emotional and searing testimony did not stop Republicans on the committee rehashing talking points about why they oppose gun restrictions.“Kneejerk reactions to impose gun control policies that seek to curtail our constitutional right to bear arms are not the answer,” said James Comer, the Republican ranking member.The Democratic chair of the committee, Carolyn Maloney, criticized Republican efforts to deflect attention from the need to reform gun laws.“They have blamed violent video games. They have blamed family values. They have even blamed open doors. They have blamed everything but guns,” Maloney said. “But we know the United States does not have a monopoly on mental illness, video games or any other excuse. What America does have is widespread access to guns.”The House was working on Wednesday to pass gun control proposals which would raise the age requirement to buy semi-automatic weapons from 18 to 21 and enact a federal extreme risk protection order for gun access, known as a “red-flag” law.The House has already passed bills to expand background checks for firearm purchases and increase the time gun sellers must wait for checks to be completed.But all those bills are unlikely to pass the 50-50 Senate, where 60 votes are needed to pass most legislation. A bipartisan group of senators has been negotiating over a potential compromise on gun control, but any legislation that can make it through the Senate will probably be far narrower than proposals approved by the House.Thom Tillis, a Republican from North Carolina, indicated on Tuesday that Democrats’ proposal to raise the age requirement for purchasing semi-automatic weapons was unlikely to be included in the Senate bill.“That can be in the discussion, but right now we’re trying to work on things where we have agreement,” Tillis told CNN. “We’ve got a lot of people in the discussion. We’ve got to get 60 votes.”Despite such disputes, senators have voiced confidence that they can craft a compromise bill. Members of the group met again Wednesday, and John Cornyn, a Republican of Texas, expressed hope that they would soon strike an agreement.“I think it’s reasonable to expect in the next couple weeks, maybe this work period, that that would be – I’m just speaking for myself – an aspirational goal,” Cornyn said. “But obviously, we have 100 senators who are free agents, and they can do anything they want on whatever timetable.”02:08The families whose lives have been forever altered by gun violence came to the House on Wednesday with specific demands.Everhart asked for more schools to teach Black history so children would understand the violent history of white supremacy, given that the Buffalo shooter voiced support for racist conspiracy theories.Rubio also called on lawmakers to ban assault rifles, raise the age requirement to purchase semi-automatic weapons and enact a national “red flag” law.“We understand that for some reason, to some people – to people with money, to people who fund political campaigns – that guns are more important than children. So at this moment, we ask for progress,” Rubio said.“Somewhere out there, there’s a mom listening to our testimony thinking, ‘I can’t even imagine their pain’ – not knowing that our reality will one day be hers unless we act now.”TopicsUS school shootingsTexas school shootingBuffalo shootingUS politicsHouse of RepresentativesUS CongressUS SenatenewsReuse this content More

    • 200 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘We have to do something’: calls mount for Texas gun control laws after latest deadly attack

      by

      ‘We have to do something’: calls mount for Texas gun control laws after latest deadly attackAs data indicates state leads the US in mass shooting deaths, Democrats – and some Republicans – demand legislative action Texas leaders are under growing pressure to increase gun control measures in the face of data indicating the state leads the US in mass shooting deaths, while Republicans have steadily eased restrictions on weapons and cut mental health spending.As the funerals of the 19 children and two teachers begin on Tuesday in the tiny, devastated southern Texas city of Uvalde, a week after a shooting at the elementary school, state Democrats – and some Republicans – are demanding a special legislative action.Right-leaning Republican governor Greg Abbott has been asked to convene a special legislative session to weigh legislation, with state senate Democrats calling for increasing the age for buying any gun to 21.They also want to mandate background checks for all gun sales, and regulate civilian ownership of high capacity magazines, the Austin ABC affiliate KVUE reported.They are also calling for “red flag” legislation that would permit the temporary removal of guns from persons who present an “imminent danger to themselves and others” and are urging a law to require a “cooling off” period when buying a gun.“We have to do something, man,” Democratic state senator Roland Gutierrez, whose district covers Uvalde, said to Abbott at a press conference. “Your own colleagues are telling me, calling me, and telling me an 18-year-old shouldn’t have a gun.”The gunman who took a military-style assault rifle and a backpack of ammunition into Robb elementary school last Tuesday and shot his victims in two adjoining classrooms was a local 18-year-old, Salvador Ramos.He reportedly had posted violent threats and boasted about guns on social media, and was shot dead by federal agents after local police waited for more than an hour in the hallway in what state authorities said was “the wrong decision”.“We’ve asked for gun control changes. I’m asking you now to bring us back [for a special legislative session] in three weeks … this is enough, call us back, man,” Gutierrez said.Several Texas Republicans are now also putting pressure on Abbott to act after the shootings in Uvalde. “Governor Abbott should call us into special sessions until we do SOMETHING The FBI or DPS [Texas department of public safety] BELIEVE will lessen the chance of the next Uvalde Tragedy,” Republican state senator Kel Seliger said in a tweet.“We should hope and pray every day, but DO something,” Seliger added, without presenting any specific proposals, the Dallas Morning News noted.Republican representative Jeff Leach tweeted his call for a special session, saying: “Texas lawmakers have work to do. Conversations to engage in. Deliberations & debates to have. Important decisions to make.”Abbott has sole authority to summon lawmakers before the next legislative session starts in January 2023. He has said all options are on the table. But Texas has responded to the many mass shootings to afflict the state in the last 15 years by loosening not tightening restrictions on the use of guns.And data from Everytown for Gun Safety, the gun regulation advocacy, indicate that 201 people have been killed in mass shootings in Texas since 2009, significantly more than any other state.California has suffered 162 such deaths, while Florida, the third most populous state, with 22 million people compared with 29.7m in Texas and 39.6m in California, has counted 135 such deaths, according to Everytown, which defines a mass shooting as one in which four or more people are killed, excluding the shooter.It was not immediately clear whether Uvalde was included in the Texas toll. Texas also leads the US in school shootings, according to US News & World Report.The Texas Tribune reported that state lawmakers relaxed gun laws during the last two legislative sessions, including the approval of permit-less carrying of firearms in 2021. Such easing of gun laws was approved less than two years after the Odessa and the El Paso mass shootings left 30 people dead.Some rightwing Texas Republicans last week called for more guns.“We know from past experience that the most effective tool for keeping kids safe is armed law enforcement on the campus,” US Senator Ted Cruz told MSNBC.Ken Paxton, the Texas attorney general who faces felony fraud charges, voiced similar sentiments and predicted more mass shootings.“People that are shooting people, that are killing kids, they’re not following murder laws. They’re not going to follow gun laws,” Paxton said on the far-right network Newsmax. “I’d much rather have law-abiding citizens armed, trained so they can respond when something like this happens because it’s not going to be the last time.”Democrat Beto O’Rourke, who is running for governor and heckled Abbott at a press conference last week, tweeted about some of Texas’ recent mass shootings, saying: “Abbott should have acted after Sutherland Springs, after Santa Fe, after Midland-Odessa, after El Paso. He refused. Let’s vote him out and get to work saving lives.”He also slammed the weakening of gun restrictions and made a mark during his failed bid for the Democratic 2020 presidential nomination by advocating a ban on assault weapons for the general public.38,000 Texans had their license to carry denied, revoked, or suspended over the last five years because law enforcement deemed them too dangerous to carry a loaded gun in public.But thanks to Greg Abbott’s new law, they don’t need a license to carry anymore.— Beto O’Rourke (@BetoORourke) May 29, 2022
      Abbott, meanwhile, placed the blame for the Uvalde carnage squarely on mental health concerns, at his first press conference after the attack.But mental health advocates told ABC News that Abbott has neglected mental healthcare, saying that he moved money out of Texas agencies charged with providing services. CNN also reported on such budget cuts.“We as a state, we as a society need to do a better job with mental health. Anybody who shoots somebody else has a mental health challenge. Period. We as a government need to find a way to target that mental health challenge and to do something about it,” Abbott said last Wednesday, the day after the shooting in Uvalde.Debbie Plotnick, executive vice president for state and federal advocacy at the nonprofit Mental Health America (MHA), told ABC that mental health was a regular scapegoat. “Hate is not a mental illness … having a mental health condition does not make someone violent,” she said.This spring, Abbott switched $210m away from the state agency that oversees public mental healthcare, towards funding a controversial security program at the US-Mexico border.TopicsTexas school shootingUS gun controlTexasUS politicsUS crimeUS school shootingsGun crimenewsReuse this content More

    • 313 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Why did the doctor ask if we have a gun in the house at my toddler’s check up? Because this is America | Arwa Mahdawi

      by

      Why did the doctor ask if we have a gun in the house at my toddler’s checkup? Because this is AmericaArwa MahdawiAfter taking my daughter to the paediatrician, I was left wondering if I want to raise her in a country obsessed with the right to own deadly weapons A couple of weeks ago, my wife and I took my daughter to a paediatrician in Philadelphia for her one-year checkup. It was all very routine until, squeezed between a discussion about weaning and a question about baby gates, the paediatrician asked if we had a gun in the house. I was so taken aback by the idea that I might casually keep a glock in my knicker drawer that I burst out laughing. “She’s from England,” my wife, also somewhat taken aback, explained. “They’re not used to guns.” The paediatrician gave a sad smile. “I know it’s terrible, but I do have to ask,” she said. “This is America.”Once we got home from the appointment, I looked up whether it really was normal for paediatricians to ask about guns, or if we just had a very vigilant doctor. It turns out that, yes, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that firearm safety is discussed with patients and families. Which makes sense in a country where there are more guns than people and where people get accidentally shot by toddlers on a weekly basis. This is the US – where guns are the leading cause of death for children age one and older, and where the state of Texas restricts dildo ownership (it’s illegal to own more than six dildos) but lets people carry a handgun without licensing or training.Also, uniquely American? The fact that some people seem to think that paediatricians asking about guns isn’t an indictment of American values, but an infringement of their liberties. In 2010, a woman in Florida was outraged over her kids’ doctor asking this “invasive” question, and helped set into motion a years-long legal saga known as “the docs versus the glocks”. The National Rifle Association (NRA) lobbied to get Florida to pass a law called the Firearm Owners’ Privacy Act, which prevented doctors from asking about gun ownership except in certain circumstances. If a doctor did raise the gun question, they risked losing their licence, and a $10,000 fine. This turned into a protracted lawsuit (the only thing the US loves as much as its guns is lawsuits), and, eventually, a court ruled that preventing doctors from discussing guns violated their freedom of speech. Which was a small win for sanity: now doctors don’t have to worry about losing their jobs if they tell their patients that keeping automatic weapons in their coat closet might be dangerous.My trip to the paediatrician was obviously not the first time I realised that the US has a dysfunctional relationship with firearms. However, talking about shooting while your toddler is getting their shots made the gun situation suddenly feel a lot more personal; I left that doctors appointment feeling very sick indeed. Did I really want to raise my kid in a country obsessed with the right to own deadly weapons? Was it irresponsible to voluntarily bring a child up in a place where 95% of public (state) schools carry out active shooter drills? A country where kids as young as three rehearse what to do if a gunman bursts into their classroom? The UK isn’t perfect by any means, but at least kids aren’t taught to prepare for the very real possibility their classroom might become a killing field.Because this is the US, those questions didn’t have a chance to recede. Shortly after the appointment, 10 people were murdered at a Buffalo, New York, supermarket, allegedly by an 18-year-old white supremacist. About a week later, 19 little children and two teachers were murdered in their Texas classroom by another 18-year-old. On Sunday, six minors were shot in Chattanooga, Tennessee. On Monday, a 10-year-old boy in Florida was arrested after threatening to shoot up a school. It never stops. And there seems to be no hope that it’s going to stop any time soon, either. The US supreme court is about to issue its first major ruling on gun rights in over a decade – but the conservative court is widely expected to expand gun rights and make it harder for cities and states to restrict the concealed carry of firearms. For the rest of the world, looking on in horror after the Texas massacre, this is insanity. For conservatives, this is the US.
      Arwa Mahdawi is a Guardian columnist
      TopicsUS gun controlOpinionUS politicsUS crimecommentReuse this content More

    • 200 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘America could be truly free’: John Legend on his fight to overhaul the criminal justice system

      by

      Interview‘America could be truly free’: John Legend on his fight to overhaul the criminal justice systemSam Levin in Los AngelesThe Grammy-winning singer speaks to the Guardian about mass incarceration and his campaign to elect progressive prosecutors John Legend, the singer-songwriter and longtime racial justice activist, has thrown his weight behind political campaigns that rarely get celebrity endorsements: progressive candidates running for district attorney.The Grammy, Oscar, Emmy and Tony winner has long been a vocal supporter of the movement to reduce mass incarceration in the US, and has backed several chief prosecutors and candidates who seek to right the wrongs of America’s racially biased criminal justice system.Legend, who has spoken openly about the impact of his mother’s stints in jail while struggling with addiction, is advocating at a time when progressive prosecutors are facing intense backlash; an uptick in gun violence during the pandemic has led conservatives, some Democrats and media pundits to push for a return to harsh punishments and “tough on crime” policies.Legend – who has endorsed candidates in Tennessee, North Carolina, Oregon and California – spoke to the Guardian over Zoom last week about the importance of DA races, the “defund the police” movement, and his fears about the mounting opposition to reform. This conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.How did you personally become interested in supporting progressive prosecutors?It started with seeing the effect that mass incarceration had on my own family and community. Every person you lock up has a bunch of family members that feel the effects of that. When you separate a child from their parent, you’re extending this cycle of violence and trauma to that child, creating more potential for them to get in trouble in the future. We continue to be the most incarcerated country in the world. We can do better and be smarter about it. Incarcerating people and removing them from their family should be a last resort, not a first resort, and we should be actively trying to find alternatives. Thinking about mass incarceration and how we can build a more equitable and just society, how America could be truly free, I really became convinced that prosecutors are a key lever because they have a lot of power in their communities.Why is it so important for voters to care about their local DAs?Prosecutors make policy decisions about which crimes they are going to focus on and prosecute, how much they’re going to charge someone and what they’re going to ask for in sentencing. They decide whether to use cash bail, which is a highly discriminatory policy that forces people to stay in jail simply because they can’t afford bail, leading people to be punished just for being poor. All these decisions affect our incarceration rate. In 2017, we started a “Know your DA” education campaign with the ACLU, because most people probably couldn’t tell you who their DA was and didn’t vote that far down on the ballot or just voted for the incumbent. And then we started looking for more progressive alternatives to run.This movement you’ve championed is now facing serious pushback across the country – what do you make of the opposition?We have to acknowledge that crime did go up in this country during a once-in-a-century pandemic, which caused more housing insecurity, food insecurity, poverty and unemployment. It’s not just in one city – it’s everywhere, including in communities with more conservative local leadership and prosecutors. The rise in crime is not correlated to whether or not that community had a progressive prosecutor. Blaming progressive prosecutors is not consistent with facts, and it’s not a good way of assessing what happened. Crime went up and that’s real, and all of us need to care and find ways to solve these issues. But we’re not going to solve it by mass incarcerating our way to safety. If incarceration was the key to us being safer, we’d be the safest country in the world. We’re already the most policed country in the world.You must have friends in Los Angeles who want to see a “tough on crime” response and are concerned about George Gascón, the progressive prosecutor there. How do you talk to them about this?You start with facts. George Gascón didn’t cause the pandemic or the rise in crime due to the pandemic. And then we have to talk about the costs of incarceration, not just monetary, but the disruptions to our communities and families, the disruption that I felt myself. We have to talk about the heartbreak, despair and violence that incarceration can cause. And we need progressive prosecutors who are thinking holistically about the community and making sure we’re not overusing jails and prisons as a solution to everything. Jails aren’t the solution to mental health issues, homelessness or drug addiction. When we have prosecutors in place who believe that, we can incarcerate fewer people and divert those resources to interventions that will actually help people heal and get better, rather than jail, which exacerbates their pain and their issues. We have a gun problem in this country and all kinds of issues that lead people into crime. We need to focus on investing into our communities so that we can help prevent crime.How do you feel about Democrats who are pushing back against progressive DAs and reforms, including Joe Biden who has strongly opposed calls to “defund the police”?I’m mystified by the vehemence of the rejection to “defund the police” when we haven’t defunded the police. We’ve increased funding, especially due to the American Rescue Plan. We’re already spending more on policing in America than any country in the world spends on their military, aside from China and the US. Spending more and more on police with no upper limit is not the solution. I’m frustrated by Democrats who believe that throwing more money at policing is going to solve these problems and are not looking at the root causes. The solution to homelessness is increasing the supply of affordable housing and supportive housing. We can’t send the police out to “clean up the streets”. Where are we going to put these folks? In jail?Even though crime overall is significantly lower now, do you worry we’re returning to the panic of the 1990s, when there was a push for harsh punishments surrounding the racist “superpredator” myth?I am worried about it. Back then, it was bipartisan, and now seeing how Biden and others talk about crime, it sounds bipartisan, too. I know that they’re responding to people’s real fears, and I really do empathize. I’ve had friends who have been victims of crime recently. It’s not an illusion that people are seeing crime go up since the pandemic. People are apprehensive and afraid. They feel less safe, and we can’t just say, You’re not experiencing what you’re experiencing. But we have to say that there are better solutions than more police and prisons. And politicians have the ability to lead on this issue and not just follow or propose bandaids. They can focus on systemic issues that cause crime and actually in the long run make people safer.What do you think people should understand about the realities of crime trends right now?The press has an important role. They make decisions about the sources they use – and which sources they use without skepticism. You’ll find that even newspapers like the New York Times just repeat the line that the police communications department gives them without scrutiny or skepticism. It’s important that people who are explaining crime to the public, don’t sensationalize it and don’t take statements of police unions uncritically. And we have to remember that a lot of times, progressive prosecutors are getting blamed for national and systemic issues. Folks are trying to find a local scapegoat. Alvin Bragg, the progressive prosecutor in New York, got blamed for crime even before he started working.This is not necessarily an easy issue to speak out about. I’m curious if you’ve personally faced backlash?When I speak out about progressive prosecutors, I usually stay away from my Twitter [laughs].Good call.Because there is a lot of vitriol thrown my way. But what I try to make clear is that, what is radical is how many people we’ve incarcerated in this country. Our status quo is radical. I don’t think what I’m proposing about how to reform our system is that radical.TopicsUS politicsCaliforniaJohn LegendUS crimeinterviewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      US Capitol rioter who blames Trump for his actions is found guilty

      by

      US Capitol rioter who blames Trump for his actions is found guiltyDustin Byron Thompson, 38, claimed he was following orders when he stole a coat rack from a Senate office An Ohio man who claimed he was only “following presidential orders” from Donald Trump when he stormed the US Capitol has been convicted by a jury that took less than three hours to reject his novel defence for obstructing Congress from certifying Joe Biden’s presidential victory.The federal jury on Thursday also found Dustin Byron Thompson, 38, guilty of all five of the other charges in his indictment, including stealing a coat rack from an office inside the Capitol during the riot on 6 January 2021. The maximum sentence for the obstruction count, the lone felony, would be 20 years’ imprisonment.Jurors did not buy Thompson’s defence, in which he blamed Trump and members of the president’s inner circle for the insurrection and for his own actions.One juror who spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity said: “Donald Trump wasn’t on trial in this case.”The juror, a 40-year-old man, said as he left the courthouse: “Everyone agrees that Donald Trump is culpable as an overall narrative. Lots of people were there and then went home. Dustin Thompson did not.”Thompson himself, testifying a day earlier, admitted he joined the mob’s attack and stole the coat rack and a bottle of bourbon. He said he regretted his “disgraceful” behaviour.“I can’t believe the things that I did,” he said. “Mob mentality and group think is very real and very dangerous.”Still, he said he believed Trump’s false claim that the election was stolen and was trying to stand up for him. “If the president is giving you almost an order to do something, I felt obligated to do that,” he said.The US district judge Reggie Walton, who is scheduled to sentence Thompson on 20 July, described the defendant’s testimony as “totally disingenuous” and his conduct on 6 January as “reprehensible”. The judge also cast blame in Trump’s direction after the verdict was announced.“I think our democracy is in trouble,” he said, adding that “charlatans” like Trump did not care about democracy, only about power. “And as a result of that, it’s tearing our country apart.” Prosecutors did not ask for Thompson to be detained immediately, but Walton ordered him held and he was led away handcuffed. The judge said he believed Thompson was a flight risk and posed a danger to the public.Thompson’s trial was the third to go before a jury among hundreds of Capitol riot cases prosecuted by the justice department. In the first two cases, jurors also convicted the defendants of all charges.The assistant US attorney William Dreher said Thompson, a college-educated pest exterminator who lost his job during the Covid-19 pandemic, knew he was breaking the law when he joined the mob that attacked the Capitol and, in his case, looted the Senate parliamentarian’s office. The prosecutor told jurors that Thompson’s lawyer “wants you to think you have to choose between President Trump and his client.“You don’t have to choose because this is not President Trump’s trial. This is the trial for Dustin Thompson because of what he did at the Capitol on the afternoon on Jan 6,” Dreher told jurors during his closing arguments.The defence attorney, Samuel Shamansky, said Thompson had not avoided taking responsibility for his conduct.“This shameful chapter in our history is all on TV,” Shamansky told jurors. But he said Thompson, unemployed and consumed by a steady diet of conspiracy theories, was vulnerable to Trump’s lies about a stolen election. He described Thompson as a “pawn” and Trump as a “gangster” who abused his power to manipulate supporters.“The vulnerable are seduced by the strong, and that’s what happened here,” Shamansky said.The judge had barred Thompson’s lawyer from calling Trump and ally Rudolph Giuliani as trial witnesses. But he ruled that jurors could hear recordings of speeches that Trump and Giuliani delivered on 6 January, before the riot erupted. A recording of Trump’s remarks was played.Shamansky contended that Giuliani, the Trump adviser and former New York City mayor, incited rioters by encouraging them to engage in “trial by combat” and that Trump provoked the mob by saying: “If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country any more.”But Dreher told jurors that neither Trump nor Giuliani had the authority to “make legal” what Thompson did at the Capitol.The juror who spoke on condition of anonymity said he was “laughing under my breath” when Thompson testified he took the coat rack to prevent other rioters from using it as a weapon against police.TopicsUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpUS politicsUS crimenewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Ed Buck, wealthy political activist and donor, sentenced to 30 years in prison

      by

      Ed Buck, wealthy political activist and donor, sentenced to 30 years in prisonThe Democratic donor was found guilty on charges that he injected gay men with drugs in exchange for sex, leading to two deaths The wealthy political activist and Democratic donor Ed Buck was sentenced to 30 years in prison on charges that he supplied and personally injected gay men with methamphetamine in exchange for sex, leading to two deaths and multiple other overdoses.Buck, 67, was found guilty in July by a federal jury on all nine counts, including having a drug house, distributing methamphetamine and enticing men to travel for prostitution.Thursday’s sentencing closes a long saga, involving Buck, who prosecutors say used his wealth and influence to prey on and exploit mostly vulnerable Black men for “party and play” encounters at his West Hollywood apartment. The encounters involved Buck paying men to use drugs, injecting large amounts and performing sex acts on them. Officials said Buck would inject methamphetamine with or without the men’s consent and sometimes when they were unconscious.US teen overdose deaths double in three years amid fentanyl crisisRead more“Buck used his money and privilege to exploit the wealth and power imbalances between himself and his victims, who were unhoused, destitute, and/or struggling with addiction,” said Chelsea Norell, an assistant US attorney, in a court filing. “He spent thousands of dollars on drugs and party and play sessions that destroyed lives and bred insidious addictions.”Gemmel Moore, 26, fatally overdosed at Buck’s West Hollywood apartment in July 2017. A second man, Timothy Dean, 55, died nearly two years later in 2019 from a fatal overdose of methamphetamine at Buck’s home. It wasn’t until a third man overdosed twice at the apartmentthat Buck was arrested and charged. All three men were Black.Relatives and activists had pushed for Buck’s arrest since Moore died. They have said Buck escaped criminal charges for years because of his wealth, political ties and race.Buck, who was nicknamed “Doctor Kevorkian”, had at least 10 victims and would sometimes drug them while they were unconscious, according to court filings. One victim said he was “unable to move” after Buck injected him with a tranquilizer. He added that later when Buck wanted him to leave his home, Buck “became frustrated and obtained a power saw from a closet, turned it on, and approached [the] victim with it”.Prosecutors urged the judge to sentence Buck to life in prison, saying that he used “human beings as playthings, destroying their lives merely to appease his own sexual gratification”. Buck’s attorneys sought a 10-year sentence, rather than “relegating him to death in prison”. They asked the judge to consider Buck’s drug addiction, which they said he developed because of a medical condition, and the sexual abuse he suffered at the hands of his father and several priests.LaTisha Nixon, Moore’s mother, said in a letter to the court that she hoped Buck would receive the maximum sentence. Nixon, a certified nursing assistant, said she could not comfort her son the way she has for countless dying people.“All I can think about is how my son died naked on a mattress with no love around him,” Nixon said. “No one to hold his hand or tell him good things.”Buck asked for leniency before he was sentenced, telling the court: “I ask that the court take a look at my life in total,” he said, according to the Los Angeles Times, rather than “the horrible caricature the government painted me as: a meth-fueled axe killer”.Buck, a wealthy white man who was active in gay causes and animal rights issues has given more than $500,000, mostly to Democratic politicians and causes since 2000.Black LGBTQ+ activists in California had been advocating for years for Buck to be brought to justice and accused police of ignoring their concerns and allowing Buck to continue hurting people. Buck continued to prey on gay men after Moore’s death, even complaining about the investigation to Dean, who would later die in his home.“Buck’s lack of remorse is aptly captured in one image: as he was hiding out in a hotel, evading arrest for Gemmel Moore’s death, he was injecting Dane Brown, another young Black man, with back-to-back slams of methamphetamine,” Norell said.Brown, who was homeless, moved into Buck’s apartment, where Buck frequently injected him with meth, often several times a day. He was hospitalized in September 2019 after Buck shot him up three times with back-to-back doses, putting five times the meth in his system that Moore and Dean had when they died, prosecutors said.Brown returned to Buck’s home weeks later where Buck again injected him with an overdose of methamphetamine, and refused to help him, he said.“Brown sat on the couch, resigned to the same fate as Moore and Dean, when he heard his deceased mother cry out to him, ‘Get up, Dane,’” Norell said.He escaped Buck’s home and made it to a nearby gas station, where he called for help and was taken to a hospital. His harrowing account of being revived twice finally led to Buck’s arrest.TopicsUS crimeLGBT rightsUS politicsUS justice systemDrugsnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Capitol riot defendant blames actions on Trump and false election claims

      by

      Capitol riot defendant blames actions on Trump and false election claimsLawyer for man charged with stealing a coat rack from the Capitol has vowed to show Trump abused his power to ‘authorize’ attack Mentions of Donald Trump have been rare at the first few trials for people charged with storming the US Capitol, but that has changed: the latest Capitol riot defendant to go on trial is blaming his actions on the former president and his false claims about a stolen election.Dustin Byron Thompson, an Ohio man charged with stealing a coat rack from the Capitol, doesn’t deny that he joined the mob on 6 January 2021. But his lawyer vowed Tuesday to show that Trump abused his power to “authorize” the attack.Describing Trump as a man without scruples or integrity, defense attorney Samuel Shamansky said the former president engaged in a “sinister” plot to encourage Thompson and other supporters to “do his dirty work”.“It’s Donald Trump himself spewing the lies and using his position to authorize this assault,” Shamansky told jurors Tuesday during the trial’s opening statements.Justice department prosecutor Jennifer Rozzoni said Thompson knew he was breaking the law that day.“He chose to be a part of the mayhem and chaos,” she said.Thompson’s lawyer sought subpoenas to call Trump and Rudolph Giuliani as witnesses at his trial this week. A judge rejected that request but ruled that jurors can hear recordings of speeches that Trump and Giuliani delivered at a rally before the riot.Thompson’s jury trial is the third among hundreds of Capitol riot prosecutions. The first two ended with jurors convicting both defendants on all counts with which they were charged.In a February court filing, Shamansky said he wanted to argue at trial that Thompson was acting at the direction of Trump and “his various conspirators.” The lawyer asked to subpoena others from Trump’s inner circle, including former White House strategist Steve Bannon, former White House senior adviser Stephen Miller and former Trump lawyers John Eastman and Sidney Powell.Prosecutors said Thompson can’t show that Trump or Giuliani had the authority to “empower” him to break the law. They also noted that video of the rally speeches “perfectly captures” the tone, delivery and context of the statements to the extent they are “marginally relevant” to proof of Thompson’s intent on 6 January.Thompson’s lawyer argued that Trump would testify that he and others “orchestrated a carefully crafted plot to call into question the integrity of the 2020 presidential election”. Shamansky claimed that Giuliani incited rioters by encouraging them to engage in “trial by combat” and that Trump provoked the mob by saying that “if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore”.Shamansky said Thompson, who lost his job during the pandemic, became an avid consumer of the conspiracy theories and lies about a stolen election.“This is the garbage that Dustin Thompson is listening to day after day after day,” Shamansky said. “He goes down this rabbit hole. He listens to this echo chamber. And he acts accordingly.”US district Judge Reggie Walton ruled in March that any in-person testimony by Trump or Giuliani could confuse and mislead jurors.More than 770 people have been charged with federal crimes arising from 6 January. Over 250 of them have pleaded guilty, mostly to misdemeanors. Thompson is the fifth person to be tried on riot-related charges.Thompson has a co-defendant, Robert Lyon, who pleaded guilty to riot-related charges in March.Thompson, then 36, and Lyon, then 27, drove from Columbus, Ohio, to Silver Spring, Maryland, stayed overnight at a hotel and then took an Uber ride into Washington DC on the morning of 6 January. After Donald Trump’s speech, Thompson and Lyon headed over to the Capitol.Thompson was wearing a Trump 2020 winter hat and a bulletproof vest when he entered the Capitol and went to the Senate Parliamentarian’s Office, where he stole two bottles of liquor and a coat rack worth up to $500, according to prosecutors.Thompson is charged with six counts: obstructing Congress’ joint session to certify the electoral college vote, theft of government property, entering or remaining in a restricted building or grounds, disorderly or disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds, disorderly or disruptive conduct in a Capitol building, and parading, demonstrating or picketing in a Capitol building.Lyon pleaded guilty to theft of government property and disorderly conduct. Both counts are misdemeanors punishable by a maximum of one year imprisonment. Walton is scheduled to sentence Lyon on 3 June.TopicsUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpUS politicsUS crimenewsReuse this content More