US justice system

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Joe Biden scraps plan to nominate anti-abortion lawyer to Kentucky judgeship

      by

      Joe Biden scraps plan to nominate anti-abortion lawyer to Kentucky judgeshipSenator Rand Paul announced Friday he would not consent to Chad Meredith’s nomination, vetoing the president’s effort After weeks of criticism from fellow Democrats and abortion advocacy groups, Joe Biden has deserted plans to nominate an anti-abortion lawyer to be a federal judge in Kentucky.The White House said on Friday that Republican Kentucky senator Rand Paul would not be consenting to the nomination of Chad Meredith, effectively vetoing Biden’s move to put him on the bench.Biden planned to nominate anti-abortion lawyer to federal judgeship, emails showRead more“In considering potential district court nominees, the White House learned that Senator Rand Paul will not return a blue slip on Chad Meredith,” said White House spokesperson Andrew Bates on Friday, referring to the “blue slip” tradition that allows senators to veto judicial nominations from their home states. “Therefore, the White House will not nominate Mr Meredith.”Had Biden nominated Meredith, the attorney’s promotion to the court would have been unusual in the lineup of Biden’s judicial picks. The president has made it a point to nominate people from underrepresented backgrounds, public defenders and those with experience in civil rights law to the court instead of the usual slate of corporate lawyers and prosecutors.Meredith served as chief deputy general counsel to former Republican Kentucky governor Matt Bevin, who was in office from 2015 to 2019. In this role, Meredith helped the state defend a 2017 law that required doctors to perform ultrasounds and show images of the fetus to patients before performing an abortion. The law was ultimately upheld by a federal appeals court.Working under Bevin, Meredith also helped put together the former governor’s slate of controversial pardons, which included people convicted of murder and rape, according to the Louisville Courier-Journal.After Bevin left office, Meredith began working for a private law firm in Cincinnati, Ohio.News of his nomination was first reported by the Courier-Journal on 29 June. Democrats started hounding the White House for an explanation behind its intention to nominate the anti-abortion lawyer on the heels of the 24 June US supreme court decision overturning the nationwide right to terminate pregnancies embedded in Roe v Wade.In a group statement, a coalition of national abortion advocacy groups denounced news of the potential nomination.“We are in this moment because anti-abortion judges were intentionally nominated at every level to take away our fundamental right to abortion – and given his record, we know Chad Meredith would be no exception,” the statement read.When White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was questioned about the potential nomination, she said, “We make it a point here to not comment on any vacancy, whether it is on the executive branch or the judicial branch, especially those where the nomination has not been made yet.”While the White House has been quiet behind its reasoning for considering Meredith, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell said that Biden was close to taking up his judicial pick “as a personal friendship gesture”, the Kentucky senator told the New York Times. McConnell said that no specific deal between himself and Biden was made, and it simply represented the “collegiality” that exists between them.Paul, who ultimately shut the nomination down, has not commented on his veto of Meredith’s nomination. McConnell suggested to the Times that Paul may believe it is his turn to pick a judicial nominee, though he has not made such an agreement on judicial nominees with Paul.TopicsKentuckyUS politicsJoe BidenAbortionDemocratsRand PaulUS justice systemnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      High-stakes California races will decide LA mayor and San Francisco recall

      by

      High-stakes California races will decide LA mayor and San Francisco recall Analysts watch to see if voters in America’s more liberal cities will address police reform, homelessness and mass incarceration High-stakes primary races taking place on Tuesday in California are expected to have major consequences for police reform, incarceration and the state’s growing homelessness crisis.The most closely watched race is the mayor’s contest in Los Angeles, where voters are deciding between a tough-on-crime real estate developer, Rick Caruso, who has already poured nearly $40m of his own fortune into his primary campaign, and the former community organizer and Democratic congresswoman Karen Bass.Street activist, congresswoman – mayor? Karen Bass reaches for LA’s top jobRead moreIn San Francisco, the city’s progressive prosecutor, Chesa Boudin, is facing a recall election that could have a major impact on movements for criminal justice reform across the US.Midway through a tense midterm elections year, the races are likely to serve as a litmus test for Democrats and progressives. Analysts are watching to see if the majority of voters in some of America’s most ostensibly liberal cities decide to reject attempts to reduce mass incarceration and address the stark racial disparities in the criminal justice system.But one of the starkest takeaways so far is that voters simply are not very engaged in California’s primary election, despite multiple measures designed to make it easier for them to participate. Early turnout so far has been abysmal, even though every registered voter in California was mailed a ballot.“Even if you make it extremely easy to vote, like in California, but the political culture, candidates and issues aren’t there, you aren’t going to increase the turnout,” political scientist Fernando Guerra said. “We have extreme generational issues, with homelessness and crime and the cost of housing, and I think we have the candidates. There’s a lack of political culture.”Lower turnout is likely to be a particular challenge for “a lot of the young progressive candidates”, who might end up losing to an incumbent by a small margin of votes, Guerra said.Voters in California and nationwide are concerned about gas prices and the cost of living. A recent poll found that only a third of Los Angeles voters approved of the city’s police department, a lower approval rating than in 1991, after the police beating of Rodney King, but that nearly half of voters surveyed wanted to increase the size of the force.The role of the police in public safety is one of the key issues up and down the ballot, with younger progressive candidates who support defunding the police challenging older centrist Democrats in several Los Angeles city council races.Bass, the former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, supports police reform and a modest increase in Los Angeles police department staffing; Caruso has pledged to put an additional 1,500 officers on the street.Both Bass and Caruso have promised to put an end to people sleeping on the street in Los Angeles. Caruso has expressed willingness to arrest unhoused people who refuse to move to a city-provided shelter bed, and has also praised an army camp for undocumented children at the Texas border as a good model for how to deal with the city’s homelessness crisis.For some Los Angeles progressives, Bass’s more centrist positions on policing and homelessness have been a disappointment. Two years after George Floyd’s murder by police sparked worldwide protests, some activists see Bass’s endorsement of putting more police on the street as a step backwards.“She’s losing the enthusiasm of folks on the left, and I think that is a miscalculation,” said Melina Abdullah, a co-founder of Black Lives Matter, Los Angeles, who endorsed Gina Viola, a local activist running to Bass’s left, for mayor.Progressive groups in LA have also organized to oust the incumbent LA county sheriff, Alex Villanueva, who has been at the center of multiple scandals related to abuse and misconduct cases within the department. His critics, however, have not rallied behind one opponent among his eight challengers.The role of massive personal fortunes in public elections has also become a central issue in California’s primary campaigns. The attempt to recall Boudin, a central figure in the movement to elect prosecutors who want to make the legal system less punitive and racist, is reportedly being funded by ultra-wealthy donors, many of them in the tech industry, including: Ron Conway, an early DoorDash investor; Garry Tan, an Instacart investor; and David Sacks, a former PayPal executive.The result of the attempt to recall Boudin in San Francisco will “affect whether prosecutors elsewhere feel emboldened to take new approaches or whether they will perceive that as a political risk”, said Sandra Mayson, a University of Pennsylvania law professor.Political spending on the Los Angeles mayoral primary has already topped $50m, with Caruso’s campaign spending more than $40m of that. Bass’s campaign has spent $3m, in contrast, and a local police union has spent a similar amount on advertisement opposing her candidacy.On Friday, Elon Musk, one of the richest men in the world, tweeted his public endorsement of Caruso, who himself is ranked No 261 on Forbes’ list of richest Americans. “He’s awesome,” Musk wrote. “Executive competence is super-underrated in politics – we should care about that a lot more!”Caruso, a real estate developer with an estimated net worth of $4bn, has used at least $38m of his own money to move to the front of a crowded non-partisan primary field, a number that has already broken every previous record for mayor’s races in Los Angeles, local experts said. The billionaire’s personal fortune has funded a barrage of attractive television ads and mailers touting his candidacy, even as Caruso has skipped some mayoral debates, and largely avoided engaging with the press or holding open public events.Bass and then Caruso took an early lead in mayoral polls, leading other mayoral primary contenders to drop out of the race, though some, such as Kevin de Leon, a current city council member, fight on.Heading into Tuesday, polls showed Bass and Caruso closely matched in terms of voter support, setting up the possibility that neither would surpass the 50% vote threshold needed to win outright. In that case, the top two candidates will advance to a runoff election in November, a result that is expected to generate millions more in political spending from Caruso and from Bass’s progressive backers in Hollywood.TopicsCaliforniaUS politicsLos AngelesSan FranciscoUS policingUS justice systemnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      US Justice Department could be zeroing in on Trump lawyers, experts say

      by

      US Justice Department could be zeroing in on Trump lawyers, experts saySubpoenas for information on Rudy Giuliani and John Eastman’s roles in the fake electors scheme were issued in April Legal experts believe the US Justice Department has made headway with a key criminal inquiry and could be homing in on top Trump lawyers who plotted to overturn Joe Biden’s election, after the department wrote to the House panel probing the January 6 Capitol attack seeking transcripts of witness depositions and interviews.Trump calls Capitol attack an ‘insurrection hoax’ as public hearings set to beginRead moreWhile it’s unclear exactly what information the DoJ asked for, former prosecutors note that the 20 April request occurred at about the same time a Washington DC grand jury issued subpoenas seeking information about several Trump lawyers including Rudy Giuliani and John Eastman, plus other Trump advisers, who reportedly played roles in a fake electors scheme.Giuliani, Trump’s former personal lawyer, worked with other lawyers and some campaign officials to spearhead a scheme to replace Biden electors with alternative Trump ones in seven states that Biden won, with an eye to blocking Congress’ certification of Biden on January 6 when a mob of Trump loyalists attacked the Capitol.Deputy attorney general Lisa Monaco announced early this year that the justice department had begun investigating fake elector certificates at the behest of some state attorneys general including Michigan’s.The House committee’s sprawling investigation, which has interviewed over 1,000 people, has included a strong focus on top Trump loyalists including Eastman and Giuliani. Last month, Giuliani testified virtually for over seven hours but reportedly asserted privilege and dodged many questions about his contacts with Trump House allies.Ex-prosecutors also caution that while the justice department may want to obtain more evidence from the House select committee about the fake electors scheme and lawyers including Giuliani, there are other top Trump allies who sought to overturn Biden’s win, plus key figures in the Capitol attack who have drawn scrutiny from both the panel and justice, who prosecutors may now have in their sights.A grand jury in Washington DC, for instance, also began issuing subpoenas a few months ago seeking information about Trump allies involved in the planning and financing of the large Trump rally that preceded the Capitol attack, as the Washington Post first reported.Further, other recent grand jury activity in Washington indicates a widening justice inquiry into top Trump allies including a subpoena last month to Peter Navarro, Trump’s former top trade advisor, for testimony and some of his written communications with Trump. Navarro has responded with a lawsuit to block the subpoena.In addition, several months ago the House sent the justice department a criminal contempt of Congress referral about Mark Meadows, Trump’s former chief of staff, who played key roles in efforts to overturn Biden’s win, and was not fully cooperative with the panel’s requests for documents and testimonyIn replying to justice department’s letter, the January 6 panel chair Bennie Thompson stressed that the committee’s inquiry is ongoing and that “we told them that as a committee, the product was ours, and we’re not giving anyone access to the work product … we can’t give them unilateral access.” and called the DoJ request “premature.”But Thompson also told reporters last month the committee may allow some materials requested to be reviewed in the panel’s officesFormer prosecutors say Thompson’s response, albeit mixed, seems to augur well for more cooperation in the future and pointed to several ways that the overture to the House panel could substantially benefit current inquiries.“The DoJ request for the fruits of the House committee investigation was inevitable but is still very important,” former justice inspector general Michael Bromwich said.“It will substantially advance the DoJ investigation into the role played by higher-level architects of the insurrection,” Bromwich added. “ It will save DoJ time and resources in pushing the investigation forward. It’s very much like having a large second investigative staff that has been working in parallel rather than at cross-purposes with the criminal investigators. Because the House committee has not immunized any witnesses, the legal obstacles for using that testimony don’t exist.”Despite Thompson’s initial guarded response, Bromwich said he expects “they will comply promptly”, adding that the panel “is probably irritated that the request didn’t come earlier, rather than at a time its members are swamped with prep for public hearings and is well into drafting its report”.Likewise, Barbara McQuade, a former US attorney for the eastern district of Michigan, told the Guardian that outreach to obtain key transcripts from the House panel could prove a boon to prosecutors.“Obtaining the transcripts directly from the committee is a way to maximize efficiency,” said McQuade, now a professor of practice at the University of Michigan Law School. “Investigators can see what witnesses have said before and decide whether they need to be interviewed again. They can use the transcripts to eliminate witnesses who don’t have much light to shed on the matters under investigation.”McQuade noted that months ago, “Monaco confirmed that DoJ had received evidence from state AGs about alternate slates of electors and was investigating. It appears that DoJ is now issuing subpoenas regarding this episode. They will likely ask questions about why and how this plan was carried out and who was involved. The answers to those questions will guide the investigation. One could imagine each link leading to the next and possibly all the way to Donald Trump.”As of late May, the justice department had charged over 830 people for crimes related to their roles in the January 6 Capitol attack which followed a Trump rally where he urged a large crowd to “fight like hell.” The federal charges range from illegal entry to seditious conspiracy involving Proud Boys and Oath Keepers members, some of whom have pleaded guilty.On another front, a CNN report in late May revealed that FBI agents had recently conducted interviews in Georgia and Michigan with individuals who initially signed up to be Trump electors but then bowed out, asking specific questions about their contacts with Trump campaign officials and others.As DoJ has ramped up its inquiry into Trump’s fake electors, ex-prosecutors see more benefits that DoJ’s request to the House committee could produce.“One expects that the main purpose is to check the consistency of critical accounts – which is valuable and does signal that DoJ is moving forward amid signs that it is increasingly examining the conduct of Giuliani and Eastman,” ex-prosecutor Paul Rosenzweig saidIn another investigative twist, Paul Pelletier, the former acting chief of the fraud section at DoJ said: “DoJ’s public acknowledgment of their interest in the January 6 transcripts may well be only the tip of the iceberg.“While Chairman Thompson has deferred a formal response to the government’s inquiry, they likely have been informally sharing evidence for some time as is common in these investigations.”Looking forward, other ex-prosecutors sound bullish the House panel will extend cooperation to DoJ.“The panel is sure to cooperate because they are patriots,” former federal prosecutor Dennis Aftergut told me. “They know the importance of January 6 criminal accountability. That is the DoJ’s department, not theirs,” but predicted that the committee “will cooperate on their schedule”.Aftergut stressed that the committee has done a “bang up job” with its wide ranging investigation, but likely wants to keep the public’s attention focused on their upcoming hearings which Democratic Representative Jamie Raskin has predicted will “blow the roof off the House”.Still, he added, “Chairman Thompson calling cooperation now “premature” signals that it’s coming.”TopicsDonald TrumpUS justice systemRudy GiulianiUS Capitol attackUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 200 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Militia group leader tried to ask Trump to authorize them to stop the transfer of power

      by

      Militia group leader tried to ask Trump to authorize them to stop the transfer of powerThe justice department has alleged that Oath Keepers leadership called the president’s confidant to allow them to use force Stewart Rhodes, the Oath Keepers militia group leader charged with seditious conspiracy over the January 6 attack on the Capitol, tried to get a Donald Trump confidant to ask the former US president to allow his group to forcibly stop the peaceful transfer of power, the justice department has alleged in court papers.Capitol attack committee requests cooperation from key Republican trioRead moreThe previously unknown phone call with the unidentified individual appears to indicate the Oath Keepers had contacts with at least one person close enough to Trump that Rhodes believed the individual would be a good person to consult with his request.Once the Oath Keepers finished storming the Capitol, Rhodes gathered the Oath Keepers leadership around 5pm and walked down a few blocks to the Phoenix Park hotel in Washington DC, the justice department said on Wednesday in a statement of offense against Oath Keepers member William Wilson.The group then huddled in a private suite, the justice department said, where Rhodes called an unidentified person on speakerphone and pressed the person to get Trump to authorize them to stop the transfer of power after the Capitol attack had failed to do so.“Wilson heard Rhodes repeatedly implore the individual to tell President Trump to call upon groups like the Oath Keepers to forcibly oppose the transfer of power,” the document said. “This individual denied Rhodes’s request to speak directly with President Trump.”The extraordinary phone call indicates that Rhodes believed two important points: first, that he was close enough to the Trump confidant that he could openly discuss such a request, and second, that the confidant was close enough to Trump to be able to pass on the message.Rhodes and his attorney were not immediately able to be reached for comment.The previously unknown phone call surfaced on Wednesday in charging documents against Wilson, the leader of the North Carolina chapter of the Oath Keepers, who pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy and obstruction of an official proceeding as part of a plea agreement.The statement of offense said that Wilson was involved in efforts to prepare for January 6 with the national leadership of the Oath Keepers, and how Rhodes added Wilson to the “DC OP: Jan 6 21” group chat on the encrypted Signal messaging app.“Rhodes, Wilson, and co-conspirators used this Signal group chat and others to plan for January 6, 2021,” the justice department said.On the morning of the Capitol attack, Rhodes confirmed on the group chat that they had several well equipped QRFs outside DC – a reference to quick reaction forces, that the government said it believes were on standby to deploy to the Capitol with guns and ammunition.Around 2.34pm, the justice department said, Wilson stormed into the Capitol through the upper West Terrace doors as one of the first co-conspirators to breach the building, and by 2.38pm, was helping to pry open the doors to the rotunda from the inside.The seditious conspiracy charge against Wilson is the latest in a string of recent such indictments. In January, Rhodes and 10 other Oath Keepers were charged with seditious conspiracy – an offense that carries up to 20 years in federal prison.As part of the criminal investigation into January 6, the justice department is also examining connections between the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, another militia group, having obtained text messages showing the two groups were in touch before the Capitol attack.The House select committee investigating the Capitol attack also believes the Capitol attack included a coordinated assault perpetrated by the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s election victory, the Guardian first reported last month.TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsDonald TrumpTrump administrationUS justice systemnewsReuse this content More

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Militia group leader tried to ask Trump to authorize them to stop transfer of power

      by

      Militia group leader tried to ask Trump to authorize them to stop transfer of powerJustice department alleges Oath Keepers’ Stewart Rhodes called unidentified presidential confidant on January 6 to make request Stewart Rhodes, the Oath Keepers militia group leader charged with seditious conspiracy over the January 6 attack on the Capitol, asked an intermediary to get Donald Trump to allow his group to forcibly stop the transfer of power, the justice department has alleged in court papers.The previously unknown phone call with the unidentified individual appears to indicate the Oath Keepers had contacts with at least one person close enough to Trump that Rhodes believed the individual would be a good person to consult with his request.Capitol attack committee requests cooperation from key Republican trioRead moreOnce the Oath Keepers finished storming the Capitol, Rhodes gathered the Oath Keepers leadership at about 5pm and walked down a few blocks to the Phoenix Park hotel in Washington, the justice department said on Wednesday in a statement of offense against Oath Keepers member William Wilson.The group then huddled in a private suite, the justice department said, where Rhodes called an unidentified person on speakerphone and pressed the person to get Trump to authorize them to stop the transfer of power after the Capitol attack had failed to do so.“Wilson heard Rhodes repeatedly implore the individual to tell President Trump to call upon groups like the Oath Keepers to forcibly oppose the transfer of power,” the document said. “This individual denied Rhodes’ request to speak directly with President Trump.”The extraordinary phone call indicates that Rhodes believed two important points: first, that he was close enough to the Trump confidant that he could openly discuss such a request, and second, that the confidant was close enough to Trump to be able to pass on the message.James Lee Bright, a lawyer for Rhodes, told the Guardian that he was uncertain about who his client called or whether the call took place.The previously unknown phone call surfaced on Wednesday in charging documents against Wilson, the leader of the North Carolina chapter of the Oath Keepers, who pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy and obstruction of an official proceeding as part of a plea agreement.The statement of offense said that Wilson was involved in efforts to prepare for January 6 with the national leadership of the Oath Keepers, and how Rhodes added Wilson to the “DC OP: Jan 6 21” group chat on the encrypted Signal messaging app.“Rhodes, Wilson, and co-conspirators used this Signal group chat and others to plan for January 6, 2021,” the justice department said.On the morning of the Capitol attack, Rhodes confirmed on the group chat that they had several well equipped QRFs outside DC – a reference to quick reaction forces, that the government said it believes were on standby to deploy to the Capitol with guns and ammunition.At about 2.34pm, the justice department said, Wilson stormed into the Capitol through the upper West Terrace doors as one of the first co-conspirators to breach the building, and by 2.38pm, was helping to pry open the doors to the rotunda from the inside.The seditious conspiracy charge against Wilson – an offense that carries up to 20 years in federal prison – is the latest in a string of recent such indictments to members of the Oath Keepers. Wilson is cooperating with the the justice department in its criminal investigation into January 6.As part of the criminal investigation into January 6, the justice department is also examining connections between the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, another militia group, having obtained text messages showing the two groups were in touch before the Capitol attack.The House select committee investigating the Capitol attack also believes the Capitol attack included a coordinated assault perpetrated by the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s election victory, the Guardian first reported last month.TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsDonald TrumpTrump administrationUS justice systemnewsReuse 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

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      National Archives reportedly asks DoJ to investigate Trump document handling

      by

      National Archives reportedly asks DoJ to investigate Trump document handlingRequest follows reports of Trump tearing up documents and sending boxes of files to Mar-a-Lago property The National Archives and Records Administration (Nara) has asked the justice department to investigate whether the former US president Donald Trump violated federal law in the handling of documents, the Washington Post has reported. The Associated Press was unable to independently confirm the report.The referral followed several Washington Post stories chronicling how Trump dealt with documents, including tearing them up. In one report, confirmed by the archives, the agency arranged the transport of 15 boxes of documents from the Mar-a-Lago property in Florida after Trump’s representatives discovered them and notified the archives.The Washington Post says the referral is asking the justice department to investigate whether Trump violated the Presidential Records Act, which requires that all presidential records of an administration be turned over to the National Archives when a president leaves office.The archives did not return multiple messages seeking comment. The justice department declined to comment. In a statement, Trump said: “Following collaborative and respectful discussions, the National Archives and Records Administration (Nara) arranged for the transport of boxes that contained presidential records in compliance with the Presidential Records Act” from Mar-a-Lago that will one day become part of the Donald J Trump presidential library.The media’s “characterisation of my relationship with Nara is fake news. It was exactly the opposite. It was a great honour to work with Nara to help formally preserve the Trump legacy,” said Trump.The archive acknowledged this week that Trump representatives had been cooperating with Nara and had located records “that had not been transferred to the National Archives at the end of the Trump administration”. Nara arranged for them to be transported to Washington. “Nara officials did not visit or raid the Mar-a-Lago property,” the agency said.Nara said the former president’s representatives are continuing to search for additional records that belong to the archives.In a separate statement, David S Ferriero, the archivist of the United States, said: “Whether through the creation of adequate and proper documentation, sound records management practices, the preservation of records, or the timely transfer of them to the National Archives at the end of an administration, there should be no question as to need for both diligence and vigilance. Records matter.”Supreme court rejects Trump bid to shield documents from January 6 panelRead moreThe issue of presidential records, the Trump administration and the archives has been central to the investigation by the House committee investigating the insurrection on 6 January that sought to stop the certification of the 2020 presidential election. Trump tried to withhold White House documents in a dispute that rose to the supreme court.In an 8-1 ruling last month, the court let stand a lower court ruling that said the archives could turn over documents, which include presidential diaries, visitor logs, speech drafts and handwritten notes dealing with 6 January from the files of the former chief of staff Mark Meadows. At the time, the House committee agreed to defer its attempt to retrieve some documents, at the request of the Biden administration.A referral for potential criminal prosecution from a federal agency or from Congress does not mean the justice department is likely to bring charges or that it will even investigate the matter.Questions about Trump’s handling of records date back to 2018, when Politico reported that Trump aides, fearing he might violate the law, routinely pieced together documents with tape because of his habit of tearing them up.TopicsDonald TrumpUS supreme courtUS justice systemNational ArchivesLaw (US)US politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Stewart Rhodes: how his arrest signals a new chapter in January 6 inquiry

      by

      Stewart Rhodes: how his arrest signals a new chapter in January 6 inquiryOath Keepers leader is one of the most high-profile arrests yet in the year-long investigation into the insurrection The arrest this week of Stewart Rhodes, the founder and leader of the Oath Keepers militia, marks one of the most significant moments thus far in the federal investigation into the January 6 Capitol attack.Rhodes, along with ten other associates, is charged with seditious conspiracy for plotting to violently overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election – the first sedition charges prosecutors have brought related to the insurrection.Rhodes is the one of the most high-profile arrests yet in the year-long investigation into the insurrection, which has charged more than 700 people and counting with crimes related to the attack. Many of these cases have involved minor charges and the majority of suspects have received light sentences, but the sedition charges facing militia members could carry up to 20 years in prison and signal a shift towards more complex cases targeting organized extremist groups.Guns, ammo … even a boat: how Oath Keepers plotted an armed coupRead moreThe conspiracy charges against Rhodes and other Oath Keepers members, as well as separate conspiracy to obstruct Congress cases involving Oath Keepers and Proud Boys extremists, are additionally significant because they may reveal the extent of planning that went into the attack. What level of prior coordination and plotting pro-Trump groups conducted prior to January 6 remains a key question, and one that is set to become a focal point of trials in the coming months.“We’ve had such a good unfolding and narrative of what folks on the ground were doing, but we’ve not yet had a definitive narrative emerge about the people in power behind it and who was organizing it,” said Melissa Ryan, CEO of CARD Strategies, a consulting firm that researches online extremism and disinformation.“Between what we see over the next few months from the justice department and whatever comes out of the select congressional investigation, hopefully a story is going to start to emerge.”Who are Rhodes and the Oath Keepers?Rhodes has been a prominent figure in the far-right for over a decade. Easily distinguishable by his dark eyepatch – the result of dropping a loaded handgun and shooting himself in the left eye during his 20s, according to an Atlantic investigation – Rhodes positioned himself at the forefront of the anti-government militia movement amid its resurgence after the 2008 election of Barack Obama.A former Army paratrooper and Yale Law School graduate, Rhodes announced the creation of the Oath Keepers at a 2009 rally on the site of a Revolutionary War battle. The group, which Rhodes marketed towards former and current law enforcement and military personnel, claimed to stand for defending the constitution and advocated for disobeying certain laws such as gun control legislation. Rhodes was careful to create a broad appeal for the organization, initially trying to distance it from more openly violent extremism and claiming that it wasn’t officially a militia.But the Oath Keepers soon became a leading group in the anti-government extremist militia movement, growing to thousands of members across the country. It became a visible presence at anti-government and anti-gun control rallies, while promoting far-right conspiracies about a totalitarian New World Order. Rhodes frequently told his followers that the US was entering a state of civil war and to arm themselves, a claim that became more frequent during the nationwide protests against racism and police killings in 2020. The Oath Keepers also became ardent supporters of Donald Trump and gained a foothold in the modern Republican party, including providing security for Trump’s longtime ally Roger Stone one day before the Capitol attack.In September of 2021, hackers released a membership list for the Oath Keepers that revealed the extent that the group had become embedded in state institutions. Its members included dozens of law enforcement, armed forces members and elected officials – some of whom used their government emails when signing up for the militia.“The Oath Keepers have just been building more and more political power within the GOP, taking positions at the local level, running for office,” Ryan said. “You have state senators who identify proudly as Oath Keepers. I would not be surprised if they had a member of Congress in the next couple cycles.”A shift in the investigationThe charges against the Oath Keepers are some of the most serious to date in the investigation, alleging a well-armed plot to undermine the democratic elections. Investigators also lay out a series of events that contradict the dominant narrative of January 6 among rightwing media figures and many Republican politicians, who have claimed the attack was a mostly peaceful political protest and pushed conspiracy theories that leftists or government agents were behind any violence.The charging documents involving Rhodes and ten associates accused of seditious conspiracy portray a group intent on overturning the results of the 2020 presidential election and willing to use violence to achieve their goals. Prosecutors allege the Oath Keepers conducted extensive planning and coordination, with encrypted messages between the members discussing government overthrow prior to the attack and making plans to form “quick reaction force” teams to move into the Capitol area with firearms.“They coordinated travel across the country to enter Washington DC, equipped themselves with a variety of weapons, donned combat and tactical gear, and were prepared to answer Rhodes’s call to take up arms,” the court documents state.In the weeks leading up to the attack, Rhodes allegedly spent more than $20,000 on weapons and tactical equipment, including on night vision goggles, a shotgun and cases of ammunition. Court documents state that on the morning of the insurrection, Rhodes suggested to other Oath Keepers in an encrypted group chat that armed quick reaction force teams were standing by. (As part of a plea deal last year, one Oath Keeper admitted to stashing an M4 rifle at a Comfort Inn hotel just outside the Capitol.)“We will have several well equipped QRF’s outside DC,” Rhodes texted the Oath Keepers’ group chat.Federal investigators had been circling Rhodes for some time, filing court papers in March that alleged he was in direct communication with Oath Keepers involved in the Capitol attack and then several months later using a warrant to seize his cell phone. Rhodes stated last year that, against the advice of his legal counsel, he sat for a three-hour interview with federal agents to discuss the role that he and the Oath Keepers played in the attack. He continually claimed that he had done nothing wrong.“I may go to jail soon, not for anything I actually did, but for made-up crimes,” Rhodes said in March of last year at a speech in Texas.None of the government’s conspiracy cases related to the Capitol attack have gone to trial yet, and researchers say sedition charges can be hard to prove. The government has charged a number of militia members with seditious conspiracy in the past only for those defendants to go free after the cases went to trial. In the late 1980s, a jury acquitted 13 white supremacists who prosecutors had charged with seditious conspiracy involving a plot to kill a federal judge and overthrow the government. More recently, nine Michigan militia members were acquitted in 2012 after authorities charged them with plotting to start an armed uprising against the government.It also remains unclear what Rhodes’ arrest and the charges facing numerous Oath Keepers means for the extremist organization as a whole. Since the insurrection, some members of the group have advocated for further engagement in local government and political activism. Meanwhile, researchers say they have benefited from a Republican whitewashing of the Capitol attack that has allowed them to continue operating with a degree of impunity.“A lot of us assumed that they would be weakened by January 6,” Ryan said. “It seems like the opposite has happened.”TopicsThe far rightUS Capitol attackUS politicsUS crimeUS justice systemfeaturesReuse this content More