Tag: bid

  • Court rejects Trump’s urgent bid to keep lawyer’s records from special counsel

    Court rejects Trump’s urgent bid to keep lawyer’s records from special counsel

    [ad_1]

    trump 69409

    After setting middle-of-the-night deadlines for filings in the dispute, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday afternoon declined Trump’s request for a stay of Howell’s ruling, ordering attorney Evan Corcoran to provide records to a Washington-based grand jury assigned to the special counsel’s probe.

    The appeals court’s full order was not released, so it was not immediately clear whether Corcoran would be required to testify in addition to providing documents. But a summary of the D.C. Circuit’s order indicated that prosecutors had prevailed and that stay requests from the Trump camp were denied.

    It’s also unclear whether the panel provided any time for Trump to challenge the decision before the full bench of the appeals court or to seek relief from the Supreme Court.

    Howell ruled on Friday that Trump’s attorney-client privilege had to yield to the grand jury’s need for Corcoran’s testimony and records, given evidence that the attorney had been used to advance a crime. Smith’s probe is exploring potential obstruction of justice of the classified-documents investigation, as well as illegal retention of classified information and theft of government records, according to court filings.

    The appeals court’s order on Wednesday — from Judges Cornelia Pillard, J. Michelle Childs and Florence Pan — didn’t identify Corcoran or the case at issue but made clear that the government was on the winning side of the case in Howell’s court and in the appeals court’s new ruling.

    Pillard is an appointee of President Barack Obama as is Howell, the District Court judge who ruled in the dispute. Childs and Pan are appointees of President Joe Biden.

    Spokespeople for Trump, his campaign and Smith did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Wednesday on the appeals court’s decision.

    “Prosecutors only attack lawyers when they have no case whatsoever,” Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign said in a statement on Tuesday night that also assailed what it called “illegal” leaks about the closed-door court fight. “These leaks are happening because there is no factual or legal basis or substance to any case against President Trump.”

    In an order on Tuesday night, the three-judge appeals panel granted a short-term “administrative” stay and also asked Trump’s attorneys to specify the precise set of documents at issue by midnight and for Smith’s team to respond by 6 a.m. Wednesday to the Trump team’s demand for a longer stay of Howell’s ruling.

    Howell’s secret order on Friday required Corcoran to testify about matters he and Trump had claimed were subject to attorney-client privilege. Her order relied on the “crime-fraud exception,” which permits investigators to pursue evidence that would ordinarily be privileged but contains evidence of likely criminal conduct.

    As chief judge, Howell supervised all disputes arising from grand jury proceedings happening in Washington. That responsibility passed on Friday to U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg, who succeeded Howell as chief, but only after Howell issued the potentially momentous privilege ruling in the Trump-related legal fight.

    Proceedings related to the classified-documents grand jury, including efforts by prosecutors to compel Corcoran’s testimony, are occurring under seal — typical for nearly all grand jury proceedings.

    However, the appeals court’s docket provides bare-bones details about the case, identifying when the lower-court battle began — Feb. 7 — and confirming that it stems from a grand-jury-related ruling Howell issued on Friday.

    The grand jury probe of Trump, helmed by Smith, is an outgrowth of a monthslong battle between the National Archives and Trump to obtain hundreds of government records stashed at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida after leaving office. Trump’s aides returned 15 boxes of records in January 2022, including some that bore classification markings. As a result, the Archives brought in the Justice Department to pursue whether Trump had retained additional classified material.

    In May 2022, the Justice Department subpoenaed Trump’s office, demanding the production of any other classified materials he might possess at Mar-a-Lago. Justice Department officials traveled in early June to Mar-a-Lago, where they briefly interacted with Trump and picked up a folder of records deemed classified. Trump’s team then certified that they had thoroughly searched the premises and turned over remaining classified documents.

    But the department developed evidence suggesting that this wasn’t the case, leading to an Aug. 8, 2022, FBI search of the property, where dozens of additional documents with classification markings were discovered.

    Corcoran, who was Trump’s primary point of contact with the Archives and the Justice Department, has faced scrutiny for his involvement in efforts to certify that Trump had returned all potentially classified materials.

    The legal maneuvering in Washington comes as Trump’s lawyers are also awaiting a potential indictment of their client in an unrelated case in New York, an investigation by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg into details of a hush money payment made in 2016 to the porn actress Stormy Daniels



    [ad_2]
    #Court #rejects #Trumps #urgent #bid #lawyers #records #special #counsel
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Schumer slams House GOP’s energy permitting bid

    Schumer slams House GOP’s energy permitting bid

    [ad_1]

    senate democrats 03876

    The bill combines measures to streamline permitting reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act for energy projects and mines, which Republicans hope will form a basis to negotiate with Senate Democrats, with longtime partisan priorities like prohibiting a ban on fracking, mandating oil and gas lease sales and disapproving of President Joe Biden’s decision to kill the Keystone XL pipeline. But these provisions are unlikely to gain traction in the upper chamber given Democratic opposition.

    The bill, which is expected to receive a vote on the floor the last week of March, would also repeal major programs in the Inflation Reduction Act such as the $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and the methane tax.

    Schumer criticized the GOP’s opening bid on easing the permitting review process, saying it includes “none of the important permitting reforms that would help bring transmission and clean energy online faster.”

    Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) introduced a permitting proposal last Congress — backed by Schumer and the White House — that was rejected by most Republicans and failed to pass that would have set targets on the length of environmental reviews under NEPA. It also would have granted more authority to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to site transmission lines needed to connect wind and solar generation to far away demand centers.

    Despite that failure, House Republicans have insisted they’re serious about negotiating with Democrats on a permitting bill.

    While their “all of the above” energy bill is designed to unite the GOP’s fractious conference around combating high oil and gasoline prices, Speaker Kevin McCarthy told POLITICO Tuesday in a statement that he aims to work with Democrats to pass a permitting bill into law once the partisan phase is over.

    “It’s no secret that permitting reform is a top priority for House Republicans,” McCarthy said. “I’m pleased to see more Democrats join us in working to address this issue. We’re long overdue in addressing this challenge, and House Republicans will start by passing H.R. 1.”

    Schumer, despite his criticism of the GOP’s effort, held out the potential for bipartisan talks.

    “I’m glad that there are good-faith talks underway right now between both parties in both houses to figure out what sort of permitting deal is possible,” Schumer said.

    [ad_2]
    #Schumer #slams #House #GOPs #energy #permitting #bid
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Garcetti’s ambassadorial bid, clouded by scandal, clears final hurdle

    Garcetti’s ambassadorial bid, clouded by scandal, clears final hurdle

    [ad_1]

    india garcetti 34116

    Wednesday’s vote came nearly two years after Biden tapped Garcetti to become U.S. ambassador to India. Even hours before the first Senate roll-call, the outcome was uncertain, a rarity these days on the floor. Garcetti’s Senate backers remained confident this week that he would be confirmed, despite some Democrats privately predicting a tight vote.

    “I don’t think either, on the Dems’ or our side, we know exactly where every vote is,” Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) said ahead of the vote.

    The Foreign Relations Committee approved Garcetti’s nomination for a second time last week, with support from two Senate Republicans: Todd Young of Indiana and Bill Hagerty of Tennessee. Garcetti lost a handful of Democratic votes, however, leaving his fate in the hands of the Senate GOP — an unusual position for a Biden nominee.

    Sens. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) all voted against advancing Garcetti.

    Biden first nominated Garcetti in July 2021, and the Foreign Relations Committee held a confirmation hearing in December 2021. But Garcetti’s nomination later ground to a halt amid the Jacobs allegations. Biden re-nominated him in January. Garcetti and the White House pushed hard for final confirmation, with his parents even hiring a lobbyist to help him get over the finish line.

    “There was finally a decision, when the president renominated him, that he was entitled to a vote,” observed Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.).

    Last year, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) published a report on the allegations that said “it is more likely than not that Mayor Garcetti either had personal knowledge of the sexual harassment or should have been aware of it.” The White House, however, has consistently stood by Garcetti, who was one of Biden’s early backers in the 2020 presidential race.

    “This is an opportunity for those that say that they’re going to believe that people that are assaulted to cast their vote accordingly, and if they don’t, then it’s kind of a hypocritical situation,” Grassley said.

    Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), a staunch Garcetti ally, defended him Tuesday, describing him as “a really qualified candidate that had dispersions made against him that were disproved by the facts.”

    Jordain Carney and Anthony Adragna contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]
    #Garcettis #ambassadorial #bid #clouded #scandal #clears #final #hurdle
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Santos files paperwork for 2024 reelection bid

    Santos files paperwork for 2024 reelection bid

    [ad_1]

    202301 santos magazine francis 49

    New York Rep. George Santos, the embattled freshman Republican who has faced a slew of scandals following his election, has filed paperwork to run again in 2024.

    The statement of candidacy filed to the Federal Election Commission on Tuesday — turned in on the final day allowed — keeps the door open for Santos to seek another term but does not guarantee he’ll run. The controversy-stricken lawmaker has yet to officially say whether he’ll try for reelection but has indicated he is open to such a run. The paperwork comes as lawmakers from his own party call for his resignation.

    Tuesday’s filing does permit Santos to fundraise and spend money on campaign-related expenses. That could include some $700,000 he lent to his campaign, or legal expenses he could be facing from numerous lawsuits.

    [ad_2]
    #Santos #files #paperwork #reelection #bid
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Judge denies Jan. 6 defendant’s bid for time to review McCarthy’s Capitol security footage

    Judge denies Jan. 6 defendant’s bid for time to review McCarthy’s Capitol security footage

    [ad_1]

    capitol riot gun charge 67022

    Boasberg’s ruling is the latest ripple caused by McCarthy’s decision to widen access to 44,000 hours of Capitol security footage from Jan. 6. The Capitol Police had previously turned over about 14,000 hours of the day’s footage that leaders said encompassed crucial time periods of the riot, as well as the relevant camera angles.

    It’s unclear whether the additional footage includes evidence that will influence any of the 950-plus Jan. 6 criminal cases. But several defendants have said they intend to access the materials, which House Republicans have agreed to facilitate. The Justice Department has yet to indicate whether it, too, will attempt to obtain and review the footage.

    At Friday’s hearing, prosecutors opposed Carpenter’s request, saying they had pieced together the “overwhelming” amount of her movements using CCTV footage, leaving only “a matter of seconds” unaccounted for. Carpenter already has access to a “massive” trove of CCTV footage, they noted, and defendants have the ability to request specific camera angles they would like to focus on if they believe they need additional material.

    Prosecutors also suggested that they remain largely in the dark about what the cache of footage newly unearthed by McCarthy might include.

    “We don’t have what the speaker has,” said assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher Cook, adding, “In any case, there’s always the possibility some information may be out there.”

    Prosecutors are required to disclose to defendants any potentially exculpatory evidence they possess — a particularly thorny challenge in Jan. 6 cases as a result of the massive amounts of video evidence captured by Capitol security cameras, policy bodycams, journalists and rioters themselves, who recorded hundreds of hours worth of footage.

    But that requirement isn’t limitless, particularly when it comes to evidence that is in the possession of another agency — like the Capitol Police, an arm of Congress — and if courts determine the government has made good-faith efforts to provide as much material as possible to defendants.

    Carpenter’s attorneys argued in court Friday that McCarthy’s batch might help fill “gaps” in the footage that would provide context to the actions Carpenter took inside the Capitol. They contended that it might help contextualize some of the actions she took that resulted in the felony charges DOJ lodged, including for obstructing Congress’ proceedings and for participating in a civil disorder. She sought a 60-day delay in her trial, which is set to begin Monday, in order to determine whether any of the new footage might be relevant.

    Boasberg agreed that the request was legitimate. Any attorney would want to see a new batch of potentially exculpatory evidence, he said.

    “It’s certainly not a frivolous request by any means,” he said.

    But Boasberg agreed that the gaps Carpenter’s attorneys described were “minimal” and that the defense lawyers didn’t explain specifically why any additional footage might help Carpenter’s case.

    Prosecutors trying the seditious conspiracy case of several leaders of the Proud Boys also recently confronted the issue, when a defense attorney asked the Justice Department whether it would help organize access to the additional footage. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jason McCullough called it a “serious question” and a “serious issue,” but said it was too soon to say how DOJ would be handling the matter.

    [ad_2]
    #Judge #denies #Jan #defendants #bid #time #review #McCarthys #Capitol #security #footage
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Biden rebuffs UK bid for closer cooperation on tech

    Biden rebuffs UK bid for closer cooperation on tech

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    LONDON — Britain was rebuffed by the Biden administration after multiple requests to develop an advanced trade and technology dialogue similar to structures the U.S. set up with the European Union.

    On visits to Washington as a Cabinet minister over the past two years, Liz Truss urged U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo and senior Biden administration officials to intensify talks with the U.K. to build clean technology supply chains and boost collaboration on artificial intelligence (AI) and semiconductors.

    After Truss became prime minister in fall 2022, the idea was floated again when Raimondo visited London last October, people familiar with the conversations told POLITICO. But fear of angering the U.S.’s European partners and the U.K.’s diminished status outside the EU post-Brexit have posed barriers to influencing Washington.

    Businesses, lawmakers and experts worry the U.K. is being left on the sidelines. 

    “We tried many times,” said a former senior Downing Street official, of the British government’s efforts to set up a U.K. equivalent to the U.S.-E.U. Trade and Technology Council (TTC), noting Truss’ overtures began as trade chief in July 2021. They requested anonymity to speak on sensitive issues.

    “We did speak to Gina Raimondo about that, saying ‘we think it would be a good opportunity,’” said the former official — not necessarily to join the EU-U.S. talks directly, “but to increase trilateral cooperation.”

    Set up in June 2021, the TTC forum co-chaired by Raimondo, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and U.S. trade chief Katherine Tai gives their EU counterparts, Margrethe Vestager and Valdis Dombrovskis, a direct line to shape tech and trade policy.

    The U.S. is pushing forward with export controls on advanced semiconductors to China; forging new secure tech supply chains away from Beijing; and spurring innovation through subsidies for cutting-edge green technology and microprocessors.

    The TTC’s 10 working groups with the EU, Raimondo said in an interview late last year, “set the standards,” though Brussels has rebuffed Washington’s efforts to use the transatlantic body to go directly after Beijing.

    But the U.K. “is missing the boat on not being completely engaged in that dialogue,” said a U.S.-based representative of a major business group. “There has been some discussion about the U.K. perhaps joining the TTC,” they confirmed, and “it was kind of mooted, at least in private” with Raimondo by the Truss administration on her visit to London last October.

    The response from the U.S. had been ‘’let’s work with what we’ve got at the moment,’” said the former Downing Street official.

    Even if the U.S. does want to talk, “they don’t want to irritate the Europeans,” the same former official added. Right now the U.K.’s conversations with the U.S. on these issues are “ad hoc” under the new Atlantic Charter Boris Johnson and Joe Biden signed around the G7 summit in 2021, they said, and “nothing institutional.”

    GettyImages 1233447451
    Last October, Washington and London held the first meeting of the data and tech forum Johnson and Biden set up | Pool photo by Olivier Matthys/AFP via Getty Images

    Securing British access to the U.S.-EU tech forum or an equivalent was also discussed when CBI chief Tony Danker was in Washington last July, said people familiar with conversations during his visit. 

    The U.K.’s science and tech secretary, Michelle Donelan, confirmed the British government had discussed establishing a more regular channel for tech and trade discussions with the U.S., both last October and more recently. “My officials have just been out [to the U.S.],” she told POLITICO. “They’ve had very productive conversations.”

    A U.K. government spokesperson said: “The U.K. remains committed to working closely with the U.S. and EU to further our shared trade and technology objectives, through the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, the U.S.-U.K. Future of Atlantic Trade dialogues, and the U.K.-U.S. technology partnership.

    “We will continue to advance U.K. interests in trade and technology and explore further areas of cooperation with partners where it is mutually beneficial.”

    Britain the rule-taker?

    Last October, Washington and London held the first meeting of the data and tech forum Johnson and Biden set up. Senior officials hoped to get a deal securing the free flow of data between the U.S. and U.K. across the line and addressed similar issues as the TTC.

    They couldn’t secure the data deal. The U.K. is expected to join a U.S.-led effort to expand data transfer rules baked into the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation trading agreement as soon as this year, according to a former and a current British official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The next formal meeting between the U.K. and U.S. is penciled in for January 2024.

    Ongoing dialogue “is vital to secure an overarching agreement on U.K.-U.S. data flows, without which modern day business cannot function,” said William Bain, head of trade policy at the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC). “It would also provide an opportunity to set the ground rules around a host of other technological developments.”

    In contrast, the U.S. and EU are always at work, with TTC officials in constant contact with the operation — though questions have been raised about how long-term the transatlantic cooperation is likely to prove, ahead of next year’s U.S. presidential election.

    “Unless you have a structured system or setup, often overseen by ministers, you don’t really get the drive to actually get things done,” said the former Downing Street official.

    Right now cooperation with the U.S. on tech issues is not as intense or structured as desired, the same former official said, and is “not really brought together” in one central forum.

    GettyImages 1247532348
    Britain has yet to publish a formal semiconductor strategy | Thomas Coex/AFP via Getty Images

    “This initiative [the TTC] between the world’s two regulatory powerhouses risks sidelining the U.K.,” warned lawmakers on the UK parliament’s foreign affairs committee in a report last October. Britain may become “a rule-taker rather than a rule-maker,” MPs noted, citing the government’s “ambiguous” position on technology standards. Britain has yet to publish a formal semiconductor strategy, and others on critical minerals — like those used in EV batteries — or AI are also missing.

    Over the last two years, U.S. trade chief Tai has “spoken regularly to her three successive U.K. counterparts to identify and tackle shared economic and trade priorities,” said a spokesperson for the U.S. Trade Representative, adding “we intend to continue strengthening this partnership in the years to come.” 

    All eyes on Europe

    For its part, the EU has to date shown little interest in closer cooperation with the U.K.

    Three European Commission officials disregarded the likelihood of Britain joining the club, though one of those officials said that London may be asked to join — alongside other like-minded countries — for specific discussions related to ongoing export bans against Russia.

    Even with last week’s breakthrough over the Northern Ireland protocol calming friction between London and Brussels, the U.K. was not a priority country for involvement in the TTC, added another of the EU officials.

    “The U.K. was extremely keen to be part of a dialogue of some sort of equivalent of TTC,” said a senior business representative in London, who requested anonymity to speak about sensitive issues.

    U.K. firms see “the Holy Grail” as Britain, the U.S. and EU working together on this, they said. “We’re very keen to see a triangular dialogue at some point.”

    The U.K.’s haggling with the EU over the details of the Northern Ireland protocol governing trade in the region has posed “a political obstacle” to realizing that vision, they suggested.

    Yet with a solution to the dispute announced in late February, the same business figure said, “there will be a more prominent push to work together with the U.K.”

    TTC+

    Some trade experts think the U.K. would increase its chances of accession to the TTC if it submitted a joint request with other nations.

    But prior to that happening, “I think the EU-U.S. TTC will need to first deliver bilaterally,” said Sabina Ciofu, an international tech policy expert at the trade body techUK. 

    GettyImages 1245389395
    Representatives speak to the media following the Trade and Technology Council Meeting in Maryland | Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images

    When there is momentum, Ciofu said, the U.K. should join forces with Japan, South Korea and other advanced economies to ask for a TTC+ that could include the G7 or other partners. At the last TTC meeting in December, U.S. and EU officials said they were open to such an expansion around specific topics that had global significance.

    But not all trade experts think this is essential. Andy Burwell, director of international trade at the CBI, said he doesn’t “think it necessarily matters” whether the U.K. has a structured conversation with the U.S. like the TTC forum.

    Off the back of a soon-to-be-published refresh of the Integrated Review — the U.K.’s national security and foreign policy strategy — Prime Minister Rishi Sunak should instead seize the opportunity, Burwell said, to pinpoint where Britain is “going to own, collaborate and have access to various aspects of the supply chains.”

    The G7, Burwell said, “could be the right platform for having some of those conversations.”

    Yet the “danger with the ad hoc approach with lots of different people is incoherence,” said the former Downing Street official quoted above.

    Too many countries involved in setting the standards can, the former official said, “create difficulty in leveraging what you want — which is all of the countries agreeing together on a certain way forward … especially when you’re dealing with issues that relate to, for example, China.”

    Mark Scott, Annabelle Dickson and Tom Bristow contributed reporting.



    [ad_2]
    #Biden #rebuffs #bid #closer #cooperation #tech
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Judge rejected Perry’s bid to shield thousands of emails from Jan. 6 investigators

    Judge rejected Perry’s bid to shield thousands of emails from Jan. 6 investigators

    [ad_1]

    But Howell said Perry had taken an “astonishing view” of his immunity that would effectively put members of Congress above the law and free of political consequences for their actions. She ordered him to disclose 2,055 of the documents he sought to withhold — including all 960 of his contacts with members of the executive branch, which she said are entitled to no constitutional protection at all. Some 161 items, she said, were proper to withhold.

    “What is plain is the clause does not shield Rep. Perry’s random musings with private individuals touting an expertise in cybersecurity or political discussions with attorneys from a presidential campaign, or with state legislators concerning hearings before them about possible local election fraud or actions they could take to challenge election results in Pennsylvania,” Howell wrote in her 51-page December opinion.

    Investigators have long scrutinized Perry’s contacts with Trump, as well as with Jeff Clark, a top Justice Department aide who Perry pushed Trump to install as attorney general in the waning weeks of his administration. Clark was seen by Trump and his allies as sympathetic to his bid to overturn the 2020 election results. The Jan. 6 select committee subpoenaed Perry to testify about his efforts but he refused to appear before the panel.

    Prosecutors homed in on Perry last year, seeking his contacts with top figures connected to Trump, including Clark and attorney John Eastman, an architect of Trump’s last-ditch bid to remain in power despite losing reelection. And in August, Perry’s phone was seized by FBI agents while he was traveling with family.

    Thus far, however, investigators have not had access to any of the records because, last month, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to stay Howell’s ruling. On Thursday, those judges heard both public and private arguments about the dispute. The stay remains in place as the appeals court considers whether to leave Howell’s ruling in place, set it aside or modify it in some way.

    The judges — Karen Henderson, Gregory Katsas and Neomi Rao — appeared skeptical of the Justice Department’s position and the breadth of Howell’s ruling, although they discussed her stance only in broad strokes and the details of her opinions remained under seal until Friday.

    But the appeals panel’s ultimate leanings remained unclear at the conclusion of the public argument session Thursday. The appeals judges seemed most concerned by Howell’s determination that Perry’s outreach about Jan. 6 was not protected by the speech or debate clause because he was not acting with formal House approval.

    That determination was a centerpiece of Howell’s ruling, which she said was rooted in longstanding precedent.

    “No matter the vigor with which Rep. Perry pursued his wide-ranging interest in bolstering his belief that the results of the 2020 election were somehow incorrect — even in the face of his own reelection — his informal inquiries into the legitimacy of those election results are closer to the activities described as purely personal or political,” Howell said.

    Perry’s communications with the White House and the Justice Department appear to be at the center of one of the investigations now being headed by special counsel Jack Smith, who has been probing the pressure put on DOJ officials to express public concern about unsubstantiated election fraud claims in the 2020 election.

    That pressure culminated in an effort to have Trump dismiss acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen and install Clark, then the assistant attorney general for environment and natural resources, as acting attorney general. However, after almost every senior Justice Department official threatened to resign, Trump abandoned the plan.

    Howell, an appointee of President Barack Obama, said Perry’s claim that his communications with the executive branch should be off limits to investigators to protect legislative branch confidentiality made little sense.

    “The entire premise of Rep. Perry’s claim for privilege over these communications would turn the Clause’s foundational purpose on its head,” wrote Howell, who is set to turn over the chief judge’s position to a colleague next month. “Given the Clause’s purpose to protect Congressional members from untoward interference from the Executive Branch with legislative matters, Rep. Perry’s reliance on the Clause to shield his multi-pronged push for Executive Branch officials to take more aggressive action is not only ironic but also must fail as beyond the scope of the Clause.”

    The dispute over access to Perry’s cell phone has drawn the House itself into the fray. Lawyers for Speaker Kevin McCarthy — authorized by a bipartisan vote of House leaders — weighed in earlier this month with a 6,000-word brief that remains sealed. Howell noted in her unsealed filings Friday that the chamber weighed in “at Perry’s request.”

    Howell also dinged Perry for what she described in another unsealed filing — this one in November— for appearing to “slow-walk” his review of the items on some 10,000 documents contained on the phone FBI agents seized. She ordered him to pick up the pace of his review from about 250 documents per day to 800.

    The three-judge appeals court panel decision on Perry’s bid for speech-or-debate protection for his communications may not be the final word. Either the Justice Department or Perry could ask the full bench of the D.C. Circuit to take up the issue or seek to get the Supreme Court to intervene.

    What documents would be protected — and what wouldn’t be

    Howell analyzed batches of documents that Perry sought to withhold and broke them down into categories:

    — Contacts with members of Congress and aides about legislation and votes would be protected from review by investigators, since they’re integral to his legislative responsibilities.

    — Communications with colleagues and staff about internal House Freedom Caucus business would also be protected, since it’s a group of lawmakers focused on the House agenda.

    — Internal House GOP leadership newsletters would not be protected, Howell said, because they were almost entirely political in nature, offering talking points or describing upcoming events, not things central to the legislative process.

    — Communications about Perry’s press coverage or media strategy are not protected, Howell determined, because they’re primarily political.

    — Contacts with fellow members of Congress and aides about 2020 election fraud and legal challenges to the vote are not protected because they’re “purely political,” Howell ruled.

    [ad_2]
    #Judge #rejected #Perrys #bid #shield #thousands #emails #Jan #investigators
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • George Santos lied to a judge in 2017 bid to help a ‘family friend’ charged with fraud

    George Santos lied to a judge in 2017 bid to help a ‘family friend’ charged with fraud

    [ad_1]

    “You work for Goldman Sachs in New York?” the judge asked.

    “Yup,” Santos responded.

    The New York Republican did indeed have a political future. He was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in a Long Island swing district last November based on a largely fabricated résumé that included the claim he worked for Goldman Sachs, one of the largest investment banks in the world.

    A spokesperson for the bank told The New York Times in its original investigation into Santos’ background that there was no record of him working there. He later admitted in a New York Post interview he “never worked directly” for Goldman Sachs, but claimed a financial firm he was employed at, LinkBridge Investors, had “limited partnerships” with the bank.

    Santos now faces investigations by state, federal and international agencies on a range of potential crimes from campaign finance violations to pet charity fraud. He has refused to resign from Congress despite bipartisan calls for him to step down, arguing he never broke any laws, but he did forgo committee assignments citing the “ongoing attention surrounding both my personal and campaign financial investigations.”

    Santos’ attorney Joe Murray did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

    Santos appeared at the 2017 hearing on behalf of Trelha using his full name, George Anthony Devolder Santos. He told the judge he would secure “a long extended-stay apartment through Airbnb” in Seattle during the case if the defendant was released on bail.

    “How do you know this man?” the judge asked.

    “We’re family friends. Our parents know each other from Brazil,” Santos said.

    Trelha was ultimately deported to Brazil in early 2018 after serving seven months in jail and pleading guilty to felony access device fraud. In a telephone interview, Trelha said Santos lied about their relationship, too. Trelha, through a translator, said he met Santos in the fall of 2016 on a Facebook group for Brazilians living in Orlando, Fla., and that his mother died in 2012.

    Trelha eventually moved into Santos’ Winter Park, Fla., apartment in November 2016, according to a copy of the lease viewed by POLITICO. Santos had moved south from New York City, after he was transferred to a new position at the hospitality website HotelsPro, according to Lilian Cabral, a coworker at HotelsPro in Orlando.

    A federal prosecutor who ultimately handled the case described the fraud as “sophisticated,” saying Trelha’s three-day skimming spree in Seattle was only “the tip of the iceberg,” according to a court transcript first reported by CBS News.

    A person close to the investigation who is not authorized to speak publicly said prosecutors ultimately didn’t dig much deeper. The person didn’t remember seeing any forensic reports on Trelha’s phone and said prosecutors didn’t seem eager to pursue any international or domestic co-conspirators.

    New York-based lawyer Tiffany Bogosian, a former friend of Santos who helped him duck a theft charge in 2020 involving the use of canceled checks to purchase puppies from Amish farmers in Pennsylvania, told POLITICO in a Feb. 7 interview that Santos said he was an “informant” in Trelha’s case.

    Santos told Bogosian a warrant for his arrest in the Pennsylvania case was somehow tied to his work as an informant in the Trelha investigation, she said. Bogosian, believing his story at the time, said she called Seattle police detective Lawrence Meyer, who didn’t verify the term “informant” but confirmed Santos had “pointed them in the right direction” and offered some names of people involved in the credit card fraud. POLITICO could not reach Meyer to confirm the exchange.

    When Trelha was arrested on April 27, he was caught on a security camera removing skimming equipment from a Chase ATM on Pike Street in downtown Seattle. He had a fake Brazilian ID card and 10 suspected fraudulent cards in his hotel room, according to arrest documents. An empty Fed-Ex package police found in his rental car was sent from the Winter Park apartment he shared with Santos. Trelha declined to say who sent the package from the apartment.

    His plan was to spend a week skimming numbers and making fraudulent cards using gift cards bought at stores, Trelha said, and then another week taking out the maximum ATM withdrawals with pin numbers captured by the skimmers and cameras he installed.

    “You go at 11 p.m. so you can max it out and then when it turns midnight you take the max amount again,” he said.

    A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Emily Langlie, said sometimes identity and credit card thieves go far from home to collect numbers, so there is less chance of the stolen numbers being connected to the perpetrators later. Langlie told POLITICO she didn’t have any information about Santos’ involvement in the Trelha investigation.

    Trelha said that after he was arrested in Seattle he reached out to a friend who contacted Santos to help him, he said. “He was American and spoke English, so we thought he could help me the most,” Trelha recalled. By then, Santos had moved back north to help care for his sick mother.

    “Mr. Devolder lives in New York,” Trelha’s public defender Virginia Branham said at the bail hearing. “I have spoken to him multiple times over the last few weeks. This is the second time he’s flown out here to assist Mr. Trelha. He has arranged an extended Airbnb for Mr. Trelha to stay at during the pendency of this case,” Branham said in the recording.

    Santos told the judge he’d known Trelha “for a few years,” adding they’d “lost touch [but] got back in touch in September last year in Orlando when I was relocated from New York.”

    Santos said he was staying at a hotel “by the Space Needle” until the judge’s bail decision. At the hearing, Trelha’s bail was reduced from $250,000 to $75,000 — still well above the $10,000 requested by his counsel. Trelha said he was unable to post bail because he didn’t have a local guarantor.

    A Google account under the name George Devolder, with reviews of Brazilian restaurants in Queens and rental car companies in Miami, left a negative review of a Seattle Domino’s Pizza location in 2017, two miles from King County Jail and close to the Space Needle.

    “1 hour viewing the tracker not move! very very very slow giving the time ordered (late night) called the store was on hold for 35mins with no answer!!!! NEVER order from this store, not worth the agrevation!!!”

    [ad_2]
    #George #Santos #lied #judge #bid #family #friend #charged #fraud
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Justices skeptical of bid to make Twitter liable for terrorism

    Justices skeptical of bid to make Twitter liable for terrorism

    [ad_1]

    supreme court social media liability 78596

    “At a certain point, it becomes too attenuated to support aiding and abetting,” Justice Samuel Alito said.

    The case argued Wednesday — Twitter v. Taamneh — involved the death of a Jordanian man in an ISIS terrorist attack, and asks whether Twitter, Google and Facebook can be held liable under the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act for allegedly aiding and abetting terrorists by sharing ISIS recruitment content on their platforms.

    It followed arguments on Tuesday in a separate but related case — Gonzalez v. Google — which asked whether the use of algorithms to recommend ISIS videos on Google’s YouTube is protected under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a law shielding internet companies from being liable for most third-party content they host.

    Some justices seemed to be persuaded that social media has played a role in supporting terrorist groups. Justice Elena Kagan noted that prosecutors have traditionally sought to target criminal enterprises by going after bankers and accountants who support them. She suggested Twitter’s services could be even more vital to terrorist groups like ISIS.

    “What’s the difference?” Kagan asked. “We’re used to thinking about banks as providing very important services to terrorists. Maybe we’re not so used to — but it seems to be true — that various kinds of social media platforms also provide very important services to terrorists and if you know that you’re providing a very important service to terrorists,” you could be liable, she added.

    Several justices said companies providing widely-available services to many customers should have more insulation from lawsuits than individuals or small businesses providing face-to-face services like accounting or banking, which often have requirements on verifying customer identities.

    However, the justices seemed to struggle with just how bespoke or hands-on a service has to be to make someone liable for involvement in related criminal activity, and whether the assistance needs to directly support the crime or can just be merely helpful.

    Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who served as a White House attorney for former President George W. Bush at the time of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, seemed particularly wary about any ruling that could limit liability for a company providing valuable services to terrorist groups. He urged Edwin Kneedler not to take a stance that limits the government’s ability to go after financiers of terrorism who may not know about plans for a specific attack.

    “You’ve got to maintain a hard line there,” Kavanaugh said. “And in response to some of the hypotheticals, I’m not sure you’ve maintained the hard line.”

    But Kavanaugh said that charities and humanitarian groups also need a certain amount of confidence that their activities won’t lead to litigation, even if some people may criticize their work as being of some benefit to terrorists.

    “Moral complicity is different from legal liability,” said Kavanaugh. “There might be moral complicity without necessarily legal liability without fair notice.”

    Kneedler, arguing for the Biden administration, repeatedly warned the justices that allowing litigation against the tech companies over the efficacy of their efforts to remove terrorist-related content could degrade the social media platforms for everyone.

    “It’s an important service that we all benefit from,” Kneedler said, sounding quite pro-tech for an administration often highly critical of the platforms.

    Kneedler also warned that failing to require plaintiffs to show a clear linkage between the platforms and specific attacks would lead to an avalanche of lawsuits.

    “That would hold these defendants culpable in every terrorist attack,” he said.

    Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr partner Seth Waxman, representing Twitter, said the platform aggressively removes ISIS content. However, he said any foul-ups or inefficiency in that process can’t be enough to make the company legally liable for violence that may ensue.

    “The failure to do more to remove content in the context of a service that is generally and widely provided to anybody who complies with the policies … does not amount to the knowing provision of substantial assistance,” said Waxman, the solicitor general during the Clinton administration.

    Waxman also stressed that the company’s policy against terrorist content makes clear it is not trying to help ISIS.

    “Our state of mind is the opposite. This is negative intent. We are opposed to this,” Waxman said.

    [ad_2]
    #Justices #skeptical #bid #Twitter #liable #terrorism
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Indian-American entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy announces 2024 presidential bid

    Indian-American entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy announces 2024 presidential bid

    [ad_1]

    Washington: Indian-American tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy has launched his 2024 presidential bid with a promise to “put merit back” and end dependence on China, becoming the second community member to enter the Republican Party’s presidential primary after Nikki Haley.

    Ramaswamy, 37, whose parents migrated to the United States from Kerala and worked at a General Electric plant in Ohio, made the announcement during a live interview on Fox News’s prime time show of Tucker Carlson, a conservative political commentator.

    He is the second Indian-American to enter the Republican presidential primary.

    Earlier this month, two-term former governor of South Carolina and former US Ambassador to the United Nations, Haley announced her presidential campaign. She announced that she will contest against her former boss and ex-US President Donald Trump for the Republican Party’s nomination.

    “We are in the middle of this national identity crisis, Tucker, where we have celebrated our differences for so long that we forgot all the ways we are really just the same as Americans bound by a common set of ideals that set this nation into motion 250 years ago,” Ramaswamy said.

    He calls “wokeism” a national threat

    “That’s why I am proud to say tonight that I am running for United States president to revive those ideals in this country,” he announced.

    “I think we need to put merit’ back into America’ in every spirit of our lives,” he said, adding that he will end affirmative action in “every sphere of American life.”

    A second-generation Indian American, Ramaswamy founded Roivant Sciences in 2014 and led the largest biotech IPOs of 2015 and 2016, eventually culminating in successful clinical trials in multiple disease areas that led to FDA-approved products, according to his bio.

    He has founded other successful healthcare and technology companies, and in 2022, he launched Strive Asset Management, a new firm focused on restoring the voices of everyday citizens in the American economy by leading companies to focus on excellence over politics.

    “I’m all for putting America first, but in order to put America first, we have to first rediscover what America is. And to me, those are these basic rules of the road that set this nation into motion from meritocracy to free speech, to self-governance over aristocracy.

    “The people who we elect actually make them run the government rather than this cancerous federal bureaucracy. That’s gonna be the heart of my message,” Ramaswamy told Fox News in an interview.

    He said the US faces external threats like the rise of China.

    It “has got to be our top foreign policy threat that we’ve gotta respond to, not pointless wars somewhere else.”

    “That’s gonna require some sacrifice. It’s gonna require a declaration of independence from China and complete decoupling. And that’s not gonna be easy. It’s gonna require some inconvenience,” he said.

    Foreign policy is all about prioritisation, Ramaswamy said.

    “We gotta wake up to the fact that China is violating our sovereignty and the reason, if that had been a Russian spy balloon, we’d have shot it down instantly and ratcheted up sanctions. Why didn’t we do that for China?” he asked.

    “The answer’s simple. We depend on them for our modern way of life. This economic co-dependent relationship has to end,” he said.

    In a statement Democratic National Committee chair Jaime Harrison said as Ramaswamy used Tucker Carlson’s show to announce his campaign for president, one thing is clear: The race for the Make America Great Again (MAGA) base is getting messier and more crowded by the day.

    “Over the next few months, Republicans are guaranteed to take exceedingly extreme positions on everything from banning abortion to cutting Social Security and Medicare and we look forward to continuing to ensure every American knows just how extreme the MAGA agenda is,” Harrison said.

    [ad_2]
    #IndianAmerican #entrepreneur #Vivek #Ramaswamy #announces #presidential #bid

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )