What Trump risks if he keeps talking about the judge in his N.Y. criminal case
The former president has suggested Judge Juan Merchan is biased, and referred to District Attorney Alvin Bragg as an “animal.” Could the court limit his ability to speak about the case?
By Laura Jarrett – April 3, 2023
Former President Donald Trump onboard his airplane as he is flown to Iowa on March 13. Jabin Botsford / The Washington Post via Getty Images file
For days, former President Donald Trump has been on a tear on social media, railing against District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s hush money investigation, his former lawyer Michael Cohen, prosecutors and, more recently, the judge presiding over the historic case.
Without evidence, he’s referred to Judge Juan Merchan as “Trump Hating” and suggested that Merchan was “handpicked” by Bragg.In an interview Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” Trump’s lawyer, Joe Tacopina, was asked about the attacks and whether he believes the judge harbors any slant.
“No, I don’t believe the judge is biased. I mean, the president is entitled to his own opinion,” Tacopina said.
Trump has referred to Bragg as an “animal” in a post on his social media platform, Truth Social. In an earlier Truth Social post, he appears to have shared an article that included an image of him wielding a baseball bat juxtaposed next to an image of Bragg’s head. That post was deleted.
All defendants have a right to vigorously defend their innocence, but Trump can’t threaten the prosecutor without risking other legal charges under New York law. The judge could also issue a gag order to prevent Trump or his attorneys from speaking publicly about the case.
NBC News spoke with former prosecutors about how and when a judge might limit speech about a case.
What’s a “gag order?”
A gag order is a judicially imposed order restricting parties, attorneys and/or witnesses in a pending case from making any public statements about it. The standard courts look to is whether such statements have a “reasonable likelihood” of possibly preventing a fair trial.
Merchan could issue one himself, or do so at the request of either side, but former prosecutors say they are not used frequently in New York. It’s up to the judge to craft the order as narrowly as possible to protect free speech rights, while at the same time preserving the defendant’s right to a fair trial. Often a defendant’s attorney will request that a judge issue one — whereas in this case, it’s Trump own statements that have fueled speculation about whether Merchan will issue one.
The fact that Trump is running for public office raises the stakes and puts any restriction on his First Amendment rights in sharper view, but Robert C. Gottlieb, a former assistant district attorney in Manhattan, said that shouldn’t matter.
“He’s no different than anyone else,” said Gottlieb of Trump, noting that while one cannot ignore the political implications of the case, “that does not give him [Trump] more rights to influence jurors or to threaten or incite violence. In that courtroom, he is only a defendant.”
Gottlieb also pointed to ethical rules prohibiting Trump’s attorneys from making public statements intended to prejudice the jury pool or influence the outcome of the trial.
What’s the likelihood of the judge imposing one here?
Other former prosecutors are more skeptical that a gag issue will be issued at Tuesday’s arraignment based on Trump’s social media posts thus far.
“I think it would be challenging to do it out of the box,” said Daniel Horwitz, another former assistant district attorney in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, now in private practice. “There usually has to be a predicate for it.”
Horwitz suggested it’s more likely that Merchan will issue a warning to everyone in court Tuesday and set some “ground rules,” essentially putting Trump on notice that if he talks, “he does it at his peril.”
Gottlieb has appeared before Merchan and agreed that, at minimum, the judge will make a record of what Trump has said about the case thus far, and admonish him against making any statements that could influence the jurors.
“I cannot believe that it won’t be addressed,” said Gottlieb. “You can’t ignore what has happened.”
Even if the judge opts not to impose a gag order, former District Attorney Cy Vance, who immediately preceded Bragg, noted that Trump risks violating other laws if he continues to make statements about the case.
“There is a crime. That’s called obstructing governmental administration under New York law,” Vance said on MSNBC’s “Inside with Jen Psaki” on Sunday, explaining that it would involve efforts to intimidate a public official. “[I]f I were Mr. Trump’s lawyer I would tell him to knock it off because it’s not going to help him with the judge and if it is charged, that’s not going to help him with a jury.”
Acting New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan has sentenced Trump’s close confident Allen Weisselberg to prison, presided over the Trump Organization tax fraud trial and overseen former adviser Steve Bannon’s criminal fraud case.
But Trump’s historic arraignment on Tuesday will perhaps be Merchan’s most high-profile case to date, even after a long career atop the state-level trial court.
Merchan has been described by observers as a “tough” judge, yet one who is fair, no matter who is before him.
Here’s what you need to know.
“A man of his word’
Trump’s arraignment is likely to be a spectacle with a show of law enforcement and with the former president already fanning the flames on social media with his views on Merchan and his indictment.
But in the courthouse, Merchan does not stand for disruptions or delays, attorneys who have appeared before him told CNN, and he’s known to maintain control of his courtroom even when his cases draw considerable attention.
“Judge Merchan was efficient, practical, and listened carefully to what I had to say,” Nicholas Gravante, the attorney who represented Weisselberg in his plea, said via email.
“He was clear in signaling his judicial inclinations, which helped me tremendously in giving Mr. Weisselberg informed legal advice. Judge Merchan was always well-prepared, accessible, and – most importantly in the Weisselberg matter – a man of his word. He treated me and my colleagues with the utmost respect, both in open court and behind closed doors.”
Karen Friedman Agnifilo, a private practice attorney who previously worked as the chief assistant district attorney in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, supervising cases Merchan presided over, echoed that sentiment.
“[Merchan] doesn’t let the prosecutors or the defendants create any issues in his courtroom. He doesn’t let a media circus or any other kind of circus happen. I don’t think Donald Trump attacking him and threatening him is going to bode very well for him in the courtroom,” Agnifilo said.
“The judge is the kind of judge where he will ignore it and not hold it against Donald Trump. He’s not vindictive in any way like that.”
‘Tough’ but ‘compassionate’
Merchan showed some of his tough side when Weisselberg was sentenced, telling the former Trump associate that if he had not already promised him a five-month sentence, he would have handed him a “much greater” sentence after having listened to evidence at trial.
When he presided over Bannon’s criminal fraud case, Merchan chastised the former Trump aide’s new team of attorneys for delaying the case when they asked for more time to review new evidence.
In addition to the Trump cases, Merchan has also presided over other high-profile cases, including the “soccer mom madam” trial, in which he set a $2 million bond for suburban mom Anna Gristina, who was charged with running a $2,000-an-hour escort service for the wealthy, Bloomberg News reported.
Merchan also handed a 25-years-to-life sentence to a Senegalese man who raped and murdered his girlfriend.
Trump attorney Timothy Parlatore said during an interview Friday on CNN that Merchan was “not easy” on him when he tried a case before him, but echoed that the judge likely will be fair.
“I’ve tried a case in front of him before. He could be tough. I don’t think it’s necessarily going to be something that’s going to change his ability to evaluate the facts and the law in this case,” Parlatore said.
Merchan, however, is also credited by his peers for having helped create the Manhattan Mental Health Court, which he often presides over and where he has earned a reputation for “compassionate” rulings that give defendants second chances.
“I watched a colleague of mine try a shooting case where someone got shot, so he’s able to try those very serious violent crimes and then switch,” said Brendan Tracy, a criminal defense attorney who previously served as an assistant district attorney in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office.
“Maybe someone who was a serial shoplifter and then charged with grand larceny and is in mental health treatment court because they had mental health issues, he was able to handle the wide range of cases and do them all fairly,” Tracy added.
Still, Earl Ward, a trial attorney and chair of public defender nonprofit The Bronx Defenders, said that having watched Merchan preside over cases in the Mental Health Court, the judge often sided with prosecutors.
“He’s fair and his rulings are consistent with the law, but if it’s a close call, his reputation is that he lands on the prosecution’s side,” Ward said.
Early career
Merchan launched his legal career in 1994 when he started off as an assistant district attorney in the trial division in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. Several years later, he moved on to the state attorney general’s office, where he worked on cases in Long Island.
In 2006, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, then a Republican, appointed Merchan to Family Court in the Bronx, and Democratic Gov. David Paterson appointed him to the New York State Court of Claims in 2009, the same year he began serving as an acting New York Supreme Court Judge.
Born in Bogotá, Colombia, Merchan emigrated to the United States at the age of 6 and grew up in the New York City neighborhood of Jackson Heights, Queens, according to a New York Times profile of the judge. He was the first in his family to go to college.
Merchan initially studied business at Baruch College in New York before he dropped out of school to go work only to return several years later to finish school so that he could get his law degree, the Times reported.
He eventually received his law degree from Hofstra University.
CNN’s Kara Scannell and Lauren del Valle contributed to this report.
Related:
NPR – Law
What to know about Juan Merchan, the judge overseeing Trump’s criminal case
Joe Hernandez – April 2, 2023
Manhattan Criminal Court is seen in New York on Friday.Yuki Iwamura/AP
Now that former President Donald Trump has been indicted by a Manhattan grand jury in connection to a hush-money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in 2016, attention will no doubt turn to his arraignment and potential trial.
The judge handling the unusual and historic case is Juan Manuel Merchan, a veteran of the New York court system who has spent more than 15 years on the bench and is no stranger to high-profile prosecutions — particularly those involving Trump and his associates.
This is perhaps Merchan’s most noteworthy case yet, as it’s the first time that a former U.S. president has ever been charged with a crime.
Trump, who denies any wrongdoing, is expected to appear in a Manhattan courtroom on Tuesday for his arraignment.
The former president has already aired his opinion about the judge presiding over his case, saying in a post on Truth Social last week that Merchan “hates me” and that the judge “railroaded” Trump’s former chief financial officer into pleading guilty in a tax fraud case.
Merchan has overseen other cases related to Trump
Last year, Merchan oversaw the closely watched criminal tax fraud case against Trump’s company, which was ultimately found guilty by a Manhattan jury. Trump himself was not a defendant in that case.
Two business entities controlled by Trump were found guilty of 17 counts of tax fraud and falsifying business records and were ordered to pay the maximum penalty of $1.61 million.
During the proceedings, Merchan shut down the suggestion from the Trump Organization’s legal team that the case was a politically motivated prosecution against the former president and told attorneys to focus on the specific charges, CBS News reported.
“I will not allow you in any way to bring up a selective prosecution claim, or claim this is some sort of novel prosecution,” Merchan said.
Former Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg pleaded guilty in the case and served as a star witness for the prosecution. Merchan sentenced him to five months in prison, and the judge said he would have handed down a harsher sentence if he hadn’t already agreed to the plea deal, Politico reported.
Merchan is also overseeing a criminal case against former Trump aide Steve Bannon, who’s facing fraud and money laundering charges related to a former charity that promised to help build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Bannon has pleaded not guilty.
Merchan is a veteran of the New York legal system
According to the New York Law Journal, Merchan has been an acting justice of the New York Supreme Court since 2009.Sponsor Message
“He’s a serious jurist, smart and even tempered,” Manhattan defense attorney Ron Kuby told NBC News. “He’s not one of those judges who yells at lawyers, and is characterized as a no-nonsense judge. But he’s always in control of the courtroom.”
Karen Friedman Agnifilo, a lawyer who previously worked in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office supervising cases Merchan oversaw, told CNN that Trump likely wouldn’t help his case by publicly criticizing the judge.
Merchan “doesn’t let the prosecutors or the defendants create any issues in his courtroom. He doesn’t let a media circus or any other kind of circus happen. I don’t think Donald Trump attacking him and threatening him is going to bode very well for him in the courtroom,” Agnifilo said.
“The judge is the kind of judge where he will ignore it and not hold it against Donald Trump. He’s not vindictive in any way like that.”
Merchan was previously a family court judge, a New York assistant attorney general and an assistant district attorney for New York County.
He graduated from Baruch College in 1990 and earned his law degree from Hofstra University in 1994.
Report details ‘staggering’ church sex abuse in Maryland
Les Skene, Brian Witte and Sarah Brumfield – April 5, 2023
Jean Hargadon Wehner speaks about the release of the redacted report on child sexual abuse in the Catholic Archdiocese of Baltimore by the Maryland Attorney General’s Office on Wednesday, April 6, 2023, in Baltimore. Standing next to her is Teresa Lancaster. (Kim Hairston/The Baltimore Sun via AP)Kurt Rupprecht speaks about the abuse he suffered after the release of the redacted report on child sexual abuse in the Catholic Archdiocese of Baltimore by the Maryland Attorney General’s Office on Wednesday, April 6, 2023, in Baltimore. (Kim Hairston/The Baltimore Sun via AP)Teresa Lancaster speaks about the release of the redacted report on child sexual abuse in the Catholic Archdiocese of Baltimore by the Maryland Attorney General’s Office on Wednesday, April 6, 2023, in Baltimore. (Kim Hairston/The Baltimore Sun via AP)Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown comments about releasing the redacted report on child sexual abuse in the Catholic Archdiocese of Baltimore on Wednesday, April 6, 2023, in Baltimore. (Kim Hairston/The Baltimore Sun via AP)
BALTIMORE (AP) — More than 150 Catholic priests and others associated with the Archdiocese of Baltimore sexually abused over 600 children and often escaped accountability, according to a long-awaited state report released Wednesday that revealed the scope of abuse spanning 80 years and accused church leaders of decades of coverups.
The report paints a damning picture of the archdiocese, which is the oldest Roman Catholic diocese in the country and spans much of Maryland. Some parishes, schools and congregations had more than one abuser at the same time — including St. Mark Parish in Catonsville, which had 11 abusers living and working there between 1964 and 2004. One deacon admitted to molesting over 100 children. Another priest was allowed to feign hepatitis treatment and make other excuses to avoid facing abuse allegations.
The Maryland Attorney General’s Office released the findings of their yearslong investigation during Holy Week — considered the most sacred time of year in Christianity ahead of Easter Sunday — and said the number of victims is likely far higher. The report was redacted to protect confidential grand jury materials, meaning the identities of some accused clergy were removed.
“The staggering pervasiveness of the abuse itself underscores the culpability of the Church hierarchy,” the report said. “The sheer number of abusers and victims, the depravity of the abusers’ conduct, and the frequency with which known abusers were given the opportunity to continue preying upon children are astonishing.”
Disclosure of the redacted findings marks a significant development in an ongoing legal battle over their release and adds to growing evidence from parishes across the country as numerous similar revelations have rocked the Catholic Church in recent years.
Baltimore Archbishop William Lori, in a statement posted online, apologized to the victims and said the report “details a reprehensible time in the history of this Archdiocese, a time that will not be covered up, ignored or forgotten.”
“It is difficult for most to imagine that such evil acts could have actually occurred,” Lori said. “For victim-survivors everywhere, they know the hard truth: These evil acts did occur.”
Also on Wednesday, the state legislature passed a bill to end a statute of limitations on abuse-related civil lawsuits, sending it to Gov. Wes Moore, who has said he supports it. The Baltimore archdiocese says it has paid more than $13.2 million for care and compensation for 301 abuse victims since the 1980s, including $6.8 million toward 105 voluntary settlements.
Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown, who took office in January, said the investigation shows “pervasive, pernicious and persistent abuse.” State investigators began their work in 2019; they reviewed over 100,000 pages of documents dating back to the 1940s and interviewed hundreds of victims and witnesses.
ABUSE RECALLED AS A ‘LIFE SENTENCE’
Victims said the report was a long-overdue public reckoning with shameful accusations the church has been facing for decades.
Jean Hargadon Wehner said she was abused in Baltimore as a teen by A. Joseph Maskell, a priest who served as her Catholic high school’s counselor and chaplain. She said she reported her abuse to church officials in the early ’90s, when her memories of the trauma finally surfaced about two decades after she was repeatedly raped.
“I expected them to do the right thing in 1992,” she told reporters Wednesday. “I’m still angry.”
Maskell abused at least 39 victims, according to the report. He denied the allegations before his death in 2001 and was never criminally charged. The Associated Press typically doesn’t name victims of abuse, but Wehner has spoken publicly to draw attention to the issue.
Kurt Rupprecht, who also experienced abuse as a child, said he was in his late 40s when he pieced together his traumatic memories. He said the realization brought him some relief because it explained decades of self-destructive behavior and mental health challenges, but also left him overwhelmed with anger and disbelief.
Rupprecht said his abuser was assigned to the Diocese of Wilmington, which covers some counties on the Eastern Shore of Maryland.
“We’re here to speak the truth and never stop,” he said after the news conference. “We deal with this every day. It is our life sentence.”
The Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, known as SNAP, noted the report lists more names of abusers than have been released publicly by archdiocese officials. The organization called on the archbishop to explain the discrepancies.
Other investigations involving the Archdiocese of Washington and the Diocese of Wilmington, Delaware, which both include parts of Maryland, are ongoing.
ARCHDIOCESE TOOK STEPS TO PROTECT THE ACCUSED
The Baltimore report says church leaders were focused on keeping abuse hidden, not on protecting victims or stopping abuse. In some situations, victims ended up reporting abuse to priests who were abusive themselves. And when law enforcement did become aware of abuse allegations, police and prosecutors were often deferential and “uninterested in probing what church leaders knew and when,” according to the report.
The nearly 500-page document includes numerous instances of leaders taking steps to protect accused clergy, including allowing them to retire with financial support rather than be ousted, letting them remain in the ministry and failing to report alleged abuse to law enforcement.
In 1964, for instance, Father Laurence Brett admitted to sexually abusing a teenager at a Catholic university in Connecticut.
He was sent to New Mexico under the guise of hepatitis treatment and then to Sacramento, where another teenage boy reported being abused by Brett, the report said. He was later assigned to Baltimore, where he served as chaplain at a Catholic high school for boys and abused over 20 victims.
After several students accused him of abuse in 1973, Brett was allowed to resign, saying he had to care for a sick aunt. School officials didn’t report the abuse to authorities and dozens more victims later came forward. He never faced criminal charges and died in 2010.
The report largely focuses on the years before 2002, when an investigation by the Boston Globe into abuse and coverup in the Archdiocese of Boston led to an explosion of revelations nationwide. The nation’s Catholic bishops, for the first time, then agreed on reforms including a lifetime ban from ministry for any priest who commits even a single incident of abuse. While new national policies significantly improved the internal handling of reported abuse in the Baltimore archdiocese after 2002, significant flaws remained, according to the report.
Only one person has been indicted through the investigation: Neil Adleberg, 74, who was arrested last year and charged with rape and other counts. The case remains ongoing. Officials said he coached wrestling at a Catholic high school in the ’70s, then returned to the role for the 2014-2015 school year. The alleged abuse occurred in 2013 and 2014 but the victim was not a student of the school, officials said.
COURT TO CONSIDER RELEASING MORE NAMES IN THE FUTURE
Lawyers for the state asked a court for permission to release the report and a Baltimore Circuit Court judge ruled last month that a redacted version should be made public. The court ordered the removal the names and titles of 37 people accused of wrongdoing — whose names came out during confidential grand jury proceedings — but will consider releasing a more complete version in the future.
Lawmakers’ passage of a bill to end the state’s statute of limitations Wednesday came after similar proposals failed in recent years. Currently, victims of child sex abuse in Maryland can’t sue after they turn 38. The bill would eliminate the age limit and allow for retroactive lawsuits.
The Archdiocese of Baltimore has long faced scrutiny over its handling of abuse allegations.
In 2002, Cardinal William Keeler, who served as Baltimore archbishop for nearly two decades, released a list of 57 priests accused of sexual abuse, earning himself a reputation for transparency at a time when the nationwide scope of wrongdoing remained largely unexposed. That changed, however, when a Pennsylvania grand jury accused Keeler of covering up sexual abuse allegations while serving as bishop of Harrisburg in the 1980s.
Associated Press reporter Stefanie Dazio contributed to this report from Los Angeles. Peter Smith contributed from Pittsburgh. Witte reported from Annapolis and Brumfield reported from Silver Spring.
Cops Reveal Chilling New Details About Nashville Shooter Audrey Hale
Josh Fiallo – April 3, 2023
Metropolitan Nashville Police Department
Authorities revealed Monday that Nashville mass killer Audrey Hale fired off 152 rounds during the assault at the Covenant School that left six dead and sent a church community into mourning.
The shocking detail emerged in the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department’s latest update on their investigation, which also revealed that Hale plotted the massacre for months in writings found inside his car and home.
“[Hale] documented, in journals, [their] planning over a period of months to commit mass murder at The Covenant School,” police said in a news release Monday.
Cops say Hale’s writings have been turned over to the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit in Quantico, Virginia, which is working with local detectives to determine what drove Hale to slaughter three kids and three staffers at his former primary school.
While a precise motive hasn’t been discovered, police said they’ve determined that Hale “considered the actions of other mass murderers.”
Hale’s motive has been a mystery from the start. Nashville Police Chief John Drake initially speculated that 28-year-old Hale, who attended the private religious school as a kid, held “resentment” toward former teachers there. It’s since been revealed that Hale was devastated by the recent death of a close friend, was under the care of a doctor for an emotional disorder, and had sent a series of dark messages to a friend just before the assault began.
On the day of the shooting, March 27, Drake said Hale left behind a “manifesto” that was being studied by detectives, but its contents haven’t been made public.
The barrage of bullets fired by Hale came from two assault rifles and a handgun, cops said Monday. The three weapons were part of a seven-gun arsenal Hale had legally amassed behind his parents back—stashing the weapons throughout the Nashville home they shared, Drake said last week.
Hale was gunned down by two Nashville officers just 14 minutes after he broke into the school by shooting through locked glass doors. Police said Monday those officers each fired four shots, killing Hale at the scene.
Related:
Associated Press
Nashville police: School shooter planned attack for months
Travis Loller, Jonathan Mattise and Kimberlee Krues – April 3, 2023
Students march from Hume Fogg High School to the State Capitol for the March For Our Lives protest against gun violence in Nashville, Tenn., on Monday, April 3, 2023. (AP Photo/George Walker IV)Nashville School Shooting Students gather outside the State Capitol for the March for Our Lives anti gun protest in Nashville, Tenn., Monday, April 3, 2023. (AP Photo/George Walker IV)Maggie Williams wipes away tears as she is comforted by Ruby Barton at the March for Our Lives anti gun violence protest outside the State Capitol in Nashville, Tenn., on Monday, April 3, 2023. (AP Photo/George Walker IV)Josia Arteaga, front right, takes part in the March for Our Lives anti gun protest outside the State Capitol in Nashville, Tenn., on Monday, April 3, 2023. (AP Photo/George Walker IV)Students participate in the March for Our Lives anti gun violence protest outside the State Capitol in Nashville, Tenn., on Monday, April 3, 2023. (AP Photo/George Walker IV)Cheyenne Harris yells with other demonstrators at the March for Our Lives anti gun protest outside the State Capitol in Nashville, Tenn., on Monday, April 3, 2023. (AP Photo/George Walker IV)Robin Casler draws a chalk outline around Noah Williams at the March for Our Lives anti gun protest outside the State Capitol in Nashville, Tenn., on Monday, April 3, 2023. (AP Photo/George Walker IV)A balloon with names of the victims is seen at a memorial at the entrance to The Covenant School on Wednesday, March 29, 2023, in Nashville, Tenn. (AP Photo/Wade Payne)
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — As students across Nashville walked out of class on Monday to protest gun violence at the Tennessee Capitol following a school shooting last week, police said the person who killed six people, including three 9-year-old children, had been planning the massacre for months.
Police have not established a motive for the shootings at The Covenant School, a small Christian elementary school where the 28-year-old shooter was once a student, according to a Monday news release from the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department. Both Nashville police and FBI agents continue to review writings left behind by Audrey Hale, both in Hale’s vehicle and home, police said.
“It is known that Hale considered the actions of other mass murderers,” police said.
The three children who were killed in the shooting were Evelyn Dieckhaus, Hallie Scruggs and William Kinney. The three adults were Katherine Koonce, 60, the head of the school, custodian Mike Hill, 61, and 61-year-old substitute teacher Cynthia Peak.
Hale fired 152 rounds during the attack before being killed by police. That included 126 rifle rounds and 26 nine-millimeter rounds, according to police.
Outside the state Capitol on Monday, thousands rallied in a call for gun reform, many of them students from Nashville-area schools who walked out of their classes en masse. Some other students sat outside the House speaker’s office in the legislative building.
The crowd outside the Capitol echoed chants such as “thoughts and prayers are not enough” and sang along to songs like “All You Need is Love” – adding to it, “and action!” At one point, they sat for a moment of silence, raising posters above their heads that read, “Thoughts and prayers are useless to dead children,” “Book bags not body bags,” and “2nd graders over 2nd amendment.” Some students wore orange shooting-target stickers on their shirts.
Vivian Carlson, a senior at Hume-Fogg High School nearby in downtown Nashville, helped organize her school’s walkout. She told the crowd that her biggest fear last week, when the shooting unfolded, should have been “missing the bus or my stepmom scolding me for not cleaning the cat litter box.” Instead, she said she was missing English class Monday because politicians are “protecting old laws for a new society.”
Carlson, like many others who addressed the crowd, called for changes to Tennessee’s gun laws, including a ban on assault weapons, tougher background checks and a “red flag” law. Red flag laws generally allow law enforcement to temporarily confiscate weapons from people whose statements or behavior are deemed to make them a danger to themselves or others.
“To my fellow students, we cannot let this pressure and fire escape us,” Carlson said. “Feel the fear as you walk into school and let it inspire you to fight for change. And please, if there is one thing you can do, I beg you to vote.”
As thousands swarmed the Capitol, Gov. Bill Lee and state lawmakers held a press conference nearby to unveil legislative proposals that would add more funding for school resource officers and mental health resources.
The proposals included $140 million to place an armed security guard at every public school, as well as $27 million to enhance public and private school security. Lee is also proposing adding $30 million to expand the state’s homeland security network that will work with both public and private schools.
The governor’s proposals must now clear the Legislature as lawmakers are in their final weeks of the session.
Notably absent from Lee’s announcement were any calls to tighten the state’s access to guns. As he stood surrounded by top Republican leaders, Lee said he believed that people who are a threat to themselves should not have access to weapons, but also stated that any law designed to address those concerns shouldn’t impede 2nd Amendment rights.
He called on the Legislature to find the appropriate solution. Yet that call to action may be short-lived after Sen. Todd Gardenhire, who chairs the influential Senate Judiciary Committee, told reporters that he has no plans to consider any new gun-related bills this session.
“We all agree that we should all find something that we agree upon,” Lee said. “I think we can do that and I think we should do that.”
Lee added that he had not talked to Gardenhire about his stance on halting new gun legislation.
An AP investigation last year found that most U.S. state barely use the red flag laws touted as the most powerful tool to stop gun violence before it happens. It’s a trend experts blame on a lack of awareness of the laws and resistance by some authorities to enforce them even as shootings and gun deaths soar.
Even after the main rally ended Monday, hundreds of protesters remained at the Capitol as lawmakers went into the House and Senate chambers for their evening sessions. Many protesters made their way inside the building, where they sang “This Little Light of Mine” before erupting into chants, “Save our kids!”
The scene recalled a rowdy gun control protest last week. On Thursday, protesters were forced to leave the Senate chamber gallery after yelling, “Children are dead!” — and two Democratic lawmakers caused the House to temporarily shut down by chanting, “Power to the people!” through a megaphone.
Police have said Hale was under a doctor’s care for an undisclosed “emotional disorder.” However, authorities haven’t disclosed a link between that care and the shooting. Police also said Hale was not on their radar before the attack.
Social media accounts and other sources indicate that the shooter identified as a man and might have recently begun using the first name Aiden. Police have said Hale “was assigned female at birth” but used masculine pronouns on a social media profile. However, police have continued to use female pronouns and the name Audrey to describe Hale.
Here’s how the polarizing M16 or AR-15 rifle went from a symbol of America’s lost war in Vietnam to being owned by about 16 million Americans in 70 years
James Pasley – April 1, 2023
Reporter Betsy Halstead learns how to fire an M16 automatic rifle during the Vietnam War in 1965.Bettmann/Getty Images
The M16 or AR-15 rifle is one of the US’s most divisive symbols
To gun enthusiasts, it is an effective, lightweight weapon. To anti-gun advocates, it’s a symbol of mass shootings.
Experts estimate approximately 16 million adults in the US now own at least one of these rifles.
On Monday, a mass shooter killed three students and three adults at a school in Nashville. The shooter used two AR-15 rifles in the attack.
Semiautomatic rifles, including AR-15s, are becoming more common weapons used in recent mass shootings in the US, according to the National Criminal Justice Association. Since 2012, 10 out of 17 of the deadliest shootings in the country featured an AR-15 rifle, the Independent reported.- ADVERTISEMENT -https://s.yimg.com/rq/darla/4-10-1/html/r-sf-flx.html
AR-15 rifles are light, accurate, and quick. When they were used by the military, they were called M16 rifles.
As of 2023, about 16 million adults in the US own at least one, according to polling conducted by The Washington Post and Ipsos. It is the country’s best-selling rifle, but it has also become a divisive political symbol.
According to CJ Chivers, when a discussion turns to AR-15s, it stops being rational.
“The conversation is burdened by history, cluttered with conflicting anecdotes, and argued over by passionate camps,” Chivers wrote in an article for The New York Times.
In the 1950s, Eugene Stoner, an engineer with firearms company ArmaLite, was tinkering with gun designs in his garage.
Soldiers looking at an M-15 rifle in 1965.Stuart William MacGladrie/Fairfax Media/Getty Images
He wanted to create a new gun that could shoot steadily with a single pull of the trigger after studies showed soldiers dealing with the pressure of combat during World War II and the Korean War were not pulling the trigger on their weapons.
Stoner ended up inventing the AR-15 (as in the “ArmaLite Rifle) to rival the Soviet-created AK-47. He understood the importance of a light gun and how deadly a small bullet could be.
A pile of empty brass casings from M16 rifles on the group at the Fort Dix firing range, New Jersey, in 1967.Leif Skoogfors/Getty Images
He spoke to Congress about his gun and explained its effectiveness, saying all bullets were designed to fly through the air, but they became unstable when they hit a target.
What wasn’t so obvious was that a smaller bullet grew unstable quicker and caused far more damage to the target — meaning more brutal injuries for their opponents.
In a recent investigation, The Washington Post examined the damage a modern AR-15 can inflict, finding an AR-15 bullet can destroy entire organs or rip apart a human skull.
A US soldier holding an M16 rifle beside abandoned vehicles with their doors open in Saudi Arabia in 1991.David Turnley/Corbis/VCG/Getty Images
Joseph Sakran, a trauma surgeon at Johns Hopkins Hospital and a gunshot survivor, told The Washington Post that when he operated on people who had been shot by an AR-15, their body tissue “literally just crumbled into your hands.”
The Washington Post compared the bullet’s damage to the wake of a boat — where a blast ripples out, damaging body parts otherwise untouched by the bullet.
Unlike the cumbersome M-14 that soldiers had been using, the AR-15 was accurate, quick, and light to carry. Soldiers could go into battle with it, as well as plenty of ammunition.
A soldier uses his M16 during a battle in the Vietnam War in 1971.Neal Ulevich/AP
It used a gas operating system, making reloading quicker, and it included a new design that redirected gas from the fired cartridge, which made it easier to aim.
After initial testing in 1958, the US government bought 8,500 in 1962 and renamed it the M16. An internal report from the Pentagon called the gun “an outstanding weapon with phenomenal lethality.”
But the design of the M16 wasn’t ready for combat. The government probably should have refined the design. Instead, it hurried out production of the rifle.
US Marines in Vietnam use their M16 rifles in 1968.AP
By 1966, issues with the M16 were widespread. Soldiers’ rifles were jamming during battles. A report from 1967 said four out of every five troops from a group of 1,585 had dealt with jamming.
Paratroopers carry a wounded soldier while another holds an M16 in Vietnam in 1965.Horst Faas/AP
It got so bad that soldiers had to use a metal rod to dislodge a cartridge case. The gun was compared to a single-shot musket rifle.
At the same time, American firearms manufacturer Colt Industries was working on modifying the M16. By 1967, it was made of plastic, aluminum alloy, and steel and was capable of shooting 30 rounds over nine football fields at a speed far faster than the speed of sound.
A cavalry soldier looks through a “starlight scope” that is attached to an M16 rifle in Vietnam in 1967.Claude Bohner/AP
During this period, Colt also turned to the domestic market. The company released a civilian M16 which was, once again, called an AR-15. It had the same gas operating system and was advertised to campers and hunters.
A weapons expert shows an officer how to use an AR-15 at a firing range in 2002.Luke Frazza/AFP/Getty Images
Though the M16 was fully automatic, the AR-15 was a semi-automatic weapon, meaning one-trigger pull shot one bullet, and the gun automatically reloaded the chamber.
The National Rifle Association called it “America’s rifle.” It later was advertised using questions like, “Should you shoot a rapist before he cuts your throat?”
A table of bumper stickers at an NRA convention in 1995.Mark Peterson/Corbis/Getty Images
After 1977, when the patent for Stoner’s original gas system expired, a dozen manufacturers started selling their own AR-15 rifle, and “AR-15” became an umbrella name for a type of rifle.
People looking at guns at an NRA convention in 1995.Mark Peterson/Corbis/Getty Images
But the AR-15 didn’t become a domestic hit overnight. A large portion of the gun industry wasn’t sure about it. Many people called it the “black rifle” and considered it too expensive and ugly for hunting.
An army instructor inspects US-made M16 rifles during a training exercise in El Salvador in 1982.Robert Nickelsberg/Getty Images
Instead, throughout the 1980s, AR-15s were mainly bought by law enforcement and “survivalists.”
Things began to change in 1989 after a mass shooting at Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, California. A lone gunman shot 34 people, killing 5 children, before killing himself. In response, Colt stopped selling AR-15s for a whole year.
Daniel Correa shows one of the guns that was used in the mass shooting at Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, California.AP
But Chris Bartocci, former Colt employee and author, told CNN the shooting actually increased the AR-15’s profile. Before the shooting, many people didn’t know this type of gun was available on the domestic market. But they knew about it afterward.
Weapon bans were discussed during the Bush administration, but nothing was formalized until 1994 when the Clinton administration passed a bipartisan law that banned the manufacturing and selling of about 118 types of military-grade guns.
President Bill Clinton shakes hands with Stephen Sposato, whose wife was killed by a gun violence, after he signed a sweeping crime bill that included a ban on assault weapons.J. Scott Applewhite/AP
They were defined for the first time as “assault weapons.” The ban was imposed on guns that had magazines that could hold more than 10 bullets.
“Today, at last, the waiting ends,” then-President Bill Clinton said at the signing. “Today, the bickering stops, the era of excuses is over.”
But the new law didn’t include guns that were made before 1994, and due to loopholes, buyers could still buy slightly modified AR-15s. The Washington Post called the law “largely toothless.”
A civilian tries out an M16 at a gun shop in 1993.Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe/Getty Images
Some experts also believed that banning assault weapons made them more attractive to some Americans.
In the early 2000s, the gun industry, which had been in a slump, harnessed the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks to stoke patriotism and increase demand for AR-15s.
“There has never been a better accidental advertising campaign in history,” Doug Painter, former president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, told The Washington Post.
This continued into 2004 when the Clinton administration ban ended. At this point, the US was in the midst of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and patriotic images of soldiers using M16s prompted an increase in civilians buying AR-15s.
A woman is instructed how to handle an M16 rifle by Marine Sergeant Richard Diaz in California in 2002.David Paul Morris/Getty Images
First-person shooter video games like Call Of Duty increased the popularity of AR-15s by showing people what it was like to use one in a virtual setting.
A man plays Call of Duty 3 in 2006.Joerg Sarbach/AP
AR-15s could also be reconfigured based on their owners’ needs — cosmetically or for different uses, like hunting, target practice, or law enforcement — which helped their growing popularity.
A gun salesman holds an AR-15 with a bayonet mount at a Pittsburgh gun shop in 2004.Jeff Swensen/Getty Images
In 2005, the gun lobby was bolstered by the Bush administration. It passed a law called the Protection of Lawful Commerce Arms Act, which protected gun companies from being sued when their guns were used unlawfully, like in a mass shooting.
Former President George W. Bush is applauded for signing the Protection of Lawful Commerce Arms Act in 2005.Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images
In 2007 and 2008, during Barack Obama’s run for president, the gun lobby didn’t miss a beat. They claimed the US had never “faced a presidential candidate — and hundreds of candidates running for other offices — with such a deep-rooted hatred of firearm freedoms.”
A sign explaining a version of Obama’s gun control policies sits taped at a gun store in 2008.Kasha Broussalian/Digital First Media/Boulder Daily Camera/Getty Images
The fear of another gun ban caused sales to go up again. According to CNN, gun production increased by more than 50% once Obama took office.
According to Ryan Busse, a senior policy advisor who worked for a gun control policy group called Giffords, it was during this era that the AR-15’s image began to change.
A woman holds an AR-15 at a gun rights rally at the Utah State Capitol in 2013.George Frey/Getty Images
“By the time Obama was leading in the polls in 2007, the AR-15 was starting to become the poster child, both of industry growth, but also what we now see, which is right-wing politics wrapped in and around the firearms industry and firearms ownership,” Busse told Poynter.
The AR-15’s popularity began to show in another way, too — it became more prevalent in mass shootings. From 1996 to 2009, AR-15s were used in one out of every three mass shootings. But from 2009 to 2019, it was used in more than half of mass shootings.
People at a memorial for a mass shooting in Oregon in 2019, where the shooter used an AR-15 rifle.Scott Olsen/Getty Images
At the same time, a Pew gun survey conducted in 1999 and 2017 showed gun owners had done a complete reversal in why they bought guns. In 1999, 26% of participants owned a gun for protection. By 2017, it was up to 67%.
Despite the increase in use during mass shootings, the industry continues to grow. As of 2023, about 16 million adults in the US own at least one AR-15 rifle. It has become the country’s best-selling rifle.
A man and his 7-year-old son look at an AR-15 rifle at an NRA convention in 2022.Brandon Bell/Getty Images
The gun industry believes there are about 20 million AR-15s across the country.
In 2021, President Joe Biden said if he could do one thing to the gun industry, it would be to let victims of gun violence sue gun makers. But so far, he hasn’t achieved that.
President Joe Biden speaks about efforts to reduce gun violence at The Boys & Girls Club of West San Gabriel Valley in Monterey Park, California.Evan Vucci/AP
Last year, his administration did pass a new gun law, but it doesn’t specifically restrict AR-15s and is actually less restrictive than the 1994 law.
Going forward, it remains difficult to impose any limits on selling and purchasing AR-15s because of the rifle’s popularity and powerful lobbying by gun companies and the NRA.
A man holds an AR-15 while the gun shop owner looks on at a Maryland gun shop in 2023.Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP/Getty Images
George Soros responds to GOP attacks over Manhattan DA: ‘I don’t know him’
Jared Gans – March 31, 2023
George Soros responds to GOP attacks over Manhattan DA: ‘I don’t know him’
Prominent Democratic donor George Soros responded to Republican attacks on him over Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s (D) investigation that led to an indictment of former President Trump, saying that “I don’t know” Bragg.
Soros told Semafor that he did not contribute any money to Bragg’s campaign to become district attorney and does not know him. His response came as several members of the GOP have denounced Bragg as being backed and funded by Soros.
“I think some on the right would rather focus on far-fetched conspiracy theories than on the serious charges against the former president,” Soros said.
He has contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to Color of Change PAC, which endorsed Bragg and spent money to help his candidacy.
Soros has often been the subject of right-wing attacks and some conspiracy theories based on the large donations he has made to Democratic candidates over the years. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who leads a right-wing party, criticized Soros over donations he has made to support democracy in his native country, Hungary, and included some antisemitic tropes.
The Anti-Defamation League reported that conspiracy theories surrounding Soros have falsely attempted to cast him as controlling global society, leaning into antisemitic myths.
Soros pointed Semafor to an op-ed that he wrote in The Wall Street Journal as to why he has donated to “reform-minded prosecutors.”
He said in the piece that he believes both justice and safety need to be advanced in the criminal justice system. He said greater investment needs to happen to prevent crime through methods like deploying mental health professionals in “crisis situations,” investing in youth job programs and creating opportunities for inmates to get an education while in prison.
Soros said “reform-minded” prosecutors and law enforcement officials have rallied around a more “effective and just” agenda.
“This is why I have supported the election (and more recently the re-election) of prosecutors who support reform,” he said in the op-ed. “I have done it transparently, and I have no intention of stopping. The funds I provide enable sensible reform-minded candidates to receive a hearing from the public.”
Trump, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) and other top Republicans have targeted Bragg following the Trump indictment by tying him to Soros.
“The Soros-backed Manhattan District Attorney has consistently bent the law to downgrade felonies and to excuse criminal misconduct. Yet, now he is stretching the law to target a political opponent,” DeSantis said in a statement Thursday.
Trump to be arraigned Tuesday to face hush money indictment
Michael R. Sisak – March 31, 2023
Former President Donald Trump speaks with reporters while in flight on his plane after a campaign rally at Waco Regional Airport, in Waco, Texas, Saturday, March 25, 2023, while en route to West Palm Beach, Fla. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)Richard Fisher protests former President Donald Trump outside Trump Tower on Friday, March 31, 2023, in New York. Former President Donald Trump was indicted by a Manhattan grand jury, Thursday, a historic reckoning after years of investigations into his personal, political and business dealings and an abrupt jolt to his bid to retake the White House.(AP Photo/Bryan Woolston)Protesters gather outside Trump Tower on Friday, March 31, 2023, in New York. Former President Donald Trump was indicted by a Manhattan grand jury, Thursday, a historic reckoning after years of investigations into his personal, political and business dealings and an abrupt jolt to his bid to retake the White House. (AP Photo/Bryan Woolston)
NEW YORK (AP) — Former President Donald Trump will be arraigned Tuesday after his indictment in New York City, court officials said Friday, his formal surrender and arrest presenting the historic, shocking scene of a former U.S. commander in chief forced to stand before a judge.
While Trump and his lawyers prepared for his defense, the prosecutor in his hush money case defended the grand jury investigation that propelled him toward trial, as congressional Republicans painted it all as politically motivated.
In a letter obtained by The Associated Press, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg told three Republican House committee chairs Friday that such claims are “misleading and meritless” and rebuffed congressional probing into the grand jury process — by law, a confidential one.
“We urge you to refrain from these inflammatory accusations, withdraw your demand for information, and let the criminal justice process proceed without unlawful political interference,” Bragg wrote to Reps. James Comer, Jim Jordan and Bryan Steil.
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has vowed to use congressional oversight to probe Bragg. Steil, Jordan and Comer have asked Bragg’s office for grand jury testimony, documents and copies of any communications with the Justice Department.
Trump’s indictment, announced Thursday, came after a grand jury probe into hush money paid during the 2016 presidential campaign to squelch allegations of an extramarital sexual encounter. The indictment itself has remained sealed, as is standard in New York before an arraignment.
Trump, a Republican, has denied any wrongdoing and denounced the investigation as a “scam,” a “persecution,” an injustice and a political low blow aimed at damaging his 2024 presidential run.
Trump lawyer Joseph Tacopina said during TV interviews Friday he would “very aggressively” challenge the legal validity of the Manhattan grand jury indictment. Trump himself, on his social media platform, trained his ire about what he calls a “political persecution” on a new target: the judge expected to handle the case.
No ex-president has ever been charged with a crime before, so there’s no rulebook for booking one. Trump has Secret Service protection, so agents would need to be by his side at all times.
Indeed, Trump was asked to surrender Friday, but his lawyers said the Secret Service needed more time to make security preparations, two people familiar with the matter told The Associated Press.
Even for defendants who turn themselves in, answering criminal charges in New York generally entails at least several hours of detention while being fingerprinted, photographed, and going through other procedures.
Bragg’s office said Thursday it had contacted Trump’s lawyer to coordinate a surrender. Ahead of the court’s announcement of the arraignment date, Trump’s attorney, Joseph Tacopina, said that Tuesday was the likely date for Trump to turn himself in.
The investigation dug into six-figure payments made to porn actor Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal. Both claim to have had sexual encounters with the married Trump years before he got into politics; he denies having sexual liaisons with either woman.
As Trump ran for president in 2016, his allies paid the women to bury their allegations. The publisher of the supermarket tabloid the National Enquirer paid McDougal $150,000 for rights to her story and sat on it, in an arrangement brokered by former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen.
After Cohen himself paid Daniels $130,000, Trump’s company reimbursed him, added bonuses and logged the payments to Cohen as legal expenses.
Federal prosecutors argued — in a 2018 criminal case against Cohen — that the payments equated to illegal aid to Trump’s campaign. Cohen pleaded guilty to campaign finance violation charges, but federal prosecutors didn’t go after Trump, who was then in the White House. However, some of their court filings obliquely implicated him as someone who knew about the payment arrangements.
The New York indictment came as Trump contends with other investigations that could have grave legal consequences.
In Atlanta, prosecutors are considering whether he committed any crimes when trying to get Georgia officials to overturn his narrow 2020 election loss there to Joe Biden.
At the federal level, a Justice Department-appointed special counsel also is investigating Trump’s efforts to unravel the national election results. Additionally, the special counsel is examining how and why Trump held onto a cache of top secret government documents at his Florida club and residence, Mar-a-Lago, and whether the ex-president or his representatives tried to obstruct the probe into those documents.
Associated Press writers Colleen Long and Farnoush Amiri contributed from Washington.
‘Unlawful political interference’: Bragg defends Trump indictment against GOP attacks
Kyle Cheney, Jordain Carney and Erica Orden – March 31, 2023
Seth Wenig/AP Photo
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg defended his office’s decision to indict Donald Trump in a letter to Republican lawmakers Friday, rejecting GOP accusations of political persecution as “baseless and inflammatory.”
“That conclusion is misleading and meritless,” wrote Leslie Dubeck, Bragg’s general counsel, in a six-page letterto three House Republican committee chairs who have sought internal details of the criminal probe.
The letter was sent a day after Bragg’s office acknowledged that they had issued the first-ever indictment of a former president. Officials have also indicated they are working with Trump’s lawyers to negotiate his surrender. Though the timing of both his surrender and arraignment hasn’t been finalized, they are tentatively planned for Tuesday, according to a person familiar with the matter.
It’s uncharted territory for the legal system, the government and the country, which has never seen the indictment and prosecution of a former president. Though the precise evidence against Trump remains unknown, the case appears centered on hush money payments to a porn actress, Stormy Daniels, in 2016 to silence her allegations of a sexual relationship during Trump’s first presidential bid.
The indictment, which remains under seal, prompted a torrent of attacks from Trump’s allies, many of whom denounced it as a political witch hunt. While Trump himself has called for protests in the streets — and on Friday, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) echoed that call — most House Republicans have instead vowed to train a microscope on the Democratic district attorney, requesting information and documents about the probe.
Bragg’s office used the letter to the lawmakers, a copy of which was obtained by POLITICO, to respond to those allegations of political bias.
“Like any other defendant, Mr. Trump is entitled to challenge these charges in court and avail himself of all processes and protections that New York State’s robust criminal procedure affords. What neither Mr. Trump nor Congress may do is interfere with the ordinary course of proceedings in New York State,” the letter reads.
State judge Juan Merchan is expected to preside over the arraignment and may ultimately be called upon to preside over the criminal proceedings, according to a person familiar with the process.
Bragg’s office also used the letter to plead with Capitol Hill Republicans to encourage calm, accusing them of engaging in “unlawful political interference” in the same breath.
“We urge you to refrain from these inflammatory accusations, withdraw your demand for information, and let the criminal justice process proceed without unlawful political interference,” Dubeck wrote in the letter to Judiciary, Oversight and Administration Chairs Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), James Comer (R-Ky.) and Bryan Steil (R-Wis.).
“As Committee Chairmen, you could use the stature of your office to denounce these attacks and urge respect for the fairness of our justice system and for the work of the impartial grand jury,” she continued. “Instead, you and many of your colleagues have chosen to collaborate with Mr. Trump’s efforts to vilify and denigrate the integrity of elected state prosecutors and trial judges and made unfounded allegations that the Office’s investigation, conducted via an independent grand jury of average citizens serving New York State, is politically motivated.”
Trump dialed up his rhetoric Friday, taking aim this time at Merchan, the judge he anticipates would be presiding over his case.
“The Judge ‘assigned’ to my Witch Hunt Case … HATES ME,” Trump posted on social media, complaining about Merchan’s handling of the separate proceedings brought by the district attorney’s office against the Trump Organization, which Trump said Merchan treated “viciously.”
Bragg’s office suggested that the House GOP inquiries appeared to be functioning more as interference for Trump than as legitimate congressional oversight, a concern Dubeck said was “heightened” by some of the committee members’ own statements about their goals.
She cited Greene’s statement that “Republicans in Congress MUST subpoena these communists and END this!” as well as Rep. Anna Paulina Luna’s (R-Fla.) call to scrutinize lawmakers who are “being silent on what is currently happening to Trump.”
From a legal standpoint, individual lawmakers’ comments and motives aren’t typically given weight when a congressional committee takes actions. Trump routinely pointed to the comments of individual committee members’ plans to make use of his tax returns in his failed efforts to block Congress’ effort to obtain them.
Greene called for Trump supporters to gather Tuesday in New York, indicating she would be there herself. “We MUST protest the unconstitutional WITCH HUNT!” she tweeted. Her tweet was a departure from her reaction a day after Trump first suggested that he could be arrested, when she told reporters on the sidelines of the House GOP retreat that she would not be going to New York.
As of Friday, though, there were no indications of significant street protests or organized activities centered on the courthouse. Bragg arrived at around 7:30 a.m., amid signs of significantly heightened security, with little other movement aside from a large media presence.
In her letter, Dubeck also provided some details about the federal funding Bragg’s office has used in connection with Trump-related matters — money that House Republicans have suggested could now be under threat because of the indictment. Additionally, House Republicans received a second document on Friday detailing federal grant money the office has obtained.
None of that federal grant funding, she noted, has been used in the current investigation. She said the office has spent approximately $5,000 of federal funds — funds that the district attorney’s office helped recover during forfeiture actions — on expenses related to the investigation of Trump or the Trump organization.
“These expenses were incurred between October 2019 and August 2021,” Dubeck noted, adding that most were used to support Bragg’s predecessor’s successful defense of its probe of the Trump organization before the Supreme Court.
A spokesperson for Jordan didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the letter from Bragg’s office. Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y) said at an event on Friday that Republicans should “cease their intervention in an ongoing prosecution in a local prosecutor’s office.”
But House Republicans have already started laying some groundwork for a potential subpoena of the Manhattan district attorney, a move they haven’t publicly ruled out. They also appeared to make the case in their second letter to Bragg that they believe a subpoena would survive a legal challenge.
Comer, who noted that he hasn’t spoken with Trump recently, called the indictment a “political stunt” but said he needed more information before Republicans decided where to go next.
“I think before the next step we’ll have to see what, in fact, these charges were and then go from there,” Comer said in an interview on Friday.
Dubeck, in her letter, urged them to reach a “negotiated resolution … before taking the unprecedented and unconstitutional step of serving a subpoena on a district attorney for information related to an ongoing state criminal prosecution.”
Inside Trump’s Risky Plan to Fight the Stormy Daniels Hush-Money Case
Jose Pagliery,Roger Sollenberger – March 31, 2023
Illustration by Elizabeth Brockway/The Daily Beast
Finally faced with an actual criminal indictment, former President Donald Trump is settling on a familiar—if contradictory—defense strategy: Blame his previous lawyer, and say he would have done it anyway.
There’s just one problem: The indictment might be more sprawling than just the Stormy Daniels hush money payments that Trump’s team has claimed it was expecting for months.
On Thursday, a Manhattan grand jury indicted Trump—something he immediately characterized as “Political Persecution and Election Interference.”
The historic move capped a years-long local investigation involving those secret payments to silence a porn star from outing their sexual affair and potentially tanking his 2016 presidential campaign. While new reporting suggests that the Daniels case may not represent the full scope of charges—reportedly running more than 30 counts—that particular item largely hinges on the account of a less than reliable narrator.
That would be Trump’s longtime self-described “fixer,” Michael Cohen, who helped negotiate two nondisclosure agreements during the 2016 election, coordinated the $130,000 payment to Daniels, and got handsomely reimbursed through the Trump Organization.
But in the weeks before Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s prosecutors took the decisive step to criminally charge the former president, Trump’s defense lawyers cemented a defense that rested mainly on two points, according to a source familiar with their internal discussions.
First, it’s his lawyer’s fault. And second, Trump would have done it anyway.
The first affirmative defense exploits Cohen’s weaknesses as a truthful witness. According to the source, Trump’s team is prepared to argue that the real estate mogul was merely relying on his lawyer’s advice. Trump himself has been shopping around that theory since at least 2018, when he was still at the White House.
“I never directed Michael Cohen to break the law. He was a lawyer and he is supposed to know the law. It is called ‘advice of counsel,’ and a lawyer has great liability if a mistake is made. That is why they get paid,” he tweeted in December 2018.
At first blush, the “advice of counsel” defense makes sense, because the justice system gives great deference to lawyers and the advice they give. But it’s rarely invoked, because doing so allows investigators to pierce what are normally private attorney-client communications, according to the American Bar Association. And the defense doesn’t hold up if both the lawyer and client know what they’re doing is illegal, something known as the crime-fraud exception.
A similar “advice of counsel” defense failed to save Trump’s former White House adviser, Steve Bannon, from being convicted at trial last year for ignoring a congressional subpoena. And the Trump train has rammed head-on into the crime-fraud exception before. Last year, a California federal judge decided that Trump “more likely than not” committed a felony alongside lawyer John Eastman when they attempted to impede Congress on Jan. 6, 2021. And earlier this month, another federal judge invoked the same exception when she forced Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran to comply with a grand jury subpoena involving the Mar-a-Lago document dispute.
But that might not get New York County prosecutors very far in Trump’s case, because he rarely puts things in writing—leaving investigators with potentially very little evidence. (Though Cohen does have hush money discussions on tape.)
But investigators do have access to one potentially incriminating written document. That would be the sworn affidavit Trump submitted in 2000 in response to a Federal Election Commission investigation. That probe focused on his role in alleged campaign finance violations strikingly similar to the issues reportedly at play in the Manhattan case—alleged straw donations and in-kind corporate contributions—and Trump’s affidavit demonstrated a deep understanding of those laws.
Still, prosecutors would reportedly be relying in large part on the account of Cohen himself, who appeared as a witness before the Manhattan grand jury several times in the run-up to the indictment.
Trump’s lawyers could benefit from the tell-all memoir written by a former prosecutor on that team, Mark Pomerantz, who wrote about a Feb. 9, 2022, meeting in which DA Alvin Bragg Jr. showed deep reservations about ever relying on testimony by Cohen, who had been sentenced to prison for lying to Congress years earlier.
“At one point during the meeting, Alvin commented that he ‘could not see a world’ in which we would indict Trump and call Michael Cohen as a prosecution witness,” Pomerantz wrote.
But that raises the question of why Bragg pulled the hard 180—aggressively pursuing a case hinging on a witness he was so adamantly opposed to less than a year prior. The report of a much more sprawling indictment suggests Bragg has more on his mind.
On Tuesday, a spokeswoman for the office said that four people who were present at the meeting disputed Pomerantz’s recollection.
It’s also easy to forget why Cohen lied: to protect his former boss about the fact that there were business discussions to build a Moscow Trump Tower in Russia well into the closing months of the 2016 presidential campaign.
Trump’s second affirmative defense addresses the legality of the payments to begin with, according to the person familiar with Trump’s legal strategy. The former president plans to assert that the hush money payment did not have to be reported to the FEC, the person told The Daily Beast, because Trump would have made the payment anyway—regardless of whether he was running for office at the time.
The idea here is that Stormy Daniels going public about her claims that she had sex with Trump one night in 2006—when he was still married to his current wife, Melania—would have threatened their marriage and maybe even his public standing as a businessman.
Trump addressed this himself inthreetweets in May 2018.
“The agreement was used to stop the false and extortionist accusations made by her about an affair,” he stated. He added that such agreements are “very common among celebrities and people of wealth,” and—somewhat perplexingly—emphasized that “money from the campaign, or campaign contributions, played no roll[sic] in this transaction.”
That defense relies on the FEC rules regarding “personal use” of donor money during a political campaign. Federal law forbids candidates from using campaign funds to pay for things like personal lawsuits or expensive suits, which, Trump’s team argues, would extend to the hush money expenses by claiming they’re private and personal.
In other words, Trump’s lawyers are running on the theory that Trump would have paid Daniels anyway, “irrespective” of whether it would also help his presidential campaign.
But that defense has its drawbacks.
First, Trump would essentially be asserting that either federal prosecutors or a federal judge should have rejected Cohen’s own guilty plea to this same campaign finance crime, if it was never a crime to begin with. (That plea came three months after Trump’s tweets.)
Second, as The Daily Beast previously reported, campaign finance experts say that the hush money payments to Daniels and former Playboy “Playmate” Karen McDougal were clearly intended to influence the 2016 election. In fact, when Daniels tried to sell her story to the press years earlier, that was also in the political context of Trump’s candidacy—the potential 2012 bid he was publicly exploring at the time.
In 2018, the FEC’s Office of General Counsel found reason to believe that the payments were in fact unlawful, and that Trump, his campaign, and his company should be investigated. However, the Republican commissioners blocked that investigation—as they have done for every one of the dozens of complaints against Trump—citing the fact that Cohen, but not Trump, had already been held accountable, and the statute of limitations was running out.
The statute of limitations argument was also in large part due to Trump’s own presidential powers. He refused to appoint a replacement commissioner, depriving the FEC of its quorum for more than a year—meaning the commission couldn’t make any decisions about enforcement actions during that time.
But while the FEC Republicans let Trump slide for the Daniels payments, they saw fit to fine the National Enquirer’s parent company, American Media Inc., over its unlawful hush money payment to McDougal, which involved the same infractions. That decision also overlooked prosecutors’ agreements with both Cohen and AMI.
On Thursday, hours before the news broke about the sealed indictment, the Wall Street Journalreported that Bragg’s investigation had focused more intently on the McDougal payments than was previously known. Trump’s team hasn’t tried to attack those payments—which the FEC found unlawful—the way they have with Daniels. In fact, it’s unclear from AMI’s non-prosecution agreement whether they were or were not ultimately reimbursed for those payments. Trump told Fox News in 2018 that he personally footed that bill. Meanwhile, Cohen’s memoir claims that Trump actually stiffed AMI executive David Pecker—which is why he wouldn’t pay for the Stormy Daniels silencing deal.
But, as Cohen himself told The Daily Beast in a statement on Thursday, “It is better for the case to let the indictment speak for itself.”
Hours later, CNN reported that the indictment wasn’t nearly as narrowly focused on the hush money payments as Trump’s legal team and news reports have made it seem. Instead, CNN reported, the grand jury has brought more than 30 counts against the former president, including for business fraud. This suggests that the “novel legal theory” talking point, which Trumpworld has promoted, may not be Bragg’s silver bullet after all.
To that point, Bragg’s office might be centering the case against Trump on its already extensive investigation into his business dealings, which have already yielded a court victory. If prosecutors can tie the hush money payments to business, financial, or tax fraud at the state level, they can sidestep the federal question altogether.
Shortly after the New York County DA’s Office filed the indictment in Manhattan criminal court, Trump’s two lawyers in this case issued a statement defending their client.
“President Trump has been indicted. He did not commit any crime. We will vigorously fight this political prosecution in court,” Susan Necheles and Joe Tacopina said.
Rachel Maddow Names The 1 Thing To Prepare For In Donald Trump Legal Proceedings
Lee Moran – March 31, 2023
Rachel Maddow jumped into the MSNBC anchor chair on Thursday — when she’s not normally on air — to cover the indictment of former President Donald Trump and to warn people what they may not expect in the historic prosecution.
“I do think there’s one thing we all need to be preparing for here that we are maybe not prepared for, and that is what I think is the very high probability that this is going to be boring,” she said. “I’m not sure we’re prepared for that.”
“I’m not sure either side ideologically is prepared for that. I don’t think the punditocracy is prepared for that. I don’t think you and I are prepared for that,” Maddow continued.
Maddow acknowledged Trump’s indictment for his role in a hush money payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels “feels like really big news” and “really big news feels like it has a lot of momentum.”
“But as far as I can tell, this is about a legal proceeding starting,” she explained. “And if you look at the kind of legal proceeding this is going to be, I think we need to prepare ourselves for the fact that, A: This might go on for a really long time, and it might go on where the incremental additional news on this news story each day is something that feels like reading the small print on the back of a lottery ticket or even your car rental insurance waiver.”
“This might really be boring,” Maddow repeated.
The case against Trump “isn’t something that is unprecedented in the world of criminal law,” she added. “The actual adjudication of cases like this one, as much as we know about what kind of case this is, before the indictment’s unsealed, the actual adjudication of cases like this is often a very boring thing.”
