Connect with us

Published

on

A side battle over former President Trump’s indictment is emerging in Congress, where House Republicans fiercely condemning the probe have launched an investigation into Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D) and his office.

The new investigation, added on top of a pile of aggressive House GOP probes into the Biden administration and beyond, has prompted pushback from Bragg and congressional Democrats. They warn not only that it could interfere in an ongoing legal matter, but also question whether congressional committees have jurisdiction to look into a state-level case.

Those criticisms have prompted direct pushback from House Republicans, particularly in wake of Trump’s arrest and arraignment on 34 felony charges of falsifying business records related to a hush money scheme. The president pleaded not guilty. 

Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calf.), who promised a congressional probe into the D.A.’s office soon after Trump took to social media last month to announce he would soon be arrested in connection with the case, defended the House GOP actions in a tweet following Trump’s arraignment on Tuesday.

“Alvin Bragg is attempting to interfere in our democratic process by invoking federal law to bring politicized charges against President Trump, admittedly using federal funds, while at the same time arguing that the peoples’ representatives in Congress lack jurisdiction to investigate this farce,” McCarthy tweeted. “Not so. Bragg’s weaponization of the federal justice process will be held accountable by Congress.”

The issue is likely to drag on through the rest of this year, as Trump’s next in-person court appearance is set for Dec. 4. 

House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) said on Fox News on Wednesday that he, House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), and McCarthy would hold a call later this week to talk about next steps in their investigation. 

When asked about the possibility of subpoenaing Bragg, Jordan said in a separate Fox News interview Wednesday that “everything is on the table.”

Bragg “may contest” their request to speak to the House investigators, Jordan said. “It may have to go to court. We’ll see.”

An initial sweeping request from Jordan, Comer, and House Administration Committee Chair Bryan Steil (R-Wis.) asked Bragg to turn over all internal communications about the case while demanding he sit for testimony before the panels.

Bragg’s office warned that their request “treads into territory very clearly reserved to the states,” and argued that Congress’s investigative jurisdiction “is derived from and limited by its power to legislate concerning federal matters.”

Congressional Democrats took a similar stance, with House Oversight ranking member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) charging at the time that the House GOP move “represents an astonishing and unprecedented abuse of power as they attempt to use congressional resources to interfere in an ongoing criminal investigation at another level of government.”

House Judiciary ranking member Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said in a statement after Trump’s arraignment yesterday that Republicans are trying to “obstruct the process,” chalking the requests for information up to “political stunts.”

But the three chairman vigorously defended their authority in a response to Bragg, saying the Trump indictment “implicates substantial federal interests” and could inform creation of federal legislation to “insulate current and former presidents from such improper state and local prosecutions.”

Like McCarthy, the three GOP committee chairs in recent days have been defending their jurisdictional basis, arguing the matter touches on how federal funds are used, coordination between state and federal authorities, and oversight of federal elections and matters related to campaign finance law.

In a second response to the House chairmen, Bragg’s office said that around $5,000 in federal funds was spent on investigations of Trump or the Trump Organization by Bragg’s predecessor, between October 2019 and August 2021, mostly on Supreme Court litigation paved the way for the conviction of Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg. The office also listed hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal grants that it uses for other matters.

That admission energized Republicans.

“We do know that he has conceded that he used federal funds,” Jordan said on Fox News on Wednesday. “We knew that this investigation grew out of the special counsel Mueller investigation. That, [of] course, is a federal statute. And we know that this is all about, in our judgment, election interference.”

Steil said on Fox News over the weekend that they want to know more about any coordination between Bragg and the Department of Justice, which declined to pursue campaign finance charges against Trump over the hush money probe.

“Is he usurping federal power over campaign finance law?” Steil said.

Jeff Robbins, an attorney now in private practice who has served as both a federal prosecutor and investigative counsel for Senate Democrats, said GOP lawmakers have little authority to stand on in launching an investigation into Bragg.

He called the $5,000 spent by the office previously on other Trump organization cases “sub de minimis,” but said the bigger issue is that Congress is exceeding its authority.

In fact, it was a case launched by Trump that aided in limiting lawmakers’ subpoena power as he sought to block House Democrats from accessing his tax records from the firm Mazars, a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court.

“The power of Congress to subpoena is not unlimited. It is limited, and it has gotten actually somewhat more limited over the course of the last several years,” Robbins said.

“Any congressional subpoena is limited by the requirement … to have a legitimate legislative purpose or an oversight purpose. They don’t have oversight over the Manhattan DA’s office, and there is no legitimate legislative purpose for targeting the D.A.’s office because they don’t like the fact that the D.A.’s office has indicted Donald Trump. And they won’t be able to demonstrate any such legislative purpose,” he added.

Republicans, of course, disagree, and have suggested legislation they could pursue in order to back up their requests.

“When we look at federal government taxpayer dollars going to district attorneys across the United States, in particular progressive DAs that are not enforcing the rule of law on their streets, do we need to rewrite how these grants are being written?” Steil said on Fox News.

If the committees subpoena Bragg, he could ignore the subpoena, forcing the House to hold a contempt of Congress vote, or Bragg could challenge the subpoena’s validity in court.

“Whichever way that goes, the congressional committee will lose,” Robbins said.

House Republicans’ broad request represents another legal problem for Bragg, who has an obligation to protect the right to a fair trial.

“These confidentiality provisions exist to protect the interests of the various participants in the criminal process,” Bragg wrote in his first letter to the GOP leaders, including “the defendant.” Snow on the beach: Florida deputies say $100,000 in cocaine washed ashore White House addressing antisemitism at the start of Passover; opportunity for all faiths to combat hate

Some of the information the GOP committees are seeking will be turned over to Trump’s attorneys in short order through a process known as discovery.

But prosecutors during Trump’s arraignment on Tuesday noted concerns about how such information might be used by the former president, noting they are working on an agreement with Trump’s attorney’s that would block Trump from releasing any of it publicly.

“The people believe, especially in light of the defendant’s public comments, that a protective order is vital to insure the sanctity of the proceedings as well as the sanctity of the discovery materials,” Catherine McCaw, a prosecutor on the case said, adding that the agreement would only allow Trump to review materials in his attorney’s office and would bar him from sharing any evidence with reporters or on social media.

Continue Reading

Sports

Franklin ‘can’t wait’ to coach again after PSU exit

Published

on

By

Franklin 'can't wait' to coach again after PSU exit

James Franklin says he “can’t wait” to coach again on the heels of Penn State firing him last weekend.

“I don’t know anything else,” Franklin said Saturday during ESPN’s “College GameDay.” “I’ve been doing this for 30 years. I don’t have hobbies. I don’t golf. I don’t fish. This has been such a big part of my identity, such a big part of my family. We love it.”

On Sunday, Penn State let Franklin go after the Nittany Lions’ 0-3 start in Big Ten play.

Off last year’s appearance in the College Football Playoff semifinals, the team began the year ranked No. 2 in the AP Top 25 preseason poll. But it lost in double overtime at home to Oregon on Sept. 27, dropping Franklin to 4-21 at Penn State against AP top-10 opponents, including 1-18 against top-10 Big Ten teams in conference games.

Then, with losses to UCLA and Northwestern, Penn State became the first team since the FBS and FCS split in 1978 to lose consecutive games while favored by 20 or more points in each game, according to ESPN Research.

Before a team meeting Sunday afternoon, Penn State athletic director Pat Kraft told Franklin he was being fired.

“I was in shock,” Franklin admitted. “I’m still working through it myself. It feels surreal.”

Franklin won 104 games and reached double-digit wins six times in 11 seasons at Penn State, including the previous three.

“I had a great run there,” he said. “Penn State was good to me and my family.”

Franklin noted that Penn State’s expectations skyrocketed during his tenure, especially this past offseason. That, in turn, led to his firing when it became clear the Nittany Lions wouldn’t meet them this season.

“We created that pressure,” he said. “That’s the thing that I’m most proud of.”

Franklin, 53, is still owed $49 million from his buyout, the second largest in college football history. He said now that he is looking forward to achieving what he couldn’t at Penn State.

“I thought we were going to win a national championship there,” he said. “We were close. That goal hasn’t changed. We’re just going to go win a national championship somewhere else now.”

Continue Reading

Sports

Louisville’s ‘great plan’ rattles Beck, No. 2 Miami

Published

on

By

Louisville's 'great plan' rattles Beck, No. 2 Miami

MIAMI GARDENS, Fla. — Carson Beck‘s last throw — his fourth interception of the night — came on a hot route after Louisville brought the blitz. The play should have worked, Beck said, but there was “a miscommunication” and his receiver ran the wrong route. Instead, the pass found Louisville’s T.J. Capers with 32 seconds to play, and Miami‘s undefeated season came to an end.

That was the story of Miami’s night — one mistake on top of another, until it was finally too much for the No. 2 team in the country to overcome.

“That’s a really poor job of execution and discipline,” Miami coach Mario Cristobal said after the Hurricanes fell 24-21 to the unranked Cardinals. “That’s all of us — every player and every coach. After having some really good performances and working really hard in practice, that’s really disappointing. We’re all disappointed. We’re all pissed.”

Louisville schemed a nearly flawless game to torment the Hurricanes.

The Cardinals scored on their first two drives, showing Miami’s defense looks it hadn’t seen all season, safety Zechariah Poyser said.

“They had a great plan,” Poyser said. “They came up with stuff we hadn’t seen and we had to adjust to. We weren’t prepared for it.”

The early 14-0 deficit combined with a Louisville defensive game plan aimed at stuffing the run and forcing Beck to make quick throws frustrated the Miami offense too.

Beck’s first pick came on a deep shot over the middle in which Antonio Watts made a nifty catch for the interception. Beck went deep again on the next drive and was again picked off. He threw his third interception on a fourth-down heave in the fourth quarter that appeared to be a dagger for the Hurricanes, but Keionte Scott‘s forced fumble on the Cardinals’ ensuing drive set up a touchdown that gave Miami life.

Trailing by three with all three timeouts left, Miami drove to the Louisville 31, but coming off a timeout, Beck dodged pressure and tossed toward the sideline, where tight end Elija Lofton was out of position and the ball was intercepted, sealing the Louisville win.

It has become a familiar theme for Miami, which lost for the 10th time as a favorite under Cristobal.

Despite the ugly performance, however, Beck insisted this loss wasn’t going to define Miami.

“It’s a good thing we play 12 games and not just one,” Beck said. “That’s the biggest thing we have to realize is there’s more opportunities. We’ve been very successful this season, and shoot, we laid an egg tonight. I have to prepare better, I have to play better, and I’m going to do that and come back with fire.”

Cristobal lamented a bevy of missed opportunities, from costly penalties to the four turnovers, but insisted his team is built to withstand the loss.

“You better go out and do something about it,” Cristobal said. “That’s got to be the complete commitment of everybody. There’s no B.S., and there’s no excuse making. There’s no time to sit around and do anything but go back to work and go get better. That’s what it takes. That’s what real men do, and that’s what we have to do.”

Continue Reading

UK

Prince Andrew insisted on ‘gag order’ to stop allegations spoiling Queen’s Platinum Jubilee, memoir claims

Published

on

By

Prince Andrew insisted on 'gag order' to stop allegations spoiling Queen's Platinum Jubilee, memoir claims

Prince Andrew insisted his accuser, Virginia Giuffre, sign a one-year gag order – to prevent details of her allegations tarnishing the late Queen’s platinum jubilee, her memoirs have claimed.

Andrew relinquished his Duke of York title and remaining honours on Friday evening.

It came after discussions with King Charles, in consultation with the Prince of Wales, both of whom wanted to bring an end to the long-lasting scandal.

But, according to The Telegraph, Ms Giuffre’s book, which is due out on Tuesday, is focusing further attention on the sexual assault allegations and the prince’s friendship with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, which led to the royal’s downfall.

She tells how Andrew’s “disastrous” Newsnight interview with Emily Maitlis was like an “injection of jet fuel” for her legal team, and it raised the possibility of “subpoenaing” his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, and daughters Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie and drawing them into the legal case.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Prince Andrew’s ’embarrassed’ Royals ‘for years’

The Telegraph also reports Ms Giuffre’s claims that she got “more out of” Andrew than a reported £12m payout and $2m (around £1.4m) donation to her charity because she had “an acknowledgement that I and many other women had been victimised and a tacit pledge to never deny it again”.

The former duke paid to settle a civil sexual assault case with Ms Giuffre in 2022, despite insisting he had never met her.

More on Prince Andrew

Ms Giuffre alleged she was forced to have sex with the prince when she was 17, after being trafficked by Epstein. Andrew continues to vehemently deny her allegations.

Read more:
Andrew giving up title is ‘Victory for Virginia’
Everything we know about Andrew losing titles
Prince Andrew: A timeline of events

Queen Elizabeth II was celebrating her platinum jubilee in 2022 – the first British monarch to reach the milestone – as the civil case against her son was gathering pace.

It was settled nine days after she reached the 70th anniversary of her accession.

According to the Telegraph, Ms Giuffre, who died in April, reveals in her book: “I agreed to a one-year gag order, which seemed important to the prince because it ensured that his mother’s platinum jubilee would not be tarnished any more than it already had been.”

Parades, processions, concerts and street parties were held across the UK in celebration of the Platinum Jubilee. Pic: PA
Image:
Parades, processions, concerts and street parties were held across the UK in celebration of the Platinum Jubilee. Pic: PA

In January 2022, a US judge ruled the civil case against Andrew could go ahead, and the Queen went on to strip him of his honorary military roles, with the prince also giving up his HRH style.

‘Devastating’ interview

His 2019 Newsnight interview, which he hoped would clear his name, backfired when he said he “did not regret” his friendship with convicted paedophile Epstein, who trafficked Ms Giuffre.

Prince Andrew and Virginia Giuffre (then Roberts) in 2001 - a picture the prince claimed had been doctored. Pic: Shutterstock
Image:
Prince Andrew and Virginia Giuffre (then Roberts) in 2001 – a picture the prince claimed had been doctored. Pic: Shutterstock


Andrew also said he had “no recollection” of ever meeting Ms Giuffre and added he could not have had sex with her in March 2001 because he was at Pizza Express with his daughter Beatrice on the day in question.

Ms Giuffre, whose book is called Nobody’s Girl: A Memoir of Surviving Abuse and Fighting for Justice, wrote, according to The Telegraph: “As devastating as this interview was for Prince Andrew, for my legal team it was like an injection of jet fuel.

“Its contents would not only help us build an ironclad case against the prince but also open the door to potentially subpoenaing his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, and their daughters, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie.”

‘Amazed he was stupid enough’

She also told how Andrew had “stonewalled” her legal team for months before settlement discussions began moving very quickly when his deposition was scheduled for March 2022.

Ms Giuffre also wrote she was “amazed” that a member of the royal family would be “stupid enough” to appear in public with the convicted paedophile, after a photo of the pair walking in New York emerged.

Andrew, who remains a prince and continues to live in the Crown Estate property Royal Lodge, said on Friday the “continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the royal family”.

He insisted he was putting his “family and country first” and would stop using “my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me”.

Continue Reading

Trending