kmnd – Cincy Link

Flight attendant delivers baby mid-flight

cincylink — Sun, 16 Jul 2023 08:46:15 +0000

A flight attendant from Frontier is in the spotlight for helping deliver a baby mid-flight on the way to Orlando, Florida.The early and unexpected labor took place on a plane that was on its way to Orlando from Denver.Frontier says flight attendant Diana Giraldo helped the mother into the back lavatory and stayed with her as the baby arrived.The crew decided to land early in Pensacola so the mom could get to a hospital.According to the airline, the mom told them she chose the middle name "Sky" for her newborn daughter."The whole crew really did a great job. I transferred controls and flying duties to my First Officer as I coordinated the diversion," said Captain Chris Nye. "Dispatch did a great job as well by suggesting Pensacola Airport and getting a gate and paramedics ready for us. This was a job well done, and I was happy to see everyone working together to successfully deliver a newborn on an aircraft!"

ORLANDO, Fla. —

A flight attendant from Frontier is in the spotlight for helping deliver a baby mid-flight on the way to Orlando, Florida.

The early and unexpected labor took place on a plane that was on its way to Orlando from Denver.

Frontier says flight attendant Diana Giraldo helped the mother into the back lavatory and stayed with her as the baby arrived.

The crew decided to land early in Pensacola so the mom could get to a hospital.

According to the airline, the mom told them she chose the middle name "Sky" for her newborn daughter.

"The whole crew really did a great job. I transferred controls and flying duties to my First Officer as I coordinated the diversion," said Captain Chris Nye. "Dispatch did a great job as well by suggesting Pensacola Airport and getting a gate and paramedics ready for us. This was a job well done, and I was happy to see everyone working together to successfully deliver a newborn on an aircraft!"

Source link

President Biden addressing US Naval Academy graduates

cincylink — Sun, 16 Jul 2023 02:17:13 +0000

President Joe Biden is set to address graduates at the United States Naval Academy Friday amid turbulence abroad with Russia's invasion of Ukraine and tragedy at home after two mass shootings in as many weeks.Biden's remarks to the more than 1,000 newly commissioned ensigns and second lieutenants at Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium in Annapolis, Maryland, will be his first commencement address of the year.He is also set to deliver remarks at Saturday's graduation ceremony at the University of Delaware, his alma mater.On Sunday, the president will visit Uvalde, Texas, to console grieving families after Tuesday's shooting at an elementary school that killed 19 children and two teachers.

ANNAPOLIS, Md. —

Biden's remarks to the more than 1,000 newly commissioned ensigns and second lieutenants at Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium in Annapolis, Maryland, will be his first commencement address of the year.

He is also set to deliver remarks at Saturday's graduation ceremony at the University of Delaware, his alma mater.

On Sunday, the president will visit Uvalde, Texas, to console grieving families after Tuesday's shooting at an elementary school that killed 19 children and two teachers.

Source link

President Biden appeals for tougher gun laws: ‘How much more carnage?’

cincylink — Sun, 16 Jul 2023 01:48:52 +0000

President Joe Biden delivered an impassioned plea to Congress to act on gun control Thursday night in an address to the nation, calling on lawmakers to restore limits on the sale of assault-style weapons and high-capacity magazines after a string of mass shootings in the country.Speaking at the White House, Biden sought to drive up pressure on Congress to pass stricter gun limits after such efforts failed following past attacks."How much more carnage are we willing to accept," Biden said after last week's shootings by an 18-year-old gunman, who killed 19 students and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, and another attack on Wednesday in Tulsa, Oklahoma, where a gunman shot and killed four people and himself at a medical office.And those came after the May 14 assault in Buffalo, New York, where a white 18-year-old wearing military gear and livestreaming with a helmet camera opened fire with a rifle at a supermarket in a predominantly Black neighborhood, killing 10 people and wounding three others in what authorities described as "racially motivated violent extremism."All major broadcast networks broke away from regular programing to carry Biden's remarks at 7:30 p.m. EDT, before the start of primetime shows. The White House said the president would address "tragic mass shootings, and a need for Congress to pass commonsense laws to combat the epidemic of gun violence that is taking lives every day.""He's going to renew his call for action to stop the epidemic of gun violence that we've seen in Uvalde and in Tulsa and in Buffalo in just a few short weeks," said press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre ahead of the speech. She said Biden did not plan to announce any new executive actions and that "tonight's speech is going to focus on what Congress needs to do.""It'll be basically making sure that his voice is out there and calling to action and making sure that the American people know that he's still continuing to speak on their behalf," she said.Biden has used national speeches in the past to speak about the coronavirus pandemic and the chaotic withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan. But the president has used such addresses sparingly during his nearly 18 months in office, especially during evening hoursEarlier Thursday, Vice President Kamala Harris spoke about the Oklahoma shooting, saying, "All of us hold the people of Tulsa in our hearts, but we also reaffirm our commitment to passing commonsense gun safety laws.""No more excuses. Thoughts and prayers are important, but not enough," Harris said. "We need Congress to act."Before marking Memorial Day on Monday, Biden told reporters at the White House that there may be some bipartisan support to tighten restrictions on the kind of high-powered weapons used by the gunman in Uvalde. But he also noted that, while he had taken some steps via executive actions, he didn't have the power as president to "outlaw a weapon."He also said that "things have gotten so bad that everybody's getting more rational, at least that's my hope," adding, "There's realization on the part of rational Republicans" who realize "we can't keep repeating ourselves."Visiting Uvalde on Sunday, Biden mourned privately for three-plus hours with anguished families. Faced with chants of "do something" as he departed a church service, the president pledged: "We will."His Thursday night address coincided with bipartisan talks that are intensifying among a core group of senators discussing modest gun policy changes. Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine said the group is "making rapid progress," and Biden has spoken to Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy, among those leading their party's efforts on the issue.Democrats are hoping Biden uses the remarks to encourage the bipartisan Senate talks and build pressure on the Republicans to strike an agreement. Jean-Pierre said Biden is "encouraged" by congressional negotiations but the president wants to give lawmakers "some space" to keep talking.The private discussions in the Senate, which is split 50-50 between Democrats and Republicans, are not expected to produce the kinds of sweeping reforms being considered by the Democratic-led House — which has approved expansive background checks legislation and will next turn to an assault weapons ban.But even a House package debated Thursday that is less sweeping but includes a provision raising the required age for buying semi-automatic firearms to 21, faces slim chances in the Senate.Instead, the bipartisan senators are likely to come up with a more incremental package that would increase federal funding to support state gun safety efforts — with incentives for bolstering school security and mental health resources. The package may also encourage "red-flag laws" to keep firearms away from those who would do harm.Jean-Pierre suggested Biden would use his speech to call for expanded background checks and red flag laws — as well as a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. She said he would focus on two audiences: congressional negotiators and also the general public.Any major action is still a long shot. While the Senate approved a modest measure to encourage compliance with background checks after a 2017 church mass shooting in Texas and one in Parkland, Florida, the following year, no major legislation cleared the chamber following the devastating massacre of 20 children at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012.__Associated Press Writer Lisa Mascaro contributed.

Speaking at the White House, Biden sought to drive up pressure on Congress to pass stricter gun limits after such efforts failed following past attacks.

"How much more carnage are we willing to accept," Biden said after last week's shootings by an 18-year-old gunman, who killed 19 students and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, and another attack on Wednesday in Tulsa, Oklahoma, where a gunman shot and killed four people and himself at a medical office.

And those came after the May 14 assault in Buffalo, New York, where a white 18-year-old wearing military gear and livestreaming with a helmet camera opened fire with a rifle at a supermarket in a predominantly Black neighborhood, killing 10 people and wounding three others in what authorities described as "racially motivated violent extremism."

All major broadcast networks broke away from regular programing to carry Biden's remarks at 7:30 p.m. EDT, before the start of primetime shows. The White House said the president would address "tragic mass shootings, and a need for Congress to pass commonsense laws to combat the epidemic of gun violence that is taking lives every day."

"He's going to renew his call for action to stop the epidemic of gun violence that we've seen in Uvalde and in Tulsa and in Buffalo in just a few short weeks," said press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre ahead of the speech. She said Biden did not plan to announce any new executive actions and that "tonight's speech is going to focus on what Congress needs to do."

"It'll be basically making sure that his voice is out there and calling to action and making sure that the American people know that he's still continuing to speak on their behalf," she said.

Biden has used national speeches in the past to speak about the coronavirus pandemic and the chaotic withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan. But the president has used such addresses sparingly during his nearly 18 months in office, especially during evening hours

Earlier Thursday, Vice President Kamala Harris spoke about the Oklahoma shooting, saying, "All of us hold the people of Tulsa in our hearts, but we also reaffirm our commitment to passing commonsense gun safety laws."

"No more excuses. Thoughts and prayers are important, but not enough," Harris said. "We need Congress to act."

Before marking Memorial Day on Monday, Biden told reporters at the White House that there may be some bipartisan support to tighten restrictions on the kind of high-powered weapons used by the gunman in Uvalde. But he also noted that, while he had taken some steps via executive actions, he didn't have the power as president to "outlaw a weapon."

He also said that "things have gotten so bad that everybody's getting more rational, at least that's my hope," adding, "There's realization on the part of rational Republicans" who realize "we can't keep repeating ourselves."

Visiting Uvalde on Sunday, Biden mourned privately for three-plus hours with anguished families. Faced with chants of "do something" as he departed a church service, the president pledged: "We will."

His Thursday night address coincided with bipartisan talks that are intensifying among a core group of senators discussing modest gun policy changes. Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine said the group is "making rapid progress," and Biden has spoken to Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy, among those leading their party's efforts on the issue.

Democrats are hoping Biden uses the remarks to encourage the bipartisan Senate talks and build pressure on the Republicans to strike an agreement. Jean-Pierre said Biden is "encouraged" by congressional negotiations but the president wants to give lawmakers "some space" to keep talking.

The private discussions in the Senate, which is split 50-50 between Democrats and Republicans, are not expected to produce the kinds of sweeping reforms being considered by the Democratic-led House — which has approved expansive background checks legislation and will next turn to an assault weapons ban.

But even a House package debated Thursday that is less sweeping but includes a provision raising the required age for buying semi-automatic firearms to 21, faces slim chances in the Senate.

Instead, the bipartisan senators are likely to come up with a more incremental package that would increase federal funding to support state gun safety efforts — with incentives for bolstering school security and mental health resources. The package may also encourage "red-flag laws" to keep firearms away from those who would do harm.

Jean-Pierre suggested Biden would use his speech to call for expanded background checks and red flag laws — as well as a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. She said he would focus on two audiences: congressional negotiators and also the general public.

Any major action is still a long shot. While the Senate approved a modest measure to encourage compliance with background checks after a 2017 church mass shooting in Texas and one in Parkland, Florida, the following year, no major legislation cleared the chamber following the devastating massacre of 20 children at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012.

Associated Press Writer Lisa Mascaro contributed.

Source link

Thousands rally for gun reform after surge in mass shootings

cincylink — Fri, 14 Jul 2023 10:10:01 +0000

Warning: The above video is live and may contain graphic language. Viewer discretion is advised.Thousands of protestors are rallying in Washington, D.C., Saturday and in separate demonstrations around the country as part of a renewed push for nationwide gun control. Motivated by a fresh surge in mass shootings, from Uvalde, Texas, to Buffalo, New York, protestors say lawmakers must take note of shifting public opinion and finally enact sweeping reforms.Organizers expect the second March for Our Lives rally to draw around 50,000 demonstrators to the Washington Monument. That's far less than the original 2018 march, which filled downtown Washington with more than 200,000 people. This time, organizers are focusing on holding smaller marches at an estimated 300 locations."We want to make sure that this work is happening across the country," said Daud Mumin, co-chairman of the march's board of directors and a recent graduate of Westminster College in Salt Lake City. "This work is not just about D.C., it's not just about senators."The first march was spurred by the Feb. 14, 2018, killings of 14 students and three staff members by a former student at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. That massacre sparked the creation of the youth-led March For Our Lives movement, which successfully pressured the Republican-dominated Florida state government to enact sweeping gun control reforms.The Parkland students then took aim at gun laws in other states and nationally, launching March for Our Lives and holding the big rally in Washington on March 24, 2018.The group did not match the Florida results at the national level, but has persisted in advocating for gun restrictions since then, as well as participating in voter registration drives.Now, with another string of mass shootings bringing gun control back into the national conversation, organizers of this weekend's events say the time is right to renew their push for a national overhaul."Right now we are angry," said Mariah Cooley, a March For Our Lives board member and a senior at Washington's Howard University. "This will be a demonstration to show that us as Americans, we're not stopping anytime soon until Congress does their jobs. And if not, we'll be voting them out."The protest comes at a time of renewed political activity on guns and a crucial moment for possible action in Congress.Survivors of mass shootings and other incidents of gun violence have lobbied legislators and testified on Capitol Hill this week. Among them was Miah Cerrillo, an 11-year-old girl who survived the shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. She told lawmakers how she covered herself with a dead classmate's blood to avoid being shot.On Tuesday, actor Matthew McConaughey appeared at the White House briefing room to press for gun legislation and made highly personal remarks about the violence in his hometown of Uvalde.The House has passed bills that would raise the age limit to buy semi-automatic weapons and establish federal "red flag" laws. But such initiatives have traditionally stalled or been heavily watered down in the Senate. Democratic and Republican senators had hoped to reach agreement this week on a framework for addressing the issue and talked Friday, but they had not announced an accord by early evening.Mumin referred to the Senate as "where substantive action goes to die," and said the new march is meant to spend a message to lawmakers that public opinion on gun control is shifting under their feet. "If they're not on our side, there are going to be consequences — voting them out of office and making their lives a living hell when they're in office," he said.___Associated Press writer Ian Mader in Miami contributed to this report.

Warning: The above video is live and may contain graphic language. Viewer discretion is advised.

Thousands of protestors are rallying in Washington, D.C., Saturday and in separate demonstrations around the country as part of a renewed push for nationwide gun control. Motivated by a fresh surge in mass shootings, from Uvalde, Texas, to Buffalo, New York, protestors say lawmakers must take note of shifting public opinion and finally enact sweeping reforms.

Organizers expect the second March for Our Lives rally to draw around 50,000 demonstrators to the Washington Monument. That's far less than the original 2018 march, which filled downtown Washington with more than 200,000 people. This time, organizers are focusing on holding smaller marches at an estimated 300 locations.

"We want to make sure that this work is happening across the country," said Daud Mumin, co-chairman of the march's board of directors and a recent graduate of Westminster College in Salt Lake City. "This work is not just about D.C., it's not just about senators."

The first march was spurred by the Feb. 14, 2018, killings of 14 students and three staff members by a former student at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. That massacre sparked the creation of the youth-led March For Our Lives movement, which successfully pressured the Republican-dominated Florida state government to enact sweeping gun control reforms.

The Parkland students then took aim at gun laws in other states and nationally, launching March for Our Lives and holding the big rally in Washington on March 24, 2018.

The group did not match the Florida results at the national level, but has persisted in advocating for gun restrictions since then, as well as participating in voter registration drives.

Now, with another string of mass shootings bringing gun control back into the national conversation, organizers of this weekend's events say the time is right to renew their push for a national overhaul.

"Right now we are angry," said Mariah Cooley, a March For Our Lives board member and a senior at Washington's Howard University. "This will be a demonstration to show that us as Americans, we're not stopping anytime soon until Congress does their jobs. And if not, we'll be voting them out."

The protest comes at a time of renewed political activity on guns and a crucial moment for possible action in Congress.

Survivors of mass shootings and other incidents of gun violence have lobbied legislators and testified on Capitol Hill this week. Among them was Miah Cerrillo, an 11-year-old girl who survived the shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. She told lawmakers how she covered herself with a dead classmate's blood to avoid being shot.

On Tuesday, actor Matthew McConaughey appeared at the White House briefing room to press for gun legislation and made highly personal remarks about the violence in his hometown of Uvalde.

The House has passed bills that would raise the age limit to buy semi-automatic weapons and establish federal "red flag" laws. But such initiatives have traditionally stalled or been heavily watered down in the Senate. Democratic and Republican senators had hoped to reach agreement this week on a framework for addressing the issue and talked Friday, but they had not announced an accord by early evening.

Mumin referred to the Senate as "where substantive action goes to die," and said the new march is meant to spend a message to lawmakers that public opinion on gun control is shifting under their feet. "If they're not on our side, there are going to be consequences — voting them out of office and making their lives a living hell when they're in office," he said.

___

Associated Press writer Ian Mader in Miami contributed to this report.

Source link

Beach cleaning robot picks up plastic litter

cincylink — Fri, 14 Jul 2023 04:11:06 +0000

The League to Save Lake Tahoe has been leading litter clean-up efforts for the area's beaches and water for years. Volunteers can easily pick up large pieces of trash, but smaller pieces of plastic can eventually still find their way into the water after sinking into the sand. That's a problem the league is looking to solve with help from a new robot.It's called "BEBOT."It's fully electric, solar-powered and remote-controlled by someone walking behind it. BEBOT's job? Comb through the top few inches of sand to sift out otherwise unseen litter.“This robot is really getting the plastics and the litter just out of our view that could end up in our lake and really cause some damage," said Jesse Patterson, Chief Strategy Officer for the League, which operates under the slogan "Keep Tahoe Blue."Patterson said the robot has been compared to a giant Roomba or a Zamboni. But the rover-like machine is far smaller than that."It's very compact, no emissions, very light pressure on the ground so it's not going to disturb things like our native Tahoe Yellow Cress," Patterson said. A company called Eco Clean Solutions, which is based in France, built BEBOT along with several other robots like it. BEBOT made its U.S. debut in Florida. This week's test event at Lake Tahoe was the first run for the robot on the West Coast. In ideal conditions, the robot can crawl along at 3,000 meters (just under 2 miles) per hour. As it moves along, it sweeps and sifts the top 1 to 4 inches of sand, removing pieces of trash. "We really see the robot as the last line of defense for the lake for keeping small pollution and litter, plastics in particular from getting in the water in the first place," Patterson said.After that, volunteers sort the trash and log what they've found. BEBOT is in a pilot phase this year while the League determines the most effective way to utilize it. Patterson said that Keep Tahoe Blue will still organize regular clean-up events. He also urges all visitors to prioritize being responsible stewards of the environment."Leave it better than you found it," Patterson said. "Come enjoy this place, but pack it in, pack it out. It sounds silly and simple but it really matters here in Tahoe."

The League to Save Lake Tahoe has been leading litter clean-up efforts for the area's beaches and water for years.

Volunteers can easily pick up large pieces of trash, but smaller pieces of plastic can eventually still find their way into the water after sinking into the sand.

That's a problem the league is looking to solve with help from a new robot.

It's called "BEBOT."

It's fully electric, solar-powered and remote-controlled by someone walking behind it.

BEBOT's job? Comb through the top few inches of sand to sift out otherwise unseen litter.

“This robot is really getting the plastics and the litter just out of our view that could end up in our lake and really cause some damage," said Jesse Patterson, Chief Strategy Officer for the League, which operates under the slogan "Keep Tahoe Blue."

Patterson said the robot has been compared to a giant Roomba or a Zamboni. But the rover-like machine is far smaller than that.

"It's very compact, no emissions, very light pressure on the ground so it's not going to disturb things like our native Tahoe Yellow Cress," Patterson said.

A company called Eco Clean Solutions, which is based in France, built BEBOT along with several other robots like it.

BEBOT made its U.S. debut in Florida. This week's test event at Lake Tahoe was the first run for the robot on the West Coast.

In ideal conditions, the robot can crawl along at 3,000 meters (just under 2 miles) per hour. As it moves along, it sweeps and sifts the top 1 to 4 inches of sand, removing pieces of trash.

"We really see the robot as the last line of defense for the lake for keeping small pollution and litter, plastics in particular from getting in the water in the first place," Patterson said.

After that, volunteers sort the trash and log what they've found.

BEBOT is in a pilot phase this year while the League determines the most effective way to utilize it.

Patterson said that Keep Tahoe Blue will still organize regular clean-up events. He also urges all visitors to prioritize being responsible stewards of the environment.

"Leave it better than you found it," Patterson said. "Come enjoy this place, but pack it in, pack it out. It sounds silly and simple but it really matters here in Tahoe."

Source link

Cocaine found at the White House had no DNA, Secret Service says

cincylink — Fri, 14 Jul 2023 04:05:22 +0000

No fingerprints or DNA turned up on the baggie of cocaine found in a lobby at the White House last week despite a sophisticated FBI crime lab analysis, and surveillance footage of the area didn't identify a suspect, according to a summary of the Secret Service investigation obtained by The Associated Press. There are no leads on who brought the drugs into the building.U.S. Secret Service agents found the white powder during a routine White House sweep on July 2, in a heavily trafficked West Wing lobby where staff go in and out, and tour groups gather to drop their phones and other belongings."Without physical evidence, the investigation will not be able to single out a person of interest from the hundreds of individuals who passed through the vestibule where the cocaine was discovered," Secret Service officials said in the summary.It's most likely the bag was left behind by one of the hundreds of visitors who traveled in and out of the building over the weekend, according to a person familiar with the investigation who was not authorized to publicly discuss the ongoing probe and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.The presence of cocaine at the White House prompted a flurry of criticism and questions from Republicans, who requested a briefing Thursday on the probe. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said President Joe Biden believed it was "incredibly important" for the Secret Service to get to the bottom of how the drugs ended up in the White House. The Secret Service is responsible for securing the White House and led the investigation.Biden wasn't there at the time of the discovery. He was at Camp David with members of his family for the holiday weekend.The complex was briefly evacuated as a precaution when the white powder was found. The fire department was called in to test the substance on the spot to determine whether it was hazardous, and the initial test came back negative for a biohazard but positive for cocaine.The bag was sent for a secondary, more sensitive lab analysis. Homeland Security's National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center analyzed the item for any biothreats. Tests conducted at the facility came back negative.The cocaine and packaging underwent further forensics testing, including advanced fingerprint and DNA work at the FBI's crime laboratory, according to the summary. The FBI also did chemical testing.Meanwhile, Secret Service investigators put together a list of several hundred individuals who may have accessed the area where the drugs were found. Anyone who comes through the White House must give identifying information and pass through security before entering.But the lab results didn't turn up latent fingerprints or DNA, so agents can't compare anything to the possible suspect pool. White House staff are fingerprinted; participants in tour groups are not.Video of the West Executive street lobby entrance did not identify the person or provide any solid investigative leads, the Secret Service said.The lobby is open to staff-led tours of the West Wing, which are scheduled for nonworking hours on the weekends and evenings. Those tours are invitation-only and led by White House staff for friends, family and other guests. Most staffers who work in the complex can request an evening or weekend tour slot, but there is often a long waitlist. There were tours on the day, a Sunday, the drugs were found, as well as on the two preceding days.The Situation Room, where staffers would drop their phones before entering, has been undergoing construction work and was not in use at the time the baggie was found, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said last week.

WASHINGTON —

U.S. Secret Service agents found the white powder during a routine White House sweep on July 2, in a heavily trafficked West Wing lobby where staff go in and out, and tour groups gather to drop their phones and other belongings.

"Without physical evidence, the investigation will not be able to single out a person of interest from the hundreds of individuals who passed through the vestibule where the cocaine was discovered," Secret Service officials said in the summary.

It's most likely the bag was left behind by one of the hundreds of visitors who traveled in and out of the building over the weekend, according to a person familiar with the investigation who was not authorized to publicly discuss the ongoing probe and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

The presence of cocaine at the White House prompted a flurry of criticism and questions from Republicans, who requested a briefing Thursday on the probe. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said President Joe Biden believed it was "incredibly important" for the Secret Service to get to the bottom of how the drugs ended up in the White House. The Secret Service is responsible for securing the White House and led the investigation.

Biden wasn't there at the time of the discovery. He was at Camp David with members of his family for the holiday weekend.

The complex was briefly evacuated as a precaution when the white powder was found. The fire department was called in to test the substance on the spot to determine whether it was hazardous, and the initial test came back negative for a biohazard but positive for cocaine.

The bag was sent for a secondary, more sensitive lab analysis. Homeland Security's National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center analyzed the item for any biothreats. Tests conducted at the facility came back negative.

The cocaine and packaging underwent further forensics testing, including advanced fingerprint and DNA work at the FBI's crime laboratory, according to the summary. The FBI also did chemical testing.

Meanwhile, Secret Service investigators put together a list of several hundred individuals who may have accessed the area where the drugs were found. Anyone who comes through the White House must give identifying information and pass through security before entering.

But the lab results didn't turn up latent fingerprints or DNA, so agents can't compare anything to the possible suspect pool. White House staff are fingerprinted; participants in tour groups are not.

Video of the West Executive street lobby entrance did not identify the person or provide any solid investigative leads, the Secret Service said.

The lobby is open to staff-led tours of the West Wing, which are scheduled for nonworking hours on the weekends and evenings. Those tours are invitation-only and led by White House staff for friends, family and other guests. Most staffers who work in the complex can request an evening or weekend tour slot, but there is often a long waitlist. There were tours on the day, a Sunday, the drugs were found, as well as on the two preceding days.

The Situation Room, where staffers would drop their phones before entering, has been undergoing construction work and was not in use at the time the baggie was found, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said last week.

Source link

Feds search home of former Trump DOJ official Jeffrey Clark, subpoena GOP leaders

cincylink — Wed, 12 Jul 2023 04:51:21 +0000

Federal agents searched a former top Justice Department official's home and seized records from key Republicans in at least four states linked to Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election, in what were clear signs that authorities are ramping up their investigation of associates of the former president.Authorities on Wednesday searched the Virginia home of Jeffrey Clark, who was known at the Justice Department to champion Trump's false claims of election fraud. Agents in recent days also served subpoenas on the Republican Party chairmen of Nevada and Georgia, two states that went for President Joe Biden and where Trump allies created slates of “alternate electors” intended to subvert the vote. And Republicans in two other states — Michigan and Pennsylvania — disclosed they had been interviewed by the FBI.The Justice Department appears to be escalating its probe of pro-Trump efforts to overturn the 2020 election, which culminated in the deadly Jan. 6 insurrection. The disclosures of law enforcement activity came as the U.S. House committee investigating the riot said it had new evidence of Trump's efforts and his knowledge that he had no legal basis to try to overturn the election.The committee's Thursday hearing focused on Trump's desire to install Clark atop the Justice Department in his administration's last days. The reason for the search of Clark's Virginia home was not immediately clear and it was not known what information agents were searching for. The person who confirmed the search was not authorized to discuss it by name and spoke on condition of anonymity.Both the committee and federal authorities are probing the use of replacements for duly chosen electors in seven battleground states that voted for Biden. Trump and his allies furiously pressured authorities in those states to replace Biden's electors with ones for him on specious or nonexistent allegations that his victory was stolen.There are growing revelations about the false slates of electors. The committee this week disclosed text messages that showed an aide to U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican and Trump ally, tried to hand-deliver the fake elector votes to an aide for former Vice President Mike Pence. The texts show Pence's aide refused to accept the votes. Johnson told a Wisconsin conservative talk radio host on Thursday that the fake elector slates came from the office of Rep. Mike Kelly of Pennsylvania.Among those who have received subpoenas, according to a person familiar with the matter who was not authorized to discuss an ongoing investigation, was Georgia Republican Party chairman David Shafer.Nevada GOP Chair Michael McDonald turned over his phone to federal agents Wednesday when they approached him outside his car in Las Vegas and presented a warrant, according to another person familiar with the matter. McDonald in December 2020 stood outside Nevada's state capitol with other fake electors to swear a so-called “oath of office," flanked by men in camouflage with semi-automatic rifles.In Pennsylvania, FBI agents interviewed the chairman of the Allegheny County Republican Party at his home Thursday and gave him a subpoena for communications between him, Trump electors in the state and members of Trump’s campaign and legal team, the party official, Sam DeMarco, told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.And in Michigan, Michele Lundgren told the Detroit News that someone from the FBI served her with a subpoena Thursday and that another Trump elector was served on Wednesday. Lundgren, 72, said her discussion with the agent was “long” and “pleasant” and that she let one of the agents go through her phone and computer.“They kept asking me questions and asking me questions, and I kept telling them answers,” she said.Clark's home was searched by federal agents shortly before a committee hearing in which he was the focus. Three other former Justice Department officials testified about an extraordinary Jan. 3, 2021, Oval Office meeting at which Trump contemplated naming Clark — who led the department’s civil division — as acting attorney general in place of Jeffrey Rosen, who resisted Trump’s efforts to involve the agency.Trump relented only when other senior Justice Department officials warned Trump that they would resign if he followed through with his plan to replace Rosen with Clark.A lawyer for Clark did not return an email and phone message seeking comment.Russ Vought, president of the Center for Renewing America, which Clark recently joined as a senior fellow, tweeted that federal officers forced Clark “into the streets” while he was wearing pajamas and “took his electronic devices.”“All because Jeff saw fit to investigate voter fraud," Vought continued. "This is not America, folks. The weaponization of govt must end. Let me be very clear. We stand by Jeff and so must all patriots in this country.”The House committee and the Justice Department have worked separately but had some public friction. The committee originally rejected Justice Department requests for access to its transcripts, which include interviews with Trump family members, top officials, and key supporters. Key deputies to Attorney General Merrick Garland renewed their request last week in a letter to the committee.“It is now readily apparent that the interviews the Select Committee conducted are not just potentially relevant to our overall criminal investigations, but are likely relevant to specific prosecutions that have already commenced,” they wrote.Rep. Adam Schiff, a California Democrat who sits on the committee and has called on Garland to investigate Trump, told CNN on Sunday that Congress normally doesn't turn over all its investigative files to the Justice Department.“Traditionally, they don’t wait for Congress to do that work for the department,” he said. “So we’re going to work with them. We want them to be successful in bringing people to justice."____Associated Press writers Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin, Sara Burnett in Chicago, Marc Levy in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Sam Metz in Salt Lake City, Utah, and Michelle L. Price in New York contributed to this report.

Authorities on Wednesday searched the Virginia home of Jeffrey Clark, who was known at the Justice Department to champion Trump's false claims of election fraud. Agents in recent days also served subpoenas on the Republican Party chairmen of Nevada and Georgia, two states that went for President Joe Biden and where Trump allies created slates of “alternate electors” intended to subvert the vote. And Republicans in two other states — Michigan and Pennsylvania — disclosed they had been interviewed by the FBI.

The Justice Department appears to be escalating its probe of pro-Trump efforts to overturn the 2020 election, which culminated in the deadly Jan. 6 insurrection. The disclosures of law enforcement activity came as the U.S. House committee investigating the riot said it had new evidence of Trump's efforts and his knowledge that he had no legal basis to try to overturn the election.

The committee's Thursday hearing focused on Trump's desire to install Clark atop the Justice Department in his administration's last days. The reason for the search of Clark's Virginia home was not immediately clear and it was not known what information agents were searching for. The person who confirmed the search was not authorized to discuss it by name and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Both the committee and federal authorities are probing the use of replacements for duly chosen electors in seven battleground states that voted for Biden. Trump and his allies furiously pressured authorities in those states to replace Biden's electors with ones for him on specious or nonexistent allegations that his victory was stolen.

Yuri Gripas-Pool/Getty Images

Acting Assistant U.S. Attorney General Jeffrey Clark on Oct. 21, 2020 in Washington, DC.

There are growing revelations about the false slates of electors. The committee this week disclosed text messages that showed an aide to U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican and Trump ally, tried to hand-deliver the fake elector votes to an aide for former Vice President Mike Pence. The texts show Pence's aide refused to accept the votes. Johnson told a Wisconsin conservative talk radio host on Thursday that the fake elector slates came from the office of Rep. Mike Kelly of Pennsylvania.

Among those who have received subpoenas, according to a person familiar with the matter who was not authorized to discuss an ongoing investigation, was Georgia Republican Party chairman David Shafer.

Nevada GOP Chair Michael McDonald turned over his phone to federal agents Wednesday when they approached him outside his car in Las Vegas and presented a warrant, according to another person familiar with the matter. McDonald in December 2020 stood outside Nevada's state capitol with other fake electors to swear a so-called “oath of office," flanked by men in camouflage with semi-automatic rifles.

In Pennsylvania, FBI agents interviewed the chairman of the Allegheny County Republican Party at his home Thursday and gave him a subpoena for communications between him, Trump electors in the state and members of Trump’s campaign and legal team, the party official, Sam DeMarco, told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

And in Michigan, Michele Lundgren told the Detroit News that someone from the FBI served her with a subpoena Thursday and that another Trump elector was served on Wednesday. Lundgren, 72, said her discussion with the agent was “long” and “pleasant” and that she let one of the agents go through her phone and computer.

“They kept asking me questions and asking me questions, and I kept telling them answers,” she said.

Clark's home was searched by federal agents shortly before a committee hearing in which he was the focus. Three other former Justice Department officials testified about an extraordinary Jan. 3, 2021, Oval Office meeting at which Trump contemplated naming Clark — who led the department’s civil division — as acting attorney general in place of Jeffrey Rosen, who resisted Trump’s efforts to involve the agency.

Trump relented only when other senior Justice Department officials warned Trump that they would resign if he followed through with his plan to replace Rosen with Clark.

A lawyer for Clark did not return an email and phone message seeking comment.

Russ Vought, president of the Center for Renewing America, which Clark recently joined as a senior fellow, tweeted that federal officers forced Clark “into the streets” while he was wearing pajamas and “took his electronic devices.”

“All because Jeff saw fit to investigate voter fraud," Vought continued. "This is not America, folks. The weaponization of govt must end. Let me be very clear. We stand by Jeff and so must all patriots in this country.”

The House committee and the Justice Department have worked separately but had some public friction. The committee originally rejected Justice Department requests for access to its transcripts, which include interviews with Trump family members, top officials, and key supporters. Key deputies to Attorney General Merrick Garland renewed their request last week in a letter to the committee.

“It is now readily apparent that the interviews the Select Committee conducted are not just potentially relevant to our overall criminal investigations, but are likely relevant to specific prosecutions that have already commenced,” they wrote.

Rep. Adam Schiff, a California Democrat who sits on the committee and has called on Garland to investigate Trump, told CNN on Sunday that Congress normally doesn't turn over all its investigative files to the Justice Department.

“Traditionally, they don’t wait for Congress to do that work for the department,” he said. “So we’re going to work with them. We want them to be successful in bringing people to justice."

____

Associated Press writers Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin, Sara Burnett in Chicago, Marc Levy in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Sam Metz in Salt Lake City, Utah, and Michelle L. Price in New York contributed to this report.

Source link

Roe v. Wade overturned by Supreme Court, ending national right to abortion

cincylink — Wed, 12 Jul 2023 04:48:25 +0000

Warning: The above video is live and may be graphic in nature. Viewer discretion is advised.The Supreme Court has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years in a decision by its conservative majority to overturn Roe v. Wade. Friday's outcome is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states.The decision, unthinkable just a few years ago, was the culmination of decades of efforts by abortion opponents, made possible by an emboldened right side of the court that has been fortified by three appointees of former President Donald Trump.The ruling came more than a month after the stunning leak of a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito indicating the court was prepared to take this momentous step.It puts the court at odds with a majority of Americans who favored preserving Roe, according to opinion polls.Alito, in the final opinion issued Friday, wrote that Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the 1992 decision that reaffirmed the right to abortion, were wrong the day they were decided and must be overturned.Authority to regulate abortion rests with the political branches, not the courts, Alito wrote.Joining Alito were Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The latter three justices are Trump appointees. Thomas first voted to overrule Roe 30 years ago.Chief Justice John Roberts would have stopped short of ending the abortion right, noting that he would have upheld the Mississippi law at the heart of the case, a ban on abortion after 15 weeks, and said no more.Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — the diminished liberal wing of the court — were in dissent.The ruling is expected to disproportionately affect minority women who already face limited access to health care, according to statistics analyzed by The Associated Press.Thirteen states, mainly in the South and Midwest, already have laws on the books that ban abortion in the event Roe is overturned. Another half-dozen states have near-total bans or prohibitions after 6 weeks of pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.In roughly a half-dozen other states, the fight will be over dormant abortion bans that were enacted before Roe was decided in 1973 or new proposals to sharply limit when abortions can be performed, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights.More than 90% of abortions take place in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy, and more than half are now done with pills, not surgery, according to data compiled by Guttmacher.The decision came against a backdrop of public opinion surveys that find a majority of Americans oppose overturning Roe and handing the question of whether to permit abortion entirely to the states. Polls conducted by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and others also have consistently shown about 1 in 10 Americans want abortion to be illegal in all cases. A majority are in favor of abortion being legal in all or most circumstances, but polls indicate many also support restrictions especially later in pregnancy.The Biden administration and other defenders of abortion rights have warned that a decision overturning Roe also would threaten other high court decisions in favor of gay rights and even potentially, contraception.But Alito wrote in his draft opinion that his analysis addresses abortion only, not other rights that also stem from a right to privacy that the high court has found implicit, though not directly stated, in the Constitution. Abortion is different, Alito wrote, because of the unique moral question it poses.Whatever the intentions of the person who leaked Alito's draft opinion, the conservatives held firm in overturning Roe and Casey.In his draft, Alito dismissed the arguments in favor of retaining the two decisions, including that multiple generations of American women have partly relied on the right to abortion to gain economic and political power.Changing the composition of the court has been central to the anti-abortion side's strategy. Mississippi and its allies made increasingly aggressive arguments as the case developed, and two high-court defenders of abortion rights retired or died. The state initially argued that its law could be upheld without overruling the court's abortion precedents.Then-Gov. Phil Bryant signed the 15-week measure into law in March 2018, when Justices Anthony Kennedy and Ruth Bader Ginsburg were still members of a five-justice majority that was mainly protective of abortion rights.By early summer, Kennedy had retired and was replaced by Justice Brett Kavanaugh a few months later. The Mississippi law was blocked in lower federal courts.But the state always was headed to the nation's highest court. It did not even ask for a hearing before a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ultimately held the law invalid in December 2019.By early September 2020, the Supreme Court was ready to consider the state's appeal.The court scheduled the case for consideration at the justices' private conference on Sept. 29. But in the intervening weeks, Ginsburg died and Barrett was quickly nominated and confirmed without a single Democratic vote.The stage now was set, although it took the court another half year to agree to hear the case.By the time Mississippi filed its main written argument with the court in the summer, the thrust of its argument had changed and it was now calling for the wholesale overruling of Roe and Casey.The first sign that the court might be receptive to wiping away the constitutional right to abortion came in late summer, when the justices divided 5-4 in allowing Texas to enforce a ban on the procedure at roughly six weeks, before some women even know they are pregnant. That dispute turned on the unique structure of the law, including its enforcement by private citizens rather than by state officials, and how it can be challenged in court.But Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted in a searing dissent for the three liberal justices that their conservative colleagues refused to block "a flagrantly unconstitutional law" that "flouts nearly 50 years of federal precedents." Roberts was also among the dissenters.Then in December, after hearing additional arguments over whether to block the Texas law known as S.B. 8, the court again declined to do so, also by a 5-4 vote. "The clear purpose and actual effect of S. B. 8 has been to nullify this Court's rulings," Roberts wrote, in a partial dissent.In their Senate hearings, Trump's three high-court picks carefully skirted questions about how they would vote in any cases, including about abortion.But even as Democrats and abortion rights supporters predicted Kavanaugh and Gorsuch would vote to upend abortion rights if confirmed, the two left at least one Republican senator with a different impression. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine predicted Gorsuch and Kavanaugh wouldn't support overturning the abortion cases, based on private conversations she had with them when they were nominees to the Supreme Court.Barrett was perhaps the most vocal opponent of abortion in her time as a law professor, before becoming a federal judge in 2017. She was a member of anti-abortion groups at Notre Dame University, where she taught law, and she signed a newspaper ad opposing "abortion on demand" and defending "the right to life from fertilization to natural death." She promised to set aside her personal views when judging cases.Trump, meanwhile, had predicted as a candidate that whoever he named to the court would "automatically" vote to overrule Roe.

Warning: The above video is live and may be graphic in nature. Viewer discretion is advised.

The Supreme Court has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years in a decision by its conservative majority to overturn Roe v. Wade. Friday's outcome is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states.

The decision, unthinkable just a few years ago, was the culmination of decades of efforts by abortion opponents, made possible by an emboldened right side of the court that has been fortified by three appointees of former President Donald Trump.

The ruling came more than a month after the stunning leak of a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito indicating the court was prepared to take this momentous step.

It puts the court at odds with a majority of Americans who favored preserving Roe, according to opinion polls.

Alito, in the final opinion issued Friday, wrote that Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the 1992 decision that reaffirmed the right to abortion, were wrong the day they were decided and must be overturned.

Authority to regulate abortion rests with the political branches, not the courts, Alito wrote.

Joining Alito were Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The latter three justices are Trump appointees. Thomas first voted to overrule Roe 30 years ago.

Chief Justice John Roberts would have stopped short of ending the abortion right, noting that he would have upheld the Mississippi law at the heart of the case, a ban on abortion after 15 weeks, and said no more.

Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — the diminished liberal wing of the court — were in dissent.

The ruling is expected to disproportionately affect minority women who already face limited access to health care, according to statistics analyzed by The Associated Press.

Thirteen states, mainly in the South and Midwest, already have laws on the books that ban abortion in the event Roe is overturned. Another half-dozen states have near-total bans or prohibitions after 6 weeks of pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.

In roughly a half-dozen other states, the fight will be over dormant abortion bans that were enacted before Roe was decided in 1973 or new proposals to sharply limit when abortions can be performed, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights.

More than 90% of abortions take place in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy, and more than half are now done with pills, not surgery, according to data compiled by Guttmacher.

The decision came against a backdrop of public opinion surveys that find a majority of Americans oppose overturning Roe and handing the question of whether to permit abortion entirely to the states. Polls conducted by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and others also have consistently shown about 1 in 10 Americans want abortion to be illegal in all cases. A majority are in favor of abortion being legal in all or most circumstances, but polls indicate many also support restrictions especially later in pregnancy.

The Biden administration and other defenders of abortion rights have warned that a decision overturning Roe also would threaten other high court decisions in favor of gay rights and even potentially, contraception.

But Alito wrote in his draft opinion that his analysis addresses abortion only, not other rights that also stem from a right to privacy that the high court has found implicit, though not directly stated, in the Constitution. Abortion is different, Alito wrote, because of the unique moral question it poses.

Whatever the intentions of the person who leaked Alito's draft opinion, the conservatives held firm in overturning Roe and Casey.

In his draft, Alito dismissed the arguments in favor of retaining the two decisions, including that multiple generations of American women have partly relied on the right to abortion to gain economic and political power.

Changing the composition of the court has been central to the anti-abortion side's strategy. Mississippi and its allies made increasingly aggressive arguments as the case developed, and two high-court defenders of abortion rights retired or died. The state initially argued that its law could be upheld without overruling the court's abortion precedents.

Then-Gov. Phil Bryant signed the 15-week measure into law in March 2018, when Justices Anthony Kennedy and Ruth Bader Ginsburg were still members of a five-justice majority that was mainly protective of abortion rights.

By early summer, Kennedy had retired and was replaced by Justice Brett Kavanaugh a few months later. The Mississippi law was blocked in lower federal courts.

But the state always was headed to the nation's highest court. It did not even ask for a hearing before a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ultimately held the law invalid in December 2019.

By early September 2020, the Supreme Court was ready to consider the state's appeal.

The court scheduled the case for consideration at the justices' private conference on Sept. 29. But in the intervening weeks, Ginsburg died and Barrett was quickly nominated and confirmed without a single Democratic vote.

The stage now was set, although it took the court another half year to agree to hear the case.

By the time Mississippi filed its main written argument with the court in the summer, the thrust of its argument had changed and it was now calling for the wholesale overruling of Roe and Casey.

The first sign that the court might be receptive to wiping away the constitutional right to abortion came in late summer, when the justices divided 5-4 in allowing Texas to enforce a ban on the procedure at roughly six weeks, before some women even know they are pregnant. That dispute turned on the unique structure of the law, including its enforcement by private citizens rather than by state officials, and how it can be challenged in court.

But Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted in a searing dissent for the three liberal justices that their conservative colleagues refused to block "a flagrantly unconstitutional law" that "flouts nearly 50 years of federal precedents." Roberts was also among the dissenters.

Then in December, after hearing additional arguments over whether to block the Texas law known as S.B. 8, the court again declined to do so, also by a 5-4 vote. "The clear purpose and actual effect of S. B. 8 has been to nullify this Court's rulings," Roberts wrote, in a partial dissent.

In their Senate hearings, Trump's three high-court picks carefully skirted questions about how they would vote in any cases, including about abortion.

But even as Democrats and abortion rights supporters predicted Kavanaugh and Gorsuch would vote to upend abortion rights if confirmed, the two left at least one Republican senator with a different impression. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine predicted Gorsuch and Kavanaugh wouldn't support overturning the abortion cases, based on private conversations she had with them when they were nominees to the Supreme Court.

Barrett was perhaps the most vocal opponent of abortion in her time as a law professor, before becoming a federal judge in 2017. She was a member of anti-abortion groups at Notre Dame University, where she taught law, and she signed a newspaper ad opposing "abortion on demand" and defending "the right to life from fertilization to natural death." She promised to set aside her personal views when judging cases.

Trump, meanwhile, had predicted as a candidate that whoever he named to the court would "automatically" vote to overrule Roe.

Source link

House passes major federal gun safety legislation, bill will go to Biden to sign

cincylink — Wed, 12 Jul 2023 04:48:10 +0000

The House passed a bipartisan bill on Friday to address gun violence that amounts to the first major federal gun safety legislation in decades.The final tally was 234 to 193 with 14 Republicans voting with Democrats to approve the measure.Now that the House has approved the measure, it will go to President Joe Biden to be signed into law, marking a significant bipartisan breakthrough on one of the most contentious policy issues in Washington. The Senate passed the bill in a late-night vote Thursday.The measure includes millions of dollars for mental health, school safety, crisis intervention programs and incentives for states to include juvenile records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.It also makes significant changes to the process when someone ages 18 to 21 goes to buy a firearm and closes the so-called boyfriend loophole, a victory for Democrats, who have long fought for that.The package represents the most significant new federal legislation to address gun violence since the expired 10-year assault weapons ban of 1994 -- though it fails to ban any weapons and falls far short of what Democrats and polls show most Americans want to see.Securing a bipartisan agreement on major gun legislation has been notoriously difficult for lawmakers in recent years even in the face of countless mass shootings across the country.Democrats in particular have been quick to celebrate the bipartisan gun deal since action to address gun violence is a major priority for the party.But the bill's passage was overshadowed on Friday by the news that the Supreme Court had overturned Roe v. Wade, holding that there is no longer a federal constitutional right to an abortion.The opinion is the most consequential Supreme Court decision in decades and will transform the landscape of women's reproductive health in America.It came one day after the Supreme Court struck down a New York gun law enacted more than a century ago that places restrictions on carrying a concealed handgun outside the home.The rulings once again highlight the limited power of the Democratic party, despite it controlling both branches of Congress and the White House.House GOP leaders opposed billDespite broad bipartisan support for the bill in the Senate, top House Republican leaders came out in opposition to the bill and urged their members to vote "no."Fourteen House Republicans voted for the bill, however. They included:Liz Cheney of WyomingAdam Kinzinger of IllinoisTom Rice of South CarolinaJohn Katko of New YorkMaria Salazar of FloridaChris Jacobs of New YorkBrian Fitzpatrick of PennsylvaniaPeter Meijer of MichiganFred Upton of MichiganTony Gonzales of TexasSteve Chabot of OhioMike Turner of OhioDavid Joyce of OhioAnthony Gonzalez of OhioThe bill passed the Senate on Thursday with 15 Republicans joining Democrats in support. The final tally was 65-33.The legislation came together in the aftermath of recent mass shootings at a Uvalde, Texas, elementary school and a Buffalo, New York, supermarket that was in a predominantly Black neighborhood.A bipartisan group of negotiators set to work in the Senate and unveiled legislative text on Tuesday. The bill — titled the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act — was released by Republican Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Democratic Sens. Chris Murphy of Connecticut and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.Lawmakers then raced to pass the bill before they left Washington for the July Fourth recess.As lawmakers searched for a compromise, there were points at which it was not clear whether the effort would succeed or fall apart. But while the bipartisan effort appeared to be on thin ice after several key sticking points emerged, ultimately negotiators were able to resolve issues that arose.Key provisions in the billThe bill includes $750 million to help states implement and run crisis intervention programs. The money can be used to implement and manage red flag programs — which through court orders can temporarily prevent individuals in crisis from accessing firearms — and for other crisis intervention programs like mental health courts, drug courts and veterans courts.This bill closes a years-old loophole in domestic violence law -- the "boyfriend loophole" -- which barred individuals who have been convicted of domestic violence crimes against spouses, partners with whom they shared children or partners with whom they cohabitated from having guns. Old statutes didn't include intimate partners who may not live together, be married or share children. Now the law will bar from having a gun anyone who is convicted of a domestic violence crime against someone they have a "continuing serious relationship of a romantic or intimate nature."The law isn't retroactive. It will, however, allow those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence crimes to restore their gun rights after five years if they haven't committed other crimes.The bill encourages states to include juvenile records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System with grants as well as implements a new protocol for checking those records.The bill goes after individuals who sell guns as primary sources of income but have previously evaded registering as federally licensed firearms dealers. It also increases funding for mental health programs and school security.

The House passed a bipartisan bill on Friday to address gun violence that amounts to the first major federal gun safety legislation in decades.

The final tally was 234 to 193 with 14 Republicans voting with Democrats to approve the measure.

Now that the House has approved the measure, it will go to President Joe Biden to be signed into law, marking a significant bipartisan breakthrough on one of the most contentious policy issues in Washington. The Senate passed the bill in a late-night vote Thursday.

The measure includes millions of dollars for mental health, school safety, crisis intervention programs and incentives for states to include juvenile records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

It also makes significant changes to the process when someone ages 18 to 21 goes to buy a firearm and closes the so-called boyfriend loophole, a victory for Democrats, who have long fought for that.

The package represents the most significant new federal legislation to address gun violence since the expired 10-year assault weapons ban of 1994 -- though it fails to ban any weapons and falls far short of what Democrats and polls show most Americans want to see.

Securing a bipartisan agreement on major gun legislation has been notoriously difficult for lawmakers in recent years even in the face of countless mass shootings across the country.

Democrats in particular have been quick to celebrate the bipartisan gun deal since action to address gun violence is a major priority for the party.

But the bill's passage was overshadowed on Friday by the news that the Supreme Court had overturned Roe v. Wade, holding that there is no longer a federal constitutional right to an abortion.

The opinion is the most consequential Supreme Court decision in decades and will transform the landscape of women's reproductive health in America.

It came one day after the Supreme Court struck down a New York gun law enacted more than a century ago that places restrictions on carrying a concealed handgun outside the home.

The rulings once again highlight the limited power of the Democratic party, despite it controlling both branches of Congress and the White House.

House GOP leaders opposed bill

Despite broad bipartisan support for the bill in the Senate, top House Republican leaders came out in opposition to the bill and urged their members to vote "no."

Fourteen House Republicans voted for the bill, however. They included:

Liz Cheney of Wyoming

Adam Kinzinger of Illinois

Tom Rice of South Carolina

John Katko of New York

Maria Salazar of Florida

Chris Jacobs of New York

Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania

Peter Meijer of Michigan

Fred Upton of Michigan

Tony Gonzales of Texas

Steve Chabot of Ohio

Mike Turner of Ohio

David Joyce of Ohio

Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio

The bill passed the Senate on Thursday with 15 Republicans joining Democrats in support. The final tally was 65-33.

The legislation came together in the aftermath of recent mass shootings at a Uvalde, Texas, elementary school and a Buffalo, New York, supermarket that was in a predominantly Black neighborhood.

A bipartisan group of negotiators set to work in the Senate and unveiled legislative text on Tuesday. The bill — titled the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act — was released by Republican Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Democratic Sens. Chris Murphy of Connecticut and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.

Lawmakers then raced to pass the bill before they left Washington for the July Fourth recess.

As lawmakers searched for a compromise, there were points at which it was not clear whether the effort would succeed or fall apart. But while the bipartisan effort appeared to be on thin ice after several key sticking points emerged, ultimately negotiators were able to resolve issues that arose.

Key provisions in the bill

The bill includes $750 million to help states implement and run crisis intervention programs. The money can be used to implement and manage red flag programs — which through court orders can temporarily prevent individuals in crisis from accessing firearms — and for other crisis intervention programs like mental health courts, drug courts and veterans courts.

This bill closes a years-old loophole in domestic violence law -- the "boyfriend loophole" -- which barred individuals who have been convicted of domestic violence crimes against spouses, partners with whom they shared children or partners with whom they cohabitated from having guns. Old statutes didn't include intimate partners who may not live together, be married or share children. Now the law will bar from having a gun anyone who is convicted of a domestic violence crime against someone they have a "continuing serious relationship of a romantic or intimate nature."

The law isn't retroactive. It will, however, allow those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence crimes to restore their gun rights after five years if they haven't committed other crimes.

The bill encourages states to include juvenile records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System with grants as well as implements a new protocol for checking those records.

The bill goes after individuals who sell guns as primary sources of income but have previously evaded registering as federally licensed firearms dealers. It also increases funding for mental health programs and school security.

Source link

Jan. 6 panel to hear from top aide in Trump’s White House

cincylink — Wed, 12 Jul 2023 04:11:03 +0000

The House panel investigating the Capitol insurrection is hearing testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a top aide in Donald Trump's White House who is a vital witness in the sweeping investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack.The 25-year-old, who was a special assistant and aide to former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows, has already provided a trove of information to congressional investigators and sat for multiple interviews behind closed doors.Her appearance has been cloaked in extraordinary secrecy and has raised expectations for new revelations in the nearly yearlong investigation. The committee announced the surprise hearing with only 24 hours' notice. Here's the latest from the hearing (updates in ET):1:20 p.m. The Jan. 6 committee established the proximity of Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, during the beginning of Tuesday's hearings. Rep. Liz Cheney, vice chair of the Jan. 6 panel, noted that Hutchinson worked in the West Wing, “several steps down the hall from the Oval Office,” and “spoke daily with members of Congress, with high-ranking officials in the administration, with senior White House staff, including Mr. Meadows, with White House Counsel’s office lawyers, and with Mr. Tony Ornato who served as the White House Deputy Chief of Staff."According to Cheney, Hutchinson sat for four videotaped interviews with the panel. Footage from those interviews is being shown during today's hearing.1:15 p.m. Rep. Bennie Thompson, chair of the Jan. 6 House select committee, opened Tuesday's hearing by saying the panel "obtained new information dealing with what was going on in the White House on Jan. 6 and in the days prior."Specifically, Thompson said the committee received "specific detailed information about what the former president and his top aides were doing and saying in those critical hours, firsthand details of what transpired in the Office of the White House Chief of Staff just steps from the Oval Office as the threats of violence became clear and, indeed, violence ultimately descended on the Capitol in the attack on American democracy.""Thanks to the courage of certain individuals, the truth won't be buried," he said.Original story below: In brief excerpts of testimony revealed in court filings, Hutchinson told the committee she was in the room for White House meetings where challenges to the election were debated and discussed, including with several Republican lawmakers. In one instance, Hutchinson described seeing Meadows incinerate documents after a meeting in his office with Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., Politico reported in May.She also revealed that the White House counsel's office cautioned against plans to enlist fake electors in swing states, including in meetings involving Meadows and Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani. Attorneys for the president advised that the plan was not "legally sound," Cassidy said.During her three separate depositions, Hutchinson also testified about her boss' surprise trip to Georgia weeks after the election to oversee the audit of absentee ballot envelope signatures and ask questions about the process.She also detailed how Jeffrey Clark — a top Justice Department official who championed Trump's false claims of election fraud and whom the president contemplated naming as attorney general — was a "frequent presence" at the White House.The plot to remove the then-acting attorney general, Jeffrey Rosen, unraveled during a Jan. 3, 2021, meeting in the Oval Office when other senior Justice Department officials warned Trump that they would resign if he followed through with his plan to replace Rosen with Clark.The House panel has not explained why it abruptly scheduled the 1 p.m. hearing as lawmakers are away from Washington on a two-week recess. The committee had said last week that there would be no more hearings until July.The precise subject of Tuesday's hearing remained unclear, but the panel's announcement Monday said it would be "to present recently obtained evidence and receive witness testimony." A spokesman for the panel declined to elaborate and Hutchinson's lawyer did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment.The person familiar with the committee's plans to call Hutchinson could not discuss the matter publicly and spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity.The nine-member committee's investigation has continued during the hearings, which started three weeks ago into the attack by Trump supporters. Among the evidence, the committee recently obtained footage of Trump and his inner circle taken both before and after Jan. 6 from British filmmaker Alex Holder.Holder said last week that he had complied with a congressional subpoena to turn over all the footage he shot in the final weeks of Trump's 2020 reelection campaign, including exclusive interviews with Trump, his children and then-Vice President Mike Pence.Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, the panel's Democratic chairman, told reporters last week that the committee was in possession of the footage and needed more time to go through the hours of video.The panel has held five hearings so far, mostly laying out Trump's pressure campaign on various institutions of power in the weeks leading up to the Jan. 6 joint session of Congress, when hundreds of the Republican's supporters violently pushed past police, broke into the building and interrupted the certification of Democrat Joe Biden's presidential election victory.The committee has used the hearings to detail the pressure from Trump and his allies on Pence, on the states that were certifying Biden's win, and on the Justice Department. The panel has used live interviews, video testimony of its private witness interviews and footage of the attack to detail what it has learned.

WASHINGTON —

The House panel investigating the Capitol insurrection is hearing testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a top aide in Donald Trump's White House who is a vital witness in the sweeping investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack.

The 25-year-old, who was a special assistant and aide to former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows, has already provided a trove of information to congressional investigators and sat for multiple interviews behind closed doors.

Her appearance has been cloaked in extraordinary secrecy and has raised expectations for new revelations in the nearly yearlong investigation. The committee announced the surprise hearing with only 24 hours' notice.

Here's the latest from the hearing (updates in ET):

1:20 p.m.

The Jan. 6 committee established the proximity of Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, during the beginning of Tuesday's hearings.

Rep. Liz Cheney, vice chair of the Jan. 6 panel, noted that Hutchinson worked in the West Wing, “several steps down the hall from the Oval Office,” and “spoke daily with members of Congress, with high-ranking officials in the administration, with senior White House staff, including Mr. Meadows, with White House Counsel’s office lawyers, and with Mr. Tony Ornato who served as the White House Deputy Chief of Staff."

According to Cheney, Hutchinson sat for four videotaped interviews with the panel. Footage from those interviews is being shown during today's hearing.

1:15 p.m.

Rep. Bennie Thompson, chair of the Jan. 6 House select committee, opened Tuesday's hearing by saying the panel "obtained new information dealing with what was going on in the White House on Jan. 6 and in the days prior."

Specifically, Thompson said the committee received "specific detailed information about what the former president and his top aides were doing and saying in those critical hours, firsthand details of what transpired in the Office of the White House Chief of Staff just steps from the Oval Office as the threats of violence became clear and, indeed, violence ultimately descended on the Capitol in the attack on American democracy."

"Thanks to the courage of certain individuals, the truth won't be buried," he said.

Original story below:

In brief excerpts of testimony revealed in court filings, Hutchinson told the committee she was in the room for White House meetings where challenges to the election were debated and discussed, including with several Republican lawmakers. In one instance, Hutchinson described seeing Meadows incinerate documents after a meeting in his office with Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., Politico reported in May.

AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
Cassidy Hutchinson, a top former aide to Trump White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, is seen in a video of her interview with the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, during a hearing on Thursday, June 23, 2022, at the Capitol in Washington.

She also revealed that the White House counsel's office cautioned against plans to enlist fake electors in swing states, including in meetings involving Meadows and Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani. Attorneys for the president advised that the plan was not "legally sound," Cassidy said.

During her three separate depositions, Hutchinson also testified about her boss' surprise trip to Georgia weeks after the election to oversee the audit of absentee ballot envelope signatures and ask questions about the process.

She also detailed how Jeffrey Clark — a top Justice Department official who championed Trump's false claims of election fraud and whom the president contemplated naming as attorney general — was a "frequent presence" at the White House.

The plot to remove the then-acting attorney general, Jeffrey Rosen, unraveled during a Jan. 3, 2021, meeting in the Oval Office when other senior Justice Department officials warned Trump that they would resign if he followed through with his plan to replace Rosen with Clark.

The House panel has not explained why it abruptly scheduled the 1 p.m. hearing as lawmakers are away from Washington on a two-week recess. The committee had said last week that there would be no more hearings until July.

The precise subject of Tuesday's hearing remained unclear, but the panel's announcement Monday said it would be "to present recently obtained evidence and receive witness testimony." A spokesman for the panel declined to elaborate and Hutchinson's lawyer did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment.

The person familiar with the committee's plans to call Hutchinson could not discuss the matter publicly and spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity.

The nine-member committee's investigation has continued during the hearings, which started three weeks ago into the attack by Trump supporters. Among the evidence, the committee recently obtained footage of Trump and his inner circle taken both before and after Jan. 6 from British filmmaker Alex Holder.

Holder said last week that he had complied with a congressional subpoena to turn over all the footage he shot in the final weeks of Trump's 2020 reelection campaign, including exclusive interviews with Trump, his children and then-Vice President Mike Pence.

Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, the panel's Democratic chairman, told reporters last week that the committee was in possession of the footage and needed more time to go through the hours of video.

The panel has held five hearings so far, mostly laying out Trump's pressure campaign on various institutions of power in the weeks leading up to the Jan. 6 joint session of Congress, when hundreds of the Republican's supporters violently pushed past police, broke into the building and interrupted the certification of Democrat Joe Biden's presidential election victory.

The committee has used the hearings to detail the pressure from Trump and his allies on Pence, on the states that were certifying Biden's win, and on the Justice Department. The panel has used live interviews, video testimony of its private witness interviews and footage of the attack to detail what it has learned.

Source link

Cleveland, Ohio, mass shooting leaves 9 people wounded

cincylink — Tue, 11 Jul 2023 02:15:29 +0000

At least nine people suffered gunshot wounds in a mass shooting in Cleveland early Sunday morning, according to local police, who believe a single suspect fired on a group of people before fleeing the scene.No one has died as a result of the shooting, which Cleveland Division of Police Chief Wayne Drummond said happened in the city’s Warehouse District at 2:25 a.m., when an unidentified individual shot at a group of people.The suspect then fled the scene that Jennifer Ciaccia, an agency spokesperson, described in a statement as “chaotic.”Cleveland officers were already nearby as part of a routine detail in the area, the chief said. They responded immediately and gave medical aid to the victims, who include seven men and two women ranging in age from 23 to 38, Drummond said.No officers were hurt, Ciaccia said.Related video above: Can mass shootings be prevented?Victims were shot in places ranging from their knees and legs to their feet and arms, according to a news release.None of the victims’ injuries appeared to be life-threatening, according to Ciaccia.MetroHealth Medical Center confirmed it received nine victims, with spokesperson Dorsena Koonce telling CNN that, as of early Sunday afternoon, two victims had been treated and released, five were in the emergency department, one was in the operating room and another had already had surgery.Police are following leads and will “continue to work extremely hard to try to find” the person responsible, said Drummond. At that time, investigators had “no indication” that anything of note had taken place before the suspect opened fire. Investigators said they were also reviewing evidence and video and have interviewed victims, a statement from Ciaccia says.Police have described the suspect as a Black man wearing dark clothing.The shooting is just the latest example of America’s struggle with gun violence, as mass shootings continue largely unmitigated.There have been at least 365 mass shootings so far in 2023, according to the Gun Violence Archive, which, like CNN, defines a mass shooting as one in which four or more people are shot, excluding the shooter. US Rep. Shontel Brown – who represents Cleveland, part of Ohio’s 11th District – thanked first responders in a statement and urged Congress to do more to stem the crisis, specifically calling for universal background checks, banning assault weapons and addressing gun trafficking, among other measures.“Gun violence is devastating Northeast Ohio and Clevelanders deserve to be safe,” Brown’s statement said. “This epidemic is tearing at the fabric of our communities, and it will not end without significant legislative action.”Cleveland Mayor Justin M. Bibb expressed gratitude that no one was killed in the shooting but said it marked a “tragic and sad day” that highlights the United States’ “massive gun problem.”

CLEVELAND —

At least nine people suffered gunshot wounds in a mass shooting in Cleveland early Sunday morning, according to local police, who believe a single suspect fired on a group of people before fleeing the scene.

No one has died as a result of the shooting, which Cleveland Division of Police Chief Wayne Drummond said happened in the city’s Warehouse District at 2:25 a.m., when an unidentified individual shot at a group of people.

The suspect then fled the scene that Jennifer Ciaccia, an agency spokesperson, described in a statement as “chaotic.”

Cleveland officers were already nearby as part of a routine detail in the area, the chief said. They responded immediately and gave medical aid to the victims, who include seven men and two women ranging in age from 23 to 38, Drummond said.

No officers were hurt, Ciaccia said.

Related video above: Can mass shootings be prevented?

Victims were shot in places ranging from their knees and legs to their feet and arms, according to a news release.

None of the victims’ injuries appeared to be life-threatening, according to Ciaccia.

MetroHealth Medical Center confirmed it received nine victims, with spokesperson Dorsena Koonce telling CNN that, as of early Sunday afternoon, two victims had been treated and released, five were in the emergency department, one was in the operating room and another had already had surgery.

Police are following leads and will “continue to work extremely hard to try to find” the person responsible, said Drummond. At that time, investigators had “no indication” that anything of note had taken place before the suspect opened fire.

Investigators said they were also reviewing evidence and video and have interviewed victims, a statement from Ciaccia says.

Police have described the suspect as a Black man wearing dark clothing.

The shooting is just the latest example of America’s struggle with gun violence, as mass shootings continue largely unmitigated.

There have been at least 365 mass shootings so far in 2023, according to the Gun Violence Archive, which, like CNN, defines a mass shooting as one in which four or more people are shot, excluding the shooter.

US Rep. Shontel Brown – who represents Cleveland, part of Ohio’s 11th District – thanked first responders in a statement and urged Congress to do more to stem the crisis, specifically calling for universal background checks, banning assault weapons and addressing gun trafficking, among other measures.

“Gun violence is devastating Northeast Ohio and Clevelanders deserve to be safe,” Brown’s statement said. “This epidemic is tearing at the fabric of our communities, and it will not end without significant legislative action.”

Cleveland Mayor Justin M. Bibb expressed gratitude that no one was killed in the shooting but said it marked a “tragic and sad day” that highlights the United States’ “massive gun problem.”

Source link

Trump ally Steve Bannon now willing to testify before Jan. 6 panel

cincylink — Mon, 10 Jul 2023 04:07:53 +0000

Related video above from 2021: Steve Bannon appears in court on contempt chargesSteve Bannon, a former White House strategist and ally of Donald Trump who faces criminal charges after months of defying a congressional subpoena over the Capitol riot, has told the House committee investigating the attack that he is now willing to testify.Bannon's turnabout was conveyed in a letter late Saturday from his attorney, lawmakers said, as the committee prepares to air some of its most striking revelations yet this week against Trump in what may be its final set of hearings."I expect that we will be hearing from him and there are many questions that we have for him," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif. She and other committee members said in television interviews Sunday they intend to have Bannon sit for a private interview, which they typically conduct in a deposition with sworn testimony.Bannon had been one of the highest-profile Trump-allied holdouts in refusing to testify before the committee, leading to two criminal counts of contempt of Congress last year for resisting the committee's subpoena. He has argued that his testimony is protected by Trump's claim of executive privilege. The committee contends such a claim is dubious because Trump had fired Bannon from the White House in 2017 and Bannon was thus a private citizen when he was consulting with the then-president in the run-up to the riot on Jan. 6, 2021.Still, in recent days, as the former president grew frustrated with what he decried as a one-sided presentation by the committee of seven Democrats and two Republicans, Trump said he would waive that privilege claim, according to a letter Saturday to Bannon's lawyer."If you reach an agreement on a time and place for your testimony, I will waive executive privilege for you, which allows for you to go in and testify truthfully and fairly, as per the request of the unselect committee of political thugs and hacks," Trump wrote.The committee's Thursday evening hearing will examine the three-hour plus stretch when Trump failed to act as a mob of supporters stormed the Capitol. It will be the first hearing in prime time since the June 9 debut that was viewed by 20 million people.A hearing Tuesday will focus on the plotting and planning of the insurrection by white nationalist groups such as the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers and the Three Percenters, and will also highlight testimony taken Friday from former White House counsel Pat Cipollone.It comes after surprise testimony last month from former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson provided the most compelling evidence yet that Trump could be linked to a federal crime. Since then, the committee has seen an influx of new information and confidential tips.Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., suggested that Bannon "had a change of heart, and after watching, presumably, all of these people come forward, including Cassidy Hutchinson, he's decided that he wants to come in, and if he wants to come in, I'm certain that the committee would be very interested in hearing from him."Bannon's trial on the two criminal counts is July 18. A hearing in his case was scheduled for Monday in federal court in Washington. Bannon has been seeking a delay in his trial to at least fall.It's unclear how much Bannon intends to cooperate. He has expressed a preference to appear before the committee in a public hearing. The committee is making clear he must first sit for a private interview, typically in a sworn deposition. It's also possible he may opt to appear and then refuse to answer questions, citing his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination."The way that we have treated every single witness is the same, that they come in, they talk to the committee there," Raskin said. "If they're going to take a deposition, they're sworn under oath. It's videotaped. It's recorded, and then we take it from there."The committee says it wants to hear from Bannon because he "had specific knowledge about the events planned for Jan. 6 before they occurred." It cited as an example comments that he made on his podcast the day before the riot."It's not going to happen like you think it's going to happen. OK, it's going to be quite extraordinarily different. All I can say is strap in," Bannon said in that podcast. "All hell is going to break loose tomorrow. ... So many people said, 'Man, if I was in a revolution, I would be in Washington.' Well, this is your time in history."House investigators have been digging deeper into the evidence collected so far about the role extremist groups played in the deadly insurrection and what Trump was doing as the violence ensued down the street from the White House.Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., who will lead Thursday's hearing with Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., described the upcoming testimony as key to providing an extensive timeline of what Trump did and did not do in those critical hours on the afternoon of Jan. 6, 2021. That includes Trump's tweet criticizing Vice President Mike Pence for lacking "courage" as angry protesters outside the Capitol were heard chanting "Hang Mike Pence" for not challenging Democrat Joe Biden's 2020 election victory."We want to show the American people what was the president doing during that time," Kinzinger said Sunday. "The rest of the country knew that there was an insurrection. The president obviously had to have known there was an insurrection. So where was he? What was he doing? It's a very important hearing. Pay attention. Because I think it goes to the heart of what is the oath of a leader."Tuesday's hearing will explore efforts to assemble the mob on the National Mall and then organize the march down Pennsylvania Avenue, where some rioters — armed with pipes, bats and bear spray — charged into the Capitol, quickly overrunning the overwhelmed police force. More than 100 police officers were injured, many beaten, bloodied and bruised, that day.It will also highlight a meeting on Dec. 18, 2020 at the White House in which former Trump lawyers Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani, onetime Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn and others floated the idea of seizing voting machines and invoking national security emergency powers, to the heated objection from several White House lawyers who argued that Trump needed to accept his defeat, according to Raskin, who will lead Tuesday's hearing."We're gonna get to use a lot of Mr. Cipollone's testimony," he said. "He was aware of every major move, I think, that Donald Trump was making to try to overthrow the 2020 election and essentially seize the presidency."Kinzinger spoke on ABC's "This Week, Lofgren was on CNN's "State of the Union" and Raskin appeared on CBS' "Face the Nation."___Associated Press writer Hannah Fingerhut in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, contributed to this report.

Related video above from 2021: Steve Bannon appears in court on contempt charges

Steve Bannon, a former White House strategist and ally of Donald Trump who faces criminal charges after months of defying a congressional subpoena over the Capitol riot, has told the House committee investigating the attack that he is now willing to testify.

Bannon's turnabout was conveyed in a letter late Saturday from his attorney, lawmakers said, as the committee prepares to air some of its most striking revelations yet this week against Trump in what may be its final set of hearings.

"I expect that we will be hearing from him and there are many questions that we have for him," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif. She and other committee members said in television interviews Sunday they intend to have Bannon sit for a private interview, which they typically conduct in a deposition with sworn testimony.

Bannon had been one of the highest-profile Trump-allied holdouts in refusing to testify before the committee, leading to two criminal counts of contempt of Congress last year for resisting the committee's subpoena. He has argued that his testimony is protected by Trump's claim of executive privilege. The committee contends such a claim is dubious because Trump had fired Bannon from the White House in 2017 and Bannon was thus a private citizen when he was consulting with the then-president in the run-up to the riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

Still, in recent days, as the former president grew frustrated with what he decried as a one-sided presentation by the committee of seven Democrats and two Republicans, Trump said he would waive that privilege claim, according to a letter Saturday to Bannon's lawyer.

"If you reach an agreement on a time and place for your testimony, I will waive executive privilege for you, which allows for you to go in and testify truthfully and fairly, as per the request of the unselect committee of political thugs and hacks," Trump wrote.

The committee's Thursday evening hearing will examine the three-hour plus stretch when Trump failed to act as a mob of supporters stormed the Capitol. It will be the first hearing in prime time since the June 9 debut that was viewed by 20 million people.

Win McNamee / Getty Images
Former Trump Administration White House advisor Steve Bannon talks with members of the media after departing U.S. District Court after an appearance on Nov. 15, 2021 in Washington, DC.

A hearing Tuesday will focus on the plotting and planning of the insurrection by white nationalist groups such as the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers and the Three Percenters, and will also highlight testimony taken Friday from former White House counsel Pat Cipollone.

It comes after surprise testimony last month from former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson provided the most compelling evidence yet that Trump could be linked to a federal crime. Since then, the committee has seen an influx of new information and confidential tips.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., suggested that Bannon "had a change of heart, and after watching, presumably, all of these people come forward, including Cassidy Hutchinson, he's decided that he wants to come in, and if he wants to come in, I'm certain that the committee would be very interested in hearing from him."

Bannon's trial on the two criminal counts is July 18. A hearing in his case was scheduled for Monday in federal court in Washington. Bannon has been seeking a delay in his trial to at least fall.

It's unclear how much Bannon intends to cooperate. He has expressed a preference to appear before the committee in a public hearing. The committee is making clear he must first sit for a private interview, typically in a sworn deposition. It's also possible he may opt to appear and then refuse to answer questions, citing his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

"The way that we have treated every single witness is the same, that they come in, they talk to the committee there," Raskin said. "If they're going to take a deposition, they're sworn under oath. It's videotaped. It's recorded, and then we take it from there."

The committee says it wants to hear from Bannon because he "had specific knowledge about the events planned for Jan. 6 before they occurred." It cited as an example comments that he made on his podcast the day before the riot.

"It's not going to happen like you think it's going to happen. OK, it's going to be quite extraordinarily different. All I can say is strap in," Bannon said in that podcast. "All hell is going to break loose tomorrow. ... So many people said, 'Man, if I was in a revolution, I would be in Washington.' Well, this is your time in history."

House investigators have been digging deeper into the evidence collected so far about the role extremist groups played in the deadly insurrection and what Trump was doing as the violence ensued down the street from the White House.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., who will lead Thursday's hearing with Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., described the upcoming testimony as key to providing an extensive timeline of what Trump did and did not do in those critical hours on the afternoon of Jan. 6, 2021. That includes Trump's tweet criticizing Vice President Mike Pence for lacking "courage" as angry protesters outside the Capitol were heard chanting "Hang Mike Pence" for not challenging Democrat Joe Biden's 2020 election victory.

"We want to show the American people what was the president doing during that time," Kinzinger said Sunday. "The rest of the country knew that there was an insurrection. The president obviously had to have known there was an insurrection. So where was he? What was he doing? It's a very important hearing. Pay attention. Because I think it goes to the heart of what is the oath of a leader."

Tuesday's hearing will explore efforts to assemble the mob on the National Mall and then organize the march down Pennsylvania Avenue, where some rioters — armed with pipes, bats and bear spray — charged into the Capitol, quickly overrunning the overwhelmed police force. More than 100 police officers were injured, many beaten, bloodied and bruised, that day.

It will also highlight a meeting on Dec. 18, 2020 at the White House in which former Trump lawyers Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani, onetime Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn and others floated the idea of seizing voting machines and invoking national security emergency powers, to the heated objection from several White House lawyers who argued that Trump needed to accept his defeat, according to Raskin, who will lead Tuesday's hearing.

"We're gonna get to use a lot of Mr. Cipollone's testimony," he said. "He was aware of every major move, I think, that Donald Trump was making to try to overthrow the 2020 election and essentially seize the presidency."

Kinzinger spoke on ABC's "This Week, Lofgren was on CNN's "State of the Union" and Raskin appeared on CBS' "Face the Nation."

___

Associated Press writer Hannah Fingerhut in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, contributed to this report.

Source link

Tulsa race massacre reparations case dismissed

cincylink — Mon, 10 Jul 2023 04:05:29 +0000

By Omar Jimenez and Rebekah Riess, CNN

Oklahoma judge dismisses Tulsa race massacre reparations case filed by last known survivors

Updated: 5:47 AM EDT Jul 9, 2023

kmnd – Cincy Link

Flight attendant delivers baby mid-flight

President Biden addressing US Naval Academy graduates

President Biden appeals for tougher gun laws: ‘How much more carnage?’

Thousands rally for gun reform after surge in mass shootings

Beach cleaning robot picks up plastic litter

Cocaine found at the White House had no DNA, Secret Service says

Feds search home of former Trump DOJ official Jeffrey Clark, subpoena GOP leaders

Roe v. Wade overturned by Supreme Court, ending national right to abortion

House passes major federal gun safety legislation, bill will go to Biden to sign

House GOP leaders opposed bill

Key provisions in the bill

Jan. 6 panel to hear from top aide in Trump’s White House

Cleveland, Ohio, mass shooting leaves 9 people wounded

Trump ally Steve Bannon now willing to testify before Jan. 6 panel

Tulsa race massacre reparations case dismissed

Iran set to deliver armed drones to Russia

Jan. 6 panel probes President Trump’s ‘siren call’ to extremists

Mega Millions $480 million jackpot is among the largest in its history

10-year-old checkers champ raises money for Ukrainian army

Jurors see gruesome video of Parkland school shooting

Jury selection

Pleading guilty to all charges

Trial preparations

Victims of the Parkland school shooting

Settlement with Broward School District

Four years after shooting

Parkland school shooter acted casually after fleeing

Jury selection

Pleading guilty to all charges

Trial preparations

Victims of the Parkland school shooting

Settlement with Broward School District

Four years after shooting

Steve Bannon found guilty of contempt for defying Jan. 6 committee subpoena

Family of 3 fatally shot at Iowa state park; gunman also dead

Brittney Griner testifies at Russia drug trial

Griner said she inadvertently packed cannabis oil, state media reported

'She's one of us'

Mega Millions numbers drawn with $1.28 billion jackpot

Arrest made after 4 found dead at 2 homes in small Nebraska town