Categories
Politics

In First Talks, Dueling Accusations Set Testy Tone for U.S.-China Diplomacy

ANCHOR – Even ahead of the Biden government’s first face-to-face meeting with senior Chinese diplomats on Thursday, American officials predicted the discussions would not go well. You were right: the traditional few minutes of opening greetings and remarks dissolved into more than an hour of very public verbal struggle, confirming the expected tone of confrontation between the geopolitical rivals.

US officials said the two days of talks would continue, but immediately accused the Chinese delegation of violating the format for the sensitive discussions that sought to find common ground amid the many points of conflict between them.

Yang Jiechi, China’s top diplomat, accused the United States of taking a “condescending” approach to the talks, saying the American delegation had no right to accuse Beijing of human rights abuses or to speak on the virtues of democracy.

At one point, he said the United States would do well to resolve its own “deep-seated” problems, particularly pointing out the Black Lives Matter movement against American racism. Second, after it appeared that the opening speech had ended and journalists were initially asked to leave the room to allow deeper discussions to begin, Mr. Yang accused the United States of inconsistent advocacy of a free press.

“I don’t think the vast majority of countries in the world would recognize the universal values ​​held by the United States or that the opinions of the United States could represent international public opinion,” Yang said through an interpreter. “And these countries would not recognize that the rules serve as the basis for international order for a small number of people.”

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken seemed surprised, but took on a more determined tone. He opened the talks with an anodyne recitation of topics to be covered in the three roundtables over two days – from working together to fight climate change and fighting the pandemic to American concerns about Chinese trade policy and military aggression. Mr. Blinken also said that China’s human rights violations “threaten the rules-based order that sustains global stability.”

But after protracted comments from Mr. Yang, which American officials cited as violating an agreement that limited the opening speech to two minutes, Mr. Blinken asked about a dozen journalists to stand for his response.

In an implicit opposition to China, Mr Blinken said the United States had a long history of openly confronting its shortcomings “not trying to ignore them, not pretending that they didn’t exist, they under the rug, too sweep “. And he recalled a meeting between Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Xi Jinping more than a decade ago when both men who now run their respective countries were vice presidents.

“It is never a good bet to bet against America,” Mr Biden said at the time, according to Mr Blinken, who added: “That remains true to this day.”

When the journalists were again told to leave after the American response, Mr. Yang turned directly to the television cameras and said in English, “Wait.” He then began another lengthy criticism of US policy.

Within an hour, Beijing’s diplomats repeatedly criticized new economic sanctions that were imposed on 24 Chinese officials on the eve of the talks. “This is not how you should welcome your guests,” said Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi.

The sanctions punished Chinese officials who the Biden government said had undermined democracy in Hong Kong by rewriting the territory’s electoral laws and promoting the changes through the Communist Party-controlled legislature. Biden administration officials had previously said the sanctions were not deliberately planned to affect talks in Anchorage.

But they clearly insulted the Chinese diplomats, who they used as evidence that the diplomatic overture was not intended to establish ground rules for a bilateral understanding of each capital’s priorities, but rather to provide the United States with a platform on which to embarrass Beijing can be.

The title, which a high-ranking US official later described as “outstanding” by the Chinese for his domestic audience, left little doubt that little would be achieved with the diplomatic discussions.

Following an often conflicting strategy for dealing with China over the past four years, President Donald J. Trump’s desire for a trade deal opposes punishing Beijing for rampant abuse of minority Uyghurs, military aggression in regional waters and refusal to address the problem Address Immediately Challenges Coronavirus Outbreak – The Biden government has attempted a fresh approach.

The new policy towards China is largely based on economic and diplomatic competition, but is also ready to take turns working together or confronting Beijing if necessary. The discussions in Anchorage should provide a basis for this approach.

It is now unclear how much cooperation will be possible between the two nations, although it will be necessary to achieve a number of common goals, including limiting Iran’s nuclear program and North Korean weapon systems.

Senior government officials in Biden had previously joked that hopes of much progress in the talks were so low that it would be more efficient for both sides to simply fax about their respective topics of conversation.

Categories
Business

‘Reply All’ Podcast Is Paused After Accusations of Poisonous Tradition

The popular Gimlet Media podcast, Reply All, was paused and its series, which addressed racism allegations by food magazine Bon Appétit, was discontinued after former Gimlet employees complained that one of its hosts and a reporter himself was becoming a toxic work culture had contributed.

On Thursday, co-host Alex Goldman announced to the audience in a two-minute statement posted on the Reply All feed entitled “A Message from the Staff From“ Reply All ”” that senior reporter Sruthi Pinnamaneni and Co -host PJ Vogt had decided to leave the podcast. Last week, former colleagues accused them of opposing union efforts that many black workers believed necessary to increase diversity and create an equal workplace.

“Former colleagues of ours at Gimlet have publicly described several cases of worrying behavior from both Sruthi and my longtime co-host PJ Vogt,” Goldman said in the statement released Thursday. “These reports prompted our team to settle the work culture at ‘Reply All’ and ask us whether we could continue broadcasting the story without asking ourselves and what was going on at Gimlet. We now understand that we should never have released the series as reported, and the fact that we did was a systematic editorial error. “

On Twitter and in interviews last week, former Gimlet employees said they viewed Mr. Vogt and Ms. Pinnamaneni’s involvement in the “Test Kitchen” series as hypocritical.

Eric Eddings, a former Gimlet employee who co-hosted The Nod podcast, said he couldn’t believe Ms. Pinnamaneni was telling a series about racism and toxicity in the workplace when she and Mr. Vogt asked for a “nearly identical” atmosphere at Gimlet was responsible.

Mr Vogt and Mrs Pinnamaneni publicly apologized after the allegations surfaced. They didn’t respond to requests for comment on Thursday.

Mr. Goldman said the remaining two episodes of “Test Kitchen,” which were supposed to be a four-part series, would not be released. He apologized to the audience for “our many mistakes”.

“We apologize to our colleagues and our former colleagues who we hurt,” he said. “We are sorry for you, our listeners. And of course we apologize to the people who spoke to us for the ‘test kitchen’ and told us their extremely personal stories. “

The two previously published episodes of “Test Kitchen” would stay online, Goldman said with an additional disclaimer. “Reply to All” would be interrupted, he said, as the show staff assessed what had gone wrong. “Once we fully understand it ourselves, we want to tell you as best we can what happened,” said Goldman.

A spokesman for Spotify, which acquired Gimlet Media in February 2019, said Mr. Vogt and Ms. Pinnamaneni would stay with Gimlet despite not being on the podcast. He didn’t give any details about her new roles.

Mr. Goldman and Mr. Vogt started with “Reply All” in 2014 and adapted it from their previous WNYC radio show “TLDR” (too long; not read). Episodes in recent years have taken listeners to phone scam rings in India and on a journey to track down a Song that a director heard on the radio as a teenager.

Mr Eddings and other former Gimlet employees said that Mr Vogt and Ms. Pinnamaneni were firmly opposed to union efforts, which were seen by black workers as the only way to create an environment in which they could thrive and that the two were theirs Efforts declined to diversify the staff. In one case, according to Mr. Eddings, Mr. Vogt sent derogatory text messages to a Gimlet employee who was involved in the union effort that left the employee in tears.

On the second installment in the Test Kitchen series that Ms. Pinnamaneni recounts, Ms. Pinnamaneni said that Gimlet had “its own version” of the problems Bon Appétit was facing.

“The white people who ran the place hired people of color and promised them changes that never seemed to fully materialize,” she said later. When a group of employees tried to change the atmosphere in Gimlet through union formation, they chose not to join the effort, she said. “As I’ve talked about it, I’ve talked about the way your fight got on my toes.” She said it took her eight months to report on Bon Appétit to realize how wrong she was.

In a series of tweets on Thursday, Mr Goldman said the announcement did not end “Reply All”.

“We’re just finding out what’s next,” he wrote. “‘Answer All’ wasn’t and is not just Alex and PJ. There’s an insanely talented group of people doing this show.”

Categories
Health

Cuomo faces political disaster attributable to Covid dying probe, bullying accusations

Governor Andrew Cuomo holds a daily press conference at the base of the Mario Cuomo Bridge in Tarrytown, New York on June 15, 2020.

Lev Radin | Pacific Press | LightRocket via Getty Images

What a difference a few months have made for New York Governor Andrew Cuomo – and not in a good way.

Cuomo was hailed last year by many who viewed him as a competent, scientifically respectful, no-nonsense, fatherly counterpoint to Donald Trump’s direct, expertly despicable, and often confusing approach to dealing with the coronavirus pandemic.

Cuomo’s daily press conferences, detailing the gritty Covid-19 stats in New York and urging citizens to take precautions against infection, became a must-see TV for weeks, as did his towel joke in interviews with the CNN presenter Chris Cuomo – his own brother.

As a result, it was discussed again that Cuomo, whose father Mario worried about running for president, earned him the sobriety of “Hamlet on the Hudson,” being a candidate for the Democratic White House nomination in 2024 would, or some position in the federal government before that.

Cuomo even landed a contract to write a book, American Crisis: Leadership Lessons from the Covid-19 Pandemic, which was published in October – even as the crisis continued to threaten his own state and elsewhere.

But it is Cuomo’s management approach to the health crisis that has created a political crisis in his administration that threatens his electoral future.

Thousands of vulnerable New Yorkers died in nursing homes during the pandemic. Your loved ones and the public deserve responses and transparency from their elected leadership.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez MP

DN.Y.

The U.S. Department of Justice is currently conducting a criminal investigation into nursing home deaths in New York related to the coronavirus. This was announced this week. The disclosure of this probe came weeks after New York attorney general Letitia James said deaths related to these hires were underreported by the Cuomo administration by up to 50%.

And Cuomo is also facing an effort in the state legislature to deprive him of his emergency powers, a push fueled by resentment at the governor’s verbal armament against lawmakers who stand in his way.

There is even talk of indicting Cuomo.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the progressive Democrat whose district includes parts of Queens and the Bronx in New York, issued a statement Friday approving requests from other elected officials for a “full investigation into government’s dealings with.” Nursing Homes During the Pandemic “joined. “

Ocasio-Cortez also said she supports “our state’s return to equal governance,” an indication of Cuomo’s years of dominance in the legislature.

“Thousands of New Yorkers at risk were killed in nursing homes during the pandemic,” she said. “Your loved ones and the public deserve answers and transparency from their elected leadership.”

An excuse, a probe

The contrast between Cuomo’s current situation and last fall was vividly illustrated last week when he left the White House without speaking to reporters after speaking to President Joe Biden and other governors and others at the White House about fighting pandemics and vaccinations had spoken to Mayor.

If that meeting had happened last summer, it would be unlikely that Cuomo would have missed the opportunity to share his thoughts on the seat with journalists.

That meeting, however, followed a report in the New York Post that Cuomo’s top adviser Melissa DeRosa recently apologized to Democratic lawmakers for holding back the Covid death count in government nursing homes last year while Trump was still president fear that the statistics will be “used against us” by federal prosecutors.

That excuse apparently raised the prosecutors’ antennas itself.

On Thursday evening, the Wall Street Journal reported that prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York had requested data on deaths in nursing homes related to Covid.

The request is “part of a broader investigation into how the state is dealing with the pandemic in these care facilities,” according to sources speaking to The Journal.

A source for the article said the data request came after DeRosa’s apology was reported.

Families of Covid victims and Republican lawmakers in New York last year criticized Cuomo for an order from the state Department of Health requiring nursing homes to withdraw their residents even if they were discharged from a hospital with Covid.

These critics accuse these policies of accelerating the spread of the virus in nursing homes.

Cuomo, whose press office did not immediately respond to a request from CNBC for comment, said this week, “My health experts do not believe it was wrong and we have gone through all the facts multiple times.”

The governor also said he had followed instructions from two leading federal agencies, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

“If we believed it was wrong we would say we believe it is wrong and we made a mistake by following the CDC and CMS guidelines and then I would be the federal government because of Sue for misconduct related to their CDC and CMS policies, “Cuomo said.

“Classic Andrew Cuomo”

On Tuesday, nine Democratic members of the State Assembly sent their colleagues a letter accusing Cuomo of deliberately obstructing the judiciary in violation of federal criminal law. That letter called on the gathering to withdraw the government’s emergency powers granted it last year as the pandemic spread.

“This is a necessary first step in correcting the criminal injustice of this governor and his government,” said the letter, which was signed by Honorable Ron Kim from Queens.

Kim said this week, after being quoted in a New York Post article for criticizing the withholding of data from nursing homes, he received an angry phone call from Cuomo on Feb.11.

“You didn’t see my anger,” Cuomo Kim warned, according to lawmakers. “They will be destroyed,” said the governor, according to Kim.

Kim also told the Post that the governor said, “I can tell the whole world what a bad person you are and you will be done.”

In an interview with NBC New York, Kim said, “He spent 10 minutes calling me names, yelling at me, threatening me and my career, my livelihood.”

Kim’s wife, who allegedly overheard Cuomo for cursing MPs so loudly, was so shocked by the governor’s threats that she “didn’t sleep that night,” said Kim.

Cuomo’s spokesman Rich Azzopardi told The Post that Kim “lied about his conversation with Governor Cuomo”.

“I know because I was one of three other people in the room when the call came,” Azzopardi said, according to The Post.

“At no point did anyone threaten to ‘destroy’ someone with their ‘anger’ or to engage in a ‘cover-up’.” “

Kim had not backed off with his claims.

Kim appeared on ABC’s “The View” on Friday and said, “Cuomo is an abuser.”

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, who often has a whipping boy for Cuomo, told MNBC’s “Morning Joe” show that the call to Kim was “classic Andrew Cuomo”.

“A lot of people in New York State got these calls, you know, bullying is nothing new,” said de Blasio.

“I believe Ron Kim, and it’s very, very sad – no officer, no person telling the truth should be treated like that.”

Categories
Business

Host of ‘Reply All’ Podcast Steps Down After Accusations of Poisonous Tradition

PJ Vogt, host of the popular Reply All podcast, said goodbye Wednesday after complaints from former colleagues that he and a senior reporter had contributed to a toxic work environment and opposed union efforts.

Mr. Vogt and senior reporter Sruthi Pinnamaneni each apologized in statements on Twitter.

The allegations at Gimlet Media, which produces Reply All, came after the podcast released its second installment in a series of reports of discrimination in the popular food magazine Bon Appétit video series. Following the Minneapolis Police Department’s murder of George Floyd last year, US newsrooms and media outlets, including the New York Times, have grappled with allegations that they did not adequately address inequalities among their ranks.

Eric Eddings, a former Gimlet employee who co-hosted the podcast “The Nod”, tweeted on Tuesday that “Reply All” and in particular Mr. Vogt and Ms. Pinnamaneni “contributed to an almost identical toxic dynamic at Gimlet” described them in their series on Bon Appétit.

“The BA staff’s stories deserve to be told, but to me it is detrimental that the coverage and storytelling are from two people who have actively and AGGRESSIVELY worked against multiple efforts to diversify Gimlet’s staff and content” , he wrote. “It was so inspiring to hear the words of people who, like me, have suffered from people who have caused this suffering to me and others.”

Mr Vogt, 35, said on Twitter that he “failed profoundly as an ally” when workers unionized and that he apologized to everyone he disappointed. “I should have thought about what it means not to be on the same side of a movement that is largely led by young paintmakers in my company,” he said.

“Today they have my support, but I can lend them,” he wrote. “I was a baby and an idiot in many ways.” He said he asked permission to step back from the show and took time to “think and listen”.

Ms. Pinnamaneni said her behavior regarding diversity and union organization efforts was “poorly informed, ignorant and hurtful”. She said on Twitter: “I didn’t pay enough attention to the colored people in Gimlet and I should have used my strength to support and promote them.”

Mr. Vogt and another presenter, Alex Goldman, started the podcast in 2014 and adapted it from their previous WNYC radio show “TLDR” (too long; not read). In the past few years, “Reply All” episodes have taken listeners to phone scam rings in India, to a maximum security prison in Illinois, and on a trip to track down a guitar song a director heard on the radio as a teenager.

Spotify, which owns Gimlet Media, didn’t respond to a request for comment. Gimlet Media also did not respond to a request for comment.

Her former colleague Mr. Eddings said he heard Mr. Vogt “vilified other colleagues” and “saw personally harassing messages from PJ to union organizers”. Mr. Vogt is not receptive to complaints that employees with color feel that they have no opportunities for advancement, he said.

He also said that he had asked Mr Vogt several times to contribute to diversity efforts, such as joining a diversity group or staff meetings, to show the issue was important to high-profile people, but Mr Vogt was not. He said that people of color on the podcast saw union formation as a way to create an environment in which they could thrive, but that Mr Vogt and Mrs Pinnamaneni were trying to raise support against them.

Brittany Luse, a former Gimlet employee who co-hosted “The Nod” with Mr. Eddings, spoke in support of his statements. “It’s impossible to explain how dark those times were,” she wrote on Twitter, referring to efforts to unite at Gimlet. “Your recoil thickened the air.”

Reggie Ugwu contributed to the coverage.

Categories
Politics

Who’s Jonathan Braun? Trump’s Final Minute Pardon Nonetheless Faces Accusations of Violence

President Donald J. Trump’s late-night commutation of a 10-year prison sentence being served by a drug smuggler named Jonathan Braun made the action sound almost routine. The White House said only that upon his release, Mr. Braun would “seek employment to support his wife and children.”

What the White House did not mention is that Mr. Braun, a New Yorker from Staten Island who had pleaded guilty in 2011 to leading a large-scale marijuana smuggling ring, still faces both criminal and civil investigations in an entirely separate matter, and has a history of violence and threatening people.

According to lawsuits filed in June against Mr. Braun and two associates by the New York State attorney general, Letitia James, and the Federal Trade Commission, Mr. Braun helped start and worked as a de facto enforcer for an operation that made predatory loans to small-business owners, threatening them with violence if they refused to pay up.

Federal prosecutors for the Southern District of New York in Manhattan also have a continuing investigation into that operation, a person with knowledge of the investigation said Friday.

As recently as two and a half years ago, Mr. Braun was accused of throwing a man off a deck at an engagement party. Federal prosecutors said in a court proceeding that he threatened to beat a rabbi who borrowed money to renovate a preschool at his synagogue. “I am going to make you bleed,” he told the rabbi, according to court documents, adding, “I will make you suffer for every penny.”

How much Mr. Trump and his aides knew about Mr. Braun’s past and his current legal troubles is not clear. In its announcement of the pardon this week, the White House appears to have substantially overstated how much of his 10-year sentence Mr. Braun had completed, saying he had served five years when he had only reported to prison a year ago. (The White House announcement also misspelled his first name, calling him Jonathon.)

Mr. Braun’s family had told people it was willing to spend millions of dollars for lawyers and others to try to get him out of prison, according to two people who have been in contact with the family members in recent months.

No one registered under federal lobbying laws to make Mr. Braun’s case to the Trump administration, though registration would not necessarily be required for legal representation. The White House announcement of the wave of 143 pardons and commutations early Wednesday, just hours before Mr. Trump left office, did not cite anyone who had backed the commutation of Mr. Braun’s sentence.

The lawyer Alan M. Dershowitz, who represented Mr. Trump in his first impeachment trial, said he “played a very limited role” in Mr. Braun’s clemency push, “almost exclusively” advising his father about the clemency process, and was paid “a very small amount of money” for his assistance.

Mr. Dershowitz said he believed Mr. Braun’s argument for clemency was “meritorious,” because Mr. Braun cooperated with prosecutors “for a good many years, and was told that his cooperation would be recognized and he didn’t get that recognition.”

His case is the latest evidence of how far the pardon process under Mr. Trump had strayed from the rigorous Justice Department guidelines and screening that previous presidents had largely relied on for clemency recommendations.

“Jonathan Braun has threatened small-business owners with violence, death and even kidnapping,” Ms. James said. “A federal commutation will not protect Mr. Braun from being held accountable in New York for the civil charges against him.”

Interviews and court documents paint a portrait of Mr. Braun as a major drug smuggler who once beat one of his underlings so badly with a belt that Mr. Braun told others he had left the victim “black and blue.” In another instance, he threatened violence against a woman who worked for him who was threatening to cooperate with prosecutors.

In response to questions about the pardon, Mr. Braun’s lawyer, Marc Fernich, declined to discuss how Mr. Braun had gotten his case in front of White House officials or who had represented him. But Mr. Fernich praised Mr. Trump’s action.

“Mr. Braun’s 10-year sentence was grossly unreasonable — an extreme statistical outlier — on the facts and circumstances of his case,” Mr. Fernich said in an email message. He said he applauded Mr. Trump’s “courage in correcting what was a grave injustice.”

A spokesman for Mr. Trump did not return an email message seeking comment.

Mr. Braun was indicted in 2010 and entered a plea deal in the drug case the next year after initially fleeing the country for Canada and Israel before turning himself in. He was not sentenced until 2019 and did not have to report to prison until last January.

While free on bail after his guilty plea but before reporting to prison, he plunged into a new enterprise, helping run an operation that made loans to small-business owners at extremely high interest rates. According to the suits filed last year by Ms. James, the New York State attorney general, and the Federal Trade Commission, Mr. Braun regularly threatened those who had trouble repaying the loans.

“I know where you live.” Mr. Braun told a small-business owner who he claimed owed him money, according to court documents filed by Ms. James.

Mr. Braun told the business owner he knew where his mother lived.

“I will take your daughters from you,” he said, according to the suit.

Mr. Braun is accused in the suit of telling another business owner: “Be thankful you’re not in New York, because your family would find you floating in the Hudson.”

Previous presidents relied on a Justice Department screening process for pardons that ensured they were being given in an evenhanded way and that those with money and connections were not receiving preferential treatment. But Mr. Trump largely disregarded that process and wielded his clemency powers unlike any previous president.

The Constitution gives presidents the ability to issue pardons and commutations, a brake on the criminal justice system and a way to show grace and mercy. But Mr. Trump doled out clemency to friends, allies, donors, witnesses who did not cooperate with investigations that involved him and his campaign, and those who could help him politically.

“When the Justice Department process is short-circuited, and there’s insufficient vetting — if you don’t take the time to look at someone’s history and potential other exposure — this is what you end up with: a process that appears corrupted by money and influence,” said Daniel Zelenko, a white-collar defense lawyer at Crowell and Moring and former federal prosecutor and enforcement lawyer at the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The full story of Mr. Braun’s arrest, indictment and sentencing spans a decade and, according to prosecutors’ statements in court and filings in his case, often unfolded like a crime thriller.

In 2009, agents from the Drug Enforcement Administration raided a house on Staten Island that Mr. Braun’s drug trafficking network used to stash large stockpiles of drugs. Mr. Braun, who was in Florida at the time, learned from his underlings about the raid.

Immediately, Mr. Braun rented a car and with at least one associate drove 25 hours to the New York border with Canada.

“In the dead of night, dressed entirely in black and utilizing a motorless boat, Braun was ferried across the river into Canada, and remained there for several months, hiding out in one of the properties owned by his Canadian associate,” according to court documents filed by the Justice Department.

Clemency Power ›

Presidential Pardons, Explained

President Trump has discussed potential pardons that could test the boundaries of his constitutional power to nullify criminal liability. Here’s some clarity on his ability to pardon.

    • May a president issue prospective pardons before any charges or conviction? Yes. In Ex parte Garland, an 1866 case involving a former Confederate senator who had been pardoned by President Andrew Johnson, the Supreme Court said the pardon power “extends to every offense known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment.” It is unusual for a president to issue a prospective pardon before any charges are filed, but there are examples, perhaps most famously President Gerald R. Ford’s pardon in 1974 of Richard M. Nixon to prevent him from being prosecuted after the Watergate scandal.
    • May a president pardon his relatives and close allies? Yes. The Constitution does not bar pardons that raise the appearance of self-interest or a conflict of interest, even if they may provoke a political backlash and public shaming. In 2000, shortly before leaving office, President Bill Clinton issued a slew of controversial pardons, including to his half brother, Roger Clinton, over a 1985 cocaine conviction for which he had served about a year in prison, and to Susan H. McDougal, a onetime Clinton business partner who had been jailed as part of the Whitewater investigation.
    • May a president issue a general pardon? This is unclear. Usually, pardons are written in a way that specifically describes which crimes or sets of activities they apply to. There is little precedent laying out the degree to which a pardon can be used to instead foreclose criminal liability for anything and everything.
    • May a president pardon himself? This is unclear. There is no definitive answer because no president has ever tried to pardon himself and then faced prosecution anyway. As a result, there has never been a case which gave the Supreme Court a chance to resolve the question. In the absence of any controlling precedent, legal thinkers are divided about the matter.
    • Find more answers here.

Mr. Braun then fled to Israel, where he took refuge for several months, hoping to avoid being apprehended as he continued to run his drug operation from an encrypted BlackBerry phone, the documents say. In the fall of 2009, Mr. Braun returned to the United States, where he was arrested and jailed.

When he was indicted in 2010, he was charged with operating a marijuana ring that was one of the major distributors in New York City, smuggling in and selling $1.72 billion worth from 2007 to 2010.

“It is neither an exaggeration nor hyperbole to state that the defendant and his criminal enterprise generated illegal proceeds exceeding the gross domestic product of a small country,” the Justice Department said in a 2010 filing.

His lawyers sought at that point to persuade a judge to release him on bail, but prosecutors successfully kept him in jail, laying out how Mr. Braun had told others that he planned to flee the United States if he was released on bail.

“Braun specifically told a cooperating government witness that he would ‘never do time in jail,’” prosecutors said in a court filing. “Braun went on to explain that ‘for 10 grand, I could get a fake passport’ and be ‘on a beach somewhere where there is no extradition,’ still ‘making money.’”

In arguing that Mr. Braun should remain in prison, the prosecutors laid out a gruesome episode in which he beat a younger man working for him who had been given the job of guarding $100,000 worth of marijuana being kept in a house in California.

After Mr. Braun learned that the marijuana had been stolen, he called the man and demanded he give him $100,000. The man refused. Mr. Braun and one of his enforcers booked flights to California, arriving there the next morning. They broke into the house, where they found the man in bed.

“Braun then took off his belt and proceeded to viciously whip his worker with the belt,” the court documents say. “At one point, the ‘kid’ tried to get away from Braun, but Braun’s enforcer pushed him back down onto the bed so that Braun could continue the beating. In Braun’s own words, his brutal assault left the ‘kid’s’ entire body ‘black and blue.’”

Mr. Braun pleaded guilty in 2011 to two counts of conspiring to import a controlled substance and money laundering. As part of his plea, prosecutors allowed him to be released on bail and live at home while awaiting sentencing. His sentencing was delayed repeatedly.

Legal experts and defense lawyers say that defendants are typically on their best behavior when they are out on bail and awaiting sentencing. But Mr. Braun continued to flout the law, according to the suits later filed against him by the New York State attorney general and the Federal Trade Commission.

In 2018, Bloomberg News wrote a series of articles about how Mr. Braun had emerged as a leading short-term lender to small businesses. While structured to try to avoid usury laws, the rates Mr. Braun changed were as high as 400 percent a year. The New York attorney general’s office opened an investigation in response to the articles.

The next year, a judge held a sentencing hearing for Mr. Braun on the drug trafficking charges. At the hearing, prosecutors laid out two recent episodes in which Mr. Braun had violently assaulted others. One allegation said that Mr. Braun had thrown someone off a two-story balcony at a Staten Island engagement party in the summer of 2018.

The other allegation related to how Mr. Braun had lent money to the Brooklyn rabbi for the preschool. The rabbi had fallen behind on the payments and Mr. Braun reportedly threatened to beat and humiliate him.

“I am coming to Crown Heights,” Mr. Braun said, according to a lawsuit filed by the synagogue. “I will hang papers all over the lampposts in Crown Heights stating that you are a liar and a thief. I am going to tell people that you are running an illegal operation and a scam.”

Fearing the rabbi would be attacked, the synagogue wired Mr. Braun $1,000 and hired a lawyer. In a subsequent call between Mr. Braun and the lawyer, Mr. Braun called the lawyer a profanity, according to the suit filed by the synagogue.

Shortly after Mr. Braun’s commutation was announced, Mr. Dershowitz said he received a call from Mr. Braun and his father.

“Everybody was very grateful. There were a lot of tears going around,” Mr. Dershowitz said, explaining that the father called again on Friday before the Jewish Sabbath. “And he said he is going to continue to call me every Shabbos, so I should expect a call.”

Kenneth P. Vogel and Ben Protess contributed reporting. Susan C. Beachy and Kitty Bennett contributed research.