Categories
Politics

Conservative Group, Seizing on Crime as an Concern, Seeks Recall of Prosecutors

WASHINGTON – A Republican-affiliated group said Monday it is launching a recall campaign, backed by unknown donors, to criminalize Democrats and their allies for being gentle by targeting progressive prosecutors.

It will initially focus on three prosecutors elected in 2019 in the affluent suburbs of Washington, northern Virginia, amid a national wave of pledges from Democrats to make law enforcement fairer and more humane.

The Virginians for Safe Communities group said the targets of the recall were Buta Biberaj of Loudoun County, Parisa Dehghani-Tafti of Arlington County and Steve Descano of Fairfax County, all of whom are Commonwealth counsel.

The campaign is faced with uncertain prospects, starting with the clarification of signature collections and legal hurdles.

However, organizers identified it as part of a broader national push to capitalize on voter concerns over rising urban crime and a backlash against sentiment against the police.

“There is a time for all things politics, and now is the time to wake up people who are in favor of law enforcement,” said Sean D. Kennedy, a Republican agent and president of Virginians for Safe Communities. He called the Northern Virginia recall effort a “test case for a nationwide launch.”

He said the group raised more than $ 250,000 and received commitments of nearly another $ 500,000. He would not reveal the identity of the donors to the group, which is registered under a section of the Tax Code that allows nonprofit groups to protect their donors from disclosure.

Mr. Kennedy, who has worked on Republican campaigns and committees, is an officer with the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, but he said the new group is independent from them. Others involved in the new group include former FBI officer Steven L. Pomerantz and Ian D. Prior, who was appointed to the Justice Department during the Trump administration and previously worked on well-funded Republican political committees.

Mr. Kennedy has used Virginians for Safe Communities as an antidote to a political committee funded by billionaire George Soros, a leading democratic donor. His group, Justice and Public Safety PAC, has spent millions of dollars in recent years to assist candidates in local prosecutorial elections who supported the decriminalization of marijuana, relaxation of bail rules, and other progressive-favored changes.

The spending turned many of the races on their heads, which previously had drawn relatively little money and attention from major national interests.

Mr Soros’s representatives did not respond to a request for comment.

His PAC spent hundreds of thousands of dollars each in 2019 to support the campaigns of Ms. Dehghani-Tafti, Mr. Descano and Ms. Biberaj as they took office and promised a new approach to criminal justice.

Their victories came at a time when politicians from both parties were scrutinizing harsh crime policies, imposing harsh penalties for drug-related crimes, and laying the groundwork for mass incarceration that disproportionately affected black communities. In late 2018, President Donald J. Trump signed the most momentous reduction in criminal law in a generation. The next month, Joseph R. Biden Jr., who was preparing to run against Mr. Trump, apologized for portions of the anti-crime legislation he championed as a senator in the 1990s.

Skepticism about law enforcement and the criminal justice system was further catalyzed by the police murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police in 2020. Many Democrats, including President Biden, have opposed the Defund the Police movement.

But a year and a half after Mr. Floyd’s death, American cities are facing a surge in gun violence and murder that began during the pandemic and has continued into this year.

Republicans have tried to blame the Democrats and their allies, and have tried to regain the cloak of law and order that politicians from both parties embraced in the 1980s and 1990s, but later because of concerns about police and police misconduct the inequalities in the criminal justice system.

The Conservatives “basically sat on the sidelines on this issue,” said Kennedy. “It was dominated by one side, and our side had basically disarmed unilaterally.”

He accused the three Northern Virginia prosecutors of “taking dangerous measures” that “undermine public confidence in our judicial system.” He cited an increase in the murder rate in Fairfax Counties and Arlington Counties.

Ms. Dehghani-Tafti, the chief prosecutor for Arlington County and the City of Falls Church, said in an email that she “does exactly what I have promised my community – what I was chosen to do – and do it well: that To make the system fairer, more responsive and more rehabilitative and at the same time guarantee our safety. “

Some of the more progressive planks on their campaign platform, and those of Ms. Biberaj and Mr Descano – who are ending law enforcement for marijuana possession and not applying for the death penalty – were at least partially codified across the country this year. Virginia Governor Ralph Northam signed law abolishing the death penalty and legalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana.

Ms. Dehghani-Tafti accused Mr. Kennedy’s group of using undisclosed “dark money” and “relying on misinformation” to “overturn a valid election through a non-democratic recall”.

Recalls are rare in Virginia and require the collection of signatures from a group of voters equal to 10 percent of the number who voted for the office in question in the last election, followed by a trial to prove that the officer has acted in a manner that constitutes incompetence, negligence or abuse of office. In the prosecutor’s case, the signature requirement would range from about 5,500 in Arlington to 29,000 in Fairfax.

Kennedy said his group intends to start paying people to collect signatures starting this week, with the goal of hitting the thresholds by Labor Day.

Recent efforts to defeat or dismiss progressive prosecutors have so far not been successful in other jurisdictions, including Philadelphia and Los Angeles, and an upcoming grassroots effort to recall the three Virginia prosecutors has apparently not met with much resonance.

Categories
Politics

Guantánamo Prosecutors Ask to Strike Data Gained From Torture

WASHINGTON — Military prosecutors have asked to wipe from the record information gleaned from the torture of a detainee now held at Guantánamo Bay, reversing their earlier position that the information could be used in pretrial proceedings against the man.

By law, prosecutors in a military commission trial are forbidden to submit evidence derived from torture. But in May, the judge, Col. Lanny J. Acosta Jr., ruled that while juries could not see that type of evidence, judges could consider it in determining pretrial matters.

Biden administration lawyers were troubled by the decision because they would be expected to defend the use of such information before appeals courts. The ruling, the first known instance in which a military judge permitted prosecutors to use information gained through torture, also carries larger implications for all cases at Guantánamo.

The chief prosecutor at Guantánamo for a decade, Brig. Gen. Mark S. Martins, had cited a statement obtained through torture, clashing with senior administration officials who questioned his authority to do so. The dispute played a part in his unexpected decision to retire from the Army 15 months early, on Sept. 30.

The detainee, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, is a Saudi man accused of orchestrating Al Qaeda’s bombing of the U.S. Navy destroyer Cole off Yemen in 2000, which killed 17 sailors.

At issue has been an effort by Mr. Nashiri’s lawyers to learn more about the reasons for a U.S. drone strike in Syria in 2015 that killed another man suspected of being a Qaeda bomber, Mohsen al-Fadhli. Pursuing a possible defense argument, they have sought to determine whether the United States has already killed men it considered to be the masterminds of the Cole bombing.

Prosecutors asked the judge to end that line of inquiry, pointing to a classified cable that reported that Mr. Nashiri had told C.I.A. agents as he was being interrogated at a black site in Afghanistan that Mr. Fadhli had had no involvement.

Mr. Nashiri’s lawyers protested the use of the C.I.A. information and added that the prisoner had made the disclosure as interrogators used a broomstick in a particularly cruel way, causing him to cry out.

The judge has yet to decide the overarching question of whether defense lawyers can continue to seek classified information about the drone attack. But he sided with the prosecutors, ruling that he could consider what Mr. Nashiri had said in deciding the matter. In response, defense lawyers filed an emergency appeal with a higher court, seeking a reversal. Government lawyers have yet to respond.

But Friday, prosecutors asked the judge, Colonel Acosta, to remove from the record information about the C.I.A. interrogation. Still, they asked him to retain the essence of his ruling, which found that there were occasions when a judge could consider such information while recognizing that “statements obtained through torture are necessarily of highly suspect reliability.”

Doing so, they wrote in a six-page filing, “can serve judicial economy” and “advance this case toward trial.” It was signed by General Martins and two other prosecutors.

Defense lawyers called the move insufficient and said they would continue to seek a reversal.

“Removing the sentences citing evidence obtained by torture, but not their motion saying the judge is free to use torture pretrial, or the judge’s ruling saying that it is lawful to do so, accomplishes little,” said Capt. Brian L. Mizer of the Navy, Mr. Nashiri’s lead military defense lawyer.

Mr. Nashiri, 56, has been held since 2002, spending four years in C.I.A. custody. His trial had been expected to start in February 2022, but that timetable is in doubt because the coronavirus pandemic has paralyzed progress in the pretrial proceedings at Guantánamo.

The judge has scheduled a two-week hearing in the case starting Sept. 20. The court last convened in January 2020.

Categories
Politics

Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani not above the regulation, prosecutors say

Rudolph Giuliani, attorney for President Donald Trump, holds a press conference on Thursday, November 19, 2020, in the Republican National Committee on lawsuits related to the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.

Tom Williams | CQ Appeal, Inc. | Getty Images

Federal prosecutors said in a court case on Friday that “the mere fact” that Rudy Giuliani is a lawyer – one who represented former President Donald Trump – does not mean that he is “above the law or immune to criminal investigation “.

The filing pushed the efforts of Giuliani’s attorneys to attack the legality of search warrants on his iCloud account in 2019 and on his Manhattan home and office last month, as part of an ongoing criminal investigation into his activities in and related to the Ukraine were issued.

Eighteen electronic devices belonging to the former Mayor of New York and Giuliani Partners employees were seized under these arrest warrants in late April.

Giuliani’s lawyers argue that finding his iCloud – which Giuliani hadn’t known about for about 18 months – may have violated his legal and client rights, and Trump’s right as president to protect his communications with his attorney.

And they say recent search warrants may be compromised by their reliance on information from iCloud search.

Another well-known Republican attorney, Victoria Toensing, has been the subject of similar search warrants.

“The warrants authorizing the search of these devices were issued by a United States district judge – this court – on the basis of a finding that there was likely reason to believe that these devices contained evidence, fruits, and instruments of certain federal crimes.” the US attorney’s office for the southern borough of New York wrote in its new filing with the Manhattan Federal Court.

Prosecutors said searching for devices and electronic accounts owned by lawyers like Giuliani and Toensing “requires special care to protect the confidentiality of attorney-client communications that may appear in search materials.”

To that end, prosecutors said they had “gone beyond these obligations” by asking a judge to appoint a so-called special master to examine the recently seized materials for potentially privileged material, which was then approved by investigators who direct the material, Criminal investigation of Giuliani would be kept away.

Prosecutors said a so-called filter team had served the purpose to review the 2019 arrest warrants for his and Toensing’s iCloud accounts.

“But to be clear, the mere fact that Giuliani and Toensing are attorneys does not mean that they are above the law or immune from criminal investigations,” the prosecutor wrote.

“But that is exactly what Giuliani and Toensing argue in their motions: because they are lawyers, the enforcement of search warrants against them has been illegal and inappropriate, and as such they are entitled to the extraordinary and unprecedented means of converting a legitimately issued search warrant into subpoena so they can review their own materials and decide what the government will see. That is not the law and their applications should otherwise be denied, “the file said.

The prosecution argued in the filing that a judge should reject requests by Giuliani and Toensing to unseal the affidavits submitted to obtain the arrest warrants.

CNBC policy

Read more about CNBC’s political coverage:

Giuliani’s attorney Arthur Aidala pushed back against prosecution filing.

“According to the government, they are alluding to the fact that Mr Giuliani argues that he is above the law,” Aidala wrote in a text message to CNBC.

“Nobody says Mayor Giuliani is above the law,” Aidala wrote.

“However, the government has a duty to follow the specific procedures that must be followed when examining material obtained from a lawyer using a search warrant rather than issuing a subpoena.”

Aidala added: “Every attorney has legal and client rights that he must protect on behalf of his clients.”

“That privilege is doubled when the attorney’s client is the President of the United States, who also has executive privilege,” Aidala said.

Giuliani played a key role in attempting to gather harmful information about President Joe Biden and his son Hunter in connection with their business dealings in Ukraine. At the time, Biden was preparing to run for president and was widely viewed as Trump’s most viable Democratic challenger.

Categories
Business

Man Purchased Lamborghini With PPP Mortgage, Prosecutors Say

A California man who received more than $ 5 million in paycheck protection program loans to help businesses in trouble during the coronavirus pandemic was arrested Friday on Friday on federal bank fraud and other charges after prosecutors said he had used the money to buy a Lamborghini and other federal luxury cars.

The man, Mustafa Qadiri, 38, from Irvine, was charged by a federal grand jury on four cases of bank fraud, four cases of wire fraud, one case of aggravated identity theft and six cases of money laundering, the U.S. attorney in the Central District of California announced.

Prosecutors said Mr. Qadiri’s federal loan efforts began in late May 2020 and grossed him nearly $ 5.1 million by early June. Mr. Qadiri is accused of using that money on a shopping spree that included buying a Ferrari, a Lamborghini and a Bentley and paying for “wasteful vacations,” all of which are banned under the paycheck protection program, prosecutors said.

Bilal A. Essayli, a lawyer for Mr. Qadiri, declined to comment.

Mr. Qadiri filed applications for Covid-19 relief funds with three different banks to help four California-based companies that were actually down, according to prosecutors. In addition to submitting fraudulent company information and “changed bank account details”, a statement from the prosecutor said Mr. Qadiri was using someone else’s name, social security number and signature on applications.

Some of Mr. Qadiri’s assets have already been confiscated, prosecutors said. Federal agents seized a 2011 Ferrari 458 Italia registered with All American Capital Holdings, one of the companies listed on Mr. Qadiri’s PPP loan applications. A 2018 Lamborghini Aventador S registered with the same company was also confiscated.

The 2011 Ferrari 458 Italia can sell for more than $ 100,000, according to Cars.com. It has a V-8 engine and 570 horsepower and can go from zero to 62 mph in 3.4 seconds. Says the rating.

Another popular website for auto enthusiasts, Kelley Blue Book, has a listing for a 2011 Ferrari 458 Italia that sells for $ 179,000. The website also has a 2018 report on the Lamborghini Aventador S that states, “There is no better car to showcase your success or to stroke your ego.” This car has a V-12 engine and 740 horsepower and can go from zero to 60 mph in less than three seconds. According to the test report, one of its disadvantages is: “The Aventador is neither the most comfortable car to drive in, nor is it terribly efficient. It deserves an EPA estimated at 10 mpg for city driving. “

On Lamborghini.com, the website describing the Aventador S has the slogan “Dare your ego”.

Prosecutors said in a statement that another luxury vehicle Mr. Qadiri bought with PPP money, a 2020 Bentley Continental GT Coupe, had also been confiscated.

A US law firm spokesman said that if Mr. Qadiri were convicted, the charges against him would result in a maximum sentence of 302 years in prison.

Dozens of people have been arrested and charged with misusing pandemic aid funds. Mr. Qadiri is at least the third person to be charged with buying a Lamborghini.

In July, a Florida man who had received nearly $ 4 million was arrested on bank fraud and other charges after buying a blue Lamborghini for $ 318,497. In August, a Texas man who received more than $ 1.6 million from the same federal program was arrested on bank fraud and other charges after buying a 2019 Lamborghini Urus for $ 233,337.60, among other charges.

In February, Florida man David T. Hines pleaded guilty to wire fraud with a maximum sentence of up to 20 years in prison. He is waiting to be sentenced. The case against Texas man Lee Price III continues.

Categories
Politics

Prosecutors Are Stated to Have Sought Aggressive Method to Capitol Riot Inquiry

WASHINGTON – In the weeks following the deadly January 6 riot at the Capitol, federal prosecutors in Washington drew up a comprehensive plan to eradicate possible conspirators against the attackers and investigate them for links to the attack.

Prosecutors suggested that these lists could help organizers of the rally where President Donald J. Trump spoke just before the attack, anyone who helped pay the rioters to travel to Washington, and any member of the far-right groups that in the US include crowd that day.

Two of the prosecutors – trial lawyers who led the riot investigation – presented the plan to the FBI in late February, along with a roughly 25-page document setting out the strategy for uncovering possible conspiracies between the attackers and other people behind on condition of anonymity spoke to discuss an active investigation.

The aggressive plan was in line with the Justice Department’s public vow to indict those involved in the Capitol attack. But FBI officials flinched, citing concerns that the plan appeared to suggest investigating people with no evidence to suggest they committed crimes, and that doing so would be against the bureau’s policies and protection of the first amendment. It is not illegal to join any organization, including extremist groups, or to participate in protests or to fund travel to a rally.

FBI officials voiced their concern to officials at the Chief Justice Department in Washington, who eventually overturned the plan.

However, the decision by senior FBI and Justice Department officials to override the task force prosecutors came at a crucial time for the high-profile, far-reaching investigation, as the public and officials of the Biden government are accountable for the insurrection and called for a push to combat domestic extremism.

Justice Department and FBI spokesmen declined to comment.

The proposal also demonstrates the balancing act that newly sustained Justice Department leaders face as they attempt to counter domestic extremism and prevent terrorism without violating American civil liberties. The FBI was previously criticized for its response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the aspects of which were condemned as an attack on civil liberties, and for its Cointelpro campaign in the 1950s and 1960s to spy on civil rights leaders and others.

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said last week that even as he led the investigation into the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing during a previous stint at the Justice Department, investigators knew they needed to see to it that Americans’ civil liberties were protected.

“We promised to find the perpetrators, bring them to justice and do so in a way that respects the constitution,” Garland said.

FBI officials have emphasized the bureau’s efforts to stay within its boundaries when investigating protected activity. While preventing terrorism is a priority in the United States, “an investigation cannot be initiated solely on the basis of activities protected by the first amendment,” said Michael McGarrity, then head of the FBI’s counter-terrorism division, in the year 2019 in a statement from the house.

The office relies in large part on its large network of informants who provide tips and information on how to start an investigation, said current and former members of the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force. But agents cannot investigate people simply because they are members of groups that advocate violent, racist, or anti-government ideologies.

Washington prosecutors encountered this restriction while trying to identify and track down individuals who participated in the January 6 attack. They also investigated whether the attack was more than a spontaneous riot that broke out after an emotionally charged rally, limited by Mr Trump’s admonitions to his supporters to contest Congressional certification that afternoon of the election.

In February, some prosecutors expressed frustration at being obstructed by senior Justice Department officials overseeing the investigation in the weeks leading up to the swearing-in of Mr. Garland and other Biden officials.

Prosecutors wanted to know more about who had spoken to Stewart Rhodes, leader of the Oath Keepers, a militia whose members had played a prominent role in conspiracy cases charged by the government in connection with the attack.

In a message posted on the Oath Keepers website, Mr Rhodes had urged members to come to Washington and stand up for Mr Trump. He was also part of an operation to provide security to Mr. Trump’s close associates, including Roger J. Stone Jr., who spoke at the rally that day.

Prosecutors wanted a search warrant for Mr. Rhodes. Militias like the Oath Keepers and right-wing nationalist groups like the Proud Boys had for years managed to largely evade FBI control as their protests and other public activities remained within the law.

But with members of such groups in the Capitol on January 6, some prosecutors expressed the hope that they now had reason to investigate their staff and leaders.

However, the law does not prohibit pressuring people to take part in a protest or support a politician, even if the statements are provocative. and investigators found no evidence that Mr Rhodes had helped arrange anything more than bodyguards for the speakers.

Justice Department officials, including Michael R. Sherwin, an officer who was overseeing the January 6 investigation at the time, denied prosecutors’ request for a search warrant on Mr. Rhodes, according to two people who were briefed on the deliberations . They concluded that the prosecutors lacked a likely cause for doing so without violating his civil liberties and rights.

Following the dispute, two of the lead task force prosecutors contacted the FBI’s Terrorism Operations Department to inform investigators of their proposed strategy to review the insurgency. They suggested that investigators look at rally organizers and organizations such as militia groups.

Among the FBI officers who opposed the approach, according to those informed about the plan, was Deputy Director Paul M. Abbate. After office officials discussed the presentation with Justice Department officials, the assistant attorney general’s chiefs – including Matthew S. Axelrod, then the second-largest officer in the office – briefed Channing D. Phillips, the acting U.S. attorney in Washington, on the Prosecutors would not take such an approach to the investigation.

The investigation, which continues to be led by federal attorneys and FBI agents in Washington, has led to the arrest of over 400 defendants in at least 45 states. About 30 were charged with more serious crimes, including conspiracy, according to the Justice Department.

Categories
Business

Trump’s Tax Returns Are ‘One Piece of the Puzzle.’ Prosecutors Are Getting Extra.

When New York prosecutors can finally examine former President Donald J. Trump’s tax returns, they will find a true guide to getting rich while losing millions of dollars and paying little to no income taxes.

However, whether they find evidence of criminal offenses also depends on other information not included in the actual returns.

The United States Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. to receive eight years of Mr. Trump’s income tax return and other documents from his accountants. The decision ended a longstanding legal battle over prosecutors’ access to the information.

The New York Times more or less previewed what to expect last year as it received and analyzed decades of income tax data for Mr Trump and his companies. The tax records offer an unprecedented and very detailed look into the Byzantine world of Mr. Trump’s finances, which he has been bragging about for years and which he wants to keep secret.

The Times audit found the former president had reported hundreds of millions of dollars in business losses, spent years without paying federal taxes, and received a tax refund of $ 72.9 million prior to an Internal Revenue Service audit that he had requested a decade ago.

Among other things, the record found that Mr Trump had paid just $ 750 in federal income taxes in his first year as president and no income tax at all for 10 of the last 15 years. They also revealed that between 2010 and 2018 he had written off $ 26 million in “consulting fees” as business expenses, some of which were apparently paid to his older daughter Ivanka Trump when she was an employee of the Trump Organization.

The legitimacy of the charges that reduced Mr. Trump’s taxable income has since been the subject of Mr. Vance’s investigation and a separate civil investigation by New York Attorney General Letitia James. Ms. James and Mr. Vance are Democrats, and Mr. Trump has tried to portray the multiple investigation as politically motivated while denying any wrongdoing.

Mr. Vance’s office has issued subpoenas and interviews over the past few months investigating various financial matters, including whether the Trump Organization has misrepresented the value of assets in making loans or paying property taxes, as well paying $ 130,000 in hush money during the 2016 campaign to Stephanie Clifford, the pornographic film actress whose stage name is Stormy Daniels. Among those surveyed were employees of Deutsche Bank, one of Mr Trump’s largest lenders.

Despite all of its revelations, Mr Trump’s tax filings are also noteworthy for what they fail to show, including new details about the payment to Ms. Clifford, which was the first focus of Mr Vance’s investigation when it began two years ago.

The tax returns are self-reported accounting for income and expenses and often do not have the specificity required to know, for example, whether legal costs related to hush money payments have been claimed as a tax write-off or whether money has ever been paid from Russia moved by Mr. Trump’s bank accounts. The lack of this level of detail underscores the potential value of other records that Mr. Vance had access to with the Supreme Court decision on Monday.

In addition to filing tax returns, Mr. Trump’s accountants, Mazars USA, are also required to provide business records on which these returns are based and communicate with the Trump Organization. Such material could provide important context and background for decisions Mr Trump or his accountants made in preparing the tax return.

John D. Fort, a former chief of the IRS criminal investigation department, said tax returns are a useful tool for uncovering clues but could only be fully understood with additional financial information obtained elsewhere.

“It’s a very important personal financial document, but it’s only part of the puzzle,” said Fort, CPA and director of investigations at Kostelanetz & Fink in Washington. “What you find in the return must be continued with interviews and subpoenas.”

However, the Times’ investigation of Mr. Trump’s returns revealed a number of misleading claims and falsehoods he made about his wealth and business acumen.

Many of Mr. Trump’s claims to generous philanthropy fell apart when he examined his tax returns, raising questions about both the size of certain donations and the totality of his tax-deductible donations. For example, $ 119.3 million of the approximately $ 130 million in charitable deductions claimed since 2005 turned out to be the estimated value of no real estate pledges, sometimes after a planned project failed.

At least two of these land-based charity prints, one related to a golf course in Los Angeles and the other in a Westchester estate called Seven Springs, are known to be part of Ms. James’s civil investigation to see if appraisals are endorsed The tax depreciation was excessive.

In a broader sense, the tax filings showed how the public disclosures he filed as a candidate and then as president offered a skewed view of his overall finances by reporting glowing numbers for his golf courses, hotels, and other businesses on a gross revenue basis, which they achieved every year. The actual bottom line after losses and expenses was much grimmer: while Mr. Trump’s public filing showed revenue of $ 434.9 million in 2018, his tax returns reported losses totaling $ 47.4 million.

And such bad numbers were not an anomaly. Mr. Trump’s many golf courses, a core part of his business empire, posted losses of $ 315.6 million from 2000 to 2018, while the revenue from licensing his name to hotels and resorts was so good at the time of his entry into the White House how dry they were. Additionally, Mr. Trump has several hundred million dollars in loans, many of which he has personally guaranteed and which will mature over the next few years.

The Times investigation also revealed that he faces a potentially devastating IRS audit focused on the huge refund he requested in 2010, which covers all federal income taxes he paid through 2005 plus interest. Mr Trump repeatedly cited the ongoing audit as a reason he was unable to publish his tax returns after initially announcing it, despite nothing stopping him in the audit process.

Should an IRS ruling ultimately be against him, Mr. Trump could be forced to repay more than $ 100 million, taking into account interest and possible penalties, in addition to approximately $ 21.2 million in state and local tax refunds, which were based on the numbers in his federal records.

Russ Buettner and Susanne Craig contributed to the coverage.

Categories
Politics

Georgia Prosecutors Open Prison Investigation of Trump Name

ATLANTA – Fulton County prosecutors have launched a criminal investigation into former President Donald J. Trump’s attempts to dismiss Georgia’s election results, including a phone call to Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger pressuring him to get enough votes to help him undo his loss.

On Wednesday, Fani Willis, the recently elected Democratic attorney in Fulton County, sent a letter to numerous state government officials, including Mr. Raffensperger, asking for documents related to Mr. Trump’s call to be retained, according to a state official with knowledge of the letter . The letter specifically stated that the application was part of a criminal investigation, said the official, who insisted on anonymity to discuss internal matters.

The investigation makes Georgia the second state after New York to investigate Mr Trump. And it comes into a jurisdiction where potential jurors are unlikely to be hospitable to the former president. Fulton County covers most of Atlanta and overwhelmingly supported President Biden in the November election.

The Fulton County investigation follows Mr. Raffensperger’s office decision on Monday to open an administrative investigation.

Ms. Willis has pondered for several weeks whether to open an investigation after Mr. Trump’s call to Mr. Raffensperger on Jan. 2 alerted electoral experts who describe it as an extraordinary intervention in a state’s electoral process.

This call was one of several attempts Mr. Trump made to convince top Republican officials of the state to uncover cases of electoral fraud that could alter the outcome. In early December, he also called Governor Brian Kemp and pressured him to convene a special legislative session to reverse his loss of the election. Later that month, Mr. Trump called a state investigator and urged the officer to “find the scam,” according to those who were aware of the call.

Former prosecutors said Mr Trump’s claims could violate at least three state laws. One of them is the criminal inducement to commit electoral fraud, which can be either a crime or an offense. As a criminal offense, it is punished with at least one year in prison. There is also an associated conspiracy charge that can be prosecuted as either a misdemeanor or a criminal offense. A third law, an offense, prohibits “deliberate interference” with the “performance of elective duties” of another person.

Mr Biden’s victory in Georgia was reconfirmed after election officials re-certified the results of the state’s presidential election in three separate voting results: the first electoral list; a hand census ordered by the state; and another recount requested by Mr. Trump’s campaign and completed by machines. The machine count results show that Mr Biden won by around 12,000 votes.

Mr Biden was the first Democrat to win Georgia’s presidential election since 1992. Mr Trump accused Governor Brian Kemp and Mr Raffensperger, both Republicans, of not doing enough to help him reverse the result in the weeks following the election. Mr. Kemp and Mr. Raffensberger had each resisted numerous attacks by Mr. Trump, who described the governor as “unhappy” and called on the State Secretary to resign.

The Georgia investigation is ongoing as Mr. Trump is also facing an ongoing investigation by Manhattan Treasury Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. and an investigation into civil fraud by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

The very beginning of an investigation into the polarizing former president could be a career defining moment for Ms. Willis, who took office in January. The first African American woman to hold the job in Georgia’s most populous county, she has already faced some daunting challenges: Atlanta has had a year of high murder rates, and Ms. Willis has promised ambitious changes in the office as well as a review the controversial treatment of her predecessor with the police shooting of a black man, Rayshard Brooks, in June.

If Mr. Trump were convicted of a state crime in New York or Georgia, a federal pardon would not be applicable. In Georgia, Mr. Trump can’t turn to Governor Brian Kemp, a Republican, for a state pardon, and not just because the two have a broken relationship. In Georgia, pardons are only granted by the state pardon and probation authority.

Categories
Business

Prosecutors allege Theranos fraud fueled Elizabeth Holmes’ way of life

Billionaire Elizabeth Holmes, founder and CEO of Theranos Inc., and Christian Holmes come to a state dinner hosted by US President Barack Obama and US First Lady Michelle Obama in honor of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at the White House in Washington, DC, USA, on Tuesday April 28th, 2015.

Andrew Harrer | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Prosecutors paint a picture of what the public saw: a billionaire entrepreneur who donned designer labels with her black turtlenecks and rubbed shoulders with world leaders.

But like the Hall of Mirrors at Carnival, everything was just an illusion, according to the government.

Elizabeth Holmes intended to use Theranos “as an instrument to improve her personal situation,” the prosecutor wrote in a request to the court on Friday evening.

“The causal link between the defendant’s fraud and the benefits in question is strong,” the government said.

Holmes and her COO, Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, face a dozen fraud charges each. If convicted, they can spend up to 20 years in prison.

As Theranos CEO, prosecutors said Holmes led an extravagant lifestyle that included “traveling by private jets, staying at luxury hotels and having access to multiple assistants.”

“Although the defendant’s assistant was an employee of the company, she did a variety of non-business tasks for the defendant, including shopping for personal clothing and jewelry, decorating homes, buying groceries and groceries, and other items,” said the government in one file.

The government’s motion was in response to efforts by Holmes’ attorneys to prevent the jury from finding out details about their jet setting lifestyle.

The government intends to produce evidence that the alleged fraud at Theranos is directly related to the money and fame Holmes has gained as the CEO of Theranos.

Prosecutors wrote that Holmes was “the object of admiration in the local and national business community and has appeared in numerous publications and on television. She has been associated with influential figures such as politicians and business leaders. The evidence in the trial will show these benefits for.” mattered to the defendants, who watched the daily news closely to maintain their image. “

Holmes was a Silicon Valley favorite, attracting more than $ 700 million in investor money.

“In addition to the specific benefits she received from her fraud, she has also benefited from a great deal of positive attention from the media, business leaders and dignitaries,” the prosecutor wrote.

The motion comes the same night that Holmes’ lawyers claim their failed firm is no different from any other Silicon Valley start-up trying to make a name for itself.

The government “is calling for an order preventing the defense from focusing on the Silicon Valley start-up culture, arguing that founders in this area often use exaggeration and dramatic promises to get the attention they need for their businesses generate and attract capital, “the court said of Holmes lawyers.

Her lawyers argue that evidence related to the culture of Silicon Valley startups may be relevant to the case: “For example, the government intends to produce evidence of certain practices that the government claims they have in Theranos A culture of ‘secrecy’ created to show that Ms. Holmes was hiding alleged fraud. “

“While Ms. Holmes has tried to rule out such evidence, Ms. Holmes, if admitted, could certainly provide evidence that other Silicon Valley startups have used similar practices and that people at Theranos were aware of these practices.”

Holmes will face their fate in July. When she appeared on Zoom, she sometimes looked grumpy, a sharp contrast to the image she had once projected onto the world.

Categories
Politics

Prosecutors oppose bail for Ghislaine Maxwell, accused Jeffrey Epstein madam

Ghislaine Maxwell appears via video link during her trial in which she was denied bail for assisting Jeffrey Epstein in the recruitment and eventual abuse of underage girls in federal court in Manhattan on July 14, 2020 in New York in this court sketch.

Jane Rosenberg | Reuters

Federal prosecutors on Friday asked a judge to deny Ghislaine Maxwell’s new bail motion. There are no conditions that could ensure that the British celebrity does not flee to avoid a lawsuit for alleged sexual abuse of Jeffrey Epstein by children.

“The defendant poses an extreme aviation risk,” the district attorney wrote in a Manhattan federal court, filed days after Maxwell’s proposal to be released from a federal prison in Brooklyn on $ 28.5 million bail.

“The criminal conduct described in the indictment remains incredibly grave, the evidence against the defendant remains strong, and the defendant continues to have extensive financial resources and foreign connections, as well as a proven ability to live in hiding over the long term,” so the prosecutor wrote.

The filing includes a letter with a statement from Annie Farmer, a woman who says Maxwell and Epstein sexually abused her.

Farmer wrote that she did not believe that she or “any of the women [Maxwell] exploited will see justice when released on bail. “

“She has led a privileged life and abused her position of power to live beyond the rules. Escaping the country to flee again would fit in with her long history of anti-social behavior,” wrote Farmer.

Maxwell denies having committed any crimes.

Judge Alison Nathan turned down Maxwell’s first offer of bail after she was arrested in July for recruiting and caring for several underage girls who were later molested by the late money manager Epstein, a former friend of hers.

Nathan said at the time that because of her citizenship in France and the UK and her significant wealth, she posed an extreme flight risk.

In her new bail motion, Maxwell requested the release of a bail package backed by a personal note of appreciation equal to the value of her and her husband’s declared assets, plus millions of seven more relatives and close friends should be secured.

Maxwell has suggested that armed guards make sure she stays in a residence in New York City and is monitored with an electronic device.

“Ms. Maxwell is firmly committed to her innocence and is determined to defend herself,” wrote her lawyers.

“All she wants is to stay in this country to fight the allegations against her, which are based on the unconfirmed testimony of a handful of witnesses about events that took place over 25 years ago.”

Prosecutors said on their file filed Friday that Maxwell’s new bail request largely “re-enacts” the arguments she made in July when her first bail application was denied.

And prosecutors said her offer to effectively waive extradition from France if she skipped bail was of no weight given that the French Justice Ministry had reiterated to prosecutors that the nation would not extradite its citizens for prosecution.

The file also noted that Maxwell’s bail application “now claims that her marriage would remain in the United States, but her application does not address the clearly inconsistent statements she made to Pretrial Services at the time of her arrest”, when she said it was her “‘in the process of her husband’s divorce.'”

“Accordingly, the defendant’s foreign connections, wealth, and ability to avoid detection continue to have a positive impact on detention,” the prosecutor wrote.

The 66-year-old Epstein died in a Manhattan prison in August 2019 as a result of a suicide by hanging. He had been arrested the previous month for federal sexual trafficking.

Epstein was a former friend of Presidents Donald Trump and Bill Clinton, and Britain’s Prince Andrew.

Categories
Politics

Prosecutors oppose bail for Ghislaine Maxwell, accused Jeffrey Epstein maadam

Ghislaine Maxwell appears via video link during her trial in which she was denied bail for assisting Jeffrey Epstein in the recruitment and eventual abuse of underage girls in federal court in Manhattan on July 14, 2020 in New York in this court sketch.

Jane Rosenberg | Reuters

Federal prosecutors on Friday asked a judge to deny Ghislaine Maxwell’s new bail motion. There are no conditions that could ensure that the British celebrity does not flee to avoid a lawsuit for alleged sexual abuse of Jeffrey Epstein by children.

“The defendant poses an extreme aviation risk,” the district attorney wrote in a Manhattan federal court, filed days after Maxwell’s proposal to be released on bail of $ 28.5 million.

“The criminal conduct described in the indictment remains incredibly grave, the evidence against the defendant remains strong, and the defendant continues to have extensive financial resources and foreign connections, as well as a proven ability to live in hiding over the long term,” so the prosecutor wrote.

Maxwell, who denies the commission of crimes, is currently in a federal prison in Brooklyn.

Judge Alison Nathan turned down Maxwell’s first bail offer after she was arrested in July for recruiting and caring for several underage girls who were later molested by the late money manager Epstein, a former friend of hers.

Nathan said at the time that because of her citizenship in France and the UK and her significant wealth, she posed an extreme flight risk.

In her new bail motion, Maxwell requested the release of a bail package backed by a personal note of appreciation equal to the value of her and her husband’s declared assets, plus millions of seven more relatives and close friends should be secured.

Maxwell has suggested that armed guards make sure she stays in a residence in New York City and is monitored with an electronic device.

“Ms. Maxwell is firmly committed to her innocence and is determined to defend herself,” wrote her lawyers.

“All she wants is to stay in this country to fight the allegations against her, which are based on the unconfirmed testimony of a handful of witnesses about events that took place over 25 years ago.”

Prosecutors said on their file filed Friday that Maxwell’s new bail request largely “re-enacts” the arguments she made in July when her first bail application was denied.

And prosecutors said her offer to effectively waive extradition from France even though she skipped bail was of no weight as that nation’s officials had repeated to prosecutors that they were not extraditing their citizens from law enforcement.

The file also noted that Maxwell’s bail application “now claims that her marriage would remain in the United States, but her application does not address the clearly inconsistent statements she made to Pretrial Services at the time of her arrest”, when she said it was “in the process of her husband’s divorce.” “”

“Accordingly, the defendant’s foreign connections, wealth, and ability to avoid detection continue to have a positive impact on detention,” the prosecutor wrote.

The 66-year-old Epstein died in a Manhattan prison in August 2019 as a result of a suicide by hanging. He had been arrested the previous month for federal child trafficking.

Epstein was a former friend of Presidents Donald Trump and Bill Clinton, and Britain’s Prince Andrew.