Politics

By Katharine Jackson and Alexandra Ulmer

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Miami Mayor Francis Suarez announced on Thursday he is running for president, joining a host of Republican candidates vying for the 2024 nomination days after front-runner Donald Trump faced federal charges in his city.

Suarez, 45, released a campaign video titled “I’m Running,” which showed him jogging around the south Florida city. He described his vision for a youthful, upbeat and cross-cultural campaign in an interview with Reuters.

“Being the only Hispanic candidate from either party allows me to connect with a growing segment of our population,” Suarez said. “I think our candidacy will be positive and inspirational and aspirational, much like Reagan… Our modern-day politics has devolved into a screaming match.”

A Cuban-American who has sought to create a tech-driven economic boom in the city, Suarez is the only Hispanic candidate in the Republican field and the third candidate from Florida, joining former President Trump and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

He is a longshot in a race that is dominated by Trump. Most polls show DeSantis a distant second, and a smattering of other candidates barely registering with voters.

Suarez has had thorny relationships with both Trump and DeSantis. He did not support Trump in his 2020 re-election bid and was critical of some of DeSantis’ COVID pandemic-era policies.

Asked whether that could alienate voters who have embraced Trump and DeSantis’ right-ward turn, Suarez said he wanted to be respectful of voters’ “anger” but that he would seek to channel that energy into a “positive direction.”

Suarez demurred when asked whether, as president, he would pardon Trump. “I don’t want to deal in hypotheticals,” he said.

Suarez has drawn criticism for championing cryptocurrency firms such as the bankrupt FTX, which bought naming rights to the Miami’s basketball arena but was then forced to surrender them.

However, Miami has seen an influx of more traditional tech companies and wealthy investors during his tenure, as well as a construction boom that has helped contribute to the city’s reputation as a top international tourism destination.

(Reporting by Katharine Jackson, Alexandra Ulmer and James Oliphant; Editing by Doina Chiacu and Alistair Bell)

source

By Dan Whitcomb

(Reuters) – A New York ethics board on Thursday ordered former Mayor Bill de Blasio to pay a record $474,794 for using city funds for a security detail during his long-shot 2019 presidential campaign, finding that he violated conflict of interest laws.

The city’s Conflicts of Interest Board said de Blasio had required the city to pay travel expenses for a New York Police Department security detail for him and his wife while mounting a failed run for the Democratic nomination for president between May and September 2019, while still mayor of New York.

It said it had advised de Blasio, who served eight years as New York’s mayor from 2013 to 2021, against using city resources before he launched the campaign, but he disregarded that advice.

The board ruled that de Blasio should repay $319,794 spent on salaries, travel costs and overtime for the security detail for 31 campaign trips outside the state. It fined him an additional $155,000.

“When a public servant uses city resources for private purposes, it erodes the public’s trust and makes city government less efficient,” the board said in its three-page written decision, which followed a lengthy investigation and hearings into the matter.

De Blasio’s “conduct plainly violates this prohibition,” the board wrote.

The former mayor was given 30 days to pay the full amount, which according to the board included the largest such fine it had ever imposed.

Andrew Celli, a lawyer for de Blasio, said in a written statement posted to Twitter that the former mayor had sued to overturn the board’s ruling.

“In a time of unprecedented threats of political violence, the COIB’s reckless and arbitrary ruling threatens the safety and security of our democratically elected public servants,” Celli said.

Celli cited the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol as an example of threats faced by political leaders.

Three of the board’s five members are appointed to six-year terms by the mayor, one by the city’s comptroller and one by the public advocate.

(Reporting by Dan Whitcomb; Editing by Sonali Paul)

source

(Reuters) – Former President Donald Trump’s 2024 White House campaign said on Wednesday he had raised $7 million since being indicted on federal charges last week, as his message of political persecution continues to resonate with die-hard supporters.

“President Trump Raises Over $6.6 Million and Counting Since Deranged Jack Smith Announced Political Prosecution,” Trump’s campaign wrote in an email to supporters on Wednesday, referring to the U.S. special counsel investigating him.

Over $4.5 million came from digital fundraising while $2.1 million was raised from a donor event on Tuesday at Trump’s Bedminster Club in New Jersey.

A spokesman for Trump, who is the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, later emailed Reuters stating that fundraising had passed the bar of $7 million since the indictment was announced on Thursday.

In the indictment, Trump was accused of illegally retaining classified government documents after leaving the White House and then conspiring to obstruct a federal probe of the matter.

Trump was arraigned on Tuesday and pleaded not guilty to all 37 counts in court.

He has sought to frame the charges as a Democratic-led attack to knock him out of the 2024 race – and one ultimately designed to hurt Republicans, 30% of whom are considered unwavering Trump supporters.

“They’re not coming after me, they’re coming after YOU,” Trump wrote in one of a flurry of fundraising emails on Wednesday.

Polling suggests Trump’s strategy is working: A vast majority of Republicans – some 81% – believe the charges are politically motivated, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll completed on Monday.

Trump also enjoyed a fundraising bump from charges in New York as part of a case involving hush money paid to a porn star. After word emerged in March that Trump was going to be charged, his campaign raised $7 million in three days, according to senior adviser Jason Miller.

A group allied with Trump’s bid for the Republican nomination is setting records for outside political spending early in a U.S. presidential campaign as he looks to outrun his nearest rival, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, according to recent Reuters reporting.

(Reporting by Alexandra Ulmer; Editing by Mary Milliken and Cynthia Osterman)

source

By Jack Queen

(Reuters) -Donald Trump faces a formidable task defending against charges that he illegally kept top-secret documents upon leaving the White House in 2021, according to legal experts, who say neither the law nor the facts appear to be on his side.

The former U.S. president, who is a candidate to run again in the 2024 election, pleaded not guilty in Florida federal court on Tuesday. The 37 counts against him include violations of the Espionage Act, conspiracy to obstruct justice and making false statements to investigators.

National security law experts were struck by the breadth of evidence in the indictment which includes documents, photos, text messages, audio and witness statements. They said this made a strong case for prosecutors’ allegation that Trump illegally took the documents and then tried to cover it up.

“The details are pretty shocking in terms of the carelessness with which these documents were handled, and the concerted effort to keep them out of the hands of the FBI,” said Elizabeth Goitein, a national security law expert at the Brennan Center for Justice.

Trump’s lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Trump has called the case a “witch hunt” orchestrated by political enemies.

“There was no crime, except for what the DOJ and FBI have been doing against me for years,” he wrote on his Truth Social platform on Friday in reference to the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Trump’s greatest peril could lie in the conspiracy to obstruct justice charges, which carry a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.

Legal experts said the evidence appears to show that Trump was aware he had documents in his possession that were subject to a subpoena but refused to turn them over and encouraged his lawyers to mislead the FBI.

“That’s about as clear a case of obstruction as you could imagine,” said Clark Neily, a legal expert at the conservative Cato Institute.

Obstruction of justice is a particularly difficult charge to defend against, attorney Mark MacDougall said. “It offends people. Hiding things from a lawful legal process. Most people understand why that’s a crime,” he said.

Legal experts said Trump’s alleged years-long effort to conceal documents was likely a major factor in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s decision to indict him.

‘WORSE THAN THE CRIME’

During the investigation, Trump’s lawyers told the FBI that they had turned over all classified documents in their possession, which was false. They deny intentionally misleading investigators.

“This is a situation where the cover-up is worse than the crime,” the Brennan Center’s Goitein said. “If he had only been negligent, no charges would have been brought.”

The conspiracy element makes the obstruction charges far more serious, and all prosecutors must prove is that Trump worked with another person to try to hinder the investigation, regardless of whether they succeeded.

Cato’s Neily said that based on his reading of the indictment, prosecutors likely have many witnesses who have given them similar accounts of Trump’s efforts.

Trump has claimed he declassified the documents before taking them. That assertion is undercut by a taped conversation cited in the indictment, which said Trump showed a secret document to several people and said that he “could have declassified it” as president but did not.

But the classification issue will likely end up being irrelevant. Prosecutors charged Trump under the Espionage Act, a World War One-era law that predates classification and criminalizes only the unauthorized retention of “national defense information.”

National defense information does not need to be classified to be covered by that law, national security law experts said. The information need only be useful to the nation’s adversaries and be closely held by the government.

“Let’s say all of the documents were declassified. The Espionage Act does not care,” said Georgetown University law professor Todd Huntley.

COULD TRUMP PARDON HIMSELF?

However, Trump does have some potentially successful strategies. His lawyers could challenge witness accounts, blame others or argue he was following the advice of his attorneys and did not intend to break the law.

If it goes to trial, a Florida jury would hear the case since that is where the special counsel sought the indictment. In the conservative-leaning state, Trump would need only one juror to oppose his conviction for there to be a mistrial.

His defense team could also file motions that would delay a trial until after the November 2024 election. Legal experts disagree over whether Trump could pardon himself if he wins.

(Reporting by Jack Queen in New York; Additional reporting by Sarah N. Lynch in Washington, D.C.; Editing by Amy Stevens, Cynthia Osterman and Howard Goller)

source

By Trevor Hunnicutt and Jarrett Renshaw

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A collection of the nation’s leading and biggest spending environmental groups endorsed President Joe Biden’s re-election bid on Wednesday, an early sign that he has consolidated their support despite some recent policy moves that angered climate activists.

The League of Conservation Voters (LCV) Action Fund, billionaire Tom Steyer’s NextGen PAC, NRDC Action Fund and the Sierra Club endorsed Biden during an LCV dinner in Washington. This is the first time the four groups have ever jointly announced a presidential endorsement, according to the Biden campaign.

“Together, we’ve made a lot of progress so far. We have to finish the job,” Biden told the crowd climate activists.

He added that the world poses many threats, but climate change “is the only truly existential threat.”

While the endorsements are not surprising, they are a sign that the environmental groups are not letting a series of recently disappointing administration decisions on oil drilling in Alaska and backing a gas pipeline in West Virginia to dampen their enthusiasm.

“The stakes could not be more high and the choice could not be more clear,” said Eva Hernandez, Managing Director of the Sierra Club.

The groups represent the mainstream part of the environmental movement and tend to reflect older voices. Younger activists, such as the ones that sought to disrupt the annual White House Correspondents Dinner earlier this year, may be less enthusiastic to back Biden.

The four organizations combined represent millions of members and activists in every state across the country who can help mobilize voters in 2024. They also represent big money.

Steyer’s NextGen PAC spent $56.7 million in 2020, campaign finance records show.

Biden is traveling to California next week to raise campaign cash from tech and climate donors as he races to raise over a billion dollars for his re-election fight, Reuters reported.

(Reporting By Trevor Hunnicutt and Jarrett Renshaw; Editing by Mary Milliken and Lisa Shumaker)

source

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Joe Biden on Wednesday vetoed a measure approved by Congress that seeks to overturn Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules aimed at drastically cutting smog- and soot-forming emissions from heavy-duty trucks.

Biden said on Twitter that the rules will “make our air cleaner and prevent thousands of premature deaths by limiting hazardous heavy-duty vehicle pollution.”

Republicans argue that the new EPA rules, finalized in December, are overly challenging to implement, will increase supply chain costs and will make trucks too expensive for small business owners.

(Reporting by David Shepardson; editing by Jonathan Oatis)

source

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland on Wednesday defended the independent special counsel he appointed to handle federal criminal cases against former President Donald Trump, the first U.S. president to be charged with federal crimes.

Garland, in response to a reporter’s question, rejected the allegations of some Republicans in Congress that Trump’s prosecution by Special Counsel Jack Smith amounted to using the Justice Department as a weapon against political opponents.

“As I said when I appointed Mr. Smith, I did so because it underscores the Justice Department’s commitment to both independence and accountability,” Garland said, taking questions after an unrelated event at the Justice Department.

“Mr. Smith is a veteran career prosecutor. He has assembled a group of experienced and talented prosecutors and agents who share his commitment to integrity and the rule of law. Any questions about this matter will have to be answered by their filings in court.”

It was the first time Garland has commented publicly about the matter since Trump pleaded not guilty on Tuesday to federal criminal charges that he unlawfully kept national security documents when he left office and lied to officials who sought to recover them.

Trump’s plea in a federal court in Miami, sets up a legal battle likely to play out over coming months as he campaigns to win back the presidency in a November 2024 election. It could be a year or more before a trial takes place.

Asked what role he had in the indictment process, Garland said, “so my role is completely consistent with the regulations that set forth responsibilities to the attorney general under the Special Counsel regulations, and I followed those regulations.”

(Reporting by Doina Chiacu; Editing by Alistair Bell)

source

By Tim Reid, Nathan Layne and Gram Slattery

(Reuters) -For decades U.S. Republicans have proudly claimed to be the party of law and order.

But the indictment of former President Donald Trump by federal prosecutors over the alleged mishandling of classified documents has led to nearly all of his Republican rivals for the party’s White House nomination accusing the FBI of political bias, with some even calling for its dissolution.

The spectacle of so many Republican presidential candidates attacking America’s top law enforcement agency while siding with Trump – the front-runner for the nomination – has left many observers dumbfounded, given the party’s long tradition of being tough on crime and staunch defenders of federal and local cops.

This extraordinary reversal reveals a tension between Republicans’ traditional support of law enforcement and the political calculation Trump’s rivals are making as opinion polls show most Republicans think the former president is being unfairly targeted, analysts say.

The broad assault on the FBI by most of the Republican field has its roots in the years of political attacks by Trump against the agency. Trump has long accused it and the U.S. Justice Department of being out to get him.

“Trump’s attacks on the FBI are so pervasive amongst Republican primary voters that his rivals can’t say something different to Trump on that,” said Kyle Kondik, a non-partisan analyst at the University of Virginia Center for Politics.

Trump intensified his attacks on the FBI after taking office, enraged by a federal investigation into alleged ties between his 2016 election campaign and Russia.

That probe did not find that Trump or his campaign coordinated with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election, but it laid out instances where Trump allegedly obstructed the investigation and stated that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

Trump’s repeated criticism had a major impact on public opinion. A Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted in February 2018, little over a year after he entered the White House, found that three out of four Republicans thought the FBI and Justice Department were actively seeking to undermine Trump through politically motivated investigations.

That anti-FBI sentiment was fueled by the agency’s decision not to prosecute Trump’s 2016 opponent, Democrat Hillary Clinton, for using a private email server when she was U.S. secretary of state. Then-FBI Director James Comey rebuked Clinton, calling her handling of classified information careless, but said there was no clear evidence she or her aides intentionally broke laws.

Trump has also been highlighting the issue of a laptop allegedly belonging to Hunter Biden, the son of Democratic President Joe Biden. Trump and his allies claim without basis that the laptop has evidence of corruption inside the Biden family and that the FBI has failed to prosecute that.

REPUBLICAN SUPPORT

More than 80% of Republicans say the new charges against Trump are politically motivated, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll completed on Monday that shows Trump maintaining a commanding lead in the race for the Republican nomination.

That dynamic has left most of his rivals for the nomination calculating – in the short term at least – that attacking the FBI and the Justice Department is the safer option.

Most have called for the dismissal of FBI director Christopher Wray – a Republican appointee – and for reforming the agency, which they say has been “weaponized” by the Biden administration.

Biden has said repeatedly he has played no role in the classified documents case against Trump, while the Justice Department says it acts impartially.

Timothy Naftali, a presidential historian, said many Republican candidates have presented themselves as crime-busting, law and order types. But their decision to rebuke the Justice Department, and not Trump, over last week’s charges “sets up a tension between those principles and their current reaction to the indictment,” Naftali said.

Trump’s closest rival for the nomination, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, decried the “weaponization” of federal bureaucracy after Trump’s indictment.

Within DeSantis’ camp, advisers believe the campaign would have risked appearing opportunistic and out of touch with primary voters if they attacked Trump more directly over the documents charges, two people close to the governor said.

Where DeSantis does engage, those people said, it will likely be to question Trump’s effectiveness at fighting the federal bureaucracy and the so-called “deep state.”

Some candidates, including former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, former Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson and former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley have taken a more critical stand. Haley said Trump had acted recklessly, although she also said the FBI and Justice Department had “lost all credibility with the American people.”

None of the Republican president campaigns responded to requests for comment about their criticism of federal law enforcement and calls for an overhaul.

Trump’s campaign also did not respond to a request for comment.

    A spokesman for the Justice Department, which oversees the FBI, declined to comment. The Republican National Committee did not respond to a request for comment.

Bill Bowen, 78, a retired food company executive who lives in Portsmouth, New Hampshire and voted for Trump twice, said Republicans see a two-tiered justice system that is harsh on their party’s members while giving Democrats a pass.

“The whole justice system has been tilted very, very heavily against Trump,” he said.

But that will not be enough to persuade Bowen to vote for Trump again. After the Jan. 6 attacks by Trump supporters on the U.S. Capitol, he broke with the former president.

(Reporting by Tim Reid, Nathan Layne and Gram Slattery; Editing by Ross Colvin and Alistair Bell)

source

(Reuters) – Here is a list of additional legal troubles facing Donald Trump in addition to federal charges he retained classified government documents and obstructed justice. He denies any wrongdoing.

2020 ELECTION AND THE U.S. CAPITOL ATTACK

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Special Counsel Jack Smith last year to investigate Trump on both the documents and Trump’s role in actions surrounding his loss in the 2020 presidential election that culminated in Trump’s supporters’ deadly attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Trump had sought to prevent top aides, including his then-Vice President Mike Pence, from testifying in that probe being weighed by a separate D.C. grand jury. Pence appeared before the grand jury in April after Trump lost his legal challenge.

Trump repeatedly lambasted Pence before the attack for refusing to try to prevent Congress from certifying Democrat Joe Biden’s win in the 2020 presidential election.

The federal probe is also examining a plot to submit phony slates of electors to block U.S. lawmakers from certifying Biden’s victory.

A special House of Representatives committee investigating the 2021 attack last year urged the Justice Department to charge Trump with corruption of an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to make a false statement and inciting or aiding an insurrection.

GEORGIA ELECTION TAMPERING PROBE

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, a Democrat, is also investigating whether Trump and others acted illegally to try to overturn his defeat in that state’s 2020 presidential vote, with a charging decision expected by Sept. 1.

The criminal investigation focuses in part on a Jan. 2, 2021, phone call Trump made to fellow Republican Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger asking him to “find” enough votes needed to overturn Trump’s loss in Georgia.

Legal experts said Trump may have violated at least three Georgia criminal election laws: conspiracy to commit election fraud, criminal solicitation to commit election fraud and intentional interference with performance of election duties.

Trump could argue that his discussions were free speech protected by the U.S. Constitution.

NEW YORK ‘HUSH MONEY’ CRIMINAL CASE

Trump became the first U.S. president past or present to face criminal charges when a New York grand jury indicted him for allegedly falsifying business records in connection with a hush money payment made to a porn star before the 2016 presidential election.

Trump’s former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, paid porn star Stormy Daniels $130,000 for her silence about a sexual encounter she said she had with Trump in 2006. Cohen pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations and other crimes and was sentenced to three years in prison in 2018 during Trump’s presidency.

Prosecutors say Trump sought to cover up that the payment to Daniels exceeded federal campaign contribution limits. Trump has denied the allegations and the sexual encounter but has admitted to reimbursing Cohen for his payment to Daniels. Trump pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records.

The trial is scheduled for March 25, 2024, but Trump is seeking to move the case from New York state to a federal court.

SEXUAL ABUSE AND DEFAMATION

A federal grand jury in Manhattan ordered Trump to pay writer E. Jean Carroll $5 million in damages after finding him liable for sexually abusing her in the 1990s and then defaming her by lying about it in 2022.

She is seeking to amend a separate lawsuit to demand at least $10 million more after Trump made public comments on CNN and his social media platform blasting the verdict, denying he had ever met her and accusing her of making up the allegations.

Carroll filed that lawsuit, which accuses Trump of defamation, in November 2019, but it has been bogged down in appeals.

NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL CIVIL LAWSUIT

New York Attorney General Letitia James sued Trump and his family business, the Trump Organization, last September for fraud.

James, a Democrat, said that her office found more than 200 examples of misleading asset valuations between 2011 and 2021, and that Trump inflated his net worth by billions of dollars – a scheme intended to help Trump obtain lower interest rates on loans and better insurance coverage.

The civil lawsuit seeks to permanently bar Trump and three of his adult children from running companies in New York state and to recoup at least $250 million obtained through fraud.

A trial is scheduled for October 2023.

TRUTH SOCIAL DEAL

The Justice Department and financial regulators are investigating special purpose acquisition company Digital World Acquisition Corp’s October 2021 deal with Trump’s social media firm Truth Social.

The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority have been investigating whether any securities regulations were broken, according to Digital World’s financial disclosure documents.

Federal prosecutors have subpoenaed the company and every director on its board, Digital World disclosed in June 2022.

(Reporting by Joseph Ax, Luc Cohen, Karen Freifeld, Sarah N. Lynch, Jonathan Stempel, Jacqueline Thomsen and Susan Heavey; Editing by Noeleen Walder and Howard Goller)

source

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said on Tuesday that White House lawyers would review a ruling from a government agency that said she had violated a law limiting political activity by federal employees.

The Office of Special Counsel on Monday announced that Jean-Pierre had violating the Hatch Act by referring to “mega MAGA Republicans” in talking to reporters last year.

“Because Ms Jean‐Pierre made the statements while acting in her official capacity, she violated the Hatch Act prohibition against using her official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election,” the office said.

Asked at her daily briefing on Tuesday about the ruling, Jean-Pierre said she had used language given to her by White House officials.

“At the time I was given the sign-off to use that terminology,” she said.

She said the previous Donald Trump administration had frequently referred to “MAGA Republicans.” MAGA is short for Trump’s political slogan, Make America Great Again.

Jean-Pierre said White House lawyers would be in touch with the Office of Special Counsel to review the ruling.

(Reporting by Andrea Shalal and Steve Holland; Editing by Leslie Adler)

source