WASHINGTON– A man has been arrested in Moscow linked to an alleged plot to assassinate conservative commentator Tucker Carlson.
A report published by The Gateway Pundit alleges that the man arrested in connection to the plot had been promised payment by Ukrainian intelligence to implant an explosive device in a vehicle driven by Tucker during his visit to conduct an interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The man was to implant the device on Carlson’s car, which was parked in the garage of the Four Seasons Hotel in Moscow.
The man was allegedly promised $4,000 to carry out the assassination attempt, but his plans were thwarted after being detained while planning the attack.
The suspect, a 35-yr-old man by the name of Vasiliev Pyotr Alexeieovich, claims in an interrogation video that he was ordered by the Main Directorate of Intelligence of the Ukraine Ministry of Defense in November 2023 to carry out the attack.
In the video, obtained by Simon Ateba, the chief White House Correspondent at Today News Africa in Washington, Alexeieovich confirms his target was “American journalist Tucker Carlson” and says, “I’m sorry for what I did.”
COLUMBIA (Reuters)– Donald Trump easily defeated Nikki Haley in South Carolina’s Republican contest on Saturday, Edison Research projected, extending his winning streak as he marches toward a third consecutive presidential nomination and a rematch with Democratic President Joe Biden.
The former president had been widely favored to win, with poll after poll showing him holding a sizable lead despite his litany of criminal charges and Haley’s status as a native of South Carolina who won two terms as governor.
The lopsided outcome will bolster calls from Trump’s allies for Haley, Trump’s last remaining challenger, to drop out of the race. Trump has dominated all five contests thus far – in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, the U.S. Virgin Islands and now Haley’s home state – leaving her with virtually no path to the Republican nomination.
A defiant Haley, who served as U.N. ambassador under Trump, insisted this week that she would sustain her campaign through at least “Super Tuesday” on March 5, when Republicans in 15 states and one U.S. territory will cast ballots.
It was too early in the evening to know whether Haley would capture a stronger-than-expected share of the vote, which could allow her to argue that she has some momentum heading toward Super Tuesday.
She has notably sharpened her attacks on Trump in recent days, questioning his mental acuity and warning voters that he would lose November’s general election.
But there is scant evidence that Republican voters are interested in any standard-bearer except Trump.
Immigration, which Trump has made a key focus of his election campaign, was the No. 1 issue for voters in the Republican primary on Saturday, according to an exit poll conducted by Edison Research. Some 41% of voters cited that issue compared with 31% who said the economy was their top concern.
Some 84% of voters said the economy is not so good or poor, highlighting a major potential weakness for Biden in November’s general election.
WASHINGTON — Donald Trump is facing pushback from anti-abortion activists for refusing to commit to a national abortion ban, calling Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ signing of a six-week ban on the procedure a “terrible mistake.”
During an appearance Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” the Republican front runner repeatedly refused to say whether he would support a federal ban on abortion, stating “from a legal standpoint, I think it’s probably better” to be handled at the state level.
Regarding the bill signed by DeSantis, which bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, Trump said, “I think what he did is a terrible thing and a terrible mistake.”
Responding to Trump’s comments on X, DeSantis campaign spokesman Bryan Griffin wrote of Trump: “If you want to appease Democrats, here’s your guy. If you want to defeat the Democrats in 2024, (DeSantis) is the only choice.”
Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, America’s largest anti-abortion organization, released a statement condemning Trump’s stance, stating that a national ban on abortion at anything less than 15 weeks of pregnancy “makes no sense.”
“We’re at a moment where we need a human rights advocate, someone who is dedicated to saving the lives of children and serving mothers in need. Every single candidate should be clear on how they plan to do that,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, the organization’s president.
The Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade left the decision of whether and how to restrict abortion to the states, leaving many conservative Republicans pushing for a national ban on the procedure.
Trump, who has called himself the “the most pro-life president in American history,” noted that three of his Supreme Court picks resulted in part of the conservative majority that overturned Roe.
South Carolina state Rep. John McCravy, however, called Trump’s comments, “disappointing.”
“It sounded completely out of step with his staunch support for life while he was president,” he said.
Kristen Waggoner, CEO of the conservative legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom, also took issue with Trump’s comments.
“Laws protecting the unborn are not a ‘terrible mistake.’ They are the hallmark of a just and moral society,” she wrote on X. “Governors who protect life should be applauded, not attacked.”
WASHINGTON — Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy on Tuesday announced that he has ordered three GOP-led committees to launch an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.
“This logical next step will give our committees the full power to gather all the facts and answers for the American public,” McCarthy said in a statement following the announcement. ‘I am directing our House committees to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. Over the past several months, House Republicans have uncovered serious and credible allegations into President Biden’s conduct—a culture of corruption.”
The inquiry will be led by GOP Rep. James Comer of Kentucky, who chairs the House Oversight Committee, in cooperation with Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan of Ohio and Rep. Jason Smith of Missouri, who chairs the Ways and Means Committee.
In January the Republican-led House Oversight Committee launched an investigation into allegations that Biden profited from his son Hunter’s business dealings while serving as vice president.
McCarthy’s efforts come as the Republican leader faces mounting pressure from GOP leaders to take action against Biden or risk being removed as speaker.
The White House demonstrated little concern over the impeachment inquiry, calling the endeavor “extreme politics at its worst.”
WASHINGTON (AP) — Lawyers for Donald Trump on Monday asked the federal judge presiding over his election subversion case in Washington to recuse herself, saying her past public statements about the former president and his connection to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol call into question whether she can be fair.
The recusal motion from Trump’s lawyers takes aim at U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, a former assistant public defender who was nominated to the bench by President Barack Obama and has stood out as one of the toughest punishers of Jan. 6 defendants. The request is a long shot given the high threshold for recusal and because the decision on whether to recuse belongs to Chutkan, who is unlikely to see cause to step aside from the case.
Even so, the request that she give up the high-stakes trial marks the latest flashpoint in already delicate relations between the defense team and the judge, who has repeatedly cautioned the lawyers against inflammatory public comments from Trump but has nonetheless been lambasted on social media by him. Special counsel Jack Smith’s team signaled its own concern about his comments, writing last week that Trump’s daily statements — he has derided her as “highly partisan” — could taint a potential jury pool.
Chutkan ordered Smith’s team to file any opposition to Trump’s recusal bid by Thursday.
Chutkan last month scheduled the trial for March 4, 2024, over the vigorous objections of defense lawyers who said that would not give them enough time to prepare. The case in Washington, charging Trump in a four-count indictment with plotting to overturn the results of the 2024 election, is one of four criminal cases confronting the former president as he seeks reelection to the White House.
In asking Chutkan to step aside, the Trump legal team is relying on a familiar playbook. He tried unsuccessfully to get the judge removed from the hush-money case against him in New York state court, with his lawyers claiming that New York Judge Juan Manuel Merchan is biased because he’s given cash to Democrats and his daughter is a party consultant.
Federal judges are supposed to step aside in cases where their “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Other bases for recusal include a personal bias against one of the parties. Trump’s lawyers say Chutkan’s comments in cases against Jan. 6 rioters show she has “already formed an opinion about President Trump’s guilt” and many of the allegations that underpin the indictment against him.
“Although Judge Chutkan may genuinely intend to give President Trump a fair trial — and may believe that she can do so — her public statements unavoidably taint these proceedings, regardless of outcome,” the defense team wrote. “The public will reasonably and understandably question whether Judge Chutkan arrived at all of her decisions in this matter impartially, or in fulfillment of her prior negative statements regarding President Trump.”
Chutkan has often handed down prison sentences in Jan. 6 cases that are harsher than Justice Department prosecutors recommended. The judge also previously ruled against Trump in a separate Jan. 6 case, refusing his request to block the release of documents to the U.S. House’s Jan. 6 committee by asserting executive privilege.
Trump’s lawyers quoted from remarks Chutkan made in a 2022 sentencing hearing for Christine Priola, a Jan. 6 defendant from Ohio who pleaded guilty to obstructing Congress’ certification of Joe Biden’s electoral victory — one of the same charges Trump is facing.
“The people who mobbed that Capitol were there in fealty, in loyalty, to one man — not to the Constitution, of which most of the people who come before me seem woefully ignorant; not to the ideals of this country, and not to the principles of democracy,” Chutkan said. “It’s a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.”
The defense also cited Chutkan’s comments from the sentencing of a rioter from Florida who attacked police officers working to hold back the rioters. During the December 2021 hearing for Robert Palmer — who was sentenced to more than five years in prison — Chutkan said the defendant “made a very good point” that the “people who exhorted” and encouraged him “to go and take action and to fight” had not been charged. Chutkan added that she doesn’t “make charging decisions” and has no “influence on that.”
“I have my opinions, but they are not relevant,” Chutkan said.
Trump’s attorneys said that comment suggests she believed at the time that Trump should be charged.
“Public statements of this sort create a perception of prejudgment incompatible with our justice system. In a case this widely watched, of such monumental significance, the public must have the utmost confidence that the Court will administer justice neutrally and dispassionately,” Trump’s attorneys wrote.
WASHINGTON– Former President Donald Trump was indicted Tuesday by a federal grand jury on charges that his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election led, in part, to the riots of January 6.
Trump was charged with four counts: conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempting to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.
The GOP front runner for the 2024 election responded to the indictment Tuesday in a statement posted to Truth Social in which he called the latest indictments against him an act of “prosecutorial misconduct.”
“Deranged Jack Smith, in order to interfere with the Presidential Election of 2024, will be putting out yet another fake indictment of your favorite President, me, at 5:00 P.M.”
“Why didn’t they do this 2.5 years ago? Why did they wait so long? Because they wanted to put it right in the middle of my campaign. Prosecutorial Misconduct!” Trump added.
The indictment lists six unnamed co-conspirators, including several attorneys, a DOJ official and a political consultant. It alleges Trump “pursued unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election results.”
“Despite having lost, the Defendant was determined to remain in power. So for more than two months following election day on November 3, 2020, the Defendant spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election and that he had actually won. These claims were false, and the Defendant knew that they were false,” the indictment reads.
Smith addressed the indictment in a brief statement to reporters following the announcement.
“The attack on our nation’s capitol on January 6 2021 was an unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy,” he said at the news conference. “As described in the indictment, it was fueled by lies.”
“My office will seek a speedy trial so our evidence can be tested in court and judged by a jury of citizens,” he added.
The former president has claimed on multiple occasions that the criminal allegations against him are part of an ongoing political “witch hunt.”
Former President Donald Trump, Special counsel Jack Smith.
Getty Images/AP
ROCHESTER, N.H. — Embattled Florida Governor Ron DeSantis unveiled a new economic plan to New Hampshire voters Monday as poll numbers show him trailing GOP front runner Donald Trump by 37 points.
“Our country is in decline right now,” a trend voters need to reverse, DeSantis said during an economic policy speech in Rochester, N.H.
DeSantis told the mostly undecided voters that he plans to rebuild America’s economic standing in the world by reversing policies from “failed elites” who have undermined the middle class.
“We will declare our economic independence from the failed elites that have orchestrated American decline, from the reckless federal spending that has inflated prices and plunged this nation to the brink of bankruptcy,” he said.
Monday’s speech came on the heels of devastating poll numbers which show former president Donald Trump comfortably holding 54% of the likely Republican primary electorate.
DeSantis’ new 10-part economic plan also calls for including diversity requirements − “unleashing” energy companies, and blocking more undocumented migrants at the border.
The Democratic National Committee was quick to attack DeSantis over the plan, declaring it “extreme.”
“It remains a mystery why DeSantis would try to reboot his dumpster fire of a campaign by promising to bring his failures as governor nationwide, but by all means, we welcome Republicans to continue reminding the American people how catastrophic the MAGA agenda is for the economy,” said Ammar Moussa, a spokesperson for the DNC.
DeSantis refused to comment on Trump’s expanding lead in the polls, saying “I’m not answering anything that’s not about the economy.”
WASHINGTON (National Review)– A series of internal Facebook emails obtained by the House Judiciary Committee confirm that the Biden White House placed significant pressure on the company to crack down on “misinformation” related to the Covid pandemic in early 2021.
The emails, released publicly by committee chairman Jim Jordan on Thursday, suggest that in some cases Facebook and Instagram complied with the White House’s content-moderation requests in order to avoid public and private backlash.
One April 2021 email sent by a Facebook employee on behalf of Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg acknowledged that, “We are facing continued pressure from external stakeholders, including the [Biden] White House.”
That same month Nick Clegg, Facebook’s president for global Affairs, informed his team that senior Biden adviser Andy Slavitt, was “outraged – not too strong a word to describe his reaction – that we did not remove” a popular post. According to the Ohio Republican, the offensive content was a humorous meme that suggested vaccine recipients would be solicited to join class-action lawsuits in the future.
Recounting his conversation with Slavitt, Clegg said in the email that he pushed back on the demand, pointing out “that removing content like that would represent a significant incursion into traditional boundaries of free expression in the US.” However, Slavitt rejected the argument altogether, according to the high-ranking Facebook official: “he replied that the post directly comparing Covid vaccines to asbestos poisoning in a way which demonstrably inhibits confidence in Covid vaccines amongst those the Biden administration is try to reach.”
Replying to Clegg’s email, Facebook’s vice president of public policy Brian Rice said that he saw Slavitt’s demand as a “crossroads” and suggested to colleagues that it should inform their content-moderation practices going forward.
“Given what is at stake here, it would also be a good idea if we could regroup and take stock of where we are in our relations with the [White House], and our internal methods too,” Rice wrote in a reply to Clegg’s email.
By July 2021, President Biden was accusing platforms such as Facebook of “killing people” by refusing to censor “misinformation” related to the virus. “They’re killing people,” Biden said during a press conference at the time. “Look, the only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated. And they’re killing people.”
The public and private pressure appears to have yielded results: weeks after Biden’s comments, on August 2, 2021, Facebook leadership asked employees to “brainstorm some additional policy levers we can pull to be more aggressive against…misinformation. This is stemming from the continued criticism of our approach from the [Biden] administration.”
When the White House demanded that Facebook remove a Covid-related Tucker Carlson video, Facebook refused but offered the olive branch of suppressing the clip’s reach by 50 percent for seven days while the video was fact-checked, according to a “talking points” memo Clegg disseminated to his colleagues.
Clegg disseminated “talking points” drafted to relay to the White House after it did not ban a Tucker Carlson video – which did not violating any rules – that included the olive branch gesture that the clip received a “50% demotion for seven days” severely curtailing its reach.
In February, Jordan subpoenaed several large high-tech firms including Meta, Amazon, and Apple demanding documents pertaining “to the moderation, deletion, suppression, restriction or reduced circulation of content.”
Jordan accused Facebook of obstructing his committee’s investigation, pointing out that not until the panel threatened to hold Zuckerberg in contempt “did Facebook produce ANY internal documents to the Committee, including these documents, which PROVE that government pressure was directly responsible for censorship on Facebook,” Jordan wrote on Twitter.
Meta has yet to respond to National Review’s request for comment.
Jordan has also invited “Twitter Files” investigative journalist Matt Taibbi to testify before the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government to explain how federal actors had collaborated with social-media companies to stifle conservative ideas and personalities.
In early July, a Louisiana Federal Judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking certain federal agencies and officials, including the FBI and the Department of Health and Human Services, from communicating with social-media platforms.
Judge Terry Doughty wrote that he is likely to side with the plaintiffs, attorney generals from two Republican-led states, on the merits of their case and restricted correspondence between government actors and big tech companies — apart from matters of criminal activity or national-security threats — until the case is resolved.
“The Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits in establishing that the Government has used its power to silence the opposition,” Doughty wrote in court filings published at the time. “Opposition to COVID-19 vaccines; opposition to COVID-19 masking and lockdowns; opposition to the lab-leak theory of COVID-19; opposition to the validity of the 2020 election; opposition to President Biden’s policies; statements that the Hunter Biden laptop story was true. All were suppressed.”
“It is quite telling that each example or category of suppressed speech was conservative in nature. This targeted suppression of conservative ideas is a perfect example of viewpoint discrimination of political speech. American citizens have the right to engage in free debate about the significant issues affecting the country,” the judge added.
The White House immediately challenged the ruling, arguing that it would severely disrupt the government’s ability to fight the fentanyl crisis and secure the border. Two weeks later, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals placed a temporary hold on the order.
WASHINGTON, DC – OCTOBER 14: U.S. President Joe Biden removes his face mask as he arrives to speak in the South Court Auditorium on the White House campus October 14, 2021 in Washington, DC. Biden spoke about the coronavirus pandemic and encouraged states and businesses to support vaccine mandates to avoid a surge in cases of Covid-19. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
Biden was supposed to plead guilty Wednesday to misdemeanor charges for failing to pay taxes. But U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika in Delaware put the brakes on the guilty plea after raising concerns during an hourslong hearing about the structure and terms of the agreement and another deal that would allow him to avoid prosecution on a gun charge if he meets certain conditions.
Plea deals are carefully negotiated between defense lawyers and prosecutors over the course of weeks or months and it’s unusual — especially in high-profile cases — for judges to not sign off on them. But Wednesday’s hearing revealed that the two sides apparently did not see eye to eye on the scope of the agreement around a non-prosecution clause for crimes outside of the gun charge.
Noreika — an appointee of former President Donald Trump — told both sides to file written briefs addressing her concerns within 30 days. Among other things, Noreika took issue with a provision in the agreement on the gun charge that she said would have created a role for her where she would determine if he violated the terms. The lawyers said they wanted her to serve as a neutral fact finder in determining if a violation happened, but Noreika said that is the Justice Department’s job — not the judge’s.
Hunter Biden’s lawyers and the Justice Department also disagreed on the extent to which the agreement gave him immunity from future prosecution. A prosecutor said Wednesday their investigation was ongoing, and that the agreement protecting him from other potential charges was limited only to certain offenses over a certain time frame. Hunter Biden’s lawyers said it was broader than that. After intense courtroom negotiations, the two sides appeared to agree to a more narrow non-prosecution clause.
Biden’s lawyers and prosecutors will now continue negotiations to see if they can salvage the agreement in a way that satisfies the judge.
“They are going to have to go back and figure out how they can come to an agreement terms of the plea and they have to come to a meeting of the minds, which is clear they don’t have here,” said Jessica Tillipman, associate dean for government procurement law studies at George Washington University Law School. “So I think what you’ll see is a renewed effort — or it’s just going to collapse.”
The judge may ultimately accept the deal that was proposed or reject it. If the deal totally falls apart, Hunter Biden could eventually face a trial.
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Thursday that President Joe Biden would not pardon his son.
Even if the judge ultimately accepts the plea agreement, she will have the final say on whether he serves any time behind bars. Prosecutors have said that they will recommend probation, but the judge can decide not to follow that. The two tax charges carry up to a year in prison. And the judge suggested on Wednesday that it was too soon to say whether she’s willing to sign off on probation.
“I can’t predict for you today whether that is an appropriate sentence or not,” Noreika said. “I can’t say that I will accept the sentence recommendation or whether a different sentence would be more appropriate.”
The collapse of the younger Biden’s plea deal Wednesday came as joyful news to House Republicans vying to connect him and his questionable business dealings to his father. Republicans had already slammed the agreement as a “sweetheart deal.”
“The judge did the obvious thing, they put a pause on the plea deal, so I think that was progress,” Rep. James Comer, the Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said Wednesday. “I think it adds credibility to what we’re doing.” He added that this will only propel their investigation to get answers “as to what the family did, and what level of involvement the president had.”
Comer has been investigating Hunter Biden’s financial ties and transactions since gaining the gavel in January. The Kentucky lawmaker has obtained thousands of pages of financial records from various members of the Biden family through subpoenas to the Treasury Department and various financial institutions.
Last month, shortly after Hunter Biden reached an agreement with the government, Comer joined forces with two chairmen of powerful committees to launch a larger investigation into claims by two IRS agents who claimed the Justice Department improperly interfered in the yearslong case.
IRS supervisory special agent Greg Shapley and a second agent, Joe Ziegler, testified before Congress last week that there was a pattern of “slow-walking investigative steps” into Hunter Biden, including during the Trump administration in the months before the 2020 election that Biden won.
One of the most detailed claims was that U.S. Attorney David Weiss in Delaware, the federal prosecutor who led the investigation, asked for special counsel status in order to bring the tax cases against Hunter Biden in jurisdictions outside Delaware, including the District of Columbia and California, but was denied.
Weiss and the Justice Department have denied that, saying he had “full authority” and never sought to bring charges in other states. Despite the denials, Republicans are moving forward with their probes, asking Weiss to come in and testify about the case directly. The Justice Department has offered to have the prosecutor come before lawmakers after the August recess.
WASHINGTON — IRS whistleblowers told Congress that the tax agency recommended felony charges against Hunter Biden and that the federal prosecutor handling the probe of the first son was rebuffed from filing charges on multiple occasions, the Washington Free Beacon reported on Thursday.
Rep. Jason Smith (R., Mo.) said at a press conference that two IRS employees claimed the agency sought felony charges against the younger Biden for attempting to evade taxes and fraudulent or false statements, all felony charges. The whistleblowers, who worked on the Biden probe since its start in November 2018, further claimed that the investigation was marred by “recurring unjustified delays” and “unusual actions outside the normal course of any investigation,” Smith said.
The bombshell disclosure comes days after federal prosecutors in Delaware struck a plea deal with Biden on two misdemeanor tax charges and a felony gun charge that will be dropped after he completes a diversionary program.
Smith asserted that Biden received “a slap on the wrist for charges that have put other Americans behind bars.”
According to Smith, the whistleblowers testified that Hunter Biden failed to pay more than $2.2 million in taxes and received $8.3 million from foreign entities in Ukraine, China, and Romania. Biden received at least $6 million from CEFC China Energy, an energy conglomerate linked to Chinese military intelligence. A Romanian businessman investigated for bribery paid Biden another $1 million for help on his legal case. And Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian natural gas company, paid Hunter Biden more than $80,000 a month to serve on its board of directors.
In one stunning revelation, Smith cited an encrypted text message in which Hunter Biden threatened a Chinese business partner for payment by invoking his father.
“I am sitting here with my father and would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled,” Biden wrote in a July 30, 2017, message to Henry Zhao.
“I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.”
The whistleblowers claimed that the Justice Department dragged its feet in authenticating the text message, according to Smith.
The Republican said the whistleblowers further testified that U.S. attorney David Weiss attempted to bring charges against Hunter Biden on at least two occasions but was blocked from doing so. Smith said Weiss sought to file charges in Washington, D.C., in March 2022 and in California in fall 2022. He also sought special counsel status in Spring 2022 but was also rejected.
The U.S. attorney’s office in Delaware declined comment. A spokesman for the Justice Department did not address Smith’s specific allegations but said that Weiss had “full authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges as he deems appropriate. He needs no further approval to do so.”
rebekahworsham.wordpress.com 