6���l

ANDERSON COUNTY, Texas — The Texas attorney general’s office is deliberately running out the clock on a soon-to-expire House committee to avoid cooperating with its demand that death row inmate Robert Roberson be able to testify before the committee in person, according to the two lawmakers spearheading that effort. “What the attorney general’s office, I feel like is doing right now, is trying to delay, as much as possible, and not work with us,” state Rep. Jeff Leach, R-Plano, told The Texas Tribune during a Friday event exploring the committee’s intervention in the Roberson case. “They’re basically ignoring the Supreme Court’s order, knowing that in a month or so, when the new legislative session convenes, our committee goes away,” he said. Leach, a member of the House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence, and the committee’s chair, state Rep. Joe Moody, D-El Paso, appeared Friday at a Texas Tribune event to discuss the historic legislative intervention that halted Roberson’s Oct. 17 execution. The committee is planning for Roberson to testify in person at the Capitol on Dec. 20, two months after the committee forced a delay of his execution through an extraordinary legal intervention. The committee is awaiting confirmation from Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office on whether it will voluntarily comply with the panel’s order and allow the state criminal justice department to transport Roberson from prison to the Capitol so he can testify. Moody discussed how the Texas Supreme Court has told the legislative and executive branches of state government to cooperate on this matter on three separate occasions. But after asking the executive branch if it would agree to produce Roberson, Moody said, its representatives “couldn’t answer the simple question of, can we agree or do you want me to issue a subpoena?,” Moody said. “They have refused to answer that very simple question.” As a result, Moody set the hearing for Dec. 20 and gave the attorney general’s office until the end of the day Friday to answer. If they don’t, Moody said he will issue a new subpoena for Roberson. “I’ve been in this business long enough — that’s just a foot drag,” Moody said. “So I set the hearing and I gave him a deadline.” He said he hopes that Texans question the delays by Paxton’s office. “Why don’t they want to hear from Robert? Why do they not want the Legislature to do this? Why?” The Texas attorney general’s office did not immediately respond to the comments made by Leach or Moody. It’s the latest in the dramatic back and forth between the two government branches over Roberson’s testimony. The day before Roberson’s scheduled Oct. 17 execution, the House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence held a hearing airing his claims of innocence and lack of due process. The panel’s surprise move to subpoena Roberson on Oct. 16 then successfully forced a delay in his execution. Roberson, who has maintained his innocence in the death of his child for more than 20 years, became a political lightning rod in recent months as members of the bipartisan Criminal Jurisprudence Committee — convinced that the courts had not properly applied a 2013 junk science law to his case — waged a controversial campaign to buy him more time. Roberson was convicted of capital murder in 2003 for the death of his 2-year-old daughter Nikki, who was diagnosed with shaken baby syndrome. He has sought to use the junk science law to vacate his conviction, arguing that new scientific evidence debunked Nikki’s shaken baby diagnosis and showed that she died of undiagnosed pneumonia, not abuse. The committee’s subpoena prompted the ongoing battle between lawmakers and Paxton’s office over securing Roberson’s testimony. The subpoena also created a separation of powers conflict between the state’s legislative and executive branches, prompting the Texas Supreme Court to stay Roberson’s execution on Oct. 17 as it worked through the legal dispute. In an Oct. 28 Texas Supreme Court brief, members of the criminal jurisprudence panel accused Paxton’s office of stonewalling and refusing to comply with the subpoena. “The executive branch has shown no willingness to work out its differences with the legislative branch or meet its statutory duty to assist the Committee,” the brief states. The criminal jurisprudence panel held a hearing on Oct. 21 with plans for Roberson to give his testimony in person. But Paxton quashed those plans, saying that the inmate would only testify via video, “in the interest of public safety.” Both the committee and Roberson’s attorney objected to a virtual set-up, saying that Roberson’s autism and lack of technological experience due to his more than two decades in prison meant that he could not testify effectively over video. Lawmakers then sought to visit Roberson on death row to take his testimony there. But according to the lawmakers’ brief, Paxton’s office again scuttled those plans, telling Moody that “the executive branch would no longer permit any form of hearing with Roberson.” Instead, the brief states, the executive branch proposed a joint letter in which Moody and Leach “admit that Roberson was a murderer, that they had overstepped their authority, and that no legislative committee should ever act similarly in the future.” At the Tribune event, Moody said they had no intent of signing such a letter. “I’ve got to censor myself when talking about that letter because I thought someone was joking with me when they sent it to me,” Moody said. “That was a letter that was sent to us, knowing that we would never sign it. It is written in a way that says, make sure that they never sign this, because it was saying, you know, we’re idiots, we made a mistake, we’re so sorry, Robert’s a murderer.” Paxton, meanwhile, has accused the lawmakers of “sidelining” the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s legal counsel, and said that nothing compelled the executive branch to bring Roberson to the Capitol. On Nov. 15, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that legislative subpoenas could not be used to block death warrants, clearing the way for Roberson’s execution. But the court noted that there was now plenty of time for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice to produce Roberson for testimony. The prosecuting district attorney has not yet requested a new execution date, which could not be set within 90 days of the request. “If the committee still wishes to obtain his testimony, we assume that the department can reasonably accommodate a new subpoena,” the court said. “So long as a subpoena issues in a way that does not inevitably block a scheduled execution, nothing in our holding prevents the committee from pursuing judicial relief in the ordinary way to compel a witness’s testimony.” Leach hinted that fighting the committee after the Supreme Court’s decision will have consequences. “Our AG is doing a lot of really good work,” Leach said. “But look, if you’re going to ignore the Legislature and say, ‘We don’t care about you and we’re not gonna do what the Supreme Court told us to do’ — then if we have to, we’ll be back in front of the Supreme Court. And I don’t think ... that should be necessary.Richmond Battlefield kicks off Sock Drive and welcomes Santa Claus6���l。

CLEVELAND — Here's hoping Mike Tomlin didn't spend too much time working on that NFL Coach of the Year speech. The feel-good vibes that have surrounded the Steelers' season — all of those correct buttons pushed and sticky situations navigated — backfired on Tomlin on Thursday night during what has become an all-too-common theme of his tenure. A humiliating loss to an inferior team, this time in the familiar setting of Cleveland's Huntington Bank Field and by a 24-19 score to the previously 2-8 Browns. Talk about spoiling a sterling start. "They made more plays over the course of 60 minutes," Tomlin said. "Obviously, we have to own our portions of it." It's a shame you can't put them on Craigslist or something. The Browns snapped the Steelers' five-game winning streak. Pittsburgh also dropped to 0-8 all time in road Thursday night games against teams in their division. Amazingly, Tomlin's Steelers have lost five of their past six games in Cleveland. What the Steelers must own from this one was substantial, too, starting with some poor decision-making by Tomlin, who actually entered the game as the betting favorite to win his first coach of the year award. A small sampling of things that will likely rub Steelers fans the wrong way: — Seemingly getting caught in between toward the end of the first half. Tomlin called a timeout after a second-down pass but then allowed around 40 seconds to run off the clock before Cleveland called timeout and kicked a field goal. Just call the timeout, get the ball back with some time, and give your team a chance. — It's not just all Tomlin and likely involves offensive coordinator Arthur Smith, but the fade route thrown to Cordarrelle Patterson once the Steelers took the lead in the fourth quarter made zero sense. George Pickens, Pat Freiermuth, anyone? — Justin Fields randomly throwing deep to Pickens with the Steelers trying to salt away the game. — Not instructing his players to allow Browns running back Nick Chubb to score on a 7-yard run with 1:43 to go, a move that would've afforded the Steelers more than 50 seconds to answer. — Burning a timeout after a confusing sequence where Tomlin thought it was intentional grounding and deciding to hastily accept the penalty, another decision that can certainly be questioned. If you decline, it's an easier field goal. If you accept, you're obviously giving the Browns another shot. "We wanted to move them 5 yards back," Tomlin said. "They were potentially kicking into the wind, so we wanted to stop 'em and make the field goal a longer one." The decision, the same as many on this wintry night, turned out to be the wrong one, as Jameis Winston found wide receiver Jerry Jeudy 15 yards to convert on third-and-6, and Chubb scored the go-ahead touchdown with 0:57 left. "Missed opportunities," Cam Heyward said. "We have to eat it. They made more plays at the end. "I know everybody is pretty [upset] about the loss, but we have to learn from it and be better next time." It also wasn't simply about binary decisions such as these, but it's Tomlin's job to have the Steelers ready to play on the road — and against a lousy team — where the biggest conversation topic has been the potential firing of coach Kevin Stefanski and other goofy Cleveland talk. That didn't happen. It was a trap game, and the Steelers fell right into it, torpedoing their shot at the No. 1 seed in the AFC in the process. Think about it: They needed this one to keep pace with the Chiefs and Bills. Now, they're facing an uphill climb — and doing so with plenty of questions before traveling to Cincinnati in about 10 days. The pass protection was rough early on, as defensive end Myles Garrett did his part to wreck the game. As much as Steelers fans might hate the guy, he was incredible with three sacks, five total tackles and a forced fumble, a solid answer to the T.J. Watt kerfuffle this week. Cleveland finished with four sacks of Russell Wilson, who did complete 21 of 28 passes for 270 yards, a touchdown and a 116.7 rating. Still, it wasn't enough to correct some drive-sustaining issues that plagued the Steelers early. A missed Chris Boswell field goal on the first drive — albeit from a hard-to-say-much 58 yards — then turning it over on downs. It was the first of two of those for the Steelers, who lost yards both times. They have to figure out how to sustain drives better. "They made a few plays," Wilson said. "Myles made a few plays. I thought we moved the ball at different moments, but we have to stay consistent." As Wilson said, this was a game the Steelers should have won — and not only because they forced three turnovers and had the lead in the fourth quarter of a game against a woebegone opponent. Their 8-2 start should've opened the group's collective eyes to what's possible should the Steelers take care of business. That didn't happen. The Steelers started slow on offense, made too many mistakes, botched a bunch of decisions and left Cleveland in the middle of the night with another unsightly blemish suffered here. The reason starts at the top. "It's painful, but it's life in this business," Tomlin said. "We'll take a look at the tape and learn from it. We're in the midst of some thick AFC North action. No rest for the weary. We have a big one coming up." Can't get here soon enough, honestly. (c)2024 the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Visit the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette at www.post-gazette.com Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.Prince Harry and Queen Camilla have traded places. The Duke of Sussex, 41, is now the “outcast” of the British royal family, a “position” once held by his stepmother, 77 . Ahead, why the queen’s so much more than a “simple country woman.” Plus, how Harry’s comments about Queen Camilla were “the last straw” for King Charles III. Camilla’s now ‘seen with affection,’ not Harry Speaking on Queen Camilla: The Wicked Stepmother? , a Channel 4 TV program broadcast in the U.K., journalist Petronella Wyatt, who is also a friend of the queen’s, discussed how the two royals have switched places. There once was a time—the King Charles and Princess Diana years—when Queen Camilla proved a controversial figure. Now, she’s someone who has received praise for taking on more duties amid the king and Kate Middleton’s respective cancer battles . Meanwhile, Harry, a once popular British royal, is now an “outcast.” “I think it’s very interesting to see how Harry’s position and Camilla’s position within the royal family has reversed,” Wyatt said (via Newsweek ). “Because Camilla used to be the hated and despised outcast. Now Harry’s the outcast and Camilla’s seen with affection as a sort of safe pair of hands.” Queen Camilla, Diana’s former private secretary Patrick Jephson shared, played a major role in her own reputational turnaround. “I think Camilla, far from being the simple country woman that we were sold is actually a very shrewd politically media savvy person,” he said. “We are told that the campaign to rehabilitate Camilla has been subtle. I don’t think it’s been subtle at all. It’s got all the subtlety of a sledgehammer,” he added, noting the people in King Charles’s office were “pretty cold-blooded in the way they used Harry [...] misrepresenting facts in order to portray his father and his mistress in a better light.” Harry speaking ill of Queen Camilla was the ‘last straw’ for King Charles In his 2023 Spare memoir, the queen was, much like Harry’s brother Prince William, someone who wasn’t portrayed kindly. Harry recalled wondering “if she’d be like all the wicked stepmothers in storybooks” before meeting her for the first time.” (She wasn’t, which he was grateful for.) Elsewhere, he described Queen Camilla as “the Other woman” and someone who “sacrificed” him on her “personal PR altar.” A source told the U.K.’s Mirror at the time of the book’s publication that King Charles didn’t hesitate after he learned what Harry had said about his stepmother. “It was the last straw,” the insider told the outlet per Express . “Harry was well aware how Camilla would be a red line for his father and he crossed with flagrant disregard anyway. The King felt without a doubt it crossed a line—it was the ultimate act of disrespect.” Camilla’s connection to Harry’s short visit with his father in February 2024 Remember back in February 2024 when Harry boarded a plane to London, England, soon after Buckingham Palace announced the king’s cancer diagnosis? He touched down, and went to Clarence House, where he met with his father. But Harry wasn’t there for long . Reports at the time clocked his visit at under an hour. In the aftermath, royal author Robert Jobson claimed Queen Camilla might’ve played a role in Harry’s short visit . “The queen was with the king,” Jobson said at the time. “Let’s be honest—he [Harry] wasn’t too complimentary about Queen Camilla in his book, Spare . He wasn’t very complimentary about her on Netflix [ Harry & Meghan ]. They don’t get on.” Since Harry and Meghan left royal life in 2020 and relocated to California, they only see other royals on rare occasions. Think Platinum Jubilee Weekend (June 2022), Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral (September 2022), and the coronation (May 2023), which Harry attended solo.

Russian security officials say they foiled plot to kill high ranking officer, blogger

Trump wants pardoned real estate developer Charles Kushner to be ambassador to France

Trump promises fast-track permitting for companies that invest $1 billion in USKash Patel, Donald Trump’s pick to direct the Federal Bureau of Investigation, has never served in the FBI. But he has hosted Steve Bannon’s podcast. Patel is a contributor at Real America’s Voice, the right-wing news network that produces Bannon’s show War Room, and has long appeared as a guest on the show. After top Trump adviser Bannon was imprisoned for four months earlier this year, Patel stepped up to serve as an occasional guest host. To try and understand Patel better, I listened to every episode and clip tagged with “Kash Patel” on the War Room website — and a few others that Bannon’s team missed. The overwhelming impression is that Patel is a man whose entire worldview revolves around paranoid conspiracy theories — specifically, conspiracies against both America and Trump, which for him are one and the same. It’s a specific kind of obsession that reminds me of the FBI’s first director: J. Edgar Hoover, a man who infamously abused his power to persecute political enemies. In one episode, he called on the Republican majority in Congress to unilaterally arrest Attorney General Merrick Garland — invoking an obscure legal doctrine called “inherent contempt” that has never been used in this fashion in the entirety of American history. In another, he outlined a plan for a MAGA blitz of American institutions focused on getting loyalists into high office. It is hard to tell whether Patel genuinely believes this stuff or is merely performing for Bannon’s audience. But it’s largely immaterial. Because it is this performance that made him a star in Trumpworld: his willingness to ape Trump’s own conspiratorial worldview making him into a person Trump wants to be in charge of America’s domestic security services. Once in power, his stated commitment to these beliefs — whatever he thinks privately — will push him to act in line with them. Patel, in short, is the kind of man who could become Trump’s Hoover: a man willing to push federal law enforcement into dangerously anti-democratic territory in pursuit of alleged domestic enemies. Patel believes that foreign enemies — ranging from China to Iran to drug cartels — are doing their best to infiltrate the United States and wreak havoc on its homeland. The Democrats, he believes, do not just disagree with Trump on how to handle these threats: They are actively aligned with America’s enemies. In one War Room segment, for example, Patel hosted a discredited China “expert” named Gordon Chang to warn that China was “planning an attack on our facilities on our soil.” But it’s worse than that, Chang argued: China had installed Joe Biden as the president of the United States. “They were actually able to cast the decisive vote in 2020,” Chang told Patel, claiming without evidence that China “poured money into Joe Biden’s campaign” through the Democratic crowdfunding platform ActBlue. Patel’s response was not skepticism but credulity: “I hope people are paying attention.” But Democrats are not merely unwitting cat’s paws of foreign powers, per Patel: They are nefarious actors aiming to tear down American democracy. One of Patel’s favorite phrases, one that he uses again and again on Bannon’s show, is “two-tiered system of justice.” In his mind, federal law enforcement employs two distinct standards — one for “the deep state’s” friends and another for its enemies. For this reason, Patel has an enemies list — literally. His book "Government Gangsters," which he is constantly hawking on War Room, contains an appendix listing dozens of names that comprise the “executive branch deep state.” The list ranges from names of people you know, like Vice President Kamala Harris, to people you’ve never heard of, like a former State Department diplomat named Elizabeth Dibble. If this all reminds you of Hoover — well, it should. The two men share a dangerous tendency to link enemies foreign and domestic, and a willingness to entertain dangerous abuses of law enforcement powers in fighting them. In his book "Enemies", journalist Tim Weiner argues that Hoover’s worldview was defined by a bone-deep fear of Communist plots against the American homeland. Hoover began maintaining a secret list of “enemies of the United States” inside of government and out, conducting illegal surveillance and other law-bending operations designed to bring them to heel. In theory, this is the kind of abuse of power that Patel is against. He rails constantly against government surveillance and abuses of power against political enemies. Yet at the same time, he is constantly proposing schemes — like Congress arresting Garland — that amount to efforts to criminalize political disagreements. This includes proposals to investigate prominent Democrats and even prosecute journalists. “Yes, we’re going to come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections — we’re going to come after you,” he said in a guest appearance on War Room last year. “Whether it’s criminally or civilly, we’ll figure that out.” Zack Beauchamp is a senior correspondent at Vox. His columns are syndicated by Tribune Content Agency. Get local news delivered to your inbox!