fishing game cheat
WASHINGTON (AP) — One year after the Jan. 6, 2021 , U.S. Capitol attack, Attorney General Merrick Garland said the Justice Department was committed to holding accountable all perpetrators “at any level” for “the assault on our democracy.” That bold declaration won't apply to at least one person: Donald Trump. Special counsel Jack Smith's move on Monday to abandon the federal election interference case against Trump means jurors will likely never decide whether the president-elect is criminally responsible for his attempts to cling to power after losing the 2020 campaign. The decision to walk away from the election charges and the separate classified documents case against Trump marks an abrupt end of the Justice Department’s unprecedented legal effort that once threatened his liberty but appears only to have galvanized his supporters. The abandonment of the cases accusing Trump of endangering American democracy and national security does away with the most serious legal threats he was facing as he returns to the White House. It was the culmination of a monthslong defense effort to delay the proceedings at every step and use the criminal allegations to Trump's political advantage, putting the final word in the hands of voters instead of jurors. “We always knew that the rich and powerful had an advantage, but I don’t think we would have ever believed that somebody could walk away from everything,” said Stephen Saltzburg, a George Washington University law professor and former Justice Department official. “If there ever was a Teflon defendant, that’s Donald Trump.” While prosecutors left the door open to the possibility that federal charges could be re-filed against Trump after he leaves office, that seems unlikely. Meanwhile, Trump's presidential victory has thrown into question the future of the two state criminal cases against him in New York and Georgia. Trump was supposed to be sentenced on Tuesday after his conviction on 34 felony counts in his New York hush money case , but it's possible the sentencing could be delayed until after Trump leaves office, and the defense is pushing to dismiss the case altogether. Smith's team stressed that their decision to abandon the federal cases was not a reflection of the merit of the charges, but an acknowledgement that they could not move forward under longstanding Justice Department policy that says sitting presidents cannot face criminal prosecution. Trump's presidential victory set “at odds two fundamental and compelling national interests: On the one hand, the Constitution’s requirement that the President must not be unduly encumbered in fulfilling his weighty responsibilities . . . and on the other hand, the Nation’s commitment to the rule of law,” prosecutors wrote in court papers. The move just weeks after Trump's victory over Vice President Kamala Harris underscores the immense personal stake Trump had in the campaign in which he turned his legal woes into a political rallying cry. Trump accused prosecutors of bringing the charges in a bid to keep him out of the White House, and he promised revenge on his perceived enemies if he won a second term. “If Donald J. Trump had lost an election, he may very well have spent the rest of his life in prison,” Vice President-elect JD Vance, wrote in a social media post on Monday. “These prosecutions were always political. Now it’s time to ensure what happened to President Trump never happens in this country again.” After the Jan. 6 attack by Trump supporters that left more than 100 police officers injured, Republican leader Mitch McConnell and several other Republicans who voted to acquit Trump during his Senate impeachment trial said it was up to the justice system to hold Trump accountable. The Jan. 6 case brought last year in Washington alleged an increasingly desperate criminal conspiracy to subvert the will of voters after Trump's 2020 loss, accusing Trump of using the angry mob of supporters that attacked the Capitol as “a tool” in his campaign to pressure then-Vice President Mike Pence and obstruct the certification of Democrat Joe Biden's victory. Hundreds of Jan. 6 rioters — many of whom have said they felt called to Washington by Trump — have pleaded guilty or been convicted by juries of federal charges at the same courthouse where Trump was supposed to stand trial last year. As the trial date neared, officials at the courthouse that sits within view of the Capitol were busy making plans for the crush of reporters expected to cover the historic case. But Trump's argument that he enjoyed absolute immunity from prosecution quickly tied up the case in appeals all the way up to the Supreme Court. The high court ruled in July that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution , and sent the case back to the trial court to decide which allegations could move forward. But the case was dismissed before the trial court could get a chance to do so. The other indictment brought in Florida accused Trump of improperly storing at his Mar-a-Lago estate sensitive documents on nuclear capabilities, enlisting aides and lawyers to help him hide records demanded by investigators and cavalierly showing off a Pentagon “plan of attack” and classified map. But U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the case in July on grounds that Smith was illegally appointed . Smith appealed to the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, but abandoned that appeal on Monday. Smith's team said it would continue its fight in the appeals court to revive charges against Trump's two co-defendants because “no principle of temporary immunity applies to them.” In New York, jurors spent weeks last spring hearing evidence in a state case alleging a Trump scheme to illegally influence the 2016 election through a hush money payment to a porn actor who said the two had sex. New York prosecutors recently expressed openness to delaying sentencing until after Trump's second term, while Trump's lawyers are fighting to have the conviction dismissed altogether. In Georgia, a trial while Trump is in office seems unlikely in a state case charging him and more than a dozen others with conspiring to overturn his 2020 election loss in the state. The case has been on hold since an appeals court agreed to review whether to remove Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis over her romantic relationship with the special prosecutor she had hired to lead the case. Associated Press reporter Lisa Mascaro in Washington contributed.
Trump world is celebrating after special counsel Jack Smith moved to dismiss two federal cases brought against President-elect Donald Trump. Smith’s team asked a federal judge Monday to dismiss the 2020 election interference case brought against Trump, who was charged with four felonies last year. Later on Monday, Smith also asked to dismiss the classified documents case brought against Trump. Trump and his allies—who have decried the legal cases as politically motivated—are celebrating Smith’s latest moves as Trump prepares to head to the White House next year. “The American People re-elected President Trump with an overwhelming mandate to Make America Great Again. Today’s decision by the DOJ ends the unconstitutional federal cases against President Trump, and is a major victory for the rule of law,” Steven Cheung, Trump Communications Director, said in a statement. “The American People and President Trump want an immediate end to the political weaponization of our justice system and we look forward to uniting our country,” he added. Trump’s allies also flocked to social media to boast about the latest development, arguing that the charges should have never been brought in the first place. “MAJOR VICTORY for President Trump and JUSTICE! These fake (and illegal) charges were used to persecute President Trump for being the biggest threat to the Democrat regime. Political prosecution should never happen in America!!” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) wrote on social media platform X . MAJOR VICTORY for President Trump and JUSTICE! These fake (and illegal) charges were used to persecute President Trump for being the biggest threat to the Democrat regime. Political prosecution should never happen in America!! https://t.co/42w7BxCX6c Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) quoted tech billionaire Elon Musk by writing: “[T]he Hammer of Justice is coming. May it be swift.” Vice President-elect JD Vance also weighed in, saying that Trump may have been sent to prison if he did not win the election. “If Donald J. Trump had lost an election, he may very well have spent the rest of his life in prison. These prosecutions were always political. Now it’s time to ensure what happened to President Trump never happens in this country again,” Vance wrote on X. And conservative activist Charlie Kirk wrote on X: “The lawfare lost. America won.” Despite Trump and his allies labeling his multiple legal woes as politically motivated, Trump has vowed retribution against his political opponents. Politico reported earlier this month that some involved in Trump’s legal cases could be among Trump’s targets, including Smith, New York Attorney General Letitia James and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, as well as many others. The move announced in court papers marks the end of the Justice Department’s landmark effort to hold Trump accountable for what prosecutors called a criminal conspiracy to cling to power in the run-up to his supporters' attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Justice Department prosecutors, citing longstanding department guidance that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted, said the department’s position is that “the Constitution requires that this case be dismissed before the defendant is inaugurated.” “That prohibition is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government’s proof, or the merits of the prosecution, which the Government stands fully behind,” the prosecutors wrote in Monday’s court filing. The decision was expected after Smith’s team began assessing how to wind down both the 2020 election interference case and the separate classified documents case in the wake of Trump’s victory over Vice President Kamala Harris. The Justice Department believes Trump can no longer be tried in accordance with longstanding policy that says sitting presidents cannot be prosecuted. The Associated Press contributed to this report. Stories by Lauren Sforza After failed AG bid, Matt Gaetz has a new side hustle — to get your money NEW POLL: What Americans are saying about Trump cabinet picks Democrat torches N.Y. governor, Biden in latest rant against his party Our journalism needs your support. Please subscribe today to NJ.com .None
NoneUS-Google face off as ad tech antitrust trial comes to close
‘American Idol’ Alum Caleb Kennedy Pleads Guilty, Gets 8 Years in Prison After Fatal DUI CrashMELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — Australia’s House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill that would ban children younger than 16 years old from social media , leaving it to the Senate to finalize the world-first law. The major parties backed the bill that would make platforms including TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram liable for fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to prevent young children from holding accounts. The legislation was passed with 102 votes in favor to 13 against. If the bill becomes law this week, the platforms would have one year to work out how to implement the age restrictions before the penalties are enforced. Opposition lawmaker Dan Tehan told Parliament the government had agreed to accept amendments in the Senate that would bolster privacy protections. Platforms would not be allowed to compel users to provide government-issued identity documents including passports or driver’s licenses. The platforms also could not demand digital identification through a government system. “Will it be perfect? No. But is any law perfect? No, it’s not. But if it helps, even if it helps in just the smallest of ways, it will make a huge difference to people’s lives,” Tehan told Parliament. Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said the Senate would debate the bill later Wednesday. The major parties’ support all but guarantees the legislation will be passed by the Senate where no party holds a majority of seats. Lawmakers who were not aligned with either the government or the opposition were most critical of the legislation during debate on Tuesday and Wednesday. Criticisms include that the legislation had been rushed through Parliament without adequate scrutiny, would not work, would create privacy risks for users of all ages and would take away parents’ authority to decide what’s best for their children. Critics also argue the ban would isolate children, deprive them of positive aspects of social media, drive children to the dark web, make children too young for social media reluctant to report harms they encountered and take away incentives for platforms to make online spaces safer. Independent lawmaker Zoe Daniel said the legislation would “make zero difference to the harms that are inherent to social media.” “The true object of this legislation is not to make social media safe by design, but to make parents and voters feel like the government is doing something about it,” Daniel told Parliament. “There is a reason why the government parades this legislation as world-leading, that’s because no other country wants to do it,” she added. T he platforms had asked for the vote on legislation to be delayed until at least June next year when a government-commissioned evaluation of age assurance technologies made its report on how the ban could been enforced. Rod Mcguirk, The Associated Press
‘American Idol’ Alum Caleb Kennedy Pleads Guilty, Gets 8 Years in Prison After Fatal DUI CrashTBI ID's 19 online child sexual exploitation victims, arrests 10No. 21 Creighton's Steven Ashworth doubtful for Players Era Festival opener against Aztecs
AP Sports SummaryBrief at 6:34 p.m. EST
MVP, standout performances from 2024 Group 1 girls soccer title game
PM: Energy important pillar of bilateral ties, reflects deep trustSens. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Andy Kim (D-NJ) were sworn in Monday by Vice President Kamala Harris to serve the last three weeks of the terms of former Sens. Lephonza Butler and George Helmy, respectively. Butler and Helmy resigned over the weekend so that Schiff and Kim, both of whom won elections in November to full six-year terms starting in January 2025, could be appointed to assume their posts early. Schiff was also elected to serve the remaining length of Butler's term. Butler was appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) in October 2023 to replace the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein , and Helmy was appointed by Gov. Phil Murphy (D-NJ) in August to succeed disgraced former Sen. Bob Menendez after a criminal conviction . They both vowed to be placeholders until voters could elect new senators to their respective seats. Schiff and Kim will be sworn in again on Jan. 3, 2025, at the start of their full six-year terms to the 119th Congress, along with the other incoming senators who were elected in November. Both resigned their House seats over the weekend, giving House Republicans a slight majority boost in the final weeks of the current session. "The Senate Democrats add two high-ranking caliber leaders who have already had great reputations in the House, where they got a whole lot done," Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said. Having represented coastal blue states for years, Schiff and Kim are no strangers to national politics. Schiff had served in the House since 2001, was a former House Intelligence Committee chairman, and was the lead impeachment manager for former President Donald Trump’s first Senate trial. "Schiff brings to the Senate an impressive record as a leading voice among House Democrats, where he was known for his piercing eloquence, his thoughtfulness, his unwavering support of democracy, and his courage," Schumer said. "As former chair of the House Intelligence Committee, he brings deep expertise and knowledge that will make him just a great senator." MEET THE NEW CONGRESS: THE HOUSE AND SENATE FRESHMEN ELECTED TO SERVE NEXT YEAR Kim had served in the House since 2019, previously worked in the State Department, and drew notoriety for helping staff members clean the Capitol building in the immediate aftermath of the Jan. 6, 2021, riot. He is the first Korean American senator. "He's one of the most respected and admired in the House Democratic Caucus, where his talent was only matched by his decency," Schumer said of Kim. "He boasts an impressive record of service as a national security expert and diplomat, and spent every day in Congress putting families first."MINEOLA, Nassau County (WABC) -- An initiative by New York State's Department of Education is aimed at expanding and ensuring equitable access to learning opportunities for students on Long Island, but while some districts and parents are welcoming the idea with open arms, others are not on board. Parents packed into a press conference in Mineola on Thursday, armed with signs comparing the new state plan to "robbery." "It is like the Communist Party. Communist Party of the New York State," said Manhasset parent Jennifer Zhang. The reaction came from parents from school districts on Long Island who say they don't like a new initiative from the state that could regionalize some aspects of their children's public education. They say it shouldn't be about politics, but the tone suggested otherwise. "This is just another attack on the suburbs by state government, which is completely controlled by left-wing progressive politicians, from New York City," said Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman. The goal of the initiative is mainly to maximize resources and limit costs for certain districts, and according to the association that represents more than 100 districts on Long Island, some support it, and others oppose it. "There are some districts that are supportive of it, there are some districts that are concerned about it and kind of waiting to see how things develop, particularly at the next Board of Regents meeting in December," said Robert Vecchio of the Nassau Suffolk School Board Association. However, there are none who want forced collaboration, and some school districts joined the Nassau County executive on Thursday, saying they plan to seek an injunction, and won't stop fighting until the plan is more clearly designated as optional. "We continually ask: can you please put in the record that this is voluntary with no penalty? And no one will do that up in Albany," said Cold Spring Harbor Superintendent Joe Monastero. Jeff Matteson of the New York State Department of Education said it's a local decision. "Anything in a plan sent to the state has to be an idea coming from that district," Matteson said. Many people who have moved to Long Island from the city with kids, say the big reason why is because of the schools. They plan to fight hard to maintain that control. "I am afraid of the eventual pooling of resources in such a way that it will take away and distract from my child's education," said East Williston parent Ellie Konstantatos. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul weighed in on the initiative with a statement to say she didn't create this plan, nor does she have any oversight of it. "The truth is that this plan is coming directly from the Board of Regents whose appointments are all made by the state legislature -- not the Governor. Rather than hosting bogus press conferences or spreading false rumors, these politicians should consider actually doing their job by conducting oversight over the State Education Department," the governor said in the statement. ---------- * More Long Island news * Send us a news tip * Download the abc7NY app for breaking news alerts * Follow us on YouTube Have a breaking news tip or an idea for a story we should cover? Send it to Eyewitness News using the form below. If attaching a video or photo, terms of use apply.
US-Google face off as ad tech antitrust trial comes to close
Waymo Self-Driving Taxis Coming To Tokyo