List of All Articles with Tag 'america'

One of Fox News’s star journalists found himself battling his own viewers after an appearance by former President Donald Trump on his show that many independent observers said was damaging for the ex-president’s credibility. Bret Baier won compliments from his colleagues in the media this week for the no-ground-given interview with the ex-president, which aired in two parts over Tuesday and Wednesday. But the reaction from the twice-indicted ex-president’s fanbase was less enthusiastic. One commenter, a blue-check Trump supporter, wrote a tweet attacking both the interview and Baier’s upcoming gig moderating the first Republican primary debate, set to be held on 23 August. They attacked Baier as a “Murdoch mouthpiece” and suggested that Mr Trump should skip the Fox debate. A second commenter then seemingly admitted that Mr Trump had said something incriminating during their discussion, while questioning whether the journalist had coordinated with the Department of Justice. “Bret and Martha [MacCallum], two anti-Trumpers, will be moderating the first GOP debate. Why the hell would Trump show up to that? Especially after this interview that was actually a debate between Trump & Murdoch mouthpiece. Remember Murdoch’s are all in for DeSanctimonious!” wrote the first critic, Alex Bruesewitz. The second tweeter added: “The big question is did @BretBaier have any contact with the DOJ to try and entrap @realDonaldTrump into incriminating himself. Who wrote his questions. The DOJ will be using his interview against him.” Baier flatly rejected that conspiracy in a short statement: “I’ll answer that. No. I wrote my own questions. And frankly I didn’t know that I would get much on the indictment questions assuming he might say he couldn’t talk about it. Thanks for watching.” He would later go on to approvingly retweet another viewer who took a mocking shot at a third critic of the Trump interivew. The comments are a sign of the increasingly tight spot that Baier and others on Fox’s news side find themselves in. Their network faces a ratings slide following the ouster of star opinion host Tucker Carlson, and increasing disfavour from the channel’s largely pro-Trump audience over any journalism that conflicts with the former president’s conspiracy theories. Baier struck a nerve with the former president in the segment of the interview which aired on Tuesday, as he rejected Mr Trump’s claim that the 2020 election was stolen and pressed him to admit that all of his efforts to prove otherwise had failed. But that wasn’t the only moment when the two men clashed during the discussion. Baier would also question Mr Trump about his new push to expand use of the death penalty to those convicted of selling narcotics, a plan that would likely have little if any chance of success of being passed into law. The Fox journalist noted that a woman Mr Trump took public credit and admiration for having her sentence commuted would have instead been executed under his plan, forcing the ex-president to back off his hardline stance and qualify that degrees of severity would ideally be considered under this imaginary system. Read More Trump claimed the Durham report would uncover the ‘crime of the century.’ Here’s what it really found Capitol rioter filmed shocking police officer with stun gun shouts ‘Trump won!’ as he is sentenced Ousted incumbents, key matchups set: Takeaways from Virginia's primary election Trump drops below 50 per cent among GOP voters in new CNN poll following second indictment Television veteran Geraldo Rivera says he's quitting Fox News' political combat show 'The Five' John Eastman’s expert witness in disbarment hearing is barred for not being an expert

Democrats booed and heckled Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy on Wednesday as the GOP voted to censure California representative Adam Schiff for his efforts to investigate the 2016 Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. On cameras of the House floor, Democrats could be seen rallying near the lectern and chanting, “Shame!” as the Speaker announced the result of the vote, which he said was punishment for “misleading the American public.” On Wednesday, the House voted 213-to-209 largely on party lines to censure Mr Schiff. In a speech from the floor, the California Democrat remained defiant, saying he was being punished for pursuing the truth by a party that’s attached itself to conspiratorial thinking about the election. “You who are the authors of the big lie about the last election must condemn the truth tellers and I stand proudly before you,” Mr Schiff said. “No matter how many false justifications or slanders you level against me, you but indict yourselves,” he added. “As Liz Cheney said, there will come a day when Donald Trump is gone. But your dishonor will remain.” New York Democrat Dan Goldman agreed, calling the censure vote a “phony ploy to punish Adam Schiff for speaking truth to power” in a floor speech of his own. This is a breaking news story and will be updated with new information. Read More The Body in the Woods | An Independent TV Original Documentary The harrowing discovery at centre of The Independent’s new documentary

Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene reportedly tore into her fellow conservative Lauren Boebert on the House floor on Wednesday, calling the Colorado rep a “little b****” and accusing her of copying articles of impeachment against Joe Biden. C-SPAN cameras captured the two MAGA Republicans having what appeared to be a heated conversation on Wednesday after Ms Boebert lay the groundwork to force a procedural vote on her impeachment articles in the coming days. Multiple people witnessed or were apprised of the exchange, including an anonymous GOP lawmaker, and reported its alleged contents to The Daily Beast. The argument reportedly began when Rep Boebert approached Rep Greene and was upset about “statements you made about me publicly.” The Georgia representative then allegedly called her counterpart a “little b****” and accused her of piggypacking on the idea to impeach Joe Biden, though Ms Boebert reportedly denied ever reading Ms Greene’s impachment resolution. “I’ve donated to you, I’ve defended you. But you’ve been nothing but a little b**** to me,” Ms Greene reportedly said. “And you copied my articles of impeachment after I asked you to cosponsor them.” “OK, Marjorie, we’re through,” Ms Boebert allegedly responded, to which Ms Greene reportedly said, “We were never together.” The Colorado Republican didn’t deny the heated exchange when contacted by The Daily Beast. “Marjorie is not my enemy. I came here to protect our children and their posterity. Joe Biden and the Democrats are destroying our country,” she told the outlet. “My priorities are to correct their bad policies and save America.” The Independent has contacted Ms Greene’s office for comment. On the same day as the alleged argument, Ms Greene appeared to publicly criticise Ms Boebert’s impeachment plan. “I’m different than what Lauren Boebert did,” Ms Greene said, CBS News reports. “She just went and did it. I just addressed the conference about impeachment and said that it is the right thing to do.” Ms Boebert has attempted to impeach Joe Biden multiple times. “I am bringing my articles of impeachment against Joe Biden to the House Floor in a privileged motion, meaning that every Member of Congress must vote on holding Joe Biden accountable,” she tweeted on Tuesday evening. The far-right Colorado rep has said she wants to impeach Mr Biden because of his “dereliction of duty” at the southern border. Read More AOC implores Greene and Boebert to not waste time with Biden impeachment: ‘We should actually be working’ Exclusive: Marjorie Taylor Greene names her price for McCarthy – impeach Joe Biden Boebert’s latest attempt to impeach Biden had Republicans ‘rolling eyes’, says Democrat AOC implores Greene and Boebert to not waste time with Biden impeachment Marjorie Taylor Greene names her price for McCarthy: Impeach Joe Biden Boebert’s latest attempt to impeach Biden had Republicans ‘rolling eyes’

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds has agreed to settle a lawsuit filed by journalists and open government advocates who sought to require her office to respond to public record requests, and a state panel agreed Wednesday to pay more than $100,000 in attorney fees. Reynolds settled the lawsuit about two months after the Iowa Supreme Court refused to dismiss the case filed by two media organizations and a nonprofit advocacy group. The court unanimously rejected the governor's argument that her office wasn't required to respond in a timely manner to record requests and that she could bypass the state's open records law by simply ignoring the requests. The organizations filed the lawsuit in 2021, claiming the governor had violated Iowa’s open records law by ignoring government record requests. The reporters had emailed the governor’s office with eight different open-record requests between April 2020 and April 2021 and renewed each request at least once. In each case, they received no response until filing a lawsuit in December 2021. In a statement, the governor's office acknowledged the settlement but said problems stemmed from demands during the COVID-19 pandemic. “The COVID-19 response put unprecedented demands on the governor’s team to meet the immediate needs of Iowans," Kollin Crompton, the governor's deputy communications director, said in a statement. "As a result, responses to requests were unintentionally delayed, which is not acceptable. Our office has assessed our internal processes and we continue to reevaluate the process to improve timeliness.” Earlier Wednesday, the State Appeal Board approved $135,000 to cover legal fees for the organizations, though the one Democrat on the three-member board objected. Auditor Rob Sand said state law intends that those who violate the open records law should pay fees related to the violation and a fine. The settlement, he noted, pays the fees with public money and doesn't include a fine. “These insiders have no shame," Sand said in a statement. “They abuse your rights, and then want to use your money to pay for having abused you.” The organization are the liberal-leaning Bleeding Heartland blog, Iowa Capital Dispatch and Iowa Freedom of Information Council, which focuses on open government issues. The ACLU of Iowa, which represented the organizations, said the settlement will be official later this month when the court accepts the agreement. The ACLU said the agreement also required a year of judicial oversight over the governor's office's compliance with the state open records law as well as court fees. The governor also settled separate lawsuits filed by an attorney who sued after not receiving records about COVID-19 testing contracts. The State Appeal Board approved about $40,000 to settle that case. Read More Ukraine war’s heaviest fight rages in east - follow live Charity boss speaks out over ‘traumatic’ encounter with royal aide

Donald Trump issued pardons and commuted dozens of sentences for people incarcerated for drug crimes while he was in the White House. His administration also hailed the passage of the First Step Act during his presidency as a rare bipartisan achievement towards criminal justice reform. But during his presidency, and throughout his 2024 campaign for the Republican nomination for president, with a string of violent, provocative statements from inside the White House and to crowds at campaign rallies, he has called for executing people convicted for drug crimes. In an interview with Fox News host Bret Baier that aired on 20 June, the host noted that Mr Trump’s demands to kill drug offenders would have applied to people like Alice Marie Johnson, a high-profile formerly incarcerated person who was pardoned by Mr Trump during an Oval Office event in 2020. “She’d be killed under your plan,” Mr Baier said. “Huh?” Mr Trump said after a pause. “No, no, no. Oh, under that? Uh, it would depend on the severity,” he said. “She can’t do it, OK? By the way, if that was there? She wouldn’t be killed, it would start as of now. So you wouldn’t go to the past.” He also stated that Ms Johnson would not have committed any crime, if she knew that a potential sentence, if convicted, was her death. In 2020, one day after she praised his administration during the Republican National Convention, Mr Trump granted a full pardon to Ms Johnson, who had served 22 years of a life sentence on charges related to cocaine distribution and money laundering. He had already commuted her sentence in 2018, but he issued a surprise pardon – effectively deleting her conviction and restoring her rights as a citizen – the day after she delivered a supportive speech at the RNC. “We’re going to give a full pardon. We’re going to do it right now. That means you have been fully pardoned. That’s the ultimate thing that can happen. That means you can do whatever you want in life and just keep doing the great job you’re doing,” he told her during an Oval Office event. Kim Kardashian had also personally lobbied him to take up her case at the White House. “Some say you do the crime, you do the time. However, that time should be fair and just,” Ms Johnson said during her RNC speech in 2020. “We all make mistakes. None of us wants to be defined forever based on our worst decision.” Republican officials and right-wing pundits have relied on “tough-on-crime” messaging – after 2020 uprisings against police violence, a steady stream of sensational crime coverage across media networks, and the villainizing of so-called “progressive prosecutors” in Democratic-led cities. GOP candidates competing with Mr Trump for the 2024 nomination are now turning to the former president’s attempts at criminal justice reform, zeroing in on Mr Trump’s support for the First Step Act. The law shortened some federal prison sentences, gave judges alternatives to mandatory minimum penalties, and retroactively applied 2010’s Fair Sentencing Act to eliminate racial disparities in prison sentences for cocaine possession. Ron DeSantis called the First Step Act a “jailbreak bill.” Mr Trump’s former Vice President Mike Pence said “we need to take a step back” from the law. Meanwhile, after praising China’s policy of capital punishment for drug traffickers while he was in the White House, Mr Trump has directly called on members of Congress to approve the death penalty for the same crimes in the US in his 2024 campaign. “Under Democrat [sic] control the streets of our great cities are drenched in the blood of innocent victims,” Mr Trump said at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania weeks before formally declaring his candidacy last year. “We would solve that problem so fast” he added. “I’m calling on Republicans and Democrats immediately to institute – to get to Washington and institute the death penalty for drug dealers. You will no longer have a problem.” Mr Trump’s push to execute drug dealers would appear to violate the US Constitution as affirmed by the US Supreme Court, which has held on multiple occasions that death sentences for non-lethal offences are considered cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the 8th Amendment. Read More Trump news – live: Judge sets Mar-a-Lago classified papers trial date as Hunter Biden reaches plea deal Trump calls Fox News ‘hostile’ as he declines to commit to first GOP debate on network Donald Trump helped release drug prisoners. Now he wants to execute them

US president Joe Biden labelled Xi Jinping a dictator during a political fundraiser in California on Tuesday night. The comments came a day after US secretary of state Antony Blinken visited Beijing to stabilize bilateral relations, that China said was at its lowest point since formal ties were established. Mr Biden also said Mr Xi was very embarrassed when a suspected Chinese spy balloon was blown off course over the US airspace early this year, making the remark about the Chinese leader when Mr Blinken said on Monday the "chapter" should be closed. It was, however, unclear why Mr Biden made the comment about his Chinese counterpart. "The reason why Xi Jinping got very upset in terms of when I shot that balloon down with two box cars full of spy equipment in it was he didn’t know it was there," Mr Biden said. "That’s a great embarrassment for dictators. When they didn’t know what happened. That wasn’t supposed to be going where it was. It was blown off course," Mr Biden added. Mr Biden also said China "has real economic difficulties". While Mr Xi, who met with US’s top diplomats on Monday, has not publicly responded to Mr Biden‘s comments, but they are unlikely to go down well in Beijing and could jeopardise efforts by both countries to bring their relationship back to a more stable footing after the balloon incident. Earlier, Mr Blinken and Mr Xi agreed in their meeting to stabilize the intense rivalry between Washington and Beijing so it did not veer into conflict, but failed to produce any breakthrough during the secretary of state’s rare visit to China. Mr Biden however, praised Mr Blinken’s work in attempting to repair the relationship between the two countries, adding that it would take time. Mr Biden told the fundraiser that US climate envoy John Kerry may go to China “pretty soon”. Mr Biden said he thought relations between the two countries were on the right path, and he indicated that progress was made during Mr Blinken’s trip – the first such visit by the US secretary of state in the last five years. “We’re not going to have success on every issue between us on any given day, but in a whole variety of areas, on the terms that we set for this trip, we have made progress and we are moving forward,” Mr Blinken said in Beijing on Monday. A day later, Mr Biden said that Mr Xi had been concerned by the so-called Quad strategic security group, which includes Japan, Australia, India and the United States. The US president said he previously told the Chinese counterpart that the US was not trying to encircle China with the Quad. "He called me and told me not to do that because it was putting him in a bind," Mr Biden said. “We’re just trying to make sure the international rules of air and sea lanes remain open.” Later this week, Mr Biden will meet Indian prime minister Narendra Modi and China is expected to be a topic of discussion between the two leaders. Additional reporting from the wires Read More Why haven't China and the U.S. agreed to restore military contacts? Modi US visit: Amnesty calls for human rights to be central in talks with Joe Biden Biden-Modi relationship built around mutual admiration of scrappy pasts, pragmatic needs US and China hold top-level talks, but their rivalry remains unchecked Biden is ready to fete India's leader, looking past Modi's human rights record and ties to Russia

Judge Aileen Cannon has set a date for the trial in the classified documents case against former President Donald Trump. The Trump-appointed judge has signed a court order listing the trial as starting on 14 August of this year in Fort Pierce, Florida. Meanwhile, President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden has reached a plea deal with the Justice Department over three federal charges. The news comes the morning after the former president denied that he ever possessed a secret document about attacking Iran despite the fact a recording exists that had him discussing a document he kept from his presidency. Mr Trump spoke in an interview with Fox News anchor Bret Baier at his property in Bedminster, New Jersey less than a week after he pleaded not guilty to 37 charges in a federal court in Miami at his arraignment. A federal grand jury had indicted him for allegedly willfully mishandling classified documents, obstruction of justice and making false statements. The former president was also confronted by Baier over his insistence that he won the 2020 election — which he did not, as the Fox News host made clear in a testy exchange. Read More Trump calls Fox News ‘hostile’ as he declines to commit to first GOP debate on network Trump staffers are using the rat emoji to describe Mark Meadows amid testimony rumours Democrats downplay Hunter Biden's plea deal, while Republicans see opportunity to deflect from Trump Trump claimed the Durham report would uncover the ‘crime of the century.’ Here’s what it really found

Donald Trump’s close allies and aides have started using the rat emoji in text message discussions about his former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, a report says. The phrase – which can be used to describe an informer – became popular in the former president’s inner circle after Mr Meadows’s lawyer was vague about whether he is cooperating with special counsel Jack Smith, reports Rolling Stone. The federal prosecutor had been eager to question Mr Meadows under oath about Mr Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election, and his handling of top-secret documents. But the magazine states that “it’s been an ongoing mystery to Trump and his team how much Meadows has given the feds, and whether or not he’s actually cooperating.” Mr Meadows’s lawyer gave very few details to media outlets this month on his client’s status with investigators. “Without commenting on whether or not Mr Meadows has testified before the grand jury or in any other proceeding, Mr Meadows has maintained a commitment to tell the truth where he has a legal obligation to do so,” said George Terwilliger. The magazine reported that a source had told them of the rat emoji use, and had provided a screenshot of conversations where it was included. Mr Trump has told his allies that Mr Trump has said he does not know what Mr Meadows is doing and that it would be a “shame” if rumours he is cooperating with prosecutors were true. The magazine states that the allies have told the former president that there is no evidence that Mr Meadows is cooperating and that he may be following his lawyer’s advice to keep a low profile. Mr Trump Trump faces 37 federal felony counts alleging he illegally retained national defence information and concealed classified documents. He has pleaded not guilty and Trump-appointed Judge Aileen Cannon has signed a court order listing the trial as starting on 14 August of this year in Fort Pierce, Florida. Read More Jonathan Turley tells Fox News the Trump indictment is ‘extremely damning’ and a ‘hit below the waterline’ Former Trump chief of staff says ex-president is ‘scared s***less’ Trump described Pentagon ‘plan of attack’ and shared classified military map with PAC member, indictment shows Trump news – live: Judge sets Mar-a-Lago classified papers trial date as Hunter Biden reaches plea deal Hunter Biden’s case throws a wrench in Republican rhetoric about ‘two-tiered’ justice Trump calls Fox News ‘hostile’ as he declines to commit to first GOP debate on network

A federal judge in Arkansas has permanently struck down the state’s first-in-the-nation ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth, finding that the law violates the constitutional rights of trans patients, their families and health providers. The law – the first-such ban on affirming healthcare for trans youth in the US – is permanently enjoined following a weeks-long trial, marking the first such ruling in the country. A decision from US District Judge Jay Moody, who was appointed to the federal judiciary by Barack Obama, joins a wave of legal victories in federal courts for transgender rights and the rights of trans youth to access medically recommended and potentially life-saving care. The law prohibited doctors from providing hormone therapies, puberty blockers or affirming surgeries to anyone under 18 years old. It also barred state funds or insurance coverage for affirming care for people under 18 and allowed insurance companies to refuse to cover affirming treatment for people of any age. Judge Moody had temporarily blocked the law in 2021 as a legal challenge from a group of families with trans children played out. In his ruling on 20 June, Judge Moody determined that the law unconstitutionally discriminates against transgender people and their families by infringing on their due process and rights to equal protection under the law. He also determined that the law violate the First Amendment rights of doctors by prohibiting them from referring their patients elsewhere. Judge Moody argued that attorneys for the state of Arkansas failed to contest the “extensive clinical experience” from doctors who testified in the case and the “decades of clinical experience demonstrating the efficacy of gender-affirming medical care.” He also debunked the state’s medical claims by pointing to testimony from its own witness and ruled that the state failed to prove any of its claims that affirming treatment is “ineffective or riskier than other medical care provided to minors,” among other statements. Arkansas “failed to prove that its interests in the safety of Arkansas adolescents from gender transitioning procedures or the medical community’s ethical decline are compelling, genuine, or even rational,” Judge Moody wrote. He determined that plaintiffs proved that they would “suffer immediate and irreparable harm” if the law was allowed to take effect, “outweighed by any potential harm to the State of Arkansas caused by the entry of a permanent injunction.” “I’m so grateful the judge heard my experience of how this health care has changed my life for the better and saw the dangerous impact this law could have on my life and that of countless other transgender people,” said Dylan Brandt, a 17-year-old transgender boy who joined the lawsuit challenging the law. “My mom and I wanted to fight this law not just to protect my health care, but also to ensure that transgender people like me can safely and fully live our truths,” he said in a statement through the ACLU of Arkansas. “Transgender kids across the country are having their own futures threatened by laws like this one, and it’s up to all of us to speak out, fight back, and give them hope.” Chase Strangio, deputy director for transgender justice at the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project, said the judge’s deicision provides “enormous relief” to trans youth and their families in the state. “In state after state, transgender people are being forced to fight for our most basic rights, including access to the health care many of us need to live,” he added. “This victory shows that these laws, when tested by evidence, are indefensible under any standard of constitutional review.” The ruling comes days after a federal judge appointed by Donald Trump temporarily blocked a similar ban on affirming healthcare in Indiana law. Another federal court ruling in Florida also partially blocked state law impacting access to such care, delivering a ruling that eviscerated the state’s anti-trans policies and condemned the bigotry that fuelled such legislation. Over the last year, state lawmakers across the country introduced a historic number of bills targeting LGBT+ Americans, including hundreds aimed at young trans people, as part of a growing campaign among Republican lawmakers wielding anti-trans attacks now dominating their platforms and right-wing media campaigns. Children’s hospitals and health providers offering care for trans youth also have faced an unprecedented wave of harassment and threats. At least 20 states have enacted laws or policies banning affirming healthcare for young trans people. But an increasing number of state-level and federal court decisions have blocked them from going into effect, for now. Read More Trump-appointed federal judge blocks Indiana’s ban on gender-affirming care for trans youth Pioneering transgender lawmaker has advice for pushing back against transphobic bills Neo-Nazis can’t stop Pride in Montana: ‘Yes, we are under attack. But we will not be quiet’

A man has appeared in court for the first time on four murder charges as he’s accused of shooting and killing a family with whom he shared a duplex in Kellogg, Idaho. Majorjon Kaylor, 31, appeared in Shoshone County Magistrate court in an orange jumpsuit on Tuesday morning, according to The Spokesman-Review. Mr Kaylor is facing allegations that he killed Kenneth and Kenna Guardipee, in addition to Devin Smith and a teenage boy who in the courtroom was referred to as AS. The family lived below the suspect and his family in a duplex at 515 W Brown Ave in Kellogg. Police arrived at the house after reports of a shooting at around 7.20pm on Sunday. Police found the family killed by gunfire in the home. Mr Kaylor has also been charged with burglary for entering the home. He acknowledged the five charges as they were read out by Shoshone County Municipal Court Judge Keisha Oxendine, responding “Yes”. Prosecutor Benjamin Allen said that the suspect confessed to the allegations when he was questioned by police. “Admissions were ultimately made to the offences charged,” Mr Allen said. The prosecutor said that a witness saw Mr Kaylor shoot and kill at least two of the four members of the family. Mr Allen said the killings were done in a “horrific manner” but the prosecutor declined to go into further detail. He added that Mr Kaylor has a “sparse and sporadic criminal history,” including a number of misdemeanour driving violations and a drug possession charge. The prosecutor said that Mr Kaylor works at a mine in the area and that he’s married, Mr Allen added. According to Mr Kaylor’s public defender, he has spent his entire life in Shoshone County and his criminal history doesn’t include previous violent offences. The judge remanded the suspect into custody without bail. After the hearing, Mr Kaylor was taken across the street by deputies to Shoshone County Jail. According to The Spokesman-Review, Mr Kaylor has the word “savage” tattoed above one of his eyebrows. A preliminary hearing has been scheduled for 3 July at 1.30pm. Following the shooting, Idaho State Police Lt Paul Berger told the paper that “This is a tragic situation that will affect the Kellogg community,” before adding that “Detectives continue working to establish a timeline and what led to the shooting”. Mary Jane McShane, 80, was in her backyard in the area when the shooting took place on Sunday evening. She told the paper that she didn’t hear anything. She added that she didn’t know anything had happened until she got a call from her brother asking her if she was okay. “It’s normally very calm, very quiet,” the retired nurse told the paper. “It’s shocking and sad.” Describing the town of Kellogg as small and close-knit, she said that she “never expected something like this to happen”. Ms McShane spends part of the year abroad, telling the paper that she has always been concerned about the gun culture in the northern parts of the state. She’s now concerned that her Irish friends will hesitate to come visit because of the shootings.

Judge Aileen Cannon has set a date for the trial in the classified documents case against former President Donald Trump. The Trump-appointed judge has signed a court order listing the trial as starting on 14 August of this year in Fort Pierce, Florida. “This case is hereby set for a Criminal Jury Trial during the two-week period commencing August 14, 2023, or as soon thereafter as the case may be called,” the court order states. “Any change of plea must be taken prior to 5:00 p.m. on the last business day before trial is scheduled to begin,” it adds. The court order is likely to be challenged as motions are filed, including requests for the trial to be delayed. “All pre-trial motions and motions in limine must be filed by July 24, 2023,” the court order states. Scott MacFarlane of CBS News noted that “This timeline seems quite aspirational.. not likely to hold”. Judge Cannon appears to have created what’s called a “rocket docket” seemingly in an attempt to push the trial through the judicial system. Most federal trials take as long as a year as both parties prepare for the proceedings, The Daily Beast noted. Legal experts have previously indicated that Judge Cannon can be unpredictable and that she has ruled in favour of Mr Trump in the past after he appointed her shortly before leaving the White House. While overseeing Mr Trump’s challenge to the raid of his Mar-a-Lago estate last year, she added more red tape, slowing down the FBI probe. Former federal prosecutor Brandon Van Grack told The New York Times that the proposed trial date probably won’t stand as the discovery process of handing over classified evidence to the defence legal team hasn’t started yet. But he said that the date “signals that the court is at least trying to do everything it can to move the case along and that it’s important that the case proceed quickly”. “Even though it’s unlikely to hold, it’s at least a positive signal — positive in the sense that all parties and the public should want this case to proceed as quickly as possible,” he added. As Mr Trump struggles to retain lawyers to represent him, it’s unclear if the defence wants the case to move quickly and for the case to be resolved ahead of the 2024 election or if there will be attempts to delay it until after the election. But Mr Trump has for decades attempted to delay legal cases and this case is likely to be given the same treatment. If the trial goes beyond the election and Mr Trump is elected, he may theoretically attempt to pardon himself. He may also order his attorney general to drop the charges against him, The Times notes. Following Mr Trump’s indictment in Miami, Special Counsel Jack Smith indicated that he wanted a speedy trial. Judge Cannon wrote in the court order that the trial is set to be held at her home courthouse in Fort Pierce, a small town in the north of the Southern District of Florida. More follows...

Hunter Biden has reached a plea deal with the Department of Justice, agreeing to plead guilty to three federal charges following an investigation into his taxes. President Joe Biden’s son will plead guilty to three federal charges, the Justice Department said in a court filing on Tuesday morning. A court filing from David Weiss, the US Attorney for District of Delaware, said that the president’s only living son will plea guilty to two federal charges of willful failure to pay federal income tax one charge of a firearm by a person who is “an unlawful user or addicted to a controlled substance.” At the time, Mr Biden, the sole surviving son of the president’s first marriage, was actively addicted to drugs. “The parties jointly request that the Court schedule a consolidated Initial Appearance on the firearm Inform and an Initial Appearance and Change of Plea Hearing on the tax charges,” the filing said. Mr Weiss was appointed by former president Donald Trump and has been in charge of the probe into Mr Biden. The case says that in 2017, Mr Biden had received received taxable income in excess of $1.5m, $100,000 of which was taxable to the federal government, but he failed the pay it to the Internal Revenue Service by 17 April 2018. He reportedly failed to the same the following year. White House Spokesman Iam Sams put out a statement after the charges were made public. “The President and First Lady love their son and support him as he continues to rebuild his life,” he said. “We will have no further comment.” Read More Hunter Biden charged with failing to pay federal income tax and illegally having a weapon Biden snaps back as reporter asks him about ‘big guy’ controversy White House rejects any involvement in Trump prosecution as ex-president under arrest