SAN DIEGO — A gun control organization has filed a lawsuit on behalf of victims of last year’s shooting at the Chabad of Poway, accusing the manufacturer of the weapon used in the fatal attack, the gun store that sold the weapon to the accused shooter and his parents of negligence.The lawsuit filed by Brady Legal, the litigation arm of the gun control group Brady United, also names the state of California for failing to conduct an adequate background check that would have shown the accused shooter, John T. Earnest, was underage and not eligible to buy a weapon.The suit was filed Monday in San ...
Ivanka Trump responds to Committee’s invite by saying she called for end to violence – leaves out ‘patriots’ part
Ivanka Trump is responding to her invitation from the January 6 Committee by issuing a statement that is being seen suggesting she has no intention of accepting. Earlier Thursday the Committee sent the former First Daughter and White House senior advisor a lengthy 11-page letter asking for her voluntary cooperation.
A statement from her spokesperson given to CNN White House Correspondent Kate Bennett references a tweet posted by Ivanka Trump the day of the attack on the Capitol – a tweet she was forced to delete after massive outrage.
"As the Committee already knows, Ivanka did not speak at the January 6 rally," the statement reads. "As she publicly stated at 3:15pm, 'any security breach or disrespect to our law enforcement is unacceptable. The violence must stop immediately."
NEW: @IvankaTrump's spokesperson tells me Ivanka "just learned" of the 1/6 Committee's invitation to appear before them, but from the response below, it sounds as though she isn't planning to do so: pic.twitter.com/VXpUXDnEuP
— Kate Bennett (@KateBennett_DC) January 20, 2022
But in the actual Ivanka Trump called the insurrectionists "American Patriots," as CNN reported that day:
Ivanka Trump addressed the rioters as "American Patriots" in a tweet, then deleted it https://t.co/lJvkzNsi1e pic.twitter.com/qSH3T9I5gc
— CNN (@CNN) January 6, 2021
Jared Kushner trying assure partners that Trump won't interfere with newly launched private equity firm
Jared Kushner wants other financiers to know that he plans to remain with his private equity firm whether or not his father-in-law returns to the White House.
Donald Trump's son-in-law and former senior White House adviser has been telling limited partners at Affinity Capital about the contacts he made while serving in government, particularly in the Middle East, reported Axios.
"Jared's intention is for this to be his long-term opportunity and, other than the book he has coming out, he's spending most of his time on it," the source said. "He can't live his life just waiting on what [Trump] may or may not do .... People wouldn't have joined the firm if they thought Jared is going to leave in a couple years."
However, those efforts could be complicated if Donald Trump is re-elected because some of those limited partners are said the be sovereign wealth funds, and because technology companies are generally hostile to the twice-impeached one-time president.
The Miami-based private equity firm, which is reportedly looking for office space in Israel, has a little more than $3 billion in verbal commitments for its debut fund, and its first deal is expected to come by the end of March.
A former special counsel compared the Ivanka letter to what DOJ lawyers have said in court — here’s what he found
The House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol sent a letter to Ivanka Trump asking for some of the information to confirm some of the facts that other witnesses have told them.
Among the details in the letter from committee chair Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), include questions about Former President Donald Trump's efforts to persuade Pence that he could throw the 2020 election back to the state legislatures to decide.
Former special counsel Ryan Goodman cited a phone call between Trump and former Vice President Mike Pence when Trump was pressuring Pence to refuse to certify the election during the Jan. 6 Electoral College count. "General Keith Kellogg was also in the Oval Office during that call, and has testified about that discussion," the letter says.
Goodman called this "criminal obstruction of [the] Jan. 6 proceedings for which many have been indicted."
The committee said that it wants to hear her side of the conversation she heard on the phone call and any other conversations. Thompson also gave an example of "Committee has information suggesting that President Trump's White House Counsel may have concluded that the actions President Trump directed Vice President Pence to take would violate the Constitution or would be otherwise illegal."
Until now, the conversation about Trump pressuring Pence has not been part of the conversation of illegal behavior, but Goodman recalled that the Justice Department is clearly looking at it as a possibility.
U.S. District Court Judge Carl Nichols posed the question in November last year of whether it would be a felony to "corruptly" interfere with an official government proceeding.
Former Watergate lawyer Nick Ackerman referred to the Trump administration documents that the Supreme Court said must be handed over to the Committee, saying that they too could prove the same felony.
"This really is going to answer the question, can they make a criminal case on Donald Trump for obstructing Congress, which is an extremely serious federal felony carrying imprisonment of 20 years," Ackerman explained.
According to Politico, such a crime typically happens in relation to a court case like threatening judges or jurors. Prosecutors have, however, used it in about one-third of the 730 people charged for the insurrection.
It also wasn't the first time Nichols mentioned it. During a hearing for alleged Capitol attacker Garret Miller, Nichols asked whether the obstruction of a government proceeding statute could have been violated by a person who simply "called Vice President Pence to seek to have him adjudge the certification in a particular way."
He never said Trump's name.
Justice Department prosecutor James Pearce dismissed it, but then thought again, saying that it likely would apply if the person knew Pence had an obligation under the Constitution to merely count the votes and recognize the result.
“If that person does that knowing it is not an available argument [and is] asking the vice president to do something the individual knows is wrongful … one of the definitions of ‘corruptly’ is trying to get someone to violate a legal duty,” Pearce said.
Goodman noted that Mark Meadows could be on the hook for this as well. According to text messages between Ivanka Trump and Meadows, implying that Meadows was involved in the pressure campaign against Pence.
The Committee letter said "Also, on the evening of January 5th, you texted Mr. Meadows: 'Pence pressure. WH counsel will leave.' What communications or information led you conclude that the White House Counsel would leave? What precisely did you know at the time?"
See the letter excerpt from Goodman below:
<thread> #January6thCommittee's letter to Ivanka Trump signals:\n\nCommittee has testimony (via General Kellogg) and docs that point to Trump's illegally pressuring Pence to overturn the election.\n\nKey here: criminal obstruction of 1/6 proceedings for which many have been indicted.pic.twitter.com/rexM33AxPq— Ryan Goodman (@Ryan Goodman) 1642701176
IN OTHER NEWS: Watergate lawyer explains how Supreme Court handed Congress the keys to put Trump in prison
Watergate lawyer explains how Supreme Court handed Congress the keys to put Trump away www.youtube.com