ВИБОРЧА ГАЗЕТА

Tuberville Ending Blockade of Most US Military Nominees

U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville announced on Tuesday that he’s ending his blockade of hundreds of military promotions, following heavy criticism from many of his colleagues in the Senate and clearing the way for hundreds to be approved.

Tuberville maintained that his blockade of military promotions was over a dispute about a Pentagon abortion policy. The Alabama Republican said Tuesday he’s “not going to hold the promotions of these people any longer.”

Almost 400 military nominations have been in limbo due to Tuberville’s blanket hold on confirmations and promotions for senior military officers. It’s a stance that has left key national security positions unfilled and military families with an uncertain path forward.

Tuberville said he was blocking the nominations in opposition to new Pentagon rules that allow reimbursement for travel when a service member must go out of state to get an abortion or other reproductive care. President Joe Biden’s administration instituted the new rules after the Supreme Court overturned the nationwide right to an abortion and some states have limited or banned the procedure.

Critics said that Tuberville’s ire was misplaced and that he was blocking the promotions of people who had nothing to do with the policy he opposed.

“Why are we punishing American heroes who have nothing to with the dispute?” said Senator Dan Sullivan, a Republican from Alaska. “Remember we are against the Biden abortion travel policy, but why are we punishing people who have nothing to do with the dispute and if they get confirmed can’t fix it? No one has had an answer for that question because there is no answer.”
…

Judge Rejects Trump’s Claim of Immunity from Criminal Charges

A U.S. judge on Friday said Donald Trump does not have immunity from criminal charges for actions he took as president, rejecting a bid by the Republican to toss out the case accusing him of conspiring to overturn his 2020 election loss.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan in Washington found there was no legal basis for concluding that U.S. presidents cannot face criminal charges once they are no longer in office.

Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, can immediately appeal the ruling, which could delay the trial while an appeals court and potentially the Supreme Court weigh the issue. The trial is currently scheduled to begin in March.

Chutkan’s ruling brings Trump a step closer to facing a jury on charges that he plotted to interfere in the counting of votes and obstruct Congress’ certification of his election defeat to Democrat Joe Biden.

Trump has pleaded not guilty and accused prosecutors of attempting to damage his campaign. The case is one of four criminal prosecutions that Trump is facing as he seeks to retake the White House.

Trump has other pending legal motions to dismiss the case based on claims that it violates his free speech rights and is legally flawed.

Because Trump is the first current or former U.S. president to face criminal charges, Chutkan’s ruling is the first by a U.S. court affirming that presidents can be charged with crimes like any other citizen.

The U.S. Justice Department has long had an internal policy not to indict a sitting president, but prosecutors said no such restrictions exist once a president leaves the White House.

Trump’s lawyers made a sweeping claim that Trump is “absolutely immune” from charges arising from official actions he took as president, arguing that political opponents could use the threat of criminal prosecution to interfere with a president’s responsibilities.

His defense team argued that the immunity U.S. presidents enjoy from civil lawsuits should extend to criminal charges.

Prosecutors contended that Trump’s argument would essentially put the U.S. president above the law, violating foundational principles of the U.S. Constitution.
…

US Congressman Santos Refuses to Resign, Says Expulsion Would Set Precedent

In his closing arguments for remaining a member of the House, a defiant Representative George Santos depicted himself as a victim of a smear campaign by some of his colleagues and made clear that he would not resign before a vote Friday on whether he should be expelled.

The first-term Republican congressman from New York could well become just the sixth member of the House to have been ousted by colleagues. While Santos survived two earlier expulsion efforts, a critical House Ethics Committee report released on November 16 has convinced more members that his actions merit the House’s most severe punishment.

“I will not stand by quietly,” Santos said during Thursday afternoon’s debate on the House floor. “The people of the Third District of New York sent me here. If they want me out, you’re going to have to go silence those people and go take the hard vote.”

‘This will haunt them,’ says Santos

Of the previous expulsions in the House, three were for disloyalty to the Union during the Civil War and two were for lawmakers convicted in federal court. Santos appealed to those lawmakers who worry that a new precedent is being set for the chamber’s harshest punishment.

“This will haunt them in the future where mere allegations are sufficient to have members removed from office when duly elected by their people in their respective states and districts,” Santos said during a press conference held early in the morning before House debate began.

Santos was a bright spot for the Republican Party when he won his election in November 2022, flipping a seat that had been held by the Democrats and helping Republicans take control of the House. But, soon after, reports began to emerge that Santos had lied about having Jewish ancestry, a career at top Wall Street firms and a college degree. He turned into a distraction and an embarrassment to his party.

In early March, the House Ethics Committee announced it was launching an investigation into Santos. That was followed in May when the U.S. attorney’s office for the Eastern District of New York unveiled a 13-count federal indictment that was later replaced with the 23-count indictment.

The indictment alleges he stole the identities of campaign donors and then used their credit cards to make tens of thousands of dollars in unauthorized charges. Federal prosecutors say Santos wired some of the money to his personal bank account and used the rest to pad his campaign coffers.

Santos has pleaded not guilty.

Panel says it has evidence of lawbreaking

Meanwhile, Ethics Committee investigators spent eight months on the Santos case. The panel said it amassed “overwhelming evidence” of lawbreaking by Santos that it sent to the Justice Department. Among other things, the panel said that Santos knowingly caused his campaign committee to file false or incomplete reports with the Federal Election Commission, used campaign funds for personal purposes, and violated the Ethics in Government Act with his financial disclosure statements.

The disgraceful association that comes with expulsion was not lost on Santos. But rather than seek to avoid it by resigning, he sought to frame it as an unfair persecution, saying “If I leave, they win. If I leave, the bullies take place. This is bullying.”

Members of the Republican delegation from New York led the arguments for expelling Santos. Representative Anthony D’Esposito acknowledged that the expulsion would set a new precedent, but he said he was confident the American people would welcome lawmakers being held to a higher standard.

Arguing against expulsion, Louisiana Republican Representative Clay Higgins said that while he respects the Ethics Committee, he had concerns about how the Santos case was handled. He said he was troubled that a Republican-led committee would submit a report that was so judgmental and publicized.

While the Ethics Committee does have a Republican chairman, its membership is evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats.
…