Politics

Some Jan. 6 trials are on hold. Why? There’s too much evidence

Published

3 years ago

March 11, 2022

Some Jan. 6 trials are on hold. Why? There’s too much evidence

WASHINGTON —

The quantity of proof collected as a part of the investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, revolt rivals what the Hubble telescope has amassed in its three-decade orbit. And sorting via all of it has floor lots of its prison instances to a halt.

To hurry issues alongside, U.S. attorneys and public defenders have teamed as much as create a large, searchable database to comb via the hundreds of social media messages, movies and different proof produced when the assault on the Capitol was broadcast to the world by journalists, bystanders and the rioters themselves.

“In lots of even federal prison instances you have got one pocket book of proof, proper? You’ve possibly 50 to 100 reveals. In an enormous white-collar case, you might need a number of notebooks,” mentioned Loyola Legislation Faculty professor and former U.S. Atty. Laurie Levenson. “That is astronomically extra.”

Some judges are getting antsy about how gradual the instances are shifting. And a few Republican politicians have used the delays to criticize the Biden administration’s dealing with of the instances, saying it’s time to wrap up the investigations and transfer on, an argument that would get louder if the get together regains management of Congress subsequent yr.

U.S. attorneys are underneath immense strain to efficiently prosecute as many of those instances as doable and don’t need to threat defendants getting off on a technicality as a result of they weren’t given all of the proof towards them, or worse, proof that would clear them.

A courtroom sketch of Man Wesley Reffitt, left, and his lawyer William Welch in federal court docket in Washington on Feb. 28.

(Dana Verkouteren )

Constructing a database

At this charge it might take years to prosecute all of the instances. The Justice Division continues to announce indictments almost weekly. And remains to be attempting to establish at the least 350 extra folks.

Because of this, 14 months after rioters brawled with police, leading to a number of deaths and scores of accidents, brought about thousands and thousands of {dollars} of injury and disrupted the certification of President Biden’s victory, just one Jan. 6 defendant, Man Reffitt, has confronted a jury. Reffitt, a member of the Texas Three Percenter militia group, was discovered responsible on all counts Tuesday, together with obstruction of an official continuing and carrying a firearm whereas being unlawfully on Capitol grounds.

Since so lots of the instances contact on each other, Justice Division prosecutors determined the federal government is obligated to provide all related info to all defendants and let their attorneys establish info they deem related to their particular instances. Many defendants had been asking for a similar info, and a database meant the federal government wouldn’t should repeatedly hand over the identical proof.

In Might, the federal government employed Deloitte Monetary Advisory Companies LLP to assist it assemble a searchable repository for each prosecutors and protection attorneys to entry.

However, the proof couldn’t simply be thrown into the cloud. Among the work needed to be performed by hand.

It needed to be sorted in a logical means that enables defendants to search out info which may relate to their case.

For instance, to assist protection attorneys discover their shoppers within the crowd, the federal government created a GPS spreadsheet of the places of tons of of officers in the course of the siege so radio transmissions and body-camera footage may very well be searched by location and time.

Police clear the hallway inside the Capitol.

Interviews and depositions carried out by hundreds of legislation enforcement officers in all 50 states who used totally different recording software program needed to be formatted so all protection attorneys might entry it whatever the particular person software program they’ve.

The U.S. legal professional’s workplace for the District of Columbia declined an interview request in regards to the database and investigation, pointing as a substitute to its Feb. 9 memo on the standing of the invention course of that was filed in dozens of instances.

Physique-camera footage, nameless suggestions

Based on that memo, the database contains hundreds of hours of surveillance footage from the U.S. Capitol Police, the Metropolitan Police Division, the U.S. Secret Service and the Senate and Home flooring. It additionally contains the body-camera footage from officers within the melee, radio transmissions from responding legislation enforcement businesses, location knowledge for hundreds of units that related to the Capitol’s mobile community, social media posts and suggestions, in addition to interviews with witnesses, victims and tipsters, and all stories of officer misconduct. Proof is offered to protection attorneys on a rolling foundation.

U.S. attorneys are prioritizing probably the most requested materials: footage of the Home and Senate flooring, interviews with 94 cops and witnesses about improper use of drive, 18,484 nameless suggestions obtained by the Metropolitan Police Division and Secret Service recordsdata in regards to the whereabouts of Vice President-elect Kamala Harris and Vice President Mike Pence on Jan. 6.

Amongst different proof, the division remains to be working to course of greater than 900 data of FBI interviews with legislation enforcement and about 26,000 pages of data from Capitol Police and the Metropolitan Police Division.

Fliers seeking information produced by the FBI

Prosecutors additionally instantly hand over case-specific proof to protection attorneys, reminiscent of laborious drives seized throughout an arrest or proof with figuring out info reminiscent of journey data.

U.S. attorneys informed judges final yr that the Jan. 6 investigation had already resulted in 250 terabytes of knowledge, roughly the equal of 32.5 million digital images or 500,000 hours of audio recordings. NASA’s Hubble has collected 290 terabytes of knowledge in 31 years of operation.

“This isn’t going to be a document-intensive case like many federal prosecutions are,” mentioned Brandon Fox, former chief of the prison division of the U.S. legal professional’s workplace for the Central District of California. “That is going to be all in regards to the movies. I’ve a tough time imagining one other prosecution with the sheer quantity of movies which are on the market.”

Fox mentioned giving the protection entry to a fulsome database and likewise particularly figuring out info that is likely to be related to their case echoes what federal prosecutors have performed on different difficult instances with a number of defendants. Fox led the federal prosecution group that introduced down former L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca and 20 others on obstruction of justice and different costs.

“We allowed protection attorneys to have entry to that database, however we might individually produce to the defendants issues that we thought individually had been relevant to them. And so we had the protection,” he mentioned. “That’s the very best factor they’ll do.”

Nonetheless, he famous that such measures gained’t cease defendants from arguing that discovering proof within the database that may clear them is like discovering “a needle in a haystack.”

Defendants anxious to get to court docket is likely to be hoping the federal government misses handing over a key piece of proof, one thing that would trigger a conviction to be overturned, he mentioned.

A photo from security video taken inside the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Based on the George Washington College Program on Extremism, the federal government has introduced 757 instances towards folks for crimes round Jan. 6, together with 51 Californians. Of these, 225 have pleaded responsible. The remaining defendants are largely in a holding sample. Many of the about 65 being held in federal custody are accused of assaulting cops.

Federal legislation requires trials to start inside 70 days of indictment or the protection can request the costs be dismissed. Fox mentioned this can be very uncommon for a case to be dismissed for a Speedy Trial Act violation. Judges typically cease the clock, as they’ve in almost each Jan. 6 case, for “good trigger.”

The proper to a speedy trial

That has some defendants, significantly these being held in custody, exasperated by how lengthy the method is taking.

Californian Daniel Rodriguez, who has been in jail since March 31, 2021, has repeatedly pushed for a trial date to be set. His legal professional Rebecca Levy mentioned in court docket that they primarily have the proof wanted to maneuver to trial. Rodriguez is accused of attempting to interrupt a window, brawling with police and repeatedly stunning Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone with a stun gun. Fanone had a coronary heart assault.

In a court docket continuing in August, Levy mentioned she was involved about her consumer’s speedy-trial rights, including, “Now we have been affected person up to now, however I’m involved about ready for this database to go surfing as a result of I’m getting some conflicting details about when precisely all of it might be uploaded.” She declined to remark for this story.

U.S. District Decide Amy Berman Jackson denied Levy’s request to set a trial date and saved the clock paused, saying the Justice Division was making a good-faith effort to provide proof. Rodriguez stays in a Washington, D.C., jail.

Levy once more raised the proof delays at Rodriguez’s March 3 standing listening to. That point Jackson allowed the clock to run for 2 weeks and mentioned she’s holding time on her calendar open within the hope the case can go to trial by August.

Different defendants out on bond appear prepared to provide the Justice Division time to prepare the proof for them.

Supporters of President Trump fill the steps of the U.S. Capitol before a mob stormed the building.

Los Angeles-based legal professional Tigran Martinian, who represents Rodriguez’s co-defendant Edward Badalian, has not been pushing to go to trial.

“It’s what it’s. There’s not a lot we are able to do about” the wait, Martinian informed The Occasions.

Badalian, who was charged in November with conspiracy, obstruction of an official continuing and aiding and abetting, and tampering with paperwork, is out of custody on bond. A 3rd unnamed defendant fled the nation, which is contributing to the delay, based on prosecutors.

Martinian mentioned that though being on bond provides restrictions to his consumer’s life, there’s additionally a profit.

“The issue as a protection lawyer is you need to put up the very best protection, and placing up the very best protection on a sophisticated case like this takes time,” he mentioned.

Some defendants is likely to be ready to see how sturdy the federal government’s proof is towards them earlier than deciding whether or not to hunt a plea deal or push to hurry up their trial, Loyola’s Levenson mentioned.

In the meantime, new proof is being added to the database. A whole lot of hundreds of data had been despatched to DeLoitte on Feb. 7. U.S. attorneys didn’t present a agency deadline within the memo for when the proof can be obtainable.

As soon as the database is full, the method is absolutely simply starting, Levenson cautioned.

Particular person federal instances typically take years, she mentioned, and convoluted instances like these arising from Jan. 6 are in a category of their very own.

A U.S. Capitol window broken during the riot

Politics

U.S. Tells Court It Plans to Deport Scientist to Russia

Published

9 hours ago

May 14, 2025

Press Room

U.S. Tells Court It Plans to Deport Scientist to Russia

Government lawyers told a federal judge on Wednesday that the Trump administration intends to deport a Harvard scientist back to Russia, a country she fled in 2022, despite her fear that she will be arrested there over her protest of Russia’s war in Ukraine.

Kseniia Petrova, a researcher at Harvard Medical School, has been held in a Louisiana immigration detention facility since February, when she was detained at Boston’s airport for failing to declare scientific samples she was carrying in her luggage.

This is the first time the government has formally stated its plan to deport her to Russia.

In Wednesday’s hearing, Christina Reiss, chief judge of the United States District Court in Vermont, quizzed the government lawyers about their grounds for canceling Ms. Petrova’s visa and detaining her. Judge Reiss went on to schedule a bail hearing on May 28, potentially setting the stage for Ms. Petrova’s release.

The case has drawn the attention of elite scientists around the world, and sent a chill though the community of international academics that surrounded Ms. Petrova at Harvard. Several dozen Harvard students and faculty made the drive to Burlington, Vt., for the hearing.

“For every person that they detain, thousands of others are going to be scared of coming to the country,” said Leo Gerdén, a Harvard senior from Sweden.

Ms. Petrova was detained at Logan Airport on Feb. 16 as she returned from vacation in France, carrying with her sections of frog embryos from an affiliate laboratory, at the request of her supervisor at Harvard.

She has admitted that she failed to declare the samples, but her lawyer has argued that this would ordinarily be treated as a minor infraction, punishable with a fine. Instead, the customs official canceled Ms. Petrova’s J-1 visa on the spot and initiated deportation proceedings.

When Ms. Petrova explained that she had fled her native Russia for political reasons and could not return there, she was processed as an asylum seeker, and sent to Richwood Correctional Center in Monroe, La., where she has remained for nearly three months.

In remarks from the bench, Judge Reiss seemed skeptical that the airport customs agent had possessed the authority to cancel Ms. Petrova’s visa.

“Where is that authority?” she asked. “Where does a customs and border patrol officer have the authority on his or her own to revoke a visa?” she said. “It’s got to be somewhere. Because there is no way that person has kind of an unlimited determination.”

The judge noted that the she had reviewed the statute laying out the grounds for customs officers to find someone inadmissible to the United States, and “I don’t see anything about customs violations.”

Jeffrey M. Hartman, an attorney representing the Department of Justice, said “it’s the secretary of state’s authority” to cancel a visa, and that the secretary has delegated that authority to customs officials.

Judge Reiss asked the government to clarify whether or not it planned to deport Ms. Petrova to Russia.

“You are asking for her removal to Russia?” she asked.

“Yes, your honor,” Mr. Hartman replied.

Ms. Petrova’s attorney filed a petition challenging her detention with the federal court in February, when she was held briefly at a Vermont detention center before being transferred to the immigration detention center in Louisiana.

Mr. Hartman argued that the federal court had no jurisdiction over Ms. Petrova’s detention. He said Ms. Petrova may contest her detention, but only in a Louisiana immigration court.

“It’s not something that a district court can entertain,” he said. “We think the proper venue for that question is Louisiana, where she is detained and where her custodian is.”

“But she is only detained there because you moved her,” said the judge.

Mr. Hartman said that when Ms. Petrova had been asked whether she was carrying biological materials, that she “failed to disclose their full contents,” and was carrying “a baggie with loose vials of this experimental material.”

“The C.B.P. office was our first line of defense against unknown biological materials from a foreign national out of a port of entry,” he said.

Over the past few weeks, federal courts in Vermont have handed down a series of decisions favoring noncitizen academics caught up in President Trump’s immigration crackdown.

On May 9, Tufts doctoral student Rumeysa Ozturk was released from detention on the orders of a judge, William K. Sessions III, who said that her continued detention could chill “the speech of the millions and millions of individuals in this country who are not citizens.”

And on April 30, Judge Geoffrey W. Crawford ordered the release of Mohsen Mahdawi, a student organizer at Columbia University who was detained by immigration authorities during an interview for his naturalization. Both Ms. Ozturk and Mr. Mahdawi were singled out because they had vocally protested Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.

Ms. Petrova’s case has no apparent basis in any political activism. But the attorney general of Massachusetts, Andrea Joy Campbell, who filed an amicus brief in the case, said Ms. Petrova’s detention, like that of Ms. Ozturk, represented “reckless and cruel misuse of power to punish and terrorize noncitizen members of the academic community.”

Ms. Campbell argued that international students bring significant revenue into Massachusetts, and that by creating “an atmosphere of fear,” the Trump administration has threatened the state’s economy.

Ms. Petrova’s attorney, Gregory Romanovsky, has argued that customs officials overstepped their authority by revoking her visa.

Though Customs officials may, in some cases, determine that an individual is inadmissible, he said, they must identify the legal grounds for doing so, such as criminal activity or health concerns. He said failing to declare scientific samples did not meet that test.

“It shouldn’t make her any more inadmissible than cutting in front of the line when she was waiting to be inspected,” Mr. Romanovsky said. “What the government is doing is saying, ‘If you’re an immigrant or a noncitizen and you’re not on your best behavior, we will punish you. We are going to use various immigration provisions to get rid of you.’ ”

Adam Sychla, a postdoctoral research fellow who organized a group of roughly 20 Harvard students and faculty members who traveled from Cambridge to the courthouse in Burlington, Vt., said he had never met Ms. Petrova, but had immediately decided to make the drive.

“Whether I know her personally or not, is immaterial,” he added. “I easily could have met her last week to start a collaboration. Instead, Kseniia is being unfairly detained.”

Miles J. Herszenhorn contributed reporting from Cambridge, Mass.

Politics

Republicans say they're 'out of the loop' on Trump's $400M Qatari plane deal

Published

11 hours ago

May 14, 2025

Press Room

Republicans say they're 'out of the loop' on Trump's 0M Qatari plane deal

While Democrats have largely ridiculed President Donald Trump‘s decision to accept a $400 million jet from the Qatari royal family on behalf of the U.S. government, Republicans have raised national security concerns and admitted they have not been briefed on the details of the deal.

Fox News Digital asked Senate Republicans for their reaction to Trump deciding to accept the luxury Boeing jet from Qatar. While Trump continues his diplomatic trip through the Middle East, House Republicans are busy finalizing his “big, beautiful bill” at committee markups on Capitol Hill.

“I actually haven’t paid attention to it,” Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., said. “I’m sorry to be so out of the loop on that. I’ve just been thinking about Medicaid and about what the House is sending over.”

And Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, another Trump ally, said she didn’t know enough about the deal to comment on it when pressed by Fox News Digital.

DEMS CONDEMN TRUMP’S JET DEAL, CALL $400M GIFT ‘UNCONSTITUTIONAL’

Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and President Donald Trump speak to each other at the Royal Palace in Doha May 14, 2025. Trump, right, touched down at Hamad International Airport in Doha. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

“I need to find out from the administration what exactly is going on,” Ernst added.

TRUMP DEFENDS QATAR JUMBO JET OFFER AS TROUBLED BOEING FAILS TO DELIVER NEW AIR FORCE ONE FLEET

Republican senators Susan Collins of Maine, Dan Sullivan of Alaska and Eric Schmitt of Missouri also admitted they don’t know the details of the deal.

However, Collins, a Republican with a willingness to buck the party on certain issues, seemed to align more with Democrats’ reaction to the gift, saying she suspected there could be issues within the GIFT Act, which prohibits federal employees from accepting gifts from foreign governments.

Democrats have pointed to the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution as proof the Qatari gift is “unconstitutional.” The emoluments clause states that no elected official should accept a gift from a foreign country without consent from Congress.

“My concern is his safety,” Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla, told Fox News Digital. “Qatar supports Hamas. The Hamas leaders live in Qatar, so my concern is the safety of the president. How are we going to know that the plane is safe?”

President Donald Trump wearing a red tie stands while he speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One

President Donald Trump speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One en route from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, to Doha, Qatar, May 14, 2025. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

The U.S. Department of Defense is expected to retrofit the Boeing 747-8 luxury jet to be used as Air Force One. Some Republicans still have national security concerns.

“Qatar has a relationship with China, a relationship with Hamas. That would scare me,” Scott admitted.

But Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo, said a “free plane” sounds like a “good deal for the government.”

The Trump administration has continued to defend Qatar’s gift to the United States. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed it was not “Trump’s plane” and that it was donated to the U.S. Air Force.

A Qatari Boeing 747, right, sits on the tarmac of Palm Beach International airport after Trump toured the aircraft Feb. 15, 2025. (Getty Images)

On Wednesday morning, Trump signed a series of agreements with Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani in Doha, Qatar, which included a Qatari purchasing agreement for 160 American Boeing planes, defense agreements and a declaration of cooperation between the countries.

Trump defended his decision to accept the Qatari jet Tuesday, saying it would be “stupid” not to and emphasizing that he accepted it on behalf of the U.S. government, not himself.

“The Boeing 747 is being given to the United States Air Force/Department of Defense, NOT TO ME! It is a gift from a Nation, Qatar, that we have successfully defended for many years. It will be used by our Government as a temporary Air Force One, until such time as our new Boeings, which are very late on delivery, arrive. Why should our military, and therefore our taxpayers, be forced to pay hundreds of millions of Dollars when they can get it for FREE from a country that wants to reward us for a job well done,” Trump said on Truth Social Tuesday.

“This big savings will be spent, instead, to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Only a FOOL would not accept this gift on behalf of our Country. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” Trump added.

The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment about plans to discuss the deal with Congress.

Deirdre Heavey is a politics writer for Fox News Digital.

Politics

Trump urges Syria's new leader to expel 'Palestinian terrorists'

Published

12 hours ago

May 14, 2025

Press Room

Trump urges Syria's new leader to expel 'Palestinian terrorists'

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — President Trump met Wednesday with Syria’s new leader, praising him as a “young, attractive guy” and urging him to rid his country of “Palestinian terrorists.”

Trump also urged Syrian interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa to sign onto the historic Abraham Accords brokered during Trump’s first term.

The meeting in Riyadh came as Trump concluded the Saudi Arabian leg of his Middle Eastern trip and headed to Qatar, the second destination of what has so far been an opulence-heavy tour of the region.

The meeting with Al-Sharaa, which lasted roughly half an hour and was the first time in a quarter of a century that the leaders of the two nations have met, marks a significant victory for Al-Sharaa’s fledgling government, coming one day after Trump’s decision to lift long-standing sanctions from the war-ravaged country.

It also lends legitimacy to a leader whose past as an Al Qaeda-affiliated jihadi leader — Al-Sharaa severed ties with the group in 2016 — had made Western nations keep him at arm’s length.

The sanctions were imposed on Syria in 2011, when the now-deposed President Bashar Assad began a brutal crackdown to quell anti-government uprisings.

Al-Sharaa headed an Islamist rebel coalition that toppled Assad in December, but the Trump administration and other Western governments conditioned the lifting of sanctions on his government fulfilling certain conditions.

Yet as is his custom, Trump cut through protocol and relied on personal relations, lifting the sanctions at the urging of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a long-time supporter of Syria’s rebellion, who joined the meeting via phone.

Speaking on Air Force One en route to Qatar, Trump described Al-Sharaa as a “young, attractive guy. Tough guy. Strong past. Very strong past. Fighter.”

“He’s got a real shot at holding it together,” Trump added. “I spoke with President Erdogan, who is very friendly with him. He feels he’s got a shot of doing a good job. It’s a torn-up country.”

According to a readout shared by White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on X, Trump urged Al-Sharaa to sign onto the Abraham Accords, tell “foreign terrorists” to leave Syria and deport “Palestinian terrorists,” help the U.S. in preventing Islamic State’s resurgence and assume responsibility for detention centers in northeast Syria housing thousands of people affiliated with Islamic State.

The Abraham Accords were the centerpiece of Trump’s foreign policy achievements in his first term. Brokered in 2020, they established diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan — without conditioning them on Palestinian statehood or Israeli concessions to the Palestinians.

Under Assad, Syria maintained a decades-old truce with Israel, despite hosting several Palestinian factions and allowing Iran and affiliated groups to operate in the country.