Author:

Fulton County prosecutor Nathan Wade withdraws from Trump case, allowing DA Fani Willis to continue

Fulton County special prosecutor Nathan Wade has withdrawn from the Georgia election interference case against former President Donald Trump and 18 co-defendants.  Wade is out following an order by Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee that said either he must go or District Attorney Fani Willis be disqualified from prosecuting Trump. Four co-defendants had accused Willis of having an “improper” affair with Wade, whom she hired to help prosecute the case.  Wade offered his resignation in a letter to Willis, saying he was doing so “in the interest of democracy.” “I am offering my resignation in the interest of democracy, in dedication to the American public, and to move this case forward as quickly as possible,” Wade wrote in his resignation letter to Willis.  He added that he was proud of the work prosecutors had done in relation to the case.  JUDGE RULES FANI WILLIS MUST STEP ASIDE FROM TRUMP CASE OR FIRE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR NATHAN WADE In her letter to Wade in which she accepted his resignation, Willis complimented him on his “professionalism and dignity” as he had “endured threats against you and your family, as well as unjustified attacks in the media and in court on your reputation as a lawyer.” “I will always remember – and will remind everyone – that you were brave enough to step forward and take on the investigation and prosecution of the allegations that the defendants in this case engaged in a conspiracy to overturn Georgia’s 2020 presidential election,” Willis wrote. “You were the one who had the courage to accept the role, even though you did not seek it.” “You are an outstanding advocate,” she added.  On his Truth Social platform, Trump said Wade resigned in “disgrace.” “Nathan was the ‘Special,’ in more ways than one, Prosecutor ‘engaged’ by Fani (pronounced Fauni!) Willis, to persecute TRUMP for Crooked Joe Biden and his Department of Injustice, for purposes of Election Interference and living the life of the Rich & Famous,” he wrote. “This is the equivalent of Deranged Jack Smith getting ‘canned,’ BIG STUFF, something which should happen in the not too distant future!!!” The defendants alleged that Willis benefited financially by hiring Wade in 2021 because they were in a pre-existing romantic relationship and went on several trips together. Michael Roman, a Republican operative who worked on Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign, claimed Wade’s law firm billed taxpayers $650,000 at a rate of $250 an hour since his hiring — and that he used that income to pay for vacations with Willis. KEY WITNESS IN FANI WILLIS CASE TESTIFIES HE MAY HAVE LIED IN TEXTS ABOUT FRIENDS’ AFFAIR Both Wade and Willis had denied they were in a romantic relationship prior to his hiring. During a two-day evidentiary hearing in February, they each testified that they split the cost of their shared trips. Willis told the court she reimbursed Wade for her share of the trips in cash. Roman’s attorney, Ashleigh Merchant, sought to unearth a money trail that would prove Willis had a conflict of interest in hiring Wade and should be disqualified. She called witnesses who testified that the couple were romantically entangled at the time Wade was hired. Robin Yeartie, a former “good friend” of Willis and past employee at the DA’s office, said she had “no doubt” that Wade and Willis started a relationship in 2019, after the two met at a conference. Yeartie testified to observing Willis and Wade “hugging” and “kissing” and showing “affection” prior to November 2021, and that she had no doubt that the two were in a “romantic” relationship starting in 2019, to when she and Willis last spoke in 2022.  In a surprise move, Willis took the stand in her own defense and contradicted Yeartie’s testimony. At least one expert described Willis’ testimony as “belligerent.”  SPECIAL ATTORNEY HIRED BY FANI WILLIS TO HELP PROSECUTE TRUMP DONATED BIG BUCKS TO HER CAMPAIGN She verbally sparred with lawyers for hours, at one point, prompting the judge to threaten to strike her testimony. She also raised eyebrows for appearing to be wearing her dress backwards. The star witness for the defense, Terrence Bradley, was a former law firm partner and divorce attorney for Wade. Bradley was called to the stand after McAfee determined he could not claim attorney-client privilege to avoid testifying.  Bradley, when pressed under oath, said he couldn’t recall several details and timelines about conversations he had with former client Wade about Wade’s romantic relationship with Willis. Merchant at one point referenced text messages between her and Bradley in which she had asked Bradley if he thought the relationship started before Willis hired Wade in 2021. Bradley responded “absolutely” in the text exchange. But after the hearing concluded, McAfee said the defendants “failed to meet their burden of proving that the District Attorney acquired an actual conflict of interest in this case through her personal relationship and recurring travels with her lead prosecutor.” “However, the established record now highlights a significant appearance of impropriety that infects the current structure of the prosecution team — an appearance that must be removed through the State’s selection of one of two options,” he wrote in an order released on March 15. McAfee is presiding over the prosecution of Trump and more than a dozen other defendants charged in an alleged illegal attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election in Georgia.  Willis’ sprawling indictment charges Trump and more than a dozen other defendants with violating Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, known as RICO. The case uses a statute normally associated with mobsters to accuse the former president, lawyers and other aides of a “criminal enterprise” to keep him in power after he narrowly lost the 2020 election to Democrat Joe Biden. Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee for 2024, has denied any wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty. On March 13, McAfee issued a ruling that quashed six counts in the Georgia election interference case against Trump and his 18 co-defendants. McAfee said that

Biden admin funnels $1 billion for climate programs at borders amid ongoing migrant crisis

The Biden administration is funneling $1 billion in taxpayer funds to America’s northern and southern borders to make dozens of federal ports of entry more climate friendly. The General Services Administration (GSA) announced it would direct Inflation Reduction Act funds to support the climate initiatives at the border, even as the ongoing surge of migrants strains federal resources. While GSA Administrator Robin Carnahan and Andrew Mayock, President Biden’s Federal Buy Clean Task Force co-chair, said the action would reduce “harmful emissions,” the move was slammed by Republicans and experts. “As usual, the Biden administration is refusing to address a problem of their own making,” House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Bruce Westerman, R-Ark., told Fox News Digital. “Instead, they’re touting a billion-dollar investment in green technology at the border while Biden’s border crisis continues to wreak havoc on local communities and federal lands. Talk about fiddling while Rome burns.” “Time and time again, the House Committee on Natural Resources has spotlighted these issues and recently held a field hearing in one of the hardest-hit areas of southern Arizona, yet this administration refuses to address the crisis they’ve created,” he continued.  DEM STATES, CITIES OVERRUN BY MIGRANTS FUNNELED MILLIONS IN FEDERAL COVID-19 AID TO SUPPORT ILLEGALS The top Republican lawmaker has repeatedly called attention to both the border crisis and environmental degradation indirectly wrought by migrants poring over the U.S.-Mexico border.  “Spending a billion dollars to build a so-called ‘environmentally friendly’ port of entry feels like a slap in the face to Americans watching our open border policies trash our beautiful public lands day in and day out,” said Westerman. ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION COULD HAVE MAJOR IMPACT ON HOUSE SEATS, ELECTORAL COLLEGE: EXPERTS According to the GSA, the funding will support reduced overall operational emissions of federal activities at the border, development of 23 all-electric buildings, projects ensuring four land ports of entry achieve net-zero emissions, and modernization and paving projects involving embodied carbon avoidance.  For example, $200 million will be used to renovate the Bridge of the Americas port in El Paso, Texas, installing solar panels, electric vehicle chargers and other energy efficiency installations. Another $135 million will be used to make the Douglas Commercial port in Cochise County, Arizona, all-electric, and $100 million will be used to make Arizona’s San Luis land port the first net-zero port of entry. In addition to hundreds of millions of dollars spent on southern border ports in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas, GSA is also earmarking millions of dollars more for decarbonization projects along the U.S.-Canada border in Washington, Idaho, North Dakota, Minnesota, New York, Vermont and Maine. REPUBLICANS PROBE DHS SECRETARY MAYORKAS OVER ROLE IN HOUSING MIGRANTS ON FEDERAL LANDS “The Biden Administration has made it abundantly clear that it will take no effective action to stop the flow of illegal immigration into the United States, only attempt to process faster the intake of inadmissible aliens,” NumbersUSA CEO James Massa told Fox News Digital.  “The long-term effects of the administration’s clear aim of adding as many people to the U.S. population by circumventing immigration restrictions put in place by Congress means that our nation’s carbon footprint will increase markedly, which is at odds with President Biden’s stated goal,” he added. Massa highlighted that, while the administration seeks to implement “sustainable technologies” at the border, the migrant crisis simultaneously strains the “limited local resources such as water, destroys sensitive environmental sanctuaries for birds and other species, reduces farmland, and creates unsustainable dynamics that weakens the conservation of the nation’s natural resources.” “In addition to endangering those millions of people by encouraging them to travel at the hands of cartels, these journeys across Central America to the U.S. southern border are devastating to croplands and wildlife habitat along the way,” Massa told Fox News Digital. Meanwhile, in January, the federal government reported more than 156,000 migrant encounters at the U.S. southern border, a slight year-over-year uptick, but a decrease compared to the month prior. In December, more than 302,000 migrants were encountered crossing the border, by far the largest single-month figure ever recorded. The December figures brought the fiscal 2024 first-quarter level to 785,000 encounters, the highest number ever recorded. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Trump Georgia case: Five key takeaways from judge’s order giving DA Fani Willis an ultimatum

A Georgia judge on Friday ruled that embattled District Attorney Fani Willis needs to remove her ex-lover and special prosecutor from the case, or step aside herself, scolding her for “making poor choices” and having “tremendous lapse in judgment.” In the 23-page order, Judge Scott McAfee said that lawyers for former President Trump and several co-defendants charged in the sweeping 2020 election interference case “failed to meet their burden of proving” an “actual conflict of interest in this case.”  But McAfee said that the established record of evidence “highlights the appearance of impropriety” that infects the prosecution team unless special prosecutor Nathan Wade is removed, or Willis herself steps aside.  Here are five key takeaways from the court order:  JUDGE RULES FANI WILLIS MUST STEP ASIDE FROM TRUMP CASE OR FIRE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR NATHAN WADE McAfee denied the co-defendants’ motion to have Willis disqualified from the case, saying they lacked sufficient evidence that Willis “acquired a personal stake in the prosecution, or that her financial arrangements had any impact on the case.” However, he added that his finding “is by no means an indication that the Court condones this tremendous lapse in judgment or the unprofessional manner of the District Attorney’s testimony during the evidentiary hearing.” “Rather, it is the undersigned’s opinion that Georgia law does not permit the finding of an actual conflict for simply making bad choices – even repeatedly – and it is the trial court’s duty to confine itself to the relevant issues and applicable law properly brought before it,” he said.  Last month, Willis made a surprise court appearance during the two-day evidentiary hearing and, while on the witness stand, verbally sparred with lawyers for hours — at one point, prompting the judge to threaten to strike her testimony. She also raised eyebrows for appearing to be wearing her dress backwards. The judge wrote in his order, “Other forums or sources of authority such as the General Assembly, the Georgia State Ethics Commission, the State Bar of Georgia, the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, or the voters of Fulton County may offer feedback on any unanswered questions that linger.” “But those are not the issues determinative to the Defendants’ motions alleging an actual conflict,” he said. A Georgia state senate special committee formed in January to investigate Willis has already held one hearing, in which attorney Ashleigh Merchant – who led the allegations in court against Willis – testified that Wade’s cellphone data indicated that he had made midnight trips to Willis’ condo before he was hired.  The Georgia House of Representatives also passed a bill earlier this year that would revive the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Qualifications Commission, which could be used as a way to oust Willis.  A Fulton County ethics board that was scheduled to hear complaints filed against Willis earlier this month backtracked after finding that it lacked jurisdiction. But complaints against both Willis and Wade are still pending before the Georgia state bar.  Defendants had argued that Willis’ several public statements on the case were prejudicial. McAfee said that some of those comments, including Willis’ “unorthodox decision to make on-the-record comments, and authorize members of her staff to do likewise, to authors intent on publishing a book about the special grand jury’s investigation during the pendency of this case,” didn’t warrant her disqualification.  But McAfee said that Willis’ racially charged rhetoric about “playing the race card” during a speech at a church service was “legally improper.” “Providing this type of public comment creates dangerous waters for the District Attorney to wade further into. The time may well have arrived for an order preventing the State from mentioning the case in any public forum to prevent prejudicial pretrial publicity,” he said.  Judge McAfee said that Wade’s “patently unpersuasive explanation” about inaccurate statements he submitted to the court about his divorce “indicates a willingness on his part to wrongly conceal his relationship with the District Attorney.” JUDGE DISMISSES SOME COUNTS AGAINST TRUMP IN FANI WILLIS ELECTION INTERFERENCE CASE McAfee said he was “unable to place any stock” in the testimony of Terrance Bradley, the former law partner and Wade’s divorce attorney who was considered a key witness of the defense team trying to prove Wade had been romantically involved with Willis prior to his hiring.  Bradley, when pressed under oath, said he could not recall several details and timelines about conversations he had with former client Wade about Wade’s romantic relationship with Willis. At one point, he was questioned about a text message exchange in which he said Willis’ relationship with Wade had “absolutely” started before he was hired in the DA’s office in 2021. But later in court he claimed he was “speculating” in those comments. In his order on Friday, McAfee said Bradley’s “inconsistencies, demeanor, and generally non-responsive answers left far too brittle a foundation upon which to build any conclusions.” FANI WILLIS WHO ‘RELISHED IN’ DONALD TRUMP PROSECUTION SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM CASE FOR ILLICIT AFFAIR: EXPERTS “While prior inconsistent statements can be considered as substantive evidence under Georgia law, Bradley’s impeachment by text message did not establish the basis for which he claimed such sweeping knowledge of Wade’s personal affairs,” McAfee said. Robin Yeartie, a former “good friend” of Willis and past employee at the DA’s office, testified in court that she had “no doubt” Willis and Wade’s relationship started in 2019, after the two met at a conference.  She testified to observing Willis and Wade “hugging” and “kissing” and showing “affection” prior to November 2021 and that she had no doubt that the two were in a “romantic” relationship starting in 2019 and lasting until she and Willis last spoke in 2022. Judge McAfee in his order Friday said that “while the testimony of Robin Yearti raised doubts about the State’s assertions, it ultimately lacked context and detail.”  “[N]either side was able to conclusively establish by a preponderance of the evidence when the relationship evolved into a romantic one,” he added.  Still, the judge said that “an odor of

House Oversight Democrats eye Michael Cohen as Biden impeachment inquiry hearing witness: source

Democrats on the House Oversight Committee have reached out to ex-President Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen about appearing at next week’s impeachment inquiry hearing, a source familiar with the discussions told Fox News Digital. Oversight Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., is leading an impeachment inquiry into President Biden over accusations he used his position as vice president to enrich himself and his family, which both he and the White House have denied. The next hearing is scheduled for Wednesday.  COMER INVITES HUNTER BIDEN, BUSINESS ASSOCIATES TO TESTIFY PUBLICLY MARCH 20 AMID IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY Democrats on the panel hope that a potential Cohen appearance could turn the spotlight at the highly-publicized event onto Trump, according to the source.  They “believe Cohen could help focus the hearing on Donald Trump by delivering first-hand testimony on Trump’s foreign business deals while he was president,” the source said. The source said Democrats think Cohen’s appearance and testimony could also force Republicans to respond in real time, and on camera, to criticism that they ignored allegations that Trump profited from countries like China while in office. Fox News Digital reached out to House Oversight Committee Democrats about Cohen. HUNTER BIDEN ADMITS HE PUT HIS FATHER ON SPEAKERPHONE, INVITED HIM TO MEETINGS, BUT DENIES ‘INVOLVEMENT’ Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer, was once one of his fiercest defenders, even serving part of a three-year prison sentence over charges linked to his defense of the ex-president. Cohen has become a vocal critic of Trump’s since his November 2021 release and admitted to investigators in 2018 that he arranged hush money payments to two women on Trump’s behalf. Trump has publicly denied wrongdoing. House Republicans are investigating whether Biden was part of an influence-peddling scheme with relatives including his son, Hunter Biden, specifically scrutinizing the younger Biden’s business dealings with China and Ukraine.  Hunter Biden recently turned down House Republicans’ invitation to appear at the same hearing that Democrats are in communication with Cohen about. JOE BIDEN ‘ENABLED’ FAMILY TO SELL ACCESS TO ‘DANGEROUS ADVERSARIES,’ TONY BOBULINSKI TESTIFIES In a letter sent to Oversight committee investigators earlier this week, Hunter Biden’s lawyer Abbe Lowell said that a scheduling conflict prevented their appearance, while also criticizing the hearing itself. “Your blatant planned-for-media event is not a proper proceeding but an obvious attempt to throw a Hail Mary pass after the game has ended,” Lowell wrote.

South Korea to China: Why is East Asia producing so few babies?

South Korea’s low birthrate has been declared a national emergency despite its government’s efforts to incentivise people into parenthood by paying 2 million won ($1,510) on the birth of each child as well as providing a host of other benefits to parents. The country is one of several in East and Southeast Asia where birthrates have declined rapidly in recent years. Indeed, all five of the countries with the world’s lowest birthrates (stripping out Ukraine, which is undergoing a war) are in East Asia, according to a 2023 CIA report. What is causing this, and why does it matter so much? Which countries have the lowest birthrates? South Korea, which already had one of the lowest fertility rates in the world, has experienced yet another drop in its birthrate. Last month, Statistics Korea published data showing that the country’s birthrate has dropped by 8 percent in 2023 to 0.72 compared with 2022 when it was 0.78. The birthrate refers to the number of children the average woman will have during her lifetime. Experts are warning that South Korea’s population of 51 million people may halve by 2100 if this rate of decline continues. According to the 2023 CIA publication comparing fertility rates around the world, the birthrate decline is much sharper in East Asia than any other region. The CIA’s report puts South Korea’s birthrate a little higher than the country’s own estimate – at 1.11. However, this is still the second-lowest in the world. According to the CIA report, the birthrate in self-governed Taiwan is the lowest in the world at just 1.09 while in Singapore and Hong Kong, the birthrates are 1.17 and 1.23, respectively. China, where a strict one-child policy was in place from 1980 to 2015, has a birthrate of 1.45. Japan, which has been facing the issue of an ageing population for some time, has a birthrate of 1.39. These figures are in stark contrast to other parts of the world. The 10 countries with the highest birthrates are all in Africa. Niger is the highest at 6.73, followed by Angola at 5.76. In the West, birthrates are much lower than this but still higher than East Asia. In the United States, it is 1.84 while it is 1.58 in Germany. Why are birthrates in East Asia dropping? While demographers refer to the birthrate as the fertility rate, this term encompasses those who choose not to have children as well as those who are unable to have children. There are several reasons for the decline in Asia. Economic growth and improving living conditions have reduced child mortality rates, and since more children are expected to live into adulthood, this has led to couples having fewer children, said analysts at the East-West Center, an international research organisation. The analysts explained in an article in Time magazine that economic growth and educational opportunities for women have also led them to resist traditional roles, such as housewife and mother. As a result, they may “choose to avoid marriage and childbearing altogether”. However, Ayo Wahlberg, a professor in the anthropology department at the University of Copenhagen, told Al Jazeera that this explanation is an “incomplete description of what’s going on”. While there may be a correlation between more women being employed and lower birthrates, Wahlberg said both men and women are working longer hours than they did in the past, giving them less time and energy to dedicate to childcare. He cited the example of China’s “996 working hour system”, under which some companies expect people to work from 9am to 9pm, six days a week. Wahlberg added that in South Korea, the working conditions are similarly stringent. “When are you going to have the time to look after a child in such cases?” he asked. He also pointed out that in many countries, the burden of housework and childcare falls more heavily on women than men. Additionally, women experience pregnancy-based discrimination in the workplace if companies decide to avoid hiring an employee who will need to take maternity leave. Women in East Asia face some of the worst gender pay gaps among members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Additionally, they are aware that taking maternity leave could harm their chances of promotion and progression in their careers. Therefore, they decide not have children despite family or societal pressures to do so, he said. “Is that selfish? I think it’s more being very rational about a very unacceptable situation,” Wahlberg said. Both women and men are also deciding not to have children as part of an emerging movement that has deep concerns about climate change. Why is a declining birthrate a problem? Low birthrates will ultimately lead to population declines. Wahlberg said, to replace and maintain current populations, a birthrate of 2.1 is required. A declining birthrate could have disastrous economic consequences. Many countries are facing labour shortages and are struggling under the demands of an ageing population. With improvements and developments in health and science in recent decades, life expectancy has risen sharply, which raises concerns about people growing into old age in a society that does not have enough young people to take care of them. The burden on younger people to support a much larger, aged population who are no longer working could also become intolerable, according to a 2023 report by the Pew Research Center in the United States, which concluded that income and sales taxes could have to rise steeply in the future to compensate. An abandoned school swimming pool at Shijimi Junior High School in Miki, Japan, which closed three years ago due to a lack of demand. Japan’s birthrate is falling faster than expected, and school closings have accelerated, especially in rural areas [Buddhika Weerasinghe/Getty Images] What is the solution in East Asia? East Asian countries are trying to increase fertility rates by incentivising women to have more children. In Japan, where schools have been closing at a rate of more than 475 per year since 2002

Boom time for Myanmar opium farmers amid coup chaos

In a remote corner of Myanmar, a line of farmers moves through a field of nodding poppies, making small cuts in the greenish-purple pods to release opium resin. The next morning they will collect the residue that has seeped out overnight and parcel it into bundles of sticky opium – the building blocks for manufacturing heroin. Myanmar became the world’s biggest opium producer in 2023, according to the United Nations, overtaking Afghanistan after the Taliban government launched a crackdown on the crop. Since the military in Myanmar seized power in 2021, causing social and economic turmoil and armed conflict across the country, the cash crop has become more important to some farmers struggling to get by. “I planted poppies in recent years, but only a few,” said Aung Moe Oo, speaking from the vast field enclosed by hills on the border of Shan and Karen states. “This year, I planted three acres.” He expects those three acres (1.2 hectares) to yield about 16 kilogrammes (35 pounds) of poppy resin this harvest, which he hopes to sell for about $4,500. “Growing poppies is the best way to make a living for our family,” he said, sporting a brown bucket hat and a striped grey shirt. Aye Aye Thein, another farmer from the region, used to grow rice, corn, beans and avocado. But when the fighting between the military and armed groups came to her home, she was forced to leave her fields. Conflict since the coup, which ended a rare experiment with democracy in Myanmar, has displaced almost two million people, according to the UN. Even before Aye Aye Thein had to leave her home, the plunging value of the local kyat currency had made buying agricultural products such as fertiliser much more expensive. “After the political situation changed and there is fighting, we can’t grow anything in our own fields,” she said. Aung Moe Oo agreed. “If we send our crops to the brokers’ centre, there are lots of costs that we can’t afford,” he said. “So, we grow poppy flowers instead of corn this year.” The raging conflict is disrupting transport and stunting the export of agricultural goods like rice and corn, the World Bank said late last year. Meanwhile, poppy cultivation is becoming more sophisticated, the UN says, with increased investment and improved irrigation pushing up crop yields. Myanmar produced an estimated 1,080 metric tonnes of opium last year, the world body’s office on drugs and crime said, up from an estimated 790 metric tonnes the previous year. The opium is refined into heroin in factories hidden in the jungles and ravines of Shan state and then smuggled through neighbouring countries such as Thailand and on to the world market. Adblock test (Why?)

US prosecutors willing to delay Trump hush money criminal trial

Manhattan prosecutors say they will not oppose delay of up to 30 days in trial set to start March 25. Prosecutors in the United States have said they are willing to delay Donald Trump’s criminal trial on charges related to making hush money payments for up to 30 days so the former president’s lawyers can review newly obtained evidence. The first-ever criminal trial of a former US president was set to begin on March 25. On Thursday, New York prosecutors said they were open to delaying the start of the trial “in an abundance of caution” to give Trump’s lawyers time to review records from a previous federal investigation into the matter. Trump – the presumptive Republican presidential nominee and likely opponent of President Joe Biden in the November election – has pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records to hide his former lawyer Michael Cohen’s $130,000 payment to adult performer Stormy Daniels for her silence before the 2016 election about a sexual encounter she says they had a decade earlier. In a heavily redacted filing dated March 8 and made public on Thursday, Trump’s lawyers said they needed more time to review thousands of pages of documents they recently received from the US Attorney’s office in Manhattan, which had previously investigated Cohen’s payment to Daniels. A delay would mark another victory for Trump, who has sought to slow down proceedings in his various legal entanglements. The hush money case in Manhattan is scheduled to be the first of four criminal cases against Trump to reach trial. None of the other cases has a firm trial date but any delay to the New York trial could complicate their scheduling. Trump denies an encounter with Daniels. His lawyers have argued that Cohen paid off Daniels to spare Trump’s family embarrassment, not to boost his electoral chances as prosecutors have alleged. They suggested at least a 90-day delay to the trial and also urged Justice Juan Merchan to consider dismissing the indictment altogether, arguing some of the federal prosecutors’ evidence undermined the district attorney’s arguments. Merchan would have to approve any delay to the trial. It was not immediately clear when he would rule. “The statements demonstrate that Cohen did not seek to be, and was not, acting for the benefit of President Trump’s campaign,” Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche wrote. The statements he was referring to were redacted. Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 to federal charges of violating campaign finance law through the payment to Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford. The US Attorney’s office in Manhattan did not charge Trump in that case. Earlier this week, Trump asked Merchan to postpone the trial until the US Supreme Court finishes its review of his claim of presidential immunity in his federal criminal case over efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss to Biden. The Supreme Court is due to hear those arguments on April 25. A 30-day delay to the hush money trial would mean it would start that same week – a little over six months before Election Day. Trump also faces a state criminal prosecution over his push to reverse the 2020 election results, and a federal prosecution in Florida over his handling of sensitive government documents after leaving the White House in 2021. He has pleaded not guilty in all cases. Adblock test (Why?)

Lawyer who exposed Willis-Wade relationship reacts to court ruling: ‘Disqualified’

Georgia attorney Ashleigh Merchant claimed vindication after a Fulton County judge issued a ruling in the disqualification proceedings against District Attorney Fani Willis.   In an order Friday, Judge Scott McAfee said that Willis must either withdraw herself and her team from the 2020 election interference case or remove Wade as special prosecutor. The decision came after Merchant, on behalf of her client Michael Roman, first alleged that Willis had had an “improper” affair with Wade before hiring him to prosecute former President Trump and his 18 co-defendants in 2021.  “While we believe the court should have disqualified Willis’ office entirely, this opinion is a vindication that everything put forth by the defense was true, accurate and relevant to the issues surrounding our client’s right to a fair trial. The judge clearly agreed with the defense that the actions of Willis are a result of her poor judgment and that there is a risk to the future of this case if she doesn’t quickly work to cure her conflict,” Merchant said in a statement. “While we do not agree that the courts suggested cure is adequate in response to the egregious conduct by the district attorney, we look forward to the district attorney’s response to the demands by the court. We will continue to fight for our client,” she added. JUDGE RULES FANI WILLIS MUST STEP ASIDE FROM TRUMP CASE OR FIRE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR NATHAN WADE Merchant was the first to allege in court filings that Willis had a conflict of interest in hiring Wade, her then-boyfriend, to prosecute the election interference case. She claimed that Willis had financially benefited from the relationship in the form of vacations she took with Wade, whose firm was compensated by taxpayers for working the Trump case. Documents submitted to the court by Merchant revealed that Willis and Wade had taken several trips together and that Wade’s law firm had billed taxpayers $650,000 at a rate of $250 an hour since his hiring.  Both Wade and Willis had denied that they were in a romantic relationship prior to his hiring. During a two-day evidentiary hearing in February, they each testified that they had split the cost of their shared trips. Willis told the court she reimbursed Wade for her share of the trips in cash. During a two-day evidentiary hearing in February, Merchant called witnesses who testified that the couple had begun their affair in 2019 after meeting at a conference.  TRUMP ATTORNEY REACTS TO FULTON COUNTY JUDGE’S FANI WILLIS DECISION: ‘PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT’ Robin Yeartie, a former “good friend” of Willis and past employee at the DA’s office, testified to observing Willis and Wade “hugging” and “kissing” and showing “affection” prior to November 2021 and said she had no doubt that the two had been in a “romantic” relationship starting in 2019 and lasting until she and Willis last spoke in 2022. Willis dismissed Yeartie’s testimony and said she no longer considers Yeartie a friend. The star witness for the defense was Terrence Bradley, a former law partner and divorce attorney for Wade. Merchant grilled Bradley on the witness stand last month about what he knew and when he knew about their romance. Bradley, when pressed under oath, said he could not recall several details and timelines about conversations he had with former client Wade about Wade’s romantic relationship with Willis. GEORGIA JUDGE TOSSES KEY WITNESS’ TESTIMONY AGAINST FANI WILLIS, CITING ‘INCONSISTENCIES’: COURT ORDER Merchant at one point referenced text messages between her and Bradley in which she had asked Bradley if he thought the relationship started before Willis hired Wade in 2021. Bradley responded “absolutely” in the text exchange. However, McAfee said Friday that he was “unable to place any stock” in Bradley’s testimony. In his order, McAfee said that Bradley’s “inconsistencies, demeanor, and generally non-responsive answers left far too brittle a foundation upon which to build any conclusions.” The judge ruled that while neither side had conclusively proved when the relationship began, there was “an appearance of impropriety” that requires either Willis or Wade to be removed from the Trump case.  Fox News Digital’s Brianna Herlihy contributed to this report.

House Speaker Johnson says White House doesn’t ‘call the shots’ on when impeachment is over

House Speaker Mike Johnson told Fox News on Friday that the White House does not get to “call the shots” on when the President Biden impeachment inquiry ends after he received a letter this morning from a White House lawyer arguing that it’s “over.”  White House Counsel Ed Siskel, in his message to the Louisiana Republican, said “it’s obviously time to move on, Mr. Speaker.”  “This impeachment is over,” Siskel declared. “There is too much important work to be done for the American people to continue wasting time on this charade.”  But Johnson told Fox News’ Chad Pergram on Capitol Hill Friday that “They don’t call the shots on it” and “we’ll deliberate over that when the investigation is complete.”  HUNTER BIDEN’S FORMER BUSINESS PARTNER TONY BOBULINSKI SLAMS HIM FOR ‘RUNNING AWAY’ FROM HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE  “We’re allowing the process to play out as the Constitution anticipates. Our committees of jurisdiction have done their duty,” Johnson added. “They’ve done an extraordinary job. They’ve revealed some alarming information.”  In his letter, Siskel said “The House Majority ought to work with the President on our economy, national security, and other important priorities on behalf of the American people, not continue to waste time on political stunts like this.”  HUNTER BIDEN REFUSES TO ATTEND HOUSE HEARING WITH FORMER BUSINESS ASSOCIATES  “The House Majority has reportedly collected more than 100,000 pages of records, interviewed dozens of witnesses, and held multiple public hearings—but none of the evidence has demonstrated that the President did anything wrong,” Siskel also said, noting that “Hunter Biden testified that he never involved his father in his business dealings” and “Several witnesses have testified debunking claims related to President Biden’s handling of classified documents.”  “Instead of admitting the truth that the President did nothing wrong, the Majority is wasting even more time on abusive steps like trying to re-interview witnesses who already testified — perhaps hoping the facts will be different the second time around,” Siskel continued. “This is just the latest abusive tactic in this investigation. It has targeted the President’s children, grandchildren, siblings, and in-laws for no reason. It has intruded into private citizens’ personal records on everything from medical visits to birthday presents. Enough is enough.”  Siskel sent the letter two days after Hunter Biden’s lawyer said his client would not attend a House Oversight Committee hearing next week regarding alleged influence peddling and the Biden family’s business dealings, calling it a “carnival side show.”  Fox News’ Patrick Ward contributed to this report. 

Advocates fear special US visas for Afghans could run out despite dangers

Washington, DC – As the United States withdrew its troops from Afghanistan in 2021, millions of Afghans faced the prospect of life once more under Taliban rule. For thousands among them, the danger was particularly acute: They had worked with the departing Americans and could be subject to Taliban reprisals as a result. But a long-running US programme offered the possibility of life abroad: Translators, contractors and other Afghan employees with direct ties to the US military were eligible for a Special Immigrant Visa, or SIV. Now, less than three years later, advocates fear this narrow immigration pathway — a cornerstone of Washington’s relief efforts — could quietly fall victim to deadlock in the US Congress. The legislature must pass a set of budget appropriations bills before March 22 in order to avert a government shutdown. But critics fear the package will pass without authorisation for more Special Immigrant Visas for Afghans, leaving them with even fewer options to escape the threats they may face. On Thursday, a bipartisan group of legislators sent a letter (PDF) to top Senate leaders urging them to include the provision for Special Immigrant Visas in the final version of the appropriations bills. Senator Jeanne Shaheen, one of the letter’s signatories, told Al Jazeera in a statement that Afghans connected to the US military remain “at grave risk, as the Taliban continue to hunt for them”. “For two decades, the US military mission in Afghanistan relied on trusted Afghan allies who stood shoulder-to-shoulder with American troops,” said Shaheen. “We promised to protect them — just as they did for us.” US Senator Jeanne Shaheen has pushed for 20,000 additional Special Immigrant Visas for Afghans to be authorised this year [Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/Reuters] Protecting Afghan allies Shaheen is one of 13 senators pushing for 20,000 more Special Immigrant Visas to be included for Afghans in the 2024 State and Foreign Operations (SFOPS) appropriations bill, part of the budget package that needs to pass this month. But immigration is a hot-button issue in the US election year, and advocates worry anti-immigrant sentiment could scuttle attempts to increase access. Revised drafts of the Afghan Allies Protection Act — which sets the parameters for the Special Immigrant Visas — were introduced in both the House and Senate last year. But while the Senate Appropriations Committee authorised the 20,000 additional visas, the Republican-controlled House has not approved more on its end. Because the visa programme for Afghans — first established in 2009 — was considered temporary, Congress has to regularly extend its mandate and adjust the number of visas available. Currently, there are just 7,000 special visas left for principal applicants, but advocates say there are more than 140,000 pending applicants, with at least 20,000 nearing the final stages of the process. The current processing rate is about 1,000 applicants a month, which means the visas are set to run out around August — the month that marks the third anniversary of the US troop withdrawal. Without further legislation, it is unclear what would happen next. “I’m just mystified by this whole thing,” Kim Staffieri, the executive director of the Association of Wartime Allies (AWA), told Al Jazeera. Her organisation helps Afghans associated with the US military with their visa applications. “I’ve been doing this for seven, eight years, and have never come to the point of worrying about running out of [SIVs] ever,” she said. Few options for Afghans The possibility that the programme could run out of visas has left Afghans like Abdulrahman Safi feeling betrayed. Safi, 35, worked with both the US military and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in Afghanistan, before fleeing on an evacuation flight to the US in 2021. “We come here with all these promises: ‘We won’t leave you behind,’” Safi told Al Jazeera. “Now it feels like none of that matters.” Safi is one of the tens of thousands of Afghans who have applied for Special Immigrant Visas. The shortage, however, only compounds existing problems with the programme: Critics say it has been dysfunctional for years. The spike in applications following the 2021 troop withdrawal, advocates add, has only amplified the mile-high application backlog. There are relatively few options outside of the Special Immigrant Visas — and they too suffer from long wait times and tight caps on the number of applicants admitted. Some Afghans who evacuated in 2021 were granted humanitarian parole, a temporary status with no pathway to permanent residency or citizenship. Others have applied for asylum status, although that process is likewise backlogged and can take years, with no guarantee of success. A victim of partisanship Support for the special visa programme has historically been bipartisan in the US, due in no small part to widespread advocacy from veterans groups, according to Adam Bates, a supervisory policy counsel at the International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP). In many ways, he said, the programme has been “compartmentalised away from the broader immigration debate”. “The Afghan SIV program has been around since 2009. For that entire time period, it has enjoyed widespread bipartisan support,” said Bates. “It had support across presidential administrations, even during the [Donald] Trump administration.” Bates is among the advocates who worry the programme may be falling victim to partisanship in Congress, heightened by November’s impending general elections. The immigration debate has played a prominent role in campaigns so far. Joseph Azam, a lawyer and board member for the Afghan-American Foundation, told Al Jazeera he fears other issues are overshadowing the Special Immigrant Visa programme for Afghans. “For whatever reason — because we’re in election year, there are other things going on in the world, or people are just not paying attention — this programme has gotten to the point of almost withering away,” he said. “That would be catastrophic for the tens of thousands of Afghans who have been left behind, who are in hiding with their families and were some of the first on the kill list for the Taliban when they took over.” Azam noted that no legislators