List of All Articles with Tag 'erica'

As it pushes to renew a cornerstone law that authorizes major surveillance programs, the Biden administration faces an American public that's broadly skeptical of common intelligence practices and of the need to sacrifice civil liberties for security. Congress in the coming months will debate whether to extend Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Section 702 authorizes U.S. spy agencies to collect large amounts of foreign communications for intelligence purposes ranging from stopping spies to listening in on allies and foes. Those collection programs also sweep up U.S. citizen communications that can then be searched by intelligence and law enforcement officers. The new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows that Democrats and Republicans have similar views on surveillance tactics, while Republicans have become substantially less likely over the last decade to say it's at least sometimes necessary to sacrifice freedom in response to threats. U.S. intelligence officials say Section 702 is necessary to protect national security and to counter China, Russia and other adversaries. They credit the program with better informing U.S. diplomats and enabling operations like last year's strike to kill a key plotter of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. But officials will have to overcome sharp divisions in Congress and bipartisan anger at the FBI, though most observers still believe Section 702 will be renewed in some form. Driving a political shift is increasing skepticism among Republican elected officials of the FBI and intelligence agencies. Conservatives have battered the FBI for misleading the primary surveillance court in its investigation into former President Donald Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. Trump and other top Republicans often accuse the so-called government “deep state” of using its powers to target conservatives. Historically, “the left flank has been the more vocal objector to government surveillance on privacy and civil liberties grounds,” said Carter Burwell, who was chief counsel to Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, when the law was last renewed in early 2018. ”Over the past five or 10 years, with the rise of the libertarian wing of the Republican Party, call it the antigovernment wing of the Republican Party, that is an equally vocal and powerful plurality," said Burwell, now a lawyer at the firm Debevoise & Plimpton. The poll asked U.S. adults whether they support several practices authorized by Section 702. It found that 28% of adults support the government listening to phone calls made outside of the U.S. without a warrant, while 44% oppose the practice. Views are similar about the U.S. reading emails sent between people outside of the U.S. without a warrant. The public was more receptive to surveillance of activity outside of the U.S. a decade after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. That shifted significantly by the 20th anniversary of the attacks in 2021. In the latest poll, 48% of Americans this year said they believed it necessary to sacrifice their rights and freedoms to prevent terrorism, down from 54% in 2021 and nearly two-thirds in 2011. That shift was especially dramatic among Republicans, with just 44% saying that's sometimes necessary compared with 69% in 2011. Among Democrats, 55% still say so, similar to the 59% who said so in 2011. Sarah Apwisch, a 57-year-old from Three Rivers, Michigan, described herself as somewhat opposed to the monitoring of foreign emails and phone calls. A Democrat, Apwisch said she was “mostly pro-FBI” but concerned after years of negative stories about the bureau. “Honestly, I don’t want to hear anything about the FBI,” she said. “I want the FBI to go do their business and not be in the news because they’re doing their job well and not doing things that make waves. How they do that, I don’t know.” Apwisch also said she supports the FBI and other agencies trying to hunt down enemy spies, but was uncertain about whether the FBI should also use foreign intelligence to investigate other U.S. crimes. White adults were somewhat more likely to say they were opposed to various forms of surveillance — 48% said they opposed the government listening to foreign calls without a warrant — than Black or Hispanic adults, each at 34%. Rob Redding, a 47-year-old journalist who lives in New York City, said he was neutral about many surveillance practices — but said he felt that way because as a Black man, he didn't expect to have privacy. Redding mentioned the FBI's spying in the 1960s on Martin Luther King Jr. and other civil rights leaders as well as officials in Black nationalist movements. “As a Black man in America, as someone who speaks out about the government all the time, I understand that Black people and especially Black leadership cannot trust America," Redding said. In Congress, some Democrats and Republicans have found common cause over their complaints about Section 702. Two lawmakers earlier this year issued a statement calling for an end to U.S. surveillance without a warrant. Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., chairs the liberal Congressional Progressive Caucus, while Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, is a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus. “We must take this opportunity to reform Section 702 and overhaul privacy protections for Americans so that they truly protect the civil rights, civil liberties, and privacy rights that are foundational to our democracy,” Jayapal and Davidson said. Previous lawmaker efforts to require warrants for searching intelligence databases have failed. Intelligence officials argue they have ramped up training for agents searching the databases and tightened requirements to consult with lawyers on sensitive queries. Supporters of Section 702 argue most U.S. adults want the government to stop foreign adversaries even if they state misgivings about how American intelligence operates. Glenn Gerstell, a former general counsel at the National Security Agency who is advocating for Section 702 to be extended, noted that while Congress has to be responsive to public opinion, “some of this gets pretty technical and isn’t easily understood by the public.” He said he still believed the law would be renewed with some amendments to bolster civil liberties protections and enshrine into law changes that the FBI has made in response to a series of wrongful uses of foreign intelligence. “At the end of the day, I think most members of Congress understand the value of the statute and understand that when we don’t have the statute, there is no substitute,” Gerstell said. ___ Associated Press writer Emily Swanson contributed to this report. ___ The poll of 1,081 adults was conducted March 16-20 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4.0 percentage points. Read More Ukraine war’s heaviest fight rages in east - follow live Charity boss speaks out over ‘traumatic’ encounter with royal aide Haitians are dying of thirst and starvation in severely overcrowded jails As winter warms, farmers in southern US find ways to adapt Smoky haze blanketing US, Canada could last for days as wildfires rage, winds won't budge

Mike Pence says he wants to see an armed guard in every public school in America to try and prevent mass shootings rather than gun control measures. The former vice president told a CNN town hall that he believed there should be more gun-carrying security guards in American schools capable of taking down shooters. “We ought to fund an armed and trained security guard at every public school in America and we ought to do it now,” he told host Dana Bash. Bash pointed out that heavily-armed police had not prevented the massacre in Uvalde, Texas, in which 19 students and two teachers were murdered. “That is why I always say trained and armed .... they have got to be trained. If it takes federal funding let’s do it,” said Mr Pence. “I just think we ought to end the conversation and Washington DC should stand up and provide the funding for a trained armed guard that can be part of the school community.” Mr Pence was also asked to justify his belief in expediting the death penalty for mass shooters, most of whom are killed or intend to die during the violence. “I follow these stories as closely as you do and of course our years in the White House we saw one tragedy after another and we see evidence in the aftermath that they went in without regard to whether they would survive, but I just believe in the deterrent of the law,” he said. “I believe that if perhaps we made it clear ... the Parkland shooter in Florida is going to spend the rest of his life in jail, that is not justice.” Mr Pence told the town hall that his “heart breaks” for Chicago, where his parents grew up, and the gun violence that has impacted the city. “We need to get serious and tough on violent crime and give our cities and states resources to restore law and order to our streets,” he said. Bash then had a surprising statistic for the former governor of Indiana. “I just want to say, because I’ve heard other people talk about Chicago, just for the record, the ATF data shows that more than half of the recovered guns used to commit crimes in Illinois in 2021, do you know where they came from? Indiana,” she told him. Read More Mike Pence news – live: At CNN town hall Pence says he won’t pardon Jan 6 protesters who called for his death Pence calls on DoJ not to indict Trump but stops short of saying he’d pardon him if elected in 2024 Mike Pence isn’t even a contender for 2024. Why are we pretending? Deputy Scot Peterson could have stopped Parkland school shooting but protected himself instead, trial hears

Mike Pence has called on the Justice Department to not prosecute Donald Trump for his handling of classified documents but refused to say he would pardon the former president if he won the White House. The former vice president told a CNN town hall in Des Moines, Iowa, that he viewed the handling of classified material as “a very serious matter” but told host Dana Bash that federal prosecutors should leave Mr Trump alone. “I would hope not, I really would,” he said when asked if the DoJ special counsel Jack Smith should indict Mr Trump over the documents found at his Mar-a-Lago estate. “I think it would be terribly divisive to the country at a time when the American people are hurting. This kind of action by the DoJ would only fuel further division in the country and send a terrible message to the wider world…I hope the DoJ thinks better of it and resolves this in a better way than an indictment,” he continued. Mr Pence told the audience that “no one is above the law” and admitted that he himself had no business having some classified documents at his home in Indiana. “I took full responsibility for it. I would hope there would be a way to move forward without the dramatic, drastic steps of indicting a former president of the United States.” Bash then directly asked Mr Pence, who earlier in the day officially launched his campaign for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, if as president he would pardon Mr Trump if he was convicted. “I don’t want to speak about hypotheticals. I am not sure I am going to be elected president of the United States but I believe we have a fighting chance,” he said. Mr Pence was also asked to respond to Mr Trump’s claim he would pardon anyone convicted of taking part in the violent January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol. “You know on January 6 I issued a tweet demanding that people leave the Capitol and end the violence and said those who didn’t should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and I believe that today,” he said. “We cannot ever allow what happened on January 6 to ever happen again. I have no interest or intention of pardoning those who assaulted police officers or vandalized the capitol.” Read More Mike Pence news – live: At CNN town hall Pence says he won’t pardon Jan 6 protesters who called for his death Mike Pence isn’t even a contender for 2024. Why are we pretending? Pence accuses Trump of treating abortion issue as an ‘inconvenience’

Donald Trump’s former White House adviser Steve Bannon has been subpoenaed by special counsel Jack Smith as part of a grand jury in his investigation into the January 6 insurrection, says a report. The Washington DC grand jury is separate from the investigation into the former president’s handling of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago home after he left the White House. The subpoena is for both documents and testimony and was sent out in late May, sources told NBC News. Bannon was convicted in July 2022 on two charges of contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate with the congressional January 6 committee. In October US District Judge Carl Nichols sentenced Bannon to four months in federal prison, but the sentence was suspended while he appeals his conviction. The former chairman of Breitbart News served in the Trump administration for its first seven months before leaving. Read More Ivanka and Jared split over attending Trump 2024 launch – follow live Why was Donald Trump impeached twice during his first term? Four big lies Trump told during his 2024 presidential announcement

Former President Donald Trump took to Truth Social to share his furious reaction to the news that prosecutors are ready to ask a Washington, DC grand jury to indict him for violating the Espionage Act and for obstruction of justice. The charges may drop as soon as tomorrow, further complicating Mr Trump’s 2024 campaign for the White House. “No one has told me I’m being indicted, and I shouldn’t be because I’ve done NOTHING wrong, but I have assumed for years that I am a Target of the WEAPONIZED DOJ & FBI, starting with the Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX, the ‘No Collusion’ Mueller Report, Impeachment HOAX #1, Impeachment HOAX #2, the PERFECT Ukraine phone call, and various other SCAMS & WITCH HUNTS. A TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE & ELECTION INTERFERENCE AT A LEVEL NEVER SEEN BEFORE. REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS MUST MAKE THIS THEIR # 1 ISSUE!!!” Mr Trump wrote on Truth Social on Wednesday afternoon. The Independent reported earlier on Wednesday that prosecutors are ready to ask grand jurors to approve an indictment against Mr Trump for violating a portion of the US criminal code known as Section 793, which prohibits “gathering, transmitting or losing” any “information respecting the national defence”. It is understood that prosecutors intend to ask grand jurors to vote on the indictment on Thursday, but that vote could be delayed as much as a week until the next meeting of the grand jury to allow for a complete presentation of evidence, or to allow investigators to gather more evidence for presentation if necessary. Mr Trump also quoted a line from a report by Trump ally John Solomon of Just The News: “An American Bar Association report in 2022 seemed to agree with Trump’s assertion that ‘guidelines support his contention that presidents have broad authority to formally declassify.’” On 5 June, Mr Trump went on an all-capitalised rant about the classified documents case, writing: “HOW CAN DOJ POSSIBLY CHARGE ME, WHO DID NOTHING WRONG, WHEN NO OTHER PRESIDENT’S WERE CHARGED, WHEN JOE BIDEN WON’T BE CHARGED FOR ANYTHING, INCLUDING THE FACT THAT HE HAS 1,850 BOXES, MUCH OF IT CLASSIFIED, AND SOME DATING BACK TO HIS SENATE DAY WHEN EVEN DEMOCRAT SENATORS ARE SHOCKED.” “ALSO, PRESIDENT CLINTON HAD DOCUMENTS, AND WON IN COURT. CROOKED HILLARY DELETED 33,000 EMAILS, MANY CLASSIFIED, AND WASN’T EVEN CLOSE TO BEING CHARGED! ONLY TRUMP - THE GREATEST WITCH HUNT OF ALL TIME!” he added in the post on Monday. More follows...

Javier Salazar, the sheriff of Bexar County, Texas, is recommending criminal charges against those involved with flights that sent 49 mostly Venezuelan migrants from El Paso to Martha’s Vineyard last year, what was widely derided as a political stunt orchestrated by Florida governor Ron DeSantis. A statement from the sheriff’s office says it has completed an investigation launched last September and recommended several counts of unlawful restraint, both misdemeanours and felonies, to the office of the Bexar County district attorney. Meanwhile, Casey DeSantis, Florida’s first lady and the wife of the aspiring Republican presidential candidate, has been branded a “Walmart Melania” after she wore a leather jacket emblazoned with a map of the Sunshine State, an alligator and the legend “Where woke goes to die” during a campaign stop in Iowa to promote her husband. Elsewhere, a Vice documentary about the candidate’s earlier career as a US Navy lawyer serving at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in Cuba has been mysteriously dropped from Showtime’s schedules, according to The Hollywood Reporter, with no explanation given. Read More Federal judge blocks DeSantis ban on gender-affirming care for Florida trans youth: ‘Gender identity is real’ Chris Christie gave Trump legitimacy. Now he can’t stop Trump in 2024 Mike Pence suffered the wrath of Trump. Now the ex-vice president wants his old boss’s job in 2024

The Department of Justice is preparing to ask a Washington, DC grand jury to indict former president Donald Trump for violating the Espionage Act and for obstruction of justice as soon as Thursday, adding further weight to the legal baggage facing Mr Trump as he campaigns for his party’s nomination in next year’s presidential election. The Independent has learned that prosecutors are ready to ask grand jurors to approve an indictment against Mr Trump for violating a portion of the US criminal code known as Section 793, which prohibits “gathering, transmitting or losing” any “information respecting the national defence”. The use of Section 793, which does not make reference to classified information, is understood to be a strategic decision by prosecutors that has been made to short-circuit Mr Trump’s ability to claim that he used his authority as president to declassify documents he removed from the White House and kept at his Palm Beach, Florida property long after his term expired on 20 January 2021. That section of US criminal law is written in a way that could encompass Mr Trump’s conduct even if he was authorised to possess the information as president because it states that anyone who “lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document ...relating to the national defence,” and “willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it” can be punished by as many as ten years in prison. It is understood that prosecutors intend to ask grand jurors to vote on the indictment on Thursday, but that vote could be delayed as much as a week until the next meeting of the grand jury to allow for a complete presentation of evidence, or to allow investigators to gather more evidence for presentation of necessary. A separate grand jury that is meeting in Florida has also been hearing evidence in the documents investigation. That grand jury was empaneled in part to overcome legal issues posed by the fact that some of the crimes allegedly committed by Mr Trump took place in that jurisdiction, not in Washington. Under federal law, prosecutors must bring charges against federal defendants in the jurisdiction where the crimes took place. Another source familiar with the matter has said Mr Trump was recently informed that he is a “target” of the Justice Department probe, which began in early 2022 after National Archives and Records Administration officials discovered more than 100 documents bearing classification markings in a set of 15 boxes of Trump administration records retrieved from Mar-a-Lago, the century-old mansion turned private beach club where Mr Trump maintains his primary residence and post-presidential office. Over the course of the last year, grand jurors have heard testimony from numerous associates of the ex-president, including nearly every employee of Mar-a-Lago, former administration officials who worked in Mr Trump’s post-presidential office and for his political operation, and former high-ranking administration officials such as his final White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows. Mr Meadows has already given evidence before the grand jury and is said to be cooperating with the investigation into his former boss. It is understood that the former North Carolina congressman will plead guilty to several federal charges as part of a deal for which he has already received limited immunity in exchange for his testimony. Prosecutors are also prepared to ask grand jurors to indict Mr Trump on charges that he obstructed justice during the year-long investigation and caused false statements to be made to investigators by persons working for him. It is possible that such charges could stem from a declaration submitted to federal investigators roughly a year ago, when FBI agents and prosecutors visited his home to retrieve a sealed folder filled with 38 classified documents which Mr Trump’s attorneys turned over in response to a grand jury subpoena. According to court documents, the government subsequently developed evidence indicating that documents had been removed from a storage room where his attorneys had stated that all such documents were being stored in the days following the receipt of the grand jury subpoena. Using that evidence, which reportedly includes surveillance footage taken by cameras placed in the interior of Mar-a-Lago, prosecutors obtained a search warrant for the property that was carried out by FBI agents on 8 August last year. During that search, special agents discovered 103 documents bearing classification markings, including 18 marked “top secret,” 54 marked “secret,” and 31 marked as “confidential,” including a number of documents that were stored in Mr Trump’s personal office. Read More Serbia's president promises early election amid large protests against his populist rule Pence accuses Trump of treating abortion issue as an ‘inconvenience’ Former vice president Mike Pence launches 2024 campaign attacking Trump on Jan 6 Serbia's president promises early election amid large protests against his populist rule Pence accuses Trump of treating abortion issue as an ‘inconvenience’ Former vice president Mike Pence launches 2024 campaign attacking Trump on Jan 6

Simon Cowell hit the golden buzzer for a very special contestant on "America's Got Talent."

Former vice president Mike Pence on Wednesday announced that he is entering the running for the 2024 presidential election, setting up a heated competition for the Republican nomination with former president Donald Trump. In a launch video for his campaign, Mr Pence said a “different leadership” could turn the country around to prevent the American dream from being “crushed”. “Today our party and our country need a leader that will appeal, as Lincoln said, to the better angels of our nature,” Mr Pence continued. While the video highlights Mr Pence’s work as vice president, it avoids making a single mention of the man he served during that period – Mr Trump. In an increasingly crowded GOP field, Mr Pence faces competition from fellow ex-Trump administration figures, former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley. Mr Pence served as a member of the House of Representatives between 2001 and 2013 and as Indiana’s governor between 2013 and 2017, but rose to international attention as Mr Trump’s running-mate in 2016. He is the first vice president in modern US history to run against his former running mate.

It's that time of year in which you see teams have prospects move up around various MLB organizations, and it's no different for our FanSided 15, our Top 15 MLB prospect rankings list.Since this is the time of the year in which you see various college and high school graduations taking...

Doug Burgum, the little-known governor of North Dakota, announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination for president on Wednesday morning, further crowding the Republican field. Mr Burgum, who won re-election in staunchly Republican North Dakota last year, will make his announcement official on Wednesday morning. In a preview video released on Tuesday, he mostly focused on the economy, with a tagline saying “a new leader for a changing economy.” The governor did not mention President Joe Biden in his announcement video, nor did he mention former president and current candidate Donald Trump in the video. “Anger yelling and fighting,” he said. “That's not gonna cut it anymore. Let's get things done.” Mr Burgum’s entrance into the 2024 Republican presidential primary field makes him the third candidate to throw his hat into the thing during the last week alone. On Monday, former vice president Mike Pence and ex-New Jersey governor Chris Christie filed the requisite paperwork with the Federal Election Commission to be counted as candidates in next year’s GOP primary. Mr Christie, a former ally of Mr Trump who is recasting himself as a critic this time around, kicked off his campaign at St Anslem’s College in New Hampshire on the night of 6 June. Mr Pence is set to hold a kickoff rally on Wednesday and follow that up with a CNN town hall appearance that evening. The three candidates who’ve jumped in this week are joining a primary field as diverse as any the GOP has ever had. Three primary candidates — Sen Tim Scott (R-SC), former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley, and businessman Vivek Ramaswamy — are persons of colour, as is right-wing talk show host Larry Elder. The two frontrunners in the race, Mr Trump and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, both hail from the Sunshine State, while little-known businessman Perry Johnson is a resident of Michigan. Read More Mike Pence announces 2024 run with video calling for ‘different leadership’ Trump ridicules Chris Christie’s weight in edited 2024 campaign launch video

Luci Baines Johnson was a somewhat impatient 18-year-old on Aug. 6, 1965, when she happened to be on what she called “daddy duty,” meaning “I was supposed to accompany him to important occasions.” The occasion that day was President Lyndon Johnson’s scheduled signing of the Voting Rights Act, which Congress had passed the day before. She assumed the ceremony would be in the East Room of the White House, where the Civil Rights Act had been signed the previous year. “And that would probably take an hour and then I could be on my way,” she recalled in a recent interview from the LBJ Presidential Library in Austin, Texas. Instead, her father met her and guided her to the South Portico, where the presidential motorcade was waiting. They were going to Congress. Knowing a trip to Capitol Hill would take more time than she anticipated, she asked why. “‘We are going to Congress because there are going to be some courageous men and women who may not be returning to Congress because of the stand they have taken on voting rights,’” she recalled her father telling her. ”‘And there are going to be some extraordinary men and women who will be able to come to the Congress because of this great day. That’s why we’re going to Congress.’” Johnson, who stood behind her father during the signings, knew the significance of the law and asked him afterward why he had presented the first signing pen to Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen, a Republican from Illinois, when so many civil rights champions were on hand. “Luci Baines, I did not have to say or do anything to convince one of those great civil rights leaders to be for that legislation,” she recalled him saying. “If Everett Dirksen hadn’t been willing to be so courageous to support it, too, and more importantly brought his people along ... we’d never have had a law.” Johnson said personal relationships and events in her father’s life influenced his thinking on civil rights and voting rights, as well as many of the social programs he helped establish. Some of that can be traced to his life before politics when he was a teacher in Cotulla, Texas, where most of his students were Mexican American. They were wonderful and eager, but often hungry and very poor, she said. “He thought he’d grown up poor so he would understand what their plight was like,” she said. “But he had never gone without a toothbrush. He had never gone without toothpaste. He had never gone without shoes. He had never known the kind of discrimination that they had known.” “He swore if he ever got in a position to change the trajectory of the lives of people of color” he would, she said. Johnson said she was saddened in 2013 when the Supreme Court released its ruling in Shelby County v. Holder, which essentially ended a provision of the Voting Rights Act mandating the way states were included on the list of those needing to get advance approval for voting-related changes. “I cried because I knew what was coming. I knew that there were parts of this country, including my home state, my father’s home state, that would take advantage of the fact that there would no longer be an opportunity to have the federal government ensure that everyone in the community had the right and equal access to the voting booth,” she said. “I have seen over a lifetime so much take place that has tried to close the doors on all those rights,” she said. “I’m 75 years old now, and my energies are less than they once were, but for all of my days I will do all I can to try to keep those doors open to people of color, people who are discriminated against because of their age, or their ethnicity or their physical handicaps.” With the Supreme Court due to rule on another major pillar of the Voting Rights Act, Johnson said she wants to keep fighting to try to maintain her father’s legacy and protect voting rights. “I don’t want to get to heaven one day, and I hope I do, and have to say to my father, it was gutted to death on my watch,” she said. ___ The Associated Press coverage of race and voting receives support from the Jonathan Logan Family Foundation. See more about AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.