fbpx
Connect with us

Politics

Subpoenas Issued in New York for 8 Years of Trump’s Returns, Part of Hush Money Payment Investigation

Published

on

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance issued the subpoena last month when his office began investigating hush money payments Trump’s lawyer, Michael Cohen, made to Stormy Daniels, a woman who claimed to have had an affair with the president.

What We Know:

  • The president’s tax returns have been long sought after. He is the first president in decades who has not publicly released his tax documents. Many attempts have been made to obtain these records. In July, the House Ways and Means Committee sued the Treasury Department and the IRS after they were denied access to Trump’s records. The president’s lawyers have lengthened the process by taking legal action to counter the lawsuit.
  • The latest attempt to obtain the tax documents is zeroing in on the $130,000 Trump’s lawyer paid to Stormy Daniels, formally known as Stephanie Clifford, in exchange for her silence concerning her alleged affair with the president. The payment was made before the 2016 election. Cohen was reimbursed for the amount he paid Daniels.
  • The New York Times first reported news of the subpoena stating that Vance’s investigation aims to determine whether the Trump Organization falsely accounted for the reimbursements as a legal expense, which is potentially a felony offense in New York.
  • The subpoena was issued to Trump’s accounting firm, Mazars USA, requesting his personal and corporate tax returns from 2011-2019. Unlike other subpoenas requesting the returns, this one was issued by a grand jury in a criminal investigation.
  • If a crime was committed, it wouldn’t be the first time Trump’s campaign was involved in shady business deals. Just last year, Cohen was sentenced to three years in prison after he pled guilty to breaking federal campaign finance laws.
  • Marc Mukasey, a Trump Organization attorney, released a statement on the subpoena saying, “We are reviewing and will respond as appropriate.”

We will continue to follow this investigation.

Comments

comments

News

Cuba says U.S. Sanctions Have Caused Nearly $5.6 Billion In Losses

Published

on

Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez Parilla Courtesy of Ramon Espinosa

On Thursday, Cuba stated that the island had lost nearly $5.6 billion in one year due to economic sanctions imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump.

What We Know:

  • Bruno Rodríguez, Cuban Foreign Minister, criticized what he said was a growing number of sanctions smothering the island. This topic is on the list for next year’s U.N. General Assembly session.
  • Rodríguez mentioned that this barricade is an increasingly malicious attempt to withhold Cuban people of essential goods for their survival. He also stated that the political hostility has reached “hectic levels”.
  • The $5.6 billion loss happened between April 2019 and March 2020, compared with $4.3 billion the previous year. Rodríguez mentioned that whoever wins the elections will face the tangible that the blockade and U.S. policy are hurting the Cuban people.
  • Cuba is going through a lot after everything that is happening in 2020. Having sanctions, coupled with a slow economy, the pandemic, and frequently active hurricane seasons has led to an increasing shortage of food and occasional fuel deficiency on the island.
  • Rodríguez stated:

“It’s cynical to express supposed concern that this policy affects only some Cubans, but it’s even more cynical to try and justify it.”

  • Trump recently added to the sanctions by prohibiting U.S. passengers to Cuba from bringing back Cuban cigars and rum or visiting in government-owned hotels here as he courts the Cuban-American vote in Florida for the upcoming election.

  • Trump stated the sanctions would continue in place until Cuba frees all political prisoners, legalizes political parties, holds free elections, and respects free assembly and expression rights.

Cuba has declined any interference in the country’s businesses. Having such a huge loss can be extremely detrimental to Cuba or any other Islands.

Comments

comments

Continue Reading

Election 2020

Final Presidential Debate: Takeaways and Analysis

Published

on

President Donald Trump and Joe Biden faced off in the final presidential debate of the 2020 election on Thursday October 22nd at 9 pm EST. (Graphic via Chelsea Stahl / NBC News)
President Donald Trump and Joe Biden faced off in the final presidential debate of the 2020 election on Thursday October 22nd at 9 pm EST. (Graphic via Chelsea Stahl / NBC News)

After a chaotic first debate where President Donald Trump and Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden sparred aggressively, this final debate saw a huge turnaround compared to what voter’s received last time. With White House correspondent Kristin Welker as moderator, who was praised for her performance, the debate proceeded accordingly. Both candidates allowed each other to talk and had more respectful tones, even when on the offensive.

What We Know:

The moderator was able to roll through all the topics in the allotted time for last night’s debate, much of which was never clearly answered in the previous one due to its disastrous outcome. Biden once again held his own while under fire and greatly avoided any slip-ups that would have caused Republicans to question his age and mental acuity. Trump, in a much more collective manner, stood his own as well. As the incumbent, he didn’t bring anything else new to the table but reiterated his attacks on the Biden’s family and questioned the Democrat’s responses on key issues.

Covid-19 finally hits the stage

  • The Trump campaign reportedly complained that this debate was supposed to be on foreign policy, most likely for the president to speak on what he sees as accomplishments in trading, the Middle East, and Syria and target Biden’s son’s business ties to China.
  • Instead, the debate began with the COVID-19 pandemic, a topic which polls suggest is of greater interest to the American public currently. Trump didn’t seem to offer any new insight, only reiterated a vaccine is in the works and expects distribution in a few weeks. After his diagnosis of COVID-19 earlier this month, he used it as a way to promote new drugs that are being used as treatment and saying he’s probably “immune” now.
  • During Biden’s turn, he went on the attack pointing out how Trump has repeatedly downplayed the virus and how it would just disappear. He quoted the over 220,000 American deaths to the virus and stated 200,000 more could perish by the end of 2020.
  • The rest of this topic saw back and forth from both candidates. Trump continued to give reassurance on how everything is getting better, without evidence, and how lockdowns are not the solution. Biden countered by insisting he will “shut down the virus” not the U.S when addressing the pandemic. He also frequently advocated for mask usage and social distancing throughout the event.

Seemingly inevitable Hunter Biden topic

  • Ever since the last debate, when Trump brought up Hunter Biden, it was set in stone that his son would once again come up during debate night. It didn’t take long for the president to bring up the former vice-president’s family. Trump claimed that Biden profited from his son’s overseas deals in Ukraine and China. He cited recent stories about information acquired from Hunter’s laptop.
  • Biden’s response was a simple denial of those claims. He followed the financial dispute by turning it over to Trump’s taxes and business ties to China. The shift forced the president to spend time explaining how he “pre-paid” millions in taxes and vaguely describing when he’d release his tax returns. Biden confidently asserted how he and his running mate have already released theirs and asked Trump “what are you hiding?”
  • The exchange, being analyzed from various different angles, was one of the few parts that would have left a voter confused. Trump was clearly seeking to draw blood for personal attacks on Biden’s family. In the end, those attempts to make his rival lose his cool failed, which resulted in a cleaner debate.

A focus on immigration in the U.S

  • During Trump’s first run for the White House, he hammered onto the issues of immigration as one of the main issues he wanted to tackle. Now after four years, Trump tried to downplay some of the more extreme steps he’s taken while in office. His famous Mexico border wall did not come up.
  • A question the president received about immigration was the separation of children from undocumented migrants under his current administration’s policies. He quickly turned the conversation over to detention facilities near the border and brought up what his term “cages,” created by the Obama administration before him to temporary house undocumented minors.
  • Biden, with some visible annoyance, implied that all the children of undocumented migrants came over with their parents and it was these unfair separations that make the U.S a “laughing stock”.
  • The handling of immigration has been heavily criticized under Trump’s administration these past four years ranging from I.C.E. raids, the border wall, and children cry for their parents which still may be fresh in voters’ minds. Trump’s only rebuttal to that was the children were “well taken care of” and that the facilities were “so clean”. It probably didn’t help his case at that point.

Trump and Biden on criminal justice/racism

  • One of Trump’s biggest fluke’s last debate was when he turned the conversation into race relations. He skipped around the topic and notably refused to directly condemn white supremacy and in fact told the Proud Boy’s to “stand back and stand by”. This time, it appeared that Trump did his homework and remained calmer.
  • He went ahead and bragged about his cross-party criminal justice reform and aid to historically black colleges. He attacked Biden’s involvement in a draconian crime bill in the mid-90s which consequently lead Black Americans to prisons. The moment Biden had a chance to speak on new reforms to correct that, the president questioned Biden on why he didn’t accomplish more under former President Barack Obama.
  • “It’s all talk but no action with these politicians,” Trump stated. “Why didn’t you get it done? You had eight years to get it done.”
  • For older viewers who watched this portion of the debate closely, it would have been interesting considering the crime in the 1990s. Both candidates spoke on the number of felons to whom they gave clemency and their efforts for reforms in the justice system. In a year plagued with social injustice, this is more important than ever.

In the grand scheme of things, the final presidential debate was more along the lines of what voters expect to see of a future leader. The dumbfounding first debate will certainly be one marked in history and talked about for generations. As of this point in the election, polls have demonstrated most Americans have made their choice with more than 50 million people already have cast their votes. There is a small chance this debate turned the tide to favor either party.

Comments

comments

Continue Reading

Election 2020

US Supreme Court Rules Pennsylvania Mail-In Ballots WILL Count Up to Three Days Post-Election Day

Published

on

An official mail-in ballot for the 2020 General Election in the United States is shown, Tuesday, Oct. 13, 2020, in Marple Township, Pa. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum)
An official mail-in ballot for the 2020 General Election in the United States is shown, Tuesday, Oct. 13, 2020, in Marple Township, Pa. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum)

This unusual election year has left many split on deciding how to vote. For those mail-in voters, a Supreme Court ruling has permitted Pennsylvania to count ballots that are mailed in up to three days following the Nov. 3 election.

What We Know:

  • Although the outcome showed justices divided 4-4 on Monday, it wasn’t enough to overturn the decision. The state Supreme Court ruling will stand and it requires all county election officials to receive all mail-in ballot received up until Nov. 6 regardless of the postmark is unclear and long as it meets the time constraint.
  • In this scenario, Republicans have been the main opposition, including President Donald Trump’s campaign. The pushback from conservatives has been over the deadline extension for counted votes. They argue that it violates a federal law that sets Election Day as the first Tuesday of November, typical after the first Monday, and the constitutionality of this choice is reserved for lawmakers, not the courts.
  • Lawrence Tabas, the state Republican Party chairman, has stated that the party disagrees with the decision and, citing the tight 4-4 decision, “it only underscores the importance of having a full Supreme Court as soon as possible”.

“To be clear, the Supreme Court decided not to grant a stay — which does not mean the actions of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would withstand a legal challenge to their judicial overreach should the court hear the case,” Tabas said.

  • On the other side of things, Nancy Patton Mills, chairwoman of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party, blamed Republicans for attempting to invoke confusion among voters who have yet to pick a side this election. She said in a statement that the outcome of this ruling is “a significant victory for Pennsylvania voters”.
  • The state’s high court has considered that postal service delays may end up invalidating a large portion of mail-in ballots. Since the COVID-19 pandemic has hindered the regular election process, the state’s courts acted upon the power they have to extend election deadlines during a disaster emergency, of which this health crisis can be considered one.

Since the decision, Chief Justice John Roberts along with liberal Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Clarence Thomas banded together to reject Pennsylvania Republicans’ attempt to block the state court ruling, which would have halted absentee ballots by Election Day.

Comments

comments

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Facebook

Trending