Democratic members of Congress get bomb threats on Thanksgiving
Daniel SLIM / AFP via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The homes of multiple Democratic members of Congress in Connecticut were targeted by bomb threats on Thanksgiving Day.
Reps. Joe Courtney, Jahana Hayes, Jim Himes, and John Larson all said their homes were targeted on Thursday.
“This morning, I was notified of a bomb threat targeting my home where I was celebrating Thanksgiving with my family,” Himes said in a statement. “Thankfully, after a swift and thorough response from the United States Capitol Police, the Greenwich Police Department and the Stamford Police Department, no evidence of a bomb was found.”
Hayes said in a statement she was notified by local police that it received a threatening email stating a pipe bomb had been placed in her mailbox at home. Police did not find any evidence of a pipe bomb in his mailbox and said there’s no place for political violence in the country.
“State police, U.S. Capitol Police, and the Sergeant at Arms were immediately notified. The Wolcott Police Department and State Police responded and no bomb or explosive materials were discovered and the scene was cleared. At this time the investigation is ongoing. I thank law enforcement for their swift attention to this matter, their actions demonstrate there is no place in our country for political violence.”
Local outlets in Connecticut reported that Larson and Courtney have received similar threats. ABC News has reached out for comment.
Threats against multiple members of Connecticut congressional delegations come following several of Trump’s cabinet nominees receiving threats, including Rep. Elise Stefanik, former Rep. Lee Zeldin, and Pete Hegseth.
It’s unclear, though, if the threats against some of Trump’s cabinet picks are connected to the threats against many of Connecticut’s congressional delegation.
(WASHINGTON) — Federal and local law enforcement and officials in Washington, D.C., are ramping up preparations to ensure a safe and peaceful transfer of power on Jan. 6, 2025, and on Inauguration Day.
In September, the Department of Homeland Security designated Jan. 6 a National Special Security Event (NSSE) and approved D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser’s request for additional federal resources.
The District is anticipating that there will be no declared winner on election night and, “We could enter a period where we have pervasive misinformation and disinformation about the outcome of the election,” D.C. Assistant City Administrator Chris Rodrigez warned on Tuesday.
“For a period, perhaps days or weeks, where the country, and in many respects the world, will be sitting and waiting for the declared winner,” he added.
Although there are no specific threats to the city, officials are planning ahead for any and all threats, including continued pervasive misinformation and disinformation about everything ranging from COVID to political polarization and violence. They noted that social media will be the “epicenter” of false information.
Preparation for Inauguration Day began in the aftermath of the deadly Jan. 6. insurrection. Five people died during or after the attack, including four protesters and one police officer. Approximately 140 police officers were injured during the attack, according to the Department of Justice.
Bowser told ABC News that one of the biggest lessons D.C. learned was to have “better coordination among the federal branches, and that is what the National Special Security Event status provides.”
D.C. Police Chief Pam Smith told reporters on Tuesday that close to 4,000 additional law enforcement officers will be deployed to D.C. between Jan. 6 and Inauguration Day.
In addition to law enforcement, the mayor is considering an advance request to the Department of Defense for National Guard support. Normally, a state’s governor would call out the Guard, but because D.C. is not a state, it must go through DOD. However, the Capitol Police can now call up the National Guard for support without needing the Capitol Police Board’s pre-approval.
“We have also implemented changes that will hopefully ensure that we will not need to call the National Guard unless it is a last-case scenario,” Capitol Police told ABC News.
Like D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department, U.S. Capitol Police have focused on expansion in the four years since Jan. 6. Capitol Police told ABC News that it has strengthened partnerships and coordination with local and state officials.
Capitol Police had a wave of resignations and retirements after Jan. 6, but over the past four years has hired several hundred people and now has 2,100 officers on staff. The agency also added 140 civilians to serve in various roles such as intelligence specialists, operational planners, and emergency management specialists, as well as a new Rapid Response Team.
A source familiar with security planning told ABC News to expect a security footprint similar to that of the State of the Union or the recent NATO Summit in Washington in July.
However, officials are prepared for any and all threats, noting it is a “fluid, unpredictable security environment,” which includes extremist groups and the potential for civil unrest.
“If you see something, say something” noting that the pipe bombs found at the Republican National Committee and the Democratic National Committee headquarters were placed the night before the insurrection “most likely to distract law enforcement,” Rodrigez urged residents.
Bowser told the council to anticipate robust fencing around the Capitol from Jan. 6 until Jan. 21.
She also noted that if Vice President Kamala Harris wins the presidential election, the city’s challenges will differ from a win by former President Donald Trump.
The mayor said in the event of a Harris win, “The issue is probably a million people will be here who are celebrating and who are in good spirits, and that also presents its challenges to make sure everybody can do it safely.”
“I think that the United States Capitol Police are prepared to ensure a peaceful transfer of power at the Capitol, regardless of the victor,” she added, noting that her team has experience handling large-scale historic inaugurations, including former President Barack Obama’s election.
(NEW YORK) — Seven months after a trial judge fined Donald Trump $454 million for business frauds that the judge said “shock the conscience,” a New York appeals court appeared skeptical Thursday of some of the arguments underpinning the New York attorney general’s case against the former president.
A panel of five judges at New York’s Appellate Division, First Department heard Trump’s appeal and peppered both sides with concerns about the case — appearing to question some of the key elements of the state’s case, including the application of a consumer fraud statute, the justification for the financial penalty prosecutors sought, and the private nature of the transactions in question, mirroring well-worn defense arguments that failed during the case’s lengthy trial this year.
Trump himself did not attend Thursday’s hearing in New York.
“We have a situation where there were no victims, no complaints,” argued D. John Sauer, the same attorney who successfully argued Trump’s presidential immunity appeal to the Supreme Court earlier this year. “How is there a capacity or tendency to deceive when you have these clear disclaimers?”
While the judges expressed some skepticism about some of the defense’s claims — with one judge remarking that factual inaccuracies could have resulted in Trump’s statements being “completely fallacious” — some of the defense arguments were echoed in the judges’ questions.
“The defendants’ statements were not made for ordinary people,” noted Associate Justice David Friedman. “They were directed at some of the most sophisticated actors in business.”
Deputy Solicitor General Judith Vale, arguing for New York Attorney General Letitia James, emphasized the magnitude of Trump’s alleged misstatements and their importance to the banks that loaned the former president hundreds of millions of dollars.
“Deutsche Bank would not have given these loans without the financial strength being inflated,” Vale said. “The financial statements were coming in each year, and they were important, critical to the loans each year.”
A series of questions also focused on the New York fraud statute — Executive Law 63 (12) — that the attorney general used to bring her case. Trump’s lawyers have insisted the law should not apply to profitable transactions between financial institutions and the Trump Organization.
“How do we draw a line or put up some guardrails to know when the attorney general is operating within her broad sphere or 63(12) or going into an area where she doesn’t have jurisdiction?” asked Associate Justice John R. Higgitt.
Vale responded by arguing that Trump’s frauds impacted consumers by inserting false and misleading information into the marketplace, and that Trump’s fine has a deterrent effect.
“A big point of these statutes is for the attorney general to go in quickly to stop the fraud and illegality before the counterparties are harmed,” Vale said.
When pressed about the size of the penalty and whether it was “tethered” to the limited harm incurred by the banks that did business with Trump, Vale argued that the profitability of the transactions should not give Trump a free pass to use false information.
“It is not an excuse to say our fraud was really successful so we should get some of the money,” said Vale.
In an 11-week trial that concluded in February, New York Judge Arthur Engoron found that Trump, his eldest sons, and two top Trump Organization executives exaggerated Trump’s wealth to secure better terms from lenders, for which he fined the former president $454 million.
Trump, following the ruling, secured a $175 million bond while he appeals the judgment.
(COLUMBUS, OH) — A transgender bathroom ban has been sent to Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine’s desk after passing through the state legislature.
The bill would require students in the state’s K-12 schools, as well as colleges and universities, to use the restroom or facility that aligns with their gender assigned at birth. The bill notes that it is not intended to prevent schools from building single-occupancy facilities and does not ban someone of the opposite gender from entering to help another person.
The Republican-backed bill passed 60-31 in the House and passed on party lines in the Senate, 24-7.
Supporters say their concerns lie in student’s privacy and protection.
“It protects our children and grandchildren in private spaces where they are most vulnerable. It is us using our legislative authority to ensure schools are, in fact, safe environments. After all, bathrooms, showers, changing rooms should all be safe places for our students,” said Republican state Sen. Jerry C. Cirino ahead of the bill’s passage.
Critics of the bill say that the bill is creating unfounded concerns about transgender students and may instead put trans students in danger of discrimination or violence.
“I am in disbelief that this is a top priority on our first session back from recess,” said Senate Democratic Leader Nickie J. Antonio in an online statement “There are so many other issues we should be working on. There should be no exception to liberty and justice for all, yet here we are telling our children that there are people who are less than. This bill is not about bathrooms. It’s about demonizing those who are different, and our children are watching and listening to the fearmongering.”
Several medical organizations, including the American Medical Association and American Academy of Pediatrics, have opposed policies preventing transgender individuals from accessing restrooms consistent with their gender identity.
DeWine, a Republican, has gone against state Republican legislators on transgender issues before. He vetoed a transgender youth care ban bill, which would have restricted gender-affirming puberty blockers, hormone therapy, or surgeries.
“These are gut-wrenching decisions that should be made by the parents and should be informed by teams of doctors who are advising them,” said DeWine, adding that he did not find any families or hospitals who were seeking or allowing surgeries for youth. “These are parents who have watched the child suffer sometimes for years and have real concerns that their child may not survive.”
DeWine’s office declined ABC News’ request for comment on the bill. He told reporters this past summer that he has to look at “specific language” in the legislation.
“I’m for people, kids, to be able to go to the bathroom with the gender assignment so that they have that protection, but I’ll have to look at the specific language,” DeWine told reporters .
