Former US Attorney Jessica Aber suffered from epilepsy, family says
Justice Department
(ALEXANDRIA, Va.) — The family of former United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Jessica Aber, who was found dead on Saturday at a home in Virginia, said the 43-year-old suffered from epilepsy, calling her sudden death a “tremendous sorrow” in a statement Wednesday.
Aber, 43, died in her sleep, her family said.
Police in Alexandria, Virginia, said in an update amid the investigation on Tuesday that “detectives have found no evidence suggesting that her death was caused by anything other than natural causes.”
Her family reiterated that it is believed Aber died from natural causes and said she “suffered from epilepsy and epileptic seizures for many years.”
The case will remain open until the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner rules on the manner and cause of death, police said.
“We expect more information from the medical examiner in the coming weeks,” her family said. “Our family is in shock and grieving deeply and we respectfully request privacy as we attempt to navigate through our unspeakable loss.”
Police in Alexandria, Virginia, said they were called to a home in Alexandria, a suburb of Washington, D.C., on Saturday morning for the report of an unresponsive woman and found Aber dead inside.
A friend of the family told ABC News on Sunday that police believe the death was the result of a longstanding medical issue.
Aber, who served as U.S. attorney in Virginia for most of the Biden administration, took office in October 2021 after being unanimously confirmed by the Senate and stepped down in January, shortly after President Donald Trump’s inauguration.
As U.S. attorney, Aber oversaw a staff of some 300 prosecutors and other staff and handled federal prosecutions in the state.
Lori Van Buren/Albany Times Union via Getty Images
(HEMPSTEAD, N.Y.) — A New York state trooper who claimed to have been shot in the line of duty in October is now facing criminal charges for having allegedly “staged” the shooting, according to officials.
Thomas Mascia, 27, surrendered to police Monday morning, a spokesperson for the Nassau County District Attorney’s Office told ABC News. He faces charges of official misconduct, falsely reporting a crime and tampering with evidence.
Mascia’s parents, Dorothy and Thomas, also surrendered to police on charges of criminal possession of a firearm, according to the district attorney’s office. All three have been released on their own recognizance.
Mascia was on duty Oct. 30 in Hempstead when he “initiated a radio transmission for shots fired,” according to a felony complaint obtained by ABC News.
He then “claimed he was shot by the driver of a black Dodger Charger described as either a Black or dark-skinned Hispanic male.”
The complaint alleges Mascia actually “staged the scene of the shooting,” placing shell casings on the ground hours earlier.
He then allegedly “shot himself in the leg in another location before returning to the staged location” on the Southern State Parkway.
State police temporarily shut down the section of the parkway where Mascia claimed the incident occurred “in an effort to locate the non-existent shooters, causing alarm and inconvenience to the public,” the complaint states.
The complaint accuses Mascia of staging the shooting “for the benefit of gaining attention or sympathy for himself.”
An attorney representing Mascia did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
He is expected to make his next court appearance Feb. 5.
(WASHINGTON) — More than 100 intelligence community employees will be terminated and have their security clearances revoked as the intelligence community investigates group chats that allegedly discussed explicit behavior, officials said.
The chats, which were hosted on a chat system for the intelligence community that was maintained by the National Security Agency, took place on a secure intranet called Intelink in two server channels titled “LBTQA” and “IC_Pride_TWG,” according to intelligence community officials.
“This behavior is unacceptable and those involved WILL be held accountable,” Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard posted on X.
She said the “disgusting chat groups” were immediately shut down when President Donald Trump issued his executive order ending diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in the federal government, which she called the “DEI insanity the Biden Admin was obsessed with.”
“Our IC must be focused on our core mission: ensuring the safety, security, and freedom of the American people,” Gabbard said.
Deputy Chief of Staff Alexa Henning said in a post on X Tuesday evening, “The DNI sent a memo directing all intelligence agencies to identify the employees who participated in the NSA’s ‘obscene, pornographic, and sexually explicit’ chatrooms and to terminate their employment and revoke their security clearances. Deadline: Friday.”
Gabbard, in an interview on Fox News, said on Tuesday: “There are over 100 people from across the intelligence community that contributed to and participated in this — what is really just an egregious violation of trust, what to speak of, like, basic rules and standards around professionalism. I put out a directive today that they all will be terminated and their security clearances will be revoked.”
Gabbard added: “Today’s action in holding these individuals accountable is just the beginning of what we’re seeing across the Trump administration, which is carrying out the mandate the American people gave him: Clean house, root out that rot and corruption and weaponization and politicization, so we can start to rebuild that trust in these institutions that are charged with an important mission of serving the American people, ensuring our safety, security and freedom.”
The chat conversations were first reported by the conservative magazine City Journal.
(BOSTON) — A federal judge in Boston Monday will consider whether to block President Donald Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk from carrying out their unprecedented plan to buy out tens of thousands of federal employees.
Three federal employee unions — with the support of 20 Democratic attorneys general — have argued that the Office of Personnel Management’s deferred resignation offer is an “unlawful ultimatum” to force the resignation of government workers under the “threat of mass termination.”
“OPM’s Fork Directive is a sweeping and stunningly arbitrary action to solicit blanket resignations of federal workers,” wrote lawyers for the American Federation of Government Employees, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, and the National Association of Government Employees. “Defendants have not even argued — nor could they — that the Fork Directive was the product of rational or considered decision-making.”
The buyout offer, part of Trump’s effort to trim the size of government through Musk’s newly formed Department of Government Efficiency, was sent out under the subject line “Fork in the Road” — the same language Musk used when he slashed jobs at Twitter after taking over that company in 2022.
In court, the Trump administration has described the buyout as one of the first steps in the president’s plan to “transform the federal workforce,” arguing that any further delay of the buyout would cause “remarkably disruptive and inequitable repercussions.”
Monday’s hearing comes less than two weeks after more than two million government employees received the “Fork in the Road” email from the Office of Personnel Management, offering full pay and benefits until September for any federal employee who accepted a deferred resignation by Feb. 6.
Just hours ahead of Thursday’s deadline for employees to accept the offer, U.S. District Judge George O’Toole Jr. — who was nominated to the bench by President Bill Clinton — temporarily blocked the offer until Monday so he could consider issuing a temporary restraining offer pausing the order.
“I enjoined the defendants from taking any action to implement the so-called ‘Fork Directive’ pending the completion of briefing and oral argument on the issues,” Judge O’Toole said in his ruling. “I believe that’s as far as I want to go today.”
The Trump administration, in response, “extended” the deadline for the offer, which more than 65,000 federal employees have already taken.
“We are grateful to the judge for extending the deadline so more federal workers who refuse to show up to the office can take the Administration up on this very generous, once-in-a-lifetime offer,” press secretary Karoline Leavitt said last week.
The unions who brought the lawsuit argued that Trump exceeded his authority as president with the offer, which they described as a “slapdash resignation program.”
According to the plaintiffs, Trump’s offer violates federal law, lacks congressionally appropriated funding, and does not offer employees reassurance that the president would follow through with the offer. Their claim in part relies on a federal law from the 1940s called the Administrative Procedure Act that governs how federal agencies create and enforce rules.
“In the tech universe, ‘move fast and break things’ is a fine motto in part because they’re not playing with the public’s money, and it’s expected that most initiatives are going to fail,” Loyola Marymount law professor Justin Leavitt told ABC News. “Congress knows that, so in 1946 they basically said, ‘When agencies do stuff … they have to be careful about it. They’ve got to consider all aspects of the problem.”
The plaintiffs also argued that the buyout is unlawful because it relies on funding that Congress has yet to appropriate, violating the Antideficiency Act.
“Defendants’ ultimatum divides federal workers into two groups: (1) those who submit their resignations to OPM for a promised period of pay without the requirement to work, and (2) those who have not and are therefore subject to threat of mass termination,” the lawsuit said.
Lawyers for the federal government have pushed back on those claims, arguing that Trump has the legal authority to provide the buyout for employees within the federal branch, and that any further delay would do more harm than good.
“Extending the deadline for the acceptance of deferred resignation on its very last day will markedly disrupt the expectations of the federal workforce, inject tremendous uncertainty into a program that scores of federal employees have already availed themselves of, and hinder the Administration’s efforts to reform the federal workforce,” DOJ attorney Joshua E. Gardner wrote in a filing last week.
Judge O’Toole will consider issuing a temporary restraining order that would block enforcement of the offer for as long as two weeks.
