Trump asks Supreme Court to block his criminal hush money sentencing
Walter Bibikow/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — President-elect Donald Trump has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to prevent Friday’s sentencing in his New York criminal hush money case.
In a filing Wednesday, defense lawyers argued that a New York judge lacks the authority to sentence the president-elect until Trump exhausts his appeal based on presidential immunity.
“This Court should enter an immediate stay of further proceedings in the New York trial court to prevent grave injustice and harm to the institution of the Presidency and the operations of the federal government,” Trump’s lawyers wrote.
The move came after a New York appeals court earlier Tuesday denied Trump’s request to delay the Jan. 10 sentencing.
Trump was found guilty in May on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to a hush money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in order to boost his electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election.
In asking the Supreme Court to intervene, Trump has presented the court with an unprecedented situation of a former president — whose appointment of three justices cemented the court’s conservative majority — asking the country’s highest court to effectively toss his criminal conviction less than two weeks ahead of his inauguration.
Trump asked the Supreme Court to consider whether he is entitled to a stay of the proceedings during his appeal; whether presidential immunity prevents the use of evidence related to official acts; and whether a president-elect is entitled to the same immunity as a sitting president.
If adopted by the justices, Trump’s argument about immunity for a president-elect could expand the breadth of presidential authority, temporarily providing a private citizen with the absolute immunity reserved for a sitting president.
In a 6-3 decision last year, the Supreme Court broadened the limits of presidential immunity, finding that a former president is presumptively immune from criminal liability for any official acts and absolutely immune related to his core duties. The decision not only expanded the limits of presidential power but also upended the criminal cases faced by Trump.
Despite that favorable opinion, Trump faces uncertainty in convincing the justices to halt his sentencing. The Supreme Court does not typically take on random interlocutory appeals, even by a president-elect.
Trump’s lawyers also argued that the former president’s conviction relied on evidence of official acts, including his social media posts as president and testimony from his close White House advisers. The New York judge in the case, Juan Merchan, ruled that Trump’s conviction related “entirely to unofficial conduct” and “poses no danger of intrusion on the authority and function of the Executive Branch.”
“This appeal will ultimately result in the dismissal of the District Attorney’s politically motivated prosecution that was flawed from the very beginning, centered around the wrongful actions and false claims of a disgraced, disbarred serial-liar former attorney, violated President Trump’s due process rights, and had no merit,” Trump’s filing to the Supreme Court said.
(WASHINGTON) — Since becoming President-elect Donald Trump’s choice for director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard’s rosy posture toward Moscow has prompted some Democratic critics to suggest that she could be “compromised,” or perhaps even a “Russian asset” — claims the ex-Hawaii representative and Army officer has forcefully denied.
But former advisers to Gabbard suggest that her views on Russia and its polarizing leader, Vladimir Putin, have been shaped not by some covert intelligence recruitment as far as they know — but instead by her unorthodox media consumption habits.
Three former aides said Gabbard, who left the Democratic Party in 2022, regularly read and shared articles from the Russian news site RT — formerly known as Russia Today — which the U.S. intelligence community characterized in 2017 as “the Kremlin’s principal international propaganda outlet.”
While it was not clear to those former staffers whether or when she stopped frequenting the site, one former aide said Gabbard continued to circulate articles from RT “long after” she was advised that the outlet was not a credible source of information.
Doug London, a retired 34-year veteran intelligence officer, said Gabbard’s alleged penchant to rely at least in part on outlets like RT to shape her view of the world reflects poorly on her suitability to fulfill the responsibilities of a director of national intelligence.
“That Gabbard’s views mirror Russia’s narrative and disinformation themes can but suggest naïveté, collusion, or politically opportunistic sycophancy to echo whatever she believes Trump wants to hear,” London said, adding, “none of which bodes well for the president’s principal intelligence adviser responsible for enabling the [U.S. intelligence community] to inform decision-making by telling it like it is.”
Alexa Henning, a spokesperson for the Trump transition team, said in a statement to ABC News that “this is false and nothing but a few former, conveniently anonymous, disgruntled staffers.”
“Lt. Col. Gabbard’s views on foreign policy have been shaped by her military service and multiple deployments to war zones where she’s seen the cost of war and who ultimately pays the price,” Henning said.
‘The Russian playbook’
Former congressional and campaign advisers said it was unclear to what extent Gabbard’s views were shaped by what she read in RT — and they emphasized that she would consume news from a wide range of outlets, including left-wing and right-wing blogs.
But over the past decade, Gabbard’s views on Russian aggression in Europe have evolved in a particularly dramatic fashion.
In 2014, when Russian troops annexed Crimea, Gabbard — then a first-term Democratic U.S. representative from Hawaii — released a statement advocating for “meaningful American military assistance for Ukrainian forces” and for the U.S. to invoke “stiffer, more painful economic sanctions for Russia.”
“The consequences of standing idly by while Russia continues to degrade the territorial integrity of Ukraine are clear,” she wrote at the time. “We have to act in a way that takes seriously the threat of Russian aggression against its peaceful, sovereign neighbor.”
By 2017, however, her tune had changed. In a lengthy memo to campaign staff laying out her views on foreign policy, a copy of which was obtained by ABC News, Gabbard blamed the U.S. and NATO for provoking Russian aggression and bemoaned the United States’ “hostility toward Putin.”
“There certainly isn’t any guarantee to Putin that we won’t try to overthrow Russia’s government,” she wrote in the memo from May 2017, titled “fodder for fundraising emails / social media.”
“In fact, I’m pretty sure there are American politicians who would love to do that,” she wrote.
She also condemned the very sanctions she had previously supported, writing that, “historically, the U.S. has always wanted Russia to be a poor country.”
“It’s a matter of respect,” she wrote. “The Russian people are a proud people and they don’t want the U.S. and our allies trying to control them and their government.”
Gabbard’s sentiment in the 2017 memo is “basically the Russian playbook,” said Ivo Daalder, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO during the Obama administration.
“It’s dangerous,” said Daalder. “That strain of thinking is not unique to Tulsi Gabbard, but it is certainly not where you would think a major figure in any administration would like to be, intellectually.”
By 2022, at the outset of the latest Russia-Ukraine conflict, Gabbard suggested on X that Russia’s invasion was justified by Ukraine’s potential bid to join NATO, “which would mean US/NATO forces right on Russia’s border” — a narrative perpetuated by Russian propaganda channels, including RT, and denounced by the U.S. and NATO as “false.”
Gabbard’s messaging has at times aligned so closely with Kremlin talking points that at least one commentator on Kremlin state media has referred to her as “Russia’s girlfriend.”
A ‘nefarious effort’
The U.S. government first called out RT as a propaganda mouthpiece for the Kremlin in the wake of the 2016 presidential election, three years after Gabbard was elected to Congress.
This past September, the State Department wrote that it had evidence that “RT moved beyond being simply a media outlet and has been an entity with cyber capabilities.” The U.S. also issued fresh sanctions against executives at RT, including its editor-in-chief, who the U.S. accused of engaging in a “nefarious effort to covertly recruit unwitting American influencers in support of their malign influence campaign.”
The Justice Department also indicted two RT employees in September for their alleged role in what the DOJ called a scheme to pay right-wing social media influencers nearly $10 million to “disseminate content deemed favorable to the Russian government.”
In the decade since Gabbard arrived in Washington, experts say she has regularly promoted views consistent with those espoused in RT and other Russian propaganda channels.
In its 2017 assessment, for example, the U.S. intelligence community wrote that RT “has actively collaborated with WikiLeaks” and “routinely gives [WikiLeaks founder Julian] Assange sympathetic coverage and provides him a platform to denounce the United States.”
Gabbard has long been an outspoken supporter of Assange, arguing in a June 2024 appearance on “Real Time with Bill Maher” that “[Assange’s] prosecution, the charges against him, are one of the biggest attacks on freedom of the press, that we’ve seen, and freedom of speech.”
In Congress, Gabbard also co-sponsored a resolution calling on the federal government to “drop all charges against Edward Snowden,” the former contractor for the National Security Agency who supplied WikiLeaks with secret documents in order to expose what he called “horrifying” U.S. government surveillance capabilities.
RT frequently reports glowingly on Snowden, who has for more than a decade lived under asylum in Russia.
‘Undeniable facts’
But it is Gabbard’s framing of the Russian invasion of Ukraine that has most galvanized her critics in the national security sphere.
In March 2022, Gabbard posted a video to Twitter — now X — sharing what she said were “undeniable facts” about U.S.-funded biolabs in the war-torn country, claiming that “even in the best of circumstances” they “could easily be compromised” — a debunked theory regularly promoted by RT and other Kremlin propaganda channels.
Experts say RT and other Russian state-controlled news agencies have frequently capitalized on Gabbard’s public comments to support the biolab conspiracy theory and other disinformation, recirculating clips in which she repeats the Kremlin propaganda as evidence backing the false claims — effectively engineering an echo-chamber to magnify their propaganda machine.
Even so, Brian O’Neill, a former senior intelligence official with experience in senior policymaker briefing, expressed confidence that career intelligence officials can support Gabbard with “a constant barrage of new information” that will help shape her understanding of emerging world events.
“New appointees in such roles always bring preconceptions, but like her predecessors, she will be subject to comprehensive briefings grounded in solid evidence provided by individuals of high integrity and expertise,” O’Neill said.
“That said,” O’Neill cautioned, “Trump’s well-documented hostility and skepticism toward the [intelligence community] will shape the environment she steps into. If she adopts a similar posture, there’s a risk she might deprioritize intelligence community input or dismiss inconvenient truths presented to her.”
ABC News’ Shannon Kingston contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — Three newly elected lawmakers representing the LGBTQ community will make history Friday when they are sworn in to the 119th Congress, marking several firsts in the House of Representatives.
Sarah McBride will be the first openly transgender member of Congress. She will represent Delaware’s sole congressional district in the House of Representatives after more than three years in the state Senate, which marked a historic first for trans representation at the state senate level.
Julie Johnson, set to be the first LGBTQ+ member of Congress from the South, had served in the Texas state legislature since 2018. In her campaign for the congressional seat, she touted her record in fighting anti-LGBTQ bills on the state level among her passions as a legislator.
Emily Randall will be the first LGBTQ Latina in Congress after serving as a Washington state senator since 2018.
The 118th Congress set the record for having the most LGBTQ representation in U.S. history, with 13 legislators openly identifying as gay, lesbian or bisexual. This year’s slate of members being sworn in are doing so as the country experiences growing anti-LGBTQ rhetoric and violence.
In the 2024 state legislative session, the ACLU tracked more than 500 bills they say are “anti-LGBTQ.” Transgender people — who make up less than 1% of Americans over the age of 13, according to UCLA’s research organization, the Williams Institute — have particularly been the subjects of such legislation, including restrictions on bathroom use for transgender residents, bans on gender-affirming care, and more.
In recent years, federal and local authorities have warned about the increase in violence against the LGBTQ community.
McBride has received backlash from some colleagues ahead of her swearing in. Republican Rep. Nancy Mace introduced a bill in November to restrict transgender women from using women’s restrooms at the U.S. Capitol, saying the bill was “absolutely” in response to McBride’s entering Congress. She cited concerns about her safety in restrooms, to which McBride responded by calling the bill a distraction. The bill is now dead.
House Speaker Mike Johnson said transgender women cannot use women’s restrooms, changing rooms or locker rooms in the Capitol and House office buildings. In terms of how Johnson plans to enforce this policy is not entirely clear if he’s elected Speaker again, but the speaker has “general control” of facilities, according to House rules.
McBride responded to the order by saying, “I’m not here to fight about bathrooms. I’m here to fight for Delawareans and to bring down costs facing families. Like all members, I will follow the rules as outlined by Speaker Johnson, even if I disagree with them.
LGBTQ groups have applauded the incoming legislators “when the fight for equality and justice faces unprecedented opposition,” said Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson in a statement to ABC News.
“The American people deserve a bold vision for our country, one led by champions who bring experiences to the table that have often gone unheard,” Robinson said in the statement. “They have proven themselves to be leaders through their lived examples and their careers in advancing equality and civil rights. It’s why we were proud to mobilize our grassroots forces last year to support them in their races so that every LGBTQ+ American knows that they have a voice in Washington.”
(WASHINGTON) — The election of a new chair of the Democratic National Committee, along with other top leadership positions, will be Feb. 1, 2025, at the party’s winter meeting in National Harbor, Maryland, according to a DNC official.
This selection of incoming DNC officers, which includes chair, vice chairs, treasurer, secretary, and national finance chair positions, comes as the party grapples with the results of the 2024 election, when they lost the presidency, control of the U.S. Senate and were not able to earn the majority in the House.
Laying out the next steps for party leadership, current DNC Chair Jamie Harrison — who is not vying for a second term — also announced on Monday that the party will host four forums for candidates to make their case to the 448 active DNC members who will be voting on their bids.
The forums, set to be both in-person and virtually, will provide “opportunities for engagement of grassroots Democrats,” a party official said, and will “focus on the questions and concerns of DNC members, elected representatives who will ultimately vote to elect the incoming officers.”
“As my time as Chair comes to a close and we prepare to undertake the critical work of holding the Trump Administration and Republican Party accountable for their extremism and false promises, we are beginning to lay out the process for upcoming DNC officer elections in the New Year. The DNC is committed to running a transparent, equitable, and impartial election for the next generation of leadership to guide the party forward,” Harrison said in a statement on Monday.
Harrison and all DNC staff will maintain complete neutrality throughout the process, including abstaining from endorsing or campaigning for any candidate, a party official told ABC.
“Electing the Chair and DNC officers is one of the most important responsibilities of the DNC Membership, and our staff will run an inclusive and transparent process that gives members the opportunity to get to know the candidates as they prepare to cast their votes,” Harrison added.
The DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee is set to meet on Dec. 12 to first develop a process for selecting Democratic Party officers. They’ll recommend a “Rules of Procedure” for the nomination and election of the candidates that will be sent to full membership for the vote during the winter meeting, which begins Jan. 30 in National Harbor.
Included in these rules are the requirements for gaining access to the ballot. In 2021, candidates were required to submit a nominating statement alongside the signatures of 40 DNC members. The DNC intends to use this 40 signature threshold for candidate participation in the forums, a party official said to ABC.
Thus far, there are two candidates actively campaigning to be the next chair. Former Maryland governor and Baltimore mMayor Martin O’Malley, who has served since December 2023 as the commissioner of the Social Security Administration, a week ago was the first to throw his hat into the ring for what is expected to be many bids to lead a Democratic party left in disarray following their election losses earlier this month.
“We must connect our Party with the most important place in America — the kitchen table of every family’s home. Jobs, Opportunity, and Economic Security for all. Getting things done. Hope. A 50 state strategy. Now.” he said on Monday in a post on X.
Shortly after, Ken Martin of Minnesota, a vice chair of the DNC who also serves as chairman of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor (DFL) Party and president of the Association of State Democratic Committees, entered the race.
In a statement, Martin says he’s already garnered the endorsement of 83 DNC members and will be “working to earn every vote between now and the party elections.” In his launch, Martin emphasized the party’s need to “hit the pavement, get out of DC for a bit, and go to the states — to listen, reconnect with the voters, and restore a strong and resilient party.”
Other names floated for DNC chair have been ambassador to Japan and former Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel, Democratic Party of Wisconsin Chairman Ben Wikler, and Chuck Rocha, a political strategist who worked for Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign, among others. New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy won’t be running for the role, ABC News has confirmed, after some speculation about his candidacy had been rumored.
The 448 DNC members who will vote on Feb. 1 includes 200 state elected members from 57 states, territories, and Democrats Abroad; members representing 16 affiliate groups; and 73 current at-large members elected by the DNC.
-ABC News’ Brittany Shepherd and Hannah Demissie contributed to this report.
