Trump picks Rep. Matt Gaetz to be attorney general
(WASHINGTON) — President-elect Donald Trump announced on Wednesday that he has chosen Rep. Matt Gaetz as his pick for attorney general, a move that, if he’s confirmed by the Senate, would place a firebrand and one of Trump’s most loyal allies at the head of the Justice Department.
“Matt is a deeply gifted and tenacious attorney, trained at the William & Mary College of Law, who has distinguished himself in Congress through his focus on achieving desperately needed reform at the Department of Justice,” Trump said in his social media post.
Gaetz is an explosive selection by Trump to be the chief law enforcement officer of the federal government, leading the very same executive branch of government that spent years investigating allegations regarding the Florida congressman. Gaetz was informed that the Justice Department would not seek changes just last year. He has long denied any wrongdoing.
Gaetz has been a member of Congress since winning in 2017, riding the MAGA wave that brought Trump to Washington eight years ago. Over the years, Gaetz has become one of Trump’s most ardent, and according to some allies, effective, defenders in Washington while also growing close to Trump.
Gaetz has been down at Trump’s residence in Mar-a-Lago almost every day since Election Day, helping make suggestions and input on other administration selections, sources tell ABC News. Gaetz was also seen traveling with Trump in his motorcade during his visit to Washington on Wednesday.
Notably, Gaetz is very close with Trump’s newly selected chief of staff, Susie Wiles, who also has deep and storied roots in Florida politics.
Beginning in 2019, Gaetz faced a yearslong Justice Department investigation into allegations related to sex trafficking and obstruction of justice. Gaetz has long denied any wrongdoing, and the Justice Department informed Gaetz in 2023 that it was declining to bring charges against him after its investigation.
The investigation into Gaetz stemmed from a probe into the Florida congressman’s one-time friend, former Seminole County Tax Collector Joel Greenberg, who was sentenced in 2022 to 11 years in federal prison after pleading guilty to multiple charges, including sex trafficking a minor and introducing the minor to other “adult men.”
Since the Justice Department declined to charge Gaetz following its investigation, the Florida congressman has faced an ongoing probe by the House Ethics Committee regarding the same allegations.
In September, Gaetz released a lengthy statement concerning the ongoing House Ethics probe into his alleged conduct. Gaetz stated that he would no longer voluntarily participate in the probe and included a string of answers seemingly to questions the committee asked the Florida congressman earlier that month.
(WASHINGTON) — As the bipartisan group No Labels attempted to field a third-party independent bid in the 2024 presidential race, several of its opponents aggressively attempted to sabotage its operations in hopes of preventing the group from moving forward, according to a lawsuit the group has filed.
A lawsuit filed initially against NoLabels.com Inc. in the U.S. District Court of Delaware in December of 2023 alleges that some in the Democratic Party undertook deliberate efforts to undermine the group, ultimately forcing it to halt operations. No Labels is now seeking to recover monetary damages as a result.
NoLabels.com Inc., which was created to mimic the real No Labels website – NoLabels.org, is believed to be incorporated in Delaware, according to the suit.
Documents unsealed in the case allegedly show how a handful of Democratic strategists operating under the fake NoLabels.com banner attempted to use fear tactics to raise uncertainty among No Labels supporters and donors, drive skepticism in the media, and question the authenticity and scope of the centrist group. At one point, operatives even viciously targeted No Labels founder Nancy Jacobson, as well as candidates interested in serving on its “Unity Ticket.”
One document included a business deck orchestrated by a group of political operatives called the American Patriots Project (APP) to imitate No Labels’ website with the purchase of the NoLabels.com domain as well as Google search ads. According to the deck, the operatives attempted to mislead voters and paint the centrist group as Christo-nationalists and featured images of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaking on behalf of the group. The saboteurs’ goal was to imply that No Labels was a right-wing shadow effort. Furthermore, the proposal attempted to falsely fixate on “red meat issues” such as immigration and anti-abortion messaging.
U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware Judge Gregory B. Williams issued a court order for the operatives to take down the NoLabels.com website; however, No Labels believes that there were more attempts to disavow their operations.
No Labels subpoenaed APP on Nov. 5 seeking to uncover more information.
Democratic strategists with ties to American Bridge — which calls itself the largest research, video tracking, and rapid response organization affiliated with the Democratic Party — also attempted to single out donors, according to a three-step proposal in one email listed in court documents. As donors engaged in conversation, strategists would suggest that their money was being mismanaged with inefficient or wasteful spending. These strategists also attempted to misinform the media about No Labels’ goals.
ABC News has reached out for comment to American Bridge but has not gotten a reply.
Earlier this week, No Labels leaders updated supporters on a Zoom call.
“We believe in democracy in this organization, and obviously some people didn’t want us to live democracy out the way we were living it,” Mike Rawlings, the group’s national convention chairman, told the call before tossing to Dan Webb, a No Labels board member, who updated supporters on the legal findings.
Webb notified supporters that they called on the Department of Justice to look into any potential illegal conduct.
“I think one of the defining stories will be that it’s just wrong for a group of elite donors, party operatives, media mouthpieces to actually decide that the way, the way we should protect democracy is to make sure we have less of it,” Webb said.
Most of the No Labels “family members” on the call were infuriated with the allegations and pleaded for national exposure, suggesting outlets like “60 Minutes” or Joe Rogan’s podcast to spread awareness. Overall, the call was an opportunity for supporters to air their grievances.
“I agree wholeheartedly with publicizing this as much as possible, and not making it seem like it’s just normal politics,” one supporter said.
“This is not acceptable; they’ve interfered with the democratic process here,” another supporter added.
Asked if the efforts were “just politics” or “dirty politics,” No Labels leaders suggested it went beyond that.
“I’m a strong believer in the First Amendment, and political speech is absolutely protected by the First Amendment, but the law is also clear that you cannot violate the law and claim that even though you violated the law, you were just engaging in politics,” Webb said.
He continued, “I believe we did the right thing by reporting the information to the Department of Justice, and whatever the Department of Justice decides to do, they decide to do.”
One supporter suggested that the scandal sounded like Watergate and questioned whether it was worth pursuing lawsuits. Another supporter told No Labels leaders to focus on the Problem Solvers Caucus in Congress and dismiss the past.
“We should focus on the fact that no candidate received a majority in this election,” one supporter suggested. “Our need is to focus on fixing Congress. So I think we need to balance this very carefully and not focus on a way that distracts from one main issue, and casts us as being associated with the Trump administration.”
Back in April, the group halted its efforts when it was unable to find a candidate that had a credible path to winning with its bipartisan platform.
No Labels intended to offer a different choice than the presumptive presidential nominees at that time — incumbent President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump — to citizens who yearned for something new instead of a repeat of the 2020 election. As they entered the race in March, they suggested their internal polling showed more than 70% of Americans said they’d be open to another option.
The group intends to meet with supporters in Washington, D.C., in December to create a plan to deal with the new Congress and work with congressional leaders.
-ABC News’ Nicholas Kerr contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — Special counsel Jack Smith has moved to dismiss his federal election interference case and his classified documents case against President-elect Donald Trump due to a long-standing Justice Department policy that bars the prosecution of a sitting president, not because of the merits of the charges.
Nearly 16 months after a grand jury first indicted Trump over his alleged efforts to unlawfully overturn the results of the 2020 election, Smith has asked U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to throw out the case ahead of Trump’s impending inauguration, according to a motion filed Monday.
“That prohibition is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government’s proof, or the merits of the prosecution, which the Government stands fully behind,” Smith said in his motion, in which he said, “the country have never faced the circumstance here, where a federal indictment against a private citizen has been returned by a grand jury and a criminal prosecution is already underway when the defendant is elected President.”
“Confronted with this unprecedented situation, the Special Counsel’s Office consulted with the Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), whose interpretation of constitutional questions such as those raised here is binding on Department prosecutors. After careful consideration, the Department has determined that OLC’s prior opinions concerning the Constitution’s prohibition on federal indictment and prosecution of a sitting President apply to this situation and that as a result this prosecution must be dismissed before the defendant is inaugurated,” said the motion.
Earlier this month, Judge Chutkan cancelled the remaining deadlines in the case after Smith requested time to “assess this unprecedented circumstance and determine the appropriate course going forward consistent with Department of Justice policy” following Trump’s election.
Trump last year pleaded not guilty to federal charges of undertaking a “criminal scheme” to overturn the results of the 2020 election by enlisting a slate of so-called “fake electors,” using the Justice Department to conduct “sham election crime investigations,” trying to enlist the vice president to “alter the election results,” and promoting false claims of a stolen election during the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, all in an effort to subvert democracy and remain in power.
Smith subsequently charged Trump in a superseding indictment that was adjusted to respect the Supreme Court’s July ruling that Trump is entitled to immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts undertaken as president.
Judge Chutkan had been in the process of considering how the case should proceed in light of the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling.
Smith had faced filing deadlines of Dec. 2 for both the election interference case and the classified documents case against Trump, after Smith’s team requested more time to determine how to face the unprecedented situation of pending federal cases against someone who had just been elected to the presidency.
Trump pleaded not guilty last year to 40 criminal counts related to his handling of classified materials after leaving the White House, before U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the case in July over her finding that Smith was improperly appointed to his role. Smith appealed that ruling to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that legal precedent and history confirm the attorney general’s ability to appoint special counsels, but after Trump’s reelection he asked the court to pause the appeal until Dec.2, in the same manner as the election interference case.
Getting Monday’s filing in a week ahead of schedule now raises the question of whether Smith will be able to beat the clock to officially close his office down and submit his final report to Attorney General Merrick Garland — as is required of him per the DOJ’s special counsel regulations — before Inauguration Day.
The final report will have to go through a classification review by the intelligence community, a process that can sometimes take weeks before it is approved for any kind of public release.
Attorney General Garland has made clear in appearances before Congress and public statements that he is committed to making public the final reports of all Special Counsels during his tenure, which included reports by Special Counsel Robert Hur and Special Counsel John Durham.
Special Counsel David Weiss is still continuing his investigation and is set to take his case against an FBI informant charged with lying about President Biden and his son Hunter to trial in California next week. It’s unclear whether he will formally close his investigation down and submit a final report prior to Trump taking office.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden said Thursday that he was pardoning 39 people who were convicted of non-violent crimes and was commuting the sentences of 1,500 people on home confinement, who he said have “shown successful rehabilitation and have shown commitment to making their communities stronger and safer.”
The White House described the actions as the “largest single-day grant of clemency in modern history.”
“These commutation recipients, who were placed on home confinement during the COVID pandemic, have successfully reintegrated into their families and communities and have shown that they deserve a second chance,” Biden said in a statement.
According to the White House fact sheet, some of those getting clemency on Thursday include a military veteran who spends time helping church members in poor health, a nurse who has helped in emergency response and an addiction counselor who volunteers to help young people.
The White House hinted that this isn’t the last of Biden’s pardons during his final months in office, saying that “in the coming weeks, the President will take additional steps to provide meaningful second chances and continue to review additional pardons and commutations.”
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.