adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Politics

Legal, political strategy in letting FBI search Biden’s home

Published

 on

WASHINGTON –

U.S. President Joe Biden’s decision allowing the FBI to search his home in Delaware last week is laying him open to fresh negative attention and embarrassment following the earlier discoveries of classified documents at that home and a former office. But it’s a legal and political calculation that aides hope will pay off in the long run as he prepares to seek reelection.

The remarkable, nearly 13-hour search by FBI agents of the sitting president’s Wilmington home is the latest political black eye for Biden, who promised to restore propriety to the office after the tumultuous tenure of his predecessor, Donald Trump.

But with his actions, Biden is doing more than simply complying with federal investigators assigned to look into the discovery of the records. The president is aiming to show that, unlike Trump, he never intended to retain classified materials — a key distinction that experts say diminishes the risks of criminal liability.

300x250x1

White House spokesman Ian Sams said Monday that Biden’s own attorneys invited the FBI to conduct the search. “This was a voluntary proactive offer by the president’s personal lawyers to DOJ to have access to the home,” he said, adding that it reflected “how seriously” Biden is taking the issue.

Mary McCord, a former senior U.S. Justice Department national security official, said, “If I was a lawyer and I represented the president of the United States and I wanted to show, ‘I am being fully cooperative, and I do care to be projecting transparency to the American public, and I do take this seriously,’ I think this is the advice I would give as well.”

That’s not to say she approves of his handling of the documents.

“I think it’s wrong that he had those documents there,” she said. “It shows lapses at the end of the administration,” when Biden was completing his time as vice president under Barack Obama.

Biden’s personal attorneys first discovered classified materials on Nov. 2, a week before the midterm elections, as they were clearing out an office Biden had used at the Penn Biden Center in Washington. Since that initial discovery, Biden’s team has adopted an accommodating approach to the investigation, even if they haven’t been completely transparent in public.

The White House has cited the ” risk” of sharing information “that’s not complete” potentially interfering with the probe to justify not revealing more information to the public.

They didn’t acknowledge the first discovery before the elections, though they swiftly notified the National Archives, returned the documents the day after they were found and coordinated subsequent searches and discoveries with the Department of Justice.

They also are not standing in the way of interviews of staff, including Kathy Chung, Biden’s executive assistant when he was vice president, who helped oversee the packing of boxes that were taken to the Penn Biden Center.

She feels some responsibility but had “absolutely” no knowledge of classified documents being packed, according to a person familiar with her thinking. The person spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation.

Biden himself has said he was surprised the documents were in his possession. Last Thursday, frustrated at all the focus, he told reporters: “There’s no there there.”

It all fits a theme: Biden and his aides maintain the document mishandling was not intentional. As far as Biden’s possible legal exposure goes, the question of intention is critical: Federal law does not allow anyone to store classified documents in an unauthorized location, but it’s only a prosecutable crime when someone is found to have “knowingly” removed the documents from a proper place.

Still, welcoming the FBI search could backfire depending on what else might be found. Agents last week took possession of an additional round of items with classified markings, and some of Biden’s handwritten notes and materials from his tenure as vice president and senator.

That’s in addition to the documents already turned in by Biden’s lawyers. Agents could also choose to search the Penn Biden Center and Biden’s other home in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, as the probe continues. Sams declined to say whether Biden would sign off on additional searches, referring the matter to the DOJ — which has asked the White House not to publicize searches in advance.

Criticism of Biden’s handling of the matter has come from Democrats as well as Republicans. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the president should be “embarrassed by the situation.”

“I think he should have a lot of regrets,” added Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. Even Biden’s own attorneys have called it a “mistake.”

Republicans, meanwhile, have sought to use their new-found powers in the House, where they regained the majority this month, to investigate Biden’s handling of the documents and hope to capitalize on the investigation, even as they have said investigating the documents retained by Trump is not a priority.

“It is troubling that classified documents have been improperly stored at the home of President Biden for at least six years, raising questions about who may have reviewed or had access to classified information,” House Oversight Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., wrote in asking for visitor logs to Biden’s residence.

Responding to Comer’s requests for copies of the documents taken from Biden’s home, the White House counsel’s office on Monday said it no longer had possession of them. It said the White House would “accommodate legitimate oversight interests,” while also “respecting the separation of powers and the constitutional and statutory obligations of the executive branch generally and the White House in particular.”

“This is not `legitimate’ transparency from President Biden who once claimed he’d have the most transparent administration in history,” said Oversight Committee spokesperson Jessica Collins, who added that the panels Republicans would use “all possible tools” to get answers.

Trump and some of his supporters have been outspoken, claiming Biden is guilty of worse mishandling of classified documents than the Democrats sanctimoniously accuse Trump of being. The former president is sure to press that accusation vigorously as he campaigns to regain the White House.

The investigation of Trump also centers on classified documents that ended up at a home. In that case, though, the Justice Department issued a subpoena for the return of documents that Trump had refused to give back, then obtained a warrant and seized more than 100 documents during a dramatic August search of his Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago. Federal agents are investigating potential violations of three federal laws, including one that governs gathering, transmitting or losing defense information under the Espionage Act.

In 2016, when the FBI recommended against criminal charges for Hillary Clinton over classified emails she sent and received via a private server when she was secretary of state, then-FBI Director James Comey said the Justice Department –in choosing which cases to bring over the past century — has looked for evidence of criminal intent, indications of disloyalty to the U.S., retention of vast quantities of classified documents or any effort to obstruct justice.

It’s not clear whether agents in the Biden investigation have progressed beyond the question of intent. The White House has not answered key questions, including how classified information from his time as vice president could have ended up inside his Delaware home. But Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed a special counsel to head the probe given the sensitive politics around it.

Garland declared on Monday, in answer to a question: “We do not have different rules for Democrats or Republicans. … We apply the facts under the law in each case in a neutral and nonpartisan manner. That is what we always do and that is what we are doing in the matters you are referring to.”

One key test of the limits of Biden’s strategy revolves around the question of whether the president will agree to an interview with federal investigators if he is asked. White House officials thus far have refused to say whether or under what terms he would do so.

728x90x4

Source link

Politics

Pecker’s Trump Trial Testimony Is a Lesson in Power Politics

Published

 on

David Pecker, convivial, accommodating and as bright as a button, sat in the witness stand in a Manhattan courtroom on Tuesday and described how power is used and abused.

“What I would do is publish positive stories about Mr. Trump,” the former tabloid hegemon and fabulist allowed, as if he was sharing some of his favorite dessert recipes. “And I would publish negative stories about his opponents.”

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

300x250x1
Continue Reading

Politics

Opinion: Fear the politicization of pensions, no matter the politician

Published

 on

Open this photo in gallery:

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and federal Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland don’t have a lot in common. But they do share at least one view: that governments could play a bigger role directing pension investments to the benefit of domestic industries and economic priorities.

Canadians, no matter who they vote for, should be worried that these two political heavyweights share any common ground in this regard.

It became clearer in the federal budget last week as Ottawa appointed former Bank of Canada governor Stephen Poloz to lead a working group to explore “how to catalyze greater domestic investment opportunities for Canadian pension funds.” The group will examine how Canadian pension funds can spur innovation and drive economic growth, while still meeting fiduciary and actuarial responsibilities.

This idea has been in discussion since it was highlighted in the fall economic statement. In March, dozens of chief executives signed an open letter urging federal and provincial finance ministers to “amend the rules governing pension funds to encourage them to invest in Canada.”

300x250x1

Rewind to last fall, and it was Alberta’s plans that were dominating controversial pension discussions. As Ms. Smith championed Alberta going it alone, Canadians (including Albertans) were dumbfounded by her government’s claim the province could be entitled to 53 per cent of Canada Pension Plan assets – $334-billion of the plan’s expected $575-billion by 2027. The Premier has made the argument that starting with this nest egg, and with the province’s large working-age population, a separate Alberta plan could provide more in the way of benefits to seniors with lower premiums.

The main point of contention between the Smith government and Justin Trudeau’s Liberals has been what amount Alberta would take, should it exit the Canada Pension Plan. All parties are now waiting on Ottawa’s counter assessment; the Office of the Chief Actuary will provide a calculation sometime this fall.

But lost in this furious debate over that dollar amount is Ms. Smith’s desire to see the province have a say in how the pension contributions of Albertans are invested. The Premier has long expressed frustration that Canadian pension funds were being influenced by fossil-fuel divestment movements, and has suggested a separate Alberta pension plan could be a counterweight to this.

In addition, a key part of the promise for many supporters of the Alberta pension plan idea – including former premier Jason Kenney and pension panel chair Jim Dinning – has been the benefits that would accrue to the province’s financial services sector.

But just as the UCP government might see the potential of using the heft of pension assets to bolster the province’s energy sector, or to spur white-collar jobs in Calgary, the federal Liberals would like see more pension dollars directed toward Canadian AI, digital infrastructure and housing. These are some of the areas Ms. Freeland has directed Mr. Poloz’s working group to focus on.

Some would deem Mr. Freeland’s goals admirable. Tax dollars are already flowing to these sectors. It comes at a time of increasing concern about the housing crunch, Canada’s weak GDP numbers, and the fact that Canada’s economy is being carried along by strong population growth.

But many Canadians are already concerned with government priorities and federal spending. Many more would balk at governments picking winning industries with pension contributions. And governments change. A Conservative government, for instance, might have very different industries in mind for its own pension-fund working group – say, for instance, to make sure Canada doesn’t cede oil market share to Venezuela or the United States.

This pension working group is a convenient sweetener for a business community that has in many ways soured on this Liberal government. It comes at a moment when Ottawa is facing pushback – from technology entrepreneurs to doctors – to its proposed capital-gains tax hike.

It doesn’t appear Ottawa wants to go as far as recreating the CPP in the image of the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, which has a formal mandate that includes contributing to the province’s economic development. And this isn’t to say there’s such a thing as complete neutrality in pension management now. The Canada Pension Plan Investment Board makes decisions open to debate and criticism. It should hear what governments and industry have to say, and setting up a couple of regional offices, beyond Toronto, could be helpful.

But if pension plans are formally burdened with policy imperatives from politicians, it could distract from the main goals of reasonable premiums and retirement security for Canadians. It could see the prioritization of being re-elected over returns. The regional and sectoral tug-of-wars over the cash would be never-ending.

There’s good reason to fear what an Alberta government would do should it take control of its citizens’ pension wealth. The same is most definitely true for Ottawa.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Politics Briefing: Saskatchewan residents to get carbon rebates despite province's opposition to pricing program – The Globe and Mail

Published

 on


Hello,

The federal government will continue to deliver the carbon rebate to residents of Saskatchewan despite the province’s move to stop collecting and remitting the levy, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said today.

In January, Saskatchewan’s Crown natural gas and electric utilities removed the federal carbon price from home heating bills, a move that the government says will improve fairness for its residents in relation to the other provinces.

300x250x1

But Trudeau told a news conference in Saskatoon today that payments to residents won’t stop and that the Canada Revenue Agency has ways of ensuring money owed to them is eventually collected. He said he has faith in the “rigorous” quasi-judicial proceedings the agency uses.

In Ottawa, Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault accused Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe, who is opposed to federal carbon pricing policy, of playing politics with climate change.

“The Prime Minister, and I think cabinet, felt that it wouldn’t be fair for the people of Saskatchewan to pay for the irresponsible attitude of the provincial government,” Guilbeault told a news conference.

The rebate is available to residents of provinces and territories where the federal carbon pricing system applies.

Trudeau was in Saskatoon to announce that the federal government is offering $5-billion in loan guarantees to support Indigenous communities seeking ownership stakes in natural resource and energy projects.

This is the daily Politics Briefing newsletter, written by Ian Bailey. It is available exclusively to our digital subscribers. If you’re reading this on the web, subscribers can sign up for the Politics newsletter and more than 20 others on our newsletter signup page. Have any feedback? Let us know what you think.

TODAY’S HEADLINES

Motion to allow keffiyehs in Ontario legislature fails again: A few Ontario government members blocked a move to permit keffiyehs in the legislature, prompting some people watching Question Period from the public galleries to put on the scarves.

B.C. puts social-media harms bill on hold: Premier David Eby issued a joint statement today with representatives from Meta, TikTok, Snap and X to say they have reached an agreement to work to help young people stay safe online through a new BC Online Safety Action Table.

Changes to capital-gains tax may prompt doctors to quit, CMA warns: Kathleen Ross, the president of Canadian Medical Association, said the tax measure “really is one more hit to an already beleaguered and low-morale profession.”

Thunder Bay Indigenous group wants province to dissolve the municipal police force: Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler, from the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, said that after years of turmoil, the Thunder Bay force has not earned the trust of the Indigenous people it serves.

Canada Post refusing to collect banned guns for Ottawa’s buyback program: CBC says the Crown corporation’s position is complicating Ottawa’s plans for a buyback program to remove 144,000 firearms from private hands, federal sources say.

Ottawa police investigating chant on Parliament Hill glorifying Hamas Oct. 7 attack: Police Chief Eric Stubbs acknowledged it can sometimes be difficult to discern what constitutes a hate crime as he confirmed his force is investigating a pro-Palestinian protest over the weekend on Parliament Hill.

TODAY’S POLITICAL QUOTES

“I don’t take any lessons from the Leader of the Opposition when it comes to how marginalized people feel. I’m an Italian Canadian, who, in the 1970s, was spit on.” – Ontario Government House Leader Paul Calandra in the legislature today.

“I’ve spoken with some of my peers from all around the world. All of us would be challenged to find an environment minister somewhere in the world that would tell you: Easy peasy fighting climate change.” – Federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault at a news conference in Ottawa today as international talks in the city proceed to deal with plastics pollution,

THIS AND THAT

Commons, Senate: The House of Commons is on a break until April 29. The Senate sits again April 30.

Deputy Prime Minister’s day: Chrystia Freeland participated in a fireside chat on the budget, then took media questions.

Ministers on the road: With the Commons on a break, ministers continued to fan out across Canada to talk about the budget. Today, the emphasis was largely on the budget and Indigenous reconciliation. Citizens’ Services Minister Terry Beech, with Health Minister Mark Holland, made an Indigenous reconciliation announcement in the B.C. community of Sechelt. Defence Minister Bill Blair is on a three-day visit to the Northwest Territories. Employment Minister Randy Boissonnault is in Edmonton to make an announcement on Indigenous reconciliation. Industry Minister François-Philippe Champagne was in the Quebec city of La Tuque. Public Services Minister Jean-Yves Duclos is in Quebec City, focusing on the budget and Indigenous reconciliation. Indigenous Services Minister Patty Hajdu in Vancouver addressing Indigenous reconciliation. Families Minister Jenna Sudds is in Thunder Bay. King’s Privy Council President Harjit Sajjan and Justice Minister Arif Virani touted the budget in an event in Coquitlam, B.C.

Vidal out: Conservative MP Gary Vidal has announced he won’t run in the next election owing to dramatic changes in the Saskatchewan riding he has represented since 2019 that will mean he will no longer be living there. Also, he noted in a posting on social-media platform X that the Conservatives are not allowing an open nomination in the riding he will be living in. “Although this is not the expected outcome I anticipated, circumstances beyond the control of myself and my team have dictated that I move on after the next election,” he wrote.

GG in Saskatchewan: Mary Simon and her partner, Whit Fraser, continued their visit to the province, with stops in Regina that included a stop at the Regina Open Door Society, which provides settlement and integration services to refugees and immigrants. Later, she engaged in a round-table discussion with mental-health specialists on issues affecting Canada’s farming and ranching communities.

New CEO for Pearson Centre for Progressive Policy: George Young is the new chief executive officer of the think tank on progressive issues. The former national director of the federal Liberal party under Jean Chrétien served as a chief of staff to several Chrétien ministers, was a senior adviser to former Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson.

PRIME MINISTER’S DAY

Justin Trudeau was in Saskatoon for a news conference on budget measures.

LEADERS

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May is in Ottawa to attend a session of the United Nations Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on plastic pollution.

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, in Edmonton, went door-knocking in the city with Edmonton Centre candidate Trisha Estabrooks.

No schedules released for Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet and Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre.

THE DECIBEL

On today’s podcast, Nathan VanderKlippe, The Globe’s international correspondent, discussed what has been happening on West Bank farmlands during the Israel-Hamas war. The Decibel is here.

PUBLIC OPINION

Liberals not an option: A third of Canadians surveyed by Ipsos Global Public Affairs say they would never vote Liberal in the next federal election.

No budget lift: Nanos Research says the federal Tories have a 19-point lead over the Liberals despite the release of a budget the government hoped would improve its political fortunes.

CAQ running third: Quebec’s governing Coalition Avenir Québec party has, in a new poll, fallen to third place in public support behind the Parti Québécois and the Liberals, The Gazette in Montreal reports.

OPINION

The Liberals promise billions for clean power. Don’t undermine it with politics

“In the summer of 2022, U.S. President Joe Biden’s ambition to deliver landmark climate legislation looked like it was dead – until the plan experienced a sudden political resurrection on Capitol Hill. The machinations in Washington have reverberated in Ottawa ever since.” – The Globe and Mail Editorial Board

The Liberals’ immigration policies have accomplished the opposite of what was intended

“In its well-meaning effort to encourage the migration of international students to Canada, the Trudeau government is turning swaths of our postsecondary education system into a grift. As a result, broad public support for immigration, the foundation stone of multicultural Canada, is eroding.” – John Ibbitson

Canada’s underwhelming disability benefit is a sign of a government out of ideas

“The Canada Disability Benefit had – and still has – the potential to be a generational game-changer. Done right, it could lift hundreds of thousands of Canadians out of poverty. But what the Liberal government has delivered so far is a colossal betrayal of the promise made to those living with physical, developmental and psychiatric disabilities: a program with a paltry payout and a limited scope, and bogged down in red tape.” – André Picard

Got a news tip that you’d like us to look into? E-mail us at tips@globeandmail.com. Need to share documents securely? Reach out via SecureDrop.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending