Politics

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — A Montana man who was among the first people to illegally enter the U.S. Capitol while Congress was certifying President Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election has been sentenced to just over three years in federal prison.

Joshua Hughes of East Helena was sentenced Tuesday by U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly in Washington to 38 months in prison for his actions during the approximately 38 minutes he was inside the Capitol during the insurrection carried out by supporters of then-President Donald Trump.

Hughes, 39, was also ordered to pay $2,000 in restitution.

Kelly called the events of Jan. 6, 2021 a national disgrace, Hughes’ attorney, Palmer Hoovestal, told the Independent Record in an email.

“Without the peaceful transfer of power in a democratic form of government, you have nothing,” Hoovestal wrote. ”He therefore wanted to send a message of general deterrence to the people that if you interfere with the peaceful transfer of power to newly elected-leadership, then you do so at your peril.”

Hughes and his brother, Jerod Hughes, 37, pleaded guilty in August to obstruction of an official proceeding.

The brothers climbed through a broken window and Jerod Hughes helped kick open a door to allow other rioters into the Capitol while Congress was certifying the 2020 Electoral College vote, the FBI said in charging documents.

The brothers were near the front of a group that pursued Capitol Police Officer Eugene Goodman while he backed up a flight of stairs and was able to lead the mob away from the Senate floor. The brothers later made their way into the Senate chamber, court records said.

Jerod Hughes is scheduled to be sentenced on Jan. 6, 2023, the two-year anniversary of the insurrection.

The brothers are among the at least 880 people who were charged with federal crimes relating to the riot.

source

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — A former Tennessee state senator accused of violating federal campaign finance laws pleaded guilty to two charges on Tuesday after initially calling the case against him a political witch hunt.

Former Republican state Sen. Brian Kelsey, who previously pleaded not guilty, changed his plea in front of a federal judge in the case related to his failed 2016 congressional campaign. The move came after his co-defendant, Nashville social club owner Joshua Smith, pleaded guilty last month to one count under a deal that requires him to “cooperate fully and truthfully” with federal authorities.

In October 2021, a federal grand jury in Nashville indicted Kelsey and Smith, who owns The Standard club, on several counts each. The indictment alleged that Kelsey, Smith and others violated campaign finance laws by illegally concealing the transfer of $91,000 — $66,000 from Kelsey’s state Senate campaign committee and $25,000 from a nonprofit that advocated about legal justice issues — to a national political organization to fund advertisements urging support of Kelsey’s 2016 failed congressional campaign.

Prosecutors allege that Kelsey and others caused the national political organization to make illegal and excessive campaign contributions to Kelsey by coordinating with the organization on advertisements, and that they caused the organization to file false reports to the Federal Election Commission.

Kelsey pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud the Federal Election Commission as well as aiding and abetting the acceptance of excessive contributions on behalf of a federal campaign. He faces up to five years in prison for each count.

Kelsey ignored reporters’ questions on the way in and out of court Tuesday. He and Smith are scheduled to be sentenced in June, though Kelsey’s attorney indicated that his team and Smith’s would like the sentencing moved up.

Initially, Kelsey met the charges with a defiant tone, saying in an October 2021 online announcement to reporters that he was “totally innocent,” calling the charges “nothing but a political witch hunt” and blaming President Joe Biden’s administration. He repeated that he was “totally innocent” during a state Senate floor speech days later.

Then in March, Kelsey announced on Twitter that he would not seek reelection. Without mentioning his indictment, he tweeted that he had been influenced by “a recent, exciting change to my personal life, and I look forward to spending more time with my family.” In September, his wife gave birth to their twin sons.

Kelsey, a 44-year-old attorney from Germantown, was first elected to the General Assembly in 2004 as a state representative. He was later elected to the state Senate in 2009.

After Kelsey’s guilty plea, Tennessee Republican Senate Speaker Randy McNally said in a statement: “Brian Kelsey has always been a friend and served the Senate well. I appreciate his willingness to take responsibility and accept punishment. I will be keeping he and his family in my prayers as he faces the consequences of his actions.”

Smith pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the solicitation and spending of at least $25,000 of so-called “soft money” — or funds not subject to federal limitations and reporting requirements — in connection with a federal election.

Within about a week of Smith’s plea, Kelsey’s attorneys asked a judge for a hearing about changing his plea, without specifying how it would change.

The claims in the indictment resemble a complaint against Kelsey’s campaign filed with the Federal Election Commission and the Department of Justice in 2017 by a nonprofit, the Campaign Legal Center.

That complaint claimed that independent expenditures made by the American Conservative Union in the 2016 race were coordinated with Kelsey’s congressional campaign. A spokesperson for the prominent nonprofit conservative organization said at the time of the indictment that it had been “fully cooperating with this investigation since 2018” and that “neither ACU nor any member of the board is a subject or target of this investigation.”

source

Road to New Netanyahu Government Passes Through Washington

In addition, Binyamin Netanyahu has been busy juggling the different demands of his presumed coalition partners

Israel’s former and presumed incoming prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, has been working hard this month to form his sixth government.

The country’s longest–serving prime minister, Netanyahu is a seasoned politician who has spent scores of hours in coalition negotiations.

This time, he leads a steadfast right-wing majority. Barring a major upset, Netanyahu will be the head of an ultra-right–wing government that includes extreme nationalists and ultra-Orthodox parties.

Since his victory in national elections at the beginning of this month, Netanyahu has been busy juggling the different demands of his presumed coalition partners.

“The current situation is supposed to coerce everyone into a coalition,” according toMaoz Rosenthal, senior lecturer at the Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy and Strategy at Reichman University. “They all agree on the same policy and the same leader. This creates a mutual dependence.”

Members of Netanyahu’s Likud party may have expected a swift coalition negotiation because of the clear victory at the polls. Yet, reports emerging from the negotiating table paint a more complex picture.

The Likud lawmakers are concerned they will be handed the political leftovers, after their party leader pays back the politicians who secured his victory.

“Netanyahu has complete control over his party, it is clear to everyone. This means even senior party members do not have any leverage to use against him,” Rosenthal said.

Further complicating matters is concern from the United States over the extreme elements of the incoming government.

Several of Netanyahu’s coalition partners have vowed to change the way Israel handles its conflict with the Palestinians, and also to change how the country’s large Arab minority is treated.

Itamar Ben–Gvir, one of the leaders of the Religious Zionist party, said an “iron fist” is needed in order to clamp down on Palestinian attackers. Frequently referring to Arabs as “terrorists,” Ben–Gvir is touted to be named minister of public security. Another leader of the party, Bezalel Smotrich was clamoring to be named defense minister. The option appears to have been tabled, perhaps because of Netanyahu’s attempt to avoid confrontation with the White House.

“Netanyahu’s main consideration is who gives him less of a headache,” said Dr. Ilana Shpaizman of the Department of Political Studies at Bar-Ilan University. “It is a matter of how much he can control any problems, even in terms of foreign relations. He is most certainly taking this into consideration.”

Smotrich is now poised to become finance minister. His right-wing economic ideology has Netanyahu’s ultra-Orthodox partners on edge. The majority of their constituents bank on increased state subsidies, while Smotrich champions a highly non-socialist economy.

“This will be a major headache for Netanyahu,” said Shpaizman. Previously transport minister, Smotrich is considered a strong-minded, active politician who may be a contrarian to the incoming prime minister. Still, Netanyahu apparently prefers butting heads with Smotrich on the economy, rather than on contentious issues that may put him at odds with the White House.

US officials have voiced their concern over the policies expressed by Smotrich and Ben–Gvir, according to reports in Israeli media. Ben-Gvir has been convicted in Israel of racist incitement against Arabs and has been a staunch supporter of the Kach movement, which appeared on the US terrorist organization blacklist. In the run up to the current election, Ben–Gvir tried to soften his image. Smotrich, on the other hand, has remained steadfast in his positions. Arrested for allegedly planning violent protests against Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip in 2005, he was not charged. Yet, his extreme views are worrisome to the current US administration. Smotrich also has been a vociferous opponent of gay pride parades and in 2006 organized a so-called beast parade to march in parallel as a protest.

“We hope that all Israeli government officials will continue to share the values of an open, democratic society, including tolerance and respect for all in civil society, particularly for minority groups. We have certain interests and values of ours,” Ned Price, a US State Department spokesperson, said the day after Israel’s November 1 election. It was meant as a subtle hint to Netanyahu.

The Religious Zionist party has also promised its supporters that it will drastically reform the judicial system, restricting its authority.

“If Israel is heading in a direction which erodes its democracy, the ideological connection between Israel and the US will also erode and could create a distance between the two,” Rosenthal said. “Netanyahu is well aware of this and understood how this looks on the outside.”

Since the election, Netanyahu has adopted a more moderate tone. Last week, as parliament members were sworn in, he vowed to work for all sides of Israel’s public, even those who did not vote for right-wing parties.

“We have serious disagreements, but they too have to be handled with responsibility and consideration,” he said days after the election.

One of the portfolios still being negotiated is the foreign ministry. Netanyahu is reported to prefer Ron Dermer, Israel’s former ambassador to the US and a confidant of the incumbent premier. Dermer was envoy to Washington at times of heightened tension between Netanyahu and the Obama administration. He is believed to be behind Netanyahu’s address to Congress in 2015 in which he tried to sway public opinion against the Iran nuclear deal which Obama was working on. It was a major breach of protocol on the part of the Israeli leader, which led to a further souring of relations between Jerusalem and Washington.

Israeli media reports on Monday suggested Dermer is off the list of candidates for the portfolio, however.

“It is not over until the coalition agreements are final and even after that, we may see surprises,” said Rosenthal. “This is especially true for Netanyahu.”

The reports are not only indicative of the fluidity of the negotiations, but also testament to Netanyahu’s predicament. The current name being floated to serve as foreign minister, the openly gay Amir Ohana, might help Netanyahu present a more liberal image to Israel’s allies abroad.

Negotiations are not only underway to determine the personalities who will fill the positions and serve as the face of the Israeli government. There is also a debate on the guidelines of the incoming government. From increasing construction in the West Bank to introducing the death penalty for those convicted of terrorism, there are a range of hot topics which could cause internal friction and tensions with the US.

Another one of those issues could be the Law of Return, under which people with one Jewish grandparent can acquire Israeli citizenship. The plan by Netanyahu’s right-wing partners to amend the law to remove the grandchildren clause and thus limit the number of people eligible for citizenship could put the government at odds with the large Jewish community in the US.

“I expect Netanyahu will stop this, knowing the price to pay may be very heavy,” said Shpaizman.

Both Netanyahu and his partners in the right-wing bloc do not have better options. The battered opposition is too fragmented to pose an alternative and any elements whichcould cooperate with Netanyahu have ruled such cooperation out. Even though Netanyahu’s current partners could threaten him with yet another election, it is highly unlikely they will risk doing so.

“The road for Netanyahu back to power is paved,” Shpaizman said. “It takes time to formulate the agreements, the disagreements are not that deep and there are no real bumps along the way.”

source

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Republican Kevin Kiley, a state legislator who became a conservative favorite for his pointed and relentless criticism of Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, captured a U.S. House seat Tuesday in northeastern California.

With 83% of ballots counted, Kiley received nearly 53% of the votes to defeat Democrat Kermit Jones, a doctor and Navy veteran.

The win will pad the margin of Republican control in the House. The GOP seized the majority from Democrats last week when California Rep. Mike Garcia was re-elected and gave the party its 218th seat. With Kiley’s victory, the tally stands at 220 Republicans and 212 Democrats.

“Voters want a new direction,” Kiley said in a post-election interview last week as he awaited results in the 3rd Congressional District that runs from the Sacramento suburbs down the interior spine of the state. “The House is going to be the vehicle for effectuating the change voters are looking for.”

Even with the win, Republicans will remain a small minority within the state’s congressional delegation. Of the 52 seats — the largest delegation in Congress — GOP candidates had captured just 11 districts with one race still too early to call.

The leading issues in Kiley’s race mirrored House and Senate campaigns around the country.

Kiley, a state Assembly member, argued that California was in turmoil under Democratic rule in Washington and Sacramento, with residents gouged by inflation and made anxious by rising crime. He sought to depict Jones as an eager foot soldier-in-waiting if Democrats kept their majority and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stayed in the job.

Kiley emerged as a conservative champion for his steady criticism of Newsom, particularly during the 2021 recall election that the governor easily survived. Kiley finished sixth in the field of candidates on the ballot to replace Newsom had voters wanted him removed.

Jones promised to protect access to reproductive health care, bring education costs under control and take on the homeless crisis.

___

Follow the AP’s coverage of the 2022 midterm elections at https://apnews.com/hub/2022-midterm-elections. And check out https://apnews.com/hub/explaining-the-elections to learn more about the issues and factors at play in the midterms.

source

ATLANTA (AP) — U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham testified Tuesday before a special grand jury that’s investigating whether President Donald Trump and others illegally meddled in the 2020 election in Georgia.

The South Carolina Republican’s appearance before the panel came after a drawn-out legal fight that went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court as Graham tried to avoid testifying. He had argued that his position as a senator shielded him from questioning. The courts rejected his assertion but did rule that prosecutors and grand jurors could not ask him about protected legislative activity.

Graham’s office said in a statement that he spent just over two hours with the special grand jury and “answered all questions.”

“The senator feels he was treated with respect, professionalism and courtesy,” the statement said.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis launched the investigation early last year. It is considered one of the most significant potential legal threats to the former president, who last week announced a third run for the White House. Graham is one of a number of high-profile Trump allies whose testimony has been sought.

When Willis filed paperwork in July seeking Graham’s testimony, she wrote that she wanted to ask him about a phone call he made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger shortly after the election.

Raffensperger has said Graham asked whether he could reject certain absentee ballots, which the secretary of state said he interpreted as a suggestion to throw out legally cast votes. Graham has called that idea “ridiculous.”

Willis said in August that she hoped to be able to send the special grand jury home by the end of the year. But that timeline could be complicated by the fact that some of the testimony she’s seeking is tied up in appeals.

For witnesses who live outside of Georgia, Willis has to rely on a process that involves getting a judge in the state where a potential witness lives to order that person to travel to Atlanta to testify.

Michael Flynn, a retired lieutenant general who served briefly as national security adviser under Trump, had been ordered to testify Tuesday, but a Florida judge issued a provisional stay of that order after Flynn appealed. Former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich had been ordered by a Virginia judge to testify Nov. 29, but that has been stayed pending appeal. And an appeal of former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows’ order to appear on Nov. 30 is pending before the South Carolina Supreme Court.

Former Meadows aide Cassidy Hutchinson, who previously testified before the U.S. House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, answered questions from the special grand jury last week.

Special grand jury proceedings are secret, but some related public court filings have shed light on the scope of the investigation.

From the start Willis has said she was interested in a Jan. 2, 2021, phone call between Trump and Raffensperger. The Republican president urged the state’s top elections official to “find” the votes needed to reverse his narrow loss in the state to Democrat Joe Biden.

It has also become clear that she is interested in several other areas, including: the submitting of a fake slate of Republican electors from Georgia who falsely declared that Trump won the state; false statements about the election made by former New York mayor and Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani and others to state lawmakers; efforts to pressure a Fulton County elections worker to admit wrongdoing; breaches of election equipment in rural Coffee County; the abrupt departure of the U.S. attorney in Atlanta in January 2021.

Willis has notified Giuliani, who testified before the special grand jury in August, and the Georgia fake electors that they could face criminal charges in the investigation.

Special grand juries in Georgia are generally used to investigate complex cases with many witnesses. They can compel evidence and subpoena testimony from witnesses, but they cannot issue indictments. Once its investigation is complete, a special grand jury can recommend action, but it remains up to the district attorney to decide whether to then seek an indictment from a regular grand jury.

source

NEW YORK (AP) — From the moment he left the White House in defeat last year, Donald Trump has teased the prospect of a third presidential campaign. But in the week since he officially declared his candidacy, the former president has been uncharacteristically low key.

There has been no massive stadium kickoff rally, notable for someone who has turned such events into a signature of his public life. His newly reinstated Twitter account, which helped fuel his political rise nearly a decade ago, sits silent with its more than 87 million followers.

He hasn’t announced plans to visit the key early voting states that will shape the contest for the Republican nomination, nor has he sat for a round of high-profile interviews. Indeed, since his announcement speech, Trump hasn’t held a public event.

“His lack of a schedule makes you wonder if he’s really running or if this is just a business development opportunity or a diversion from the DOJ activity,” said veteran GOP strategist Scott Reed, referring to Department of Justice probes into Trump’s handling of classified documents and his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, which are expected to intensify in the coming weeks.

Trump, who never held public office before winning the presidency in 2016, has never valued the cadence and organization associated with traditional campaigns. And several aides noted that Trump, who made his announcement unusually early and a week before the Thanksgiving holidays, is wary to draw attention away from the Dec. 6 Senate runoff in Georgia, which will close out this year’s midterm elections. The aides, who insisted on anonymity to discuss campaign strategy, said Trump will ramp up his schedule soon.

But the light-touch start to the campaign reflects the rushed and chaotic nature of his announcement, which came as midterm election votes were still being counted and even as some of his closest aides and allies had urged him to postpone until after the Georgia runoff. It also comes at a moment of unique political vulnerability for Trump.

The former president, who has spent his post-White House years positioning himself as the undisputed leader of the GOP, is now facing heated criticism inside the party for contributing to a disappointing showing in this month’s midterms. And other Republicans are openly teasing presidential runs of their own, making clear they won’t stand aside for Trump’s nomination.

Meanwhile, the legal pressure on Trump is intensifying. Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed a special counsel last week to oversee the Justice Department’s investigation into classified documents recovered from the former president’s Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, as well as key aspects of a separate probe involving the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and efforts to undo the 2020 election. And on Tuesday, the Supreme Court cleared the way for the imminent handover of Trump’s tax returns to a congressional committee after a three-year legal fight.

Still, Trump begins the race with an obvious head start. The former president had been acting like a de facto candidate for months and had long had a political operation in place. After two presidential campaigns and four years in office, he also has longstanding relationships with state and local party leaders, including many who remain loyal to him.

In the meantime, Trump has been appearing at a series of private events. Last week, he hosted the America First Policy Institute’s two-day “Gala and Experience” at Mar-a-Lago, which included policy sessions, a Thursday evening concert with country star Lee Greenwood, a golf tournament and a Friday evening black-tie gala, where Trump delivered remarks in which he railed against Garland’s special counsel decision.

Trump also appeared by video at a Conservative Political Action Conference in Mexico and answered questions via live video feed at the Republican Jewish Coalition’s annual leadership meeting in Las Vegas, where a long list of other potential 2020 hopefuls, appearing in person, courted donors. Some made the case it was time to move on from Trump.

“As you know, our country is in grave, grave trouble — it’s in big problemville, I will tell you that,” Trump said.

Trump has also rolled out a slew of endorsements, including from allies in Congress like Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Paul Gosar, Ronny Jackson and Elise Stefanik, as well as Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and failed Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake.

And his campaign team, which has yet to fill a long list of key senior roles, has been working to hire staff and build out the nitty gritty of a modern campaign organization, including integrating databases and donor lists and negotiating with vendors.

The rollout marks a stark contrast from June 2015, when Trump launched his last winning campaign for the White House at Trump Tower with a speech that drew waves of media attention with its shocking statements and tongue-and-cheek proclamations.

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best,” Trump said then. “They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists, and some, I assume, are good people.”

The next day, Trump headed to Manchester, New Hampshire — he eventually won the state’s GOP primary — followed by rallies in Arizona, South Carolina and Iowa.

Trump’s approach also stands in contrast to many of his potential rivals, who have spent the last months frequently visiting early voting states and trying to raise their profiles with media appearances.

Former Vice President Mike Pence, for instance, has given more than 40 interviews while promoting his new book.

Dan Eberhart, a former Trump campaign donor who said he would like to see Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis win the nomination, said the last week has “confirmed some things we suspected all along.”

“We now know a lot of candidates plan to run for the nomination. At this point, no one seems ready to concede the nomination to Trump or DeSantis,” Eberhart said. “We also know that a lot of people in the party are ready to move on from Trump. Right now, DeSantis is the heir apparent. We’ll have to see if he can hold on to that position, but I don’t see a lot of possible candidates who can challenge him — other than Trump himself.”

___

Follow the AP’s coverage of Donald Trump at https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump.

source

ATLANTA (AP) — A Georgia appeals court ruling on Monday means that counties can offer early voting this coming Saturday in the U.S. Senate runoff election between Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock and Republican Herschel Walker.

The Court of Appeals declined a request by the state to stay a lower court’s ruling that said state law allows early voting that day.

Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger had told county election officials that early voting could not be held that day because state law says it is illegal on a Saturday if there is a holiday on the Thursday or Friday preceding it.

Warnock’s campaign, along with the Democratic Party of Georgia and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, sued last week to challenge that guidance.

Thursday is Thanksgiving, and Friday is a state holiday. The Saturday following those two holidays is the only possibility for Saturday voting before next month’s Senate runoff election between Warnock and Walker.

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Thomas Cox on Friday issued an order siding with the Warnock campaign and the Democratic groups. He found that the law cited by the state regarding Saturday voting after a holiday does not apply to a runoff election.

Lawyers for the state filed an appeal on Monday with the Georgia Court of Appeals. They asked the court to immediately stay the lower court ruling.

They argued in a court filing that the ruling was erroneous for procedural reasons but also that Cox was wrong to consider the runoff a separate type of election rather than a continuation of the general election.

In a one-sentence order Monday, the Georgia Court of Appeals declined to stay the lower court ruling.

It’s not clear how many counties will open polling places for voting on Saturday.

Warnock and Walker, a former football player, were forced into a Dec. 6 runoff because neither won a majority in the midterm election this month.

Georgia’s 2021 election law compressed the time period between the general election and the runoff to four weeks, and Thanksgiving falls in the middle. Many Georgians will be offered only five weekdays of early in-person voting beginning Nov. 28.

source

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — While LGBTQ candidates and their supporters celebrated several milestone victories around the nation in this year’s midterm elections, California quietly reached its own: At least 10% of its state lawmakers identify publicly as LGBTQ, believed to be a first for any U.S. legislature.

The California legislators, all Democrats, are proud of their success but say it underscores the hard work that remains in their own state and elsewhere, such as handling the fallout from measures such as Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law, which bans some lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity, or laws in other states limiting transgender students’ participation in sports or blocking gender-affirming medical care for youths.

The milestone was further shrouded by the Saturday night shooting at a gay nightclub in Colorado, which killed five people and wounded many others. The suspect was charged with murder and hate crimes. Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, who just won a second term, was the first openly gay man elected as a state’s governor when he won in 2018.

“When it comes to LGBTQ people, we’re on two tracks: One track is that societally we’re winning. People by and large are totally fine with LGBTQ people, they support us, they are accepting and willing to vote for LGBTQ candidates,” California state Sen. Scott Wiener, a member of the LGBTQ Caucus, said Monday.

Yet, he said, “despite the fact that we are winning the battle in society at large, you have a very vocal, dangerous minority of extremists who are consistently attacking and demonizing our community.”

At least 519 out LGBTQ candidates won elected office this year, in positions ranging from school board up to Congress and governor, said LGBTQ Victory Fund press secretary Albert Fujii. That’s a record, well up from 2020, when 336 LGBTQ candidates won, according to the group, which along with Equality California calculated that California is the first state to pass the 10% threshold.

Of the 12 current or soon-to-be members of the California Legislature, eight were already part of its LGBTQ Caucus, including the leader of the Senate and three other senators whose terms run until 2024. Four current Assembly members won reelection Nov. 8, with two new Assembly members and two new senators joining them, increasing the caucus’s ranks by 50%. The AP has not yet called one remaining race that could add an additional LGBTQ lawmaker.

The lawmakers will be sworn in for their new terms Dec. 5; between both chambers there are 120 total legislators.

The U.S. census has found that 9.1% of Californians identified as LGBT — compared with 7.9% for the nation overall — so the Legislature will have roughly reached parity in sexual orientation and gender identity. Meanwhile, the Legislature has not yet reached parity in gender or in race and ethnicity, according to statistics from the California State Library.

New Hampshire and Vermont have each had more LGBTQ legislators, according to the institute, but their legislatures are bigger than California’s and so have not reached the 10% threshold.

The 2022 elections are a landscape of firsts for LGBTQ people, including Corey Jackson, the California Legislature’s first gay Black man, who noted that African Americans — particularly Black trans people — are especially marginalized.

“I think this is an opportunity just to say that number one, we are here, we do have something to contribute and we can lead and represent with the best of them,” said Jackson, a school board member from Riverside County.

Alaska and South Dakota elected their first out LGBTQ legislators, and Montana and Minnesota elected their first transgender legislators, according to the Human Rights Campaign. In New Hampshire, Democrat James Roesener, 26, became the first trans man elected to any U.S. state legislature.

He said he was motivated to run after a state bill that would have required schools to notify parents of developments in their children’s gender identity and expression failed only narrowly. Opponents of such requirements say they invade children’s privacy and can put them at risk of abuse at home.

Leigh Finke, who was elected in Minnesota, also was driven by growing anti-transgender rhetoric.

Finke hopes to ban so-called conversion therapy in Minnesota and, like California, make the state a sanctuary for children, and their parents, who can’t access gender-affirming health care elsewhere.

“I just thought, ‘This can’t stand.’ We have to have trans people in these rooms. If we are going to lose our rights, at least they have to look us in the eye when they do it,” she said.

Massachusetts and Oregon elected the nation’s first out lesbian governors.

Charlotte Perri, a 23-year-old voting organizer in Portland, Oregon, said she got emotional hearing Gov.-elect Tina Kotek talk at a campaign event about young people thanking her for running.

“It’s hard to feel optimistic as a young queer person with everything that’s going on,” Perri said.

Though the newly elected LGBTQ officials are overwhelmingly Democrats, at least one gay Republican — George Santos, a supporter of former President Donald Trump — won a U.S. House seat in New York by defeating another gay man, a Democrat.

The increase in LGBTQ lawmakers contrasts with efforts in some states led by members of Santos’ party to limit the influence, visibility and rights of LGBTQ people.

In Tennessee, leaders of the state’s Republican legislative supermajority said the first bill of the 2023 session will seek to ban gender-affirming care for minors. Tennessee has one LGTBQ lawmaker, Democratic Rep. Torrey Harris.

The state already has banned transgender athletes from participating in girls middle and high school sports and restricted which bathrooms transgender students and employees can use.

The Human Rights Campaign tracked what it identified as anti-LGTBQ bills introduced in 23 states this year and said they became law in 13: Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Indiana, Kentucky, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and Louisiana.

By contrast, “as California’s Legislative LGBTQ Caucus has grown, the state has led the nation in passing groundbreaking legislation protecting LGBTQ+ civil rights,” said Equality California spokesperson Samuel Garrett-Pate.

Wiener carried California’s sanctuary bill for transgender youths, which has been copied by Democratic lawmakers in other states. He and a fellow Assembly member teamed up in 2019 to expand access to HIV prevention medication. Other laws pushed by LGBTQ legislators over the years gave foster children rights to gender-affirming care and allowed nonbinary gender markers on state identification.

It’s too soon to have a solid plan for new legislation, California caucus members said, but Wiener noted realms to consider include employment resources for transgender people; homelessness and crime among at-risk LGTBQ youth; and sexual health services.

Jackson said he found hope in the election returns not only in California, but also nationwide.

“We have U.S. senators now, we have governors now, we actually have trans legislators now in this country,” Jackson said. “So in the midst of stories of hatred and stories of demonization, you still see rainbows of hope throughout our nation.”

___

Contributing to this report were Associated Press writers Kathy McCormack in Concord, N.H., Amy Forliti in Minneapolis, Claire Rush in Portland, Ore., and Kimberlee Kruesi in Nashville, Tenn.

source

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — Louisville Police Chief Erika Shields will step down in January, less than two years after she took the job amid tensions over the department’s handling of Breonna Taylor’s fatal shooting by police.

Louisville Mayor-elect Craig Greenberg said Monday that he recently spoke to Shields and she offered to submit her resignation, giving Greenberg the opportunity to pick a new chief when his term begins on Jan. 2.

Shields took over in January 2021, months after the Taylor shooting and a summer full of street protests that called attention to the shooting and police treatment of protesters. She was the fourth chief to lead the department after Taylor was killed in March 2020. Former Chief Steve Conrad was fired and two interim chiefs served short terms in 2020.

Greenberg, a Democrat who won the mayor’s race earlier this month, said he would name an interim chief to serve beginning in January while the new chief is selected.

“A search for a new chief of police will begin immediately,” Greenberg said Monday. “We will consider all applicants. I will seek the input of those on my transition team, as well as from other folks around our entire community.”

Crime in Kentucky’s largest city was a major topic during the mayor’s race won by Greenberg, and he also became a victim after surviving a shooting at his campaign office earlier this year. His opponent, Republican Bill Dieruf, had pledged to shake up the police department.

Greg Fischer, a Democrat, is leaving the mayor’s office after three terms. He presided over one of the most turbulent times in the city’s history, as a pandemic gutted the downtown business district and protesters took to the streets for months after Taylor’s death. Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Justice charged three Louisville officers with conspiring to put false information in the warrant used to raid Taylor’s apartment.

Fischer thanked Shields in a media release for accepting the chief’s job during a “challenging time.” He said her focus on reducing violent crime helped to cut homicides by 14% and shootings by 30% over last year. Louisville had seen two years of record homicides in 2020 and 2021.

Shields, who was Atlanta’s police chief before coming to Louisville, stepped down from the top Atlanta post in June 2020 after the death of Rayshard Brooks. Brooks was shot in the back by police in a restaurant parking lot after reports that he fell asleep at the wheel in a drive-thru lane. Shields was hired by Fischer after a panel unanimously selected her during a monthslong search process.

source

WASHINGTON (AP) — As angry supporters of President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol, ready to smash through windows and beat police officers, Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes extolled them as patriots and harkened back to the battle that kicked off the American Revolutionary War.

“Next comes our ‘Lexington,’” Rhodes told his fellow far-right extremists in a message on Jan. 6, 2021. ”It’s coming.”

Jurors will begin weighing his words and actions on Tuesday, after nearly two months of testimony and argument in the criminal trial of Rhodes and four co-defendants. Final defense arguments wrapped up late Monday.

The jury will weigh the charges that the Oath Keepers were not whipped into an impulsive frenzy by Trump on Jan. 6 but came to Washington intent on stopping the transfer of presidential power at all costs.

The riot was the opportunity they had been preparing for, prosecutors say. Rhodes’ followers sprang into action, marching to the Capitol, joining the crowd pushing into the building, and attempting to overturn the election that was sending Joe Biden to the White House in place of Trump, authorities allege.

Not true, the Oath Keepers argue. They say there was never any plot, that prosecutors have twisted their admittedly bombastic words and given jurors a misleading timeline of events and messages.

Hundreds of people have been convicted in the attack that left dozens of officers injured, sent lawmakers running for their lives and shook the foundations of American democracy. Now jurors in the case against Rhodes and four associates will decide, for the first time, whether the actions of any Jan. 6 defendants amount to seditious conspiracy — a rarely used charge that carries both significant prison time and political weight.

The jury’s verdict may well address the false notion that the 2020 presidential election was stolen, coming soon after 2022 midterm results in which voters rejected Trump’s chosen Republican candidates who supported his baseless claims of fraud. The outcome could also shape the future of the Justice Department’s massive and costly prosecution of the insurrection that some conservatives have sought to portray as politically motivated.

Failure to secure a seditious conspiracy conviction could spell trouble for another high-profile trial beginning next month of former Proud Boys national chairman Enrique Tarrio and other leaders of that extremist group. The Justice Department’s Jan. 6 probe has also expanded beyond those who attacked the Capitol to focus on others linked to Trump’s efforts to overturn the election.

In the Oath Keepers trial, prosecutors built their case using dozens of encrypted messages sent in the weeks leading up to Jan. 6. They show Rhodes rallying his followers to fight to defend Trump and warning they might need to “rise up in insurrection.”

“We aren’t getting through this without a civil war. Prepare your mind body and spirit,” he wrote shortly after the 2020 election.

Three defendants, including Rhodes, took the witness stand to testify in their defense — a move generally seen by defense lawyers as a last-resort option because it tends to do more harm than good. On the witness stand, Rhodes, of Granbury, Texas, and his associates — Thomas Caldwell, of Berryville, Virginia, and Jessica Watkins, of Woodstock, Ohio — sought to downplay their actions, but struggled when pressed by prosecutors to explain their violent messages.

The others on trial are Kelly Meggs, of Dunnellon, Florida, and Kenneth Harrelson of Titusville, Florida. Seditious conspiracy carries up to 20 years behind bars, and all five defendants also face other felony charges. They would be the first people convicted of seditious conspiracy at trial since the 1995 prosecution of Islamic militants who plotted to bomb New York City landmarks.

The trial unfolding in Washington’s federal court — less than a mile from the Capitol — has provided a window into the ways in which Rhodes mobilized his group and later tried to reach Trump.

But while authorities combed through thousands of messages sent by Rhodes and his co-defendants, none specifically spelled out a plan to attack the Capitol itself. Defense attorneys emphasized that fact throughout the trial in arguing that Oath Keepers who did enter the Capitol were swept up in an spontaneous outpouring of election-fueled rage rather than acting as part of a plot.

Jurors never heard from three other Oath Keepers who have pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy.

Over two days on the witness stand, a seemingly relaxed Rhodes told jurors there was no Capitol attack plan. He said he didn’t have anything to do with the guns some Oath Keepers had stashed at a Virginia hotel that prosecutors say served as the base for “quick reaction force” teams ready to ferry an arsenal of weapons across the Potomac River if necessary. The weapons were never deployed.

Rhodes, a Yale Law School graduate and former Army paratrooper, said his followers were “stupid” for going inside. Rhodes, who was in a hotel room when he found out rioters were storming the Capitol, insisted that the Oath Keepers’ only mission for the day was to provide security for Trump ally Roger Stone and other figures at events before the riot.

That message was repeated in court by others, including a man described as the Oath Keepers’ “operations leader” on Jan. 6, who told jurors he never heard anyone discussing plans to attack the Capitol.

A government witness — an Oath Keeper cooperating with prosecutors in hopes of a lighter sentence — testified that there was an “implicit” agreement to stop Congress’ certification, but the decision to enter the building was “spontaneous.”

“We talked about doing something about the fraud in the election before we went there on the 6th,” Graydon Young told jurors. “And then when the crowd got over the barricade and they went into the building, an opportunity presented itself to do something. We didn’t tell each other that.”

Prosecutors say the defense is only trying to muddy the waters in a clear-cut case. The Oath Keepers aren’t accused of entering into an agreement ahead of Jan. 6 to storm the Capitol.

Defense attorneys for Caldwell, Watkins and Harrelson worked on Monday to cast doubt on the timeline presented by prosecutors, saying that communications were hampered by overwhelmed cell towers and that other rioters forced Congress to recess before they arrived.

Prosecutor Jeffrey Nestler, though, said any lag was brief and the Oath Keepers were among the rioters who interrupted congressional proceedings by preventing lawmakers from coming back into session to certify the presidenial vote.

Citing the Civil War-era seditious conspiracy statute, prosecutors tried to prove the Oath Keepers conspired to forcibly oppose the authority of the federal government and block the execution of laws governing the transfer of presidential power. Prosecutors must show the defendants agreed to use force — not merely advocated it — to oppose the transfer of presidential power.

After the riot, Rhodes tried to get a message to Trump through an intermediary, imploring the president not to give up his fight to hold onto power. The intermediary — a man who told jurors he had an indirect way to reach the president — recorded his meeting with Rhodes and went to the FBI instead.

Rhodes told the man, speaking of Trump, “If he’s not going to do the right thing and he’s just gonna let himself be removed illegally then we should have brought rifles.” He said, “We should have fixed it right then and there. I’d hang (expletive) Pelosi from the lamppost,” Rhodes said, referring to Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

___

Richer reported from Boston.

___

For full coverage of the Capitol riot, go to https://www.apnews.com/capitol-siege

More on Donald Trump-related investigations: https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump

source