List of All Articles with Tag 'eric'

The group Republican Accountability has released a new advertisement slamming former president Donald Trump’s excuse that he was too “busy” to return boxes of classified documents to the US government. Mr Trump has claimed, first in a rally at his Bedminster golf club in New Jersey last week and then again during a Fox News interview earlier this week, that he failed to return the documents because they were mixed up with his personal belongings and he hadn’t had a chance to go through them yet when the federal government called. The advertisement opens with a narrator asking “Why did Donald Trump refuse to return highly sensitive classified documents?” It then cuts to Mr Trump speaking on Fox News. “I want to go through the boxes and get all my personal things out and I was very busy, as you’ve sort of seen,” Mr Trump says in the Fox News clip. “That’s right,” the narrator says. “He was too busy to comply with a subpoena because he was too busy DJing at Mar-a-Lago.” The advertisement then spends the next 30 or so seconds detailing some of what Mr Trump has been up to since leaving the White House in 2021. “Too busy crashing random people’s weddings,” the narrator says, as images of Mr Trump engaged in various leisure activities appear on the screen. “Too busy going to multiple UFC fights. Too busy selling NFTs. Too busy dancing to the Village People by the pool. Too busy golfing.” Whatever his reasons, Mr Trump is now facing 37 felony counts over his mishandling of the documents and refusal to return them. He is the first president to ever face federal indictment, pleading not guilty to the charges at a courthouse in Miami last Tuesday. Mr Trump is also under indictment in New York over his alleged role in a hush money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels and could face further indictments over his attemps to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election. Nevertheless, the former president continues to lead polls of the 2024 Republican nominating contest by a wide margin. Whether his legal issues affect his standing either in the Republican primary or the general election remains to be seen, but they do appear to be raising the personal stakes of the upcoming presidential election for Mr Trump. “Trump has no respect for the law,” the narrator’s concluding statement begins. “He doesn’t think rules apply to him — especially when he’s so busy.” Read More Ivanka and Jared split over attending Trump 2024 launch – follow live Why was Donald Trump impeached twice during his first term? Four big lies Trump told during his 2024 presidential announcement Trump news – live: Trump pleads for help from Congress as DoJ shares first classified documents evidence Prosecutors have recordings of multiple Trump interviews, documents show

Vice President Kamala Harris has said she knows of young people choosing which college they want to attend based on how restrictive the abortion laws are in that state. Commenting in an interview for the Roe v Wade retrospective on MSNBC’s The ReidOut, Ms Harris said her goddaughter told her that her friends wanted to attend schools in states where there was more freedom in terms of reproductive rights. Ms Harris told the roundtable: “When the decision came down she told me ‘Do you know what’s happening? My friends – whatever gender – are starting to make decisions about where they will actually go to college depending on what’s happening in that state.’” “Because of course, if you look at it, I think the number is something like 23 million women of reproductive age live in states that have banned abortion, and what that is gonna mean for those 23 million, for the myriad of health care issues that are at stake ... It’s having a real impact on all types of decisions people make,” she added. The show took a look back at the decision to overturn the landmark Roe v Wade decision that legalised abortion in the US in 1973 when the Supreme Court ruled that “unduly restrictive state regulation of abortion is unconstitutional”. In 2022, the Supreme Court, packed with three Trump-era appointees, overturned Roe v Wade and returned decisions on abortion freedom to the states. Since then, a number of states have introduced effective abortion bans that limit the procedure to the very early days of pregnancy – often before women are aware they are pregnant. Some states have also criminalised assisting women with accessing abortion, and limited abortion to cases of rape or incest. Ms Harris said that the Supreme Court’s decision last year had infringed on women’s rights. “The idea that the highest court in our land just did that and rolled back rights that had been recognized was incredibly shocking,” she said on MSNBC. She said that after she learned the news of the ruling, she called her husband and shared some “words not meant for television at this moment”. Ms Harris went on to say that the ruling means that some have to “suffer in silence,” the thought of which made her “angry and sad”. Read More Where abortion laws stand in every state a year after the Supreme Court overturned Roe A year after fall of Roe, 25 million women live in states with abortion bans or tighter restrictions Judge to weigh suspending Wyoming's first-in-the-nation ban on abortion pills US prepares for potential end of Roe v Wade - live When will there be a Roe v Wade decision? Why these prosecutors are refusing to enforce anti-abortion laws

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board has defended the newspaper’s decision to publish a defensive column from US Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who dismissed allegations of wrongdoing detailed in an investigative news outlet before it had even published its story. The conservative justice – who authored the court’s landmark opinion overturning Roe v Wade one year ago – failed to disclose private jet travel and a luxury fishing trip with a hedge fund billionaire who would later repeatedly ask the nation’s highest court to intervene on his behalf, according to ProPublica’s findings published on 21 June. ProPublica, which has published several investigative pieces outlining alleged ethical lapses among members of the court, had yet to publish its report before The Wall Street Journal ran his column with the blunt and accusatory headline “ProPublica Misleads Its Readers”. Later that day, the editorial board defended its decision to run his defensive piece. “The political assault on the Supreme Court continues, and the latest Justice in the grinder is Samuel Alito,” the board wrote. “As usual, this is a non-scandal built on partisan spin intended to harm the Justice and the current Court majority.” The Wall Street Journal did not return The Independent’s request for comment or explain how it commissioned Mr Alito’s column and how the newspaper made a decision to publish a response to ProPublica before anyone read its reporting. “Justice Alito clearly wanted his defense to receive public disclosure in full, not edited piecemeal. We saw ProPublica’s list of 18 questions and had a good idea of where the reporters were going. The story proved us right,” the editorial board wrote. “It is also hilarious to be denounced for betraying the media brotherhood for the offense of scooping the competition,” the board added, appearing to dismiss criticism that the newspaper provided a venue for a powerful figure before allegations against him were publicised at length as merely a resentful media story. “This is the same crowd that would prefer if we didn’t exist,” the board added. “Their pearl-clutching reveals the degree of media conformity when it comes to approved progressive political targets like Justice Alito.” The board stated that it is defending the Supreme Court “because someone has to,” alleging that the investigations are not about sincere ethics questions but are instead about “the left’s fury at having lost control of the Court” and instead to “destroy” it. ProPublica’s founding editor-in-chief Paul E Steiger served as the managing editor of the Wall Street Journal from 1991 to 2007. Stephen Engelberg, ProPublica’s current editor-in-chief, told The New York Times that Mr Alito’s column “declared without anyone having read the article and without asking for our comment.” “We’re curious to know whether The Journal fact-checked the essay before publication,” he added. Read More Justice Alito tries to get ahead of damning report about billionaire gifts with defensive Wall Street Journal op-ed Wall Street Journal under fire for Justice Alito op-ed: ‘This has simply broken my brain’ Deb Haaland and Tribal leaders welcome Supreme Court decision upholding Indian Child Welfare Act Supreme Court rules Alabama discriminated against Black voters in major victory for voting rights

Federal prosecutors have given former president Donald Trump’s legal team access to much of the unclassified evidence against him, including multiple recordings of Mr Trump made during interviews of him since the end of his presidency. Attorneys working under the supervision of Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith revealed the existence of the recordings in a late Wednesday court filing which detailed what has been turned over to Mr Trump’s lawyers thus far as part of the legally-mandated “discovery” process, in which the government reveals what evidence it intends to use against a criminal defendant at trial. Specifically, the document says the government has turned over copies of “any written or recorded statements” made by Mr Trump or his co-defendant, Walt Nauta. Prosecutors said that category of evidence includes multiple “interviews” of Mr Trump by “non-governmental entities,” such as the 21 July 2021 interview referenced in the indictment of the ex-president. During that interview, Mr Trump spoke to two people who were assisting his ex-chief of staff, Mark Meadows, with the writing of a book about his former administration, and discussed a document which the ex-president claimed to be a war plan for attacking a foreign country. At the time, Mr Trump described the document as “secret information” and noted that he was not able to declassify it because he was no longer president. The batch of documents provided to Mr Trump’s defence team also includes transcripts of testimony given by witnesses to grand juries in Washington, DC and Florida during the government’s investigation into his alleged mishandling of national defence information, as well as other materials obtained by the government by way of subpoenas and search warrants, such as surveillance footage from his Mar-a-Lago property. Prosecutors wrote that the tranche of evidence made available to the ex-president’s attorneys “includes the grand jury testimony of witnesses who will testify for the government at the trial of this case”. Under the terms of a protective order issued last week by Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, Mr Trump is barred from viewing the evidence against him outside the presence of his attorneys. The order states that Mr Trump “shall only have access to Discovery Materials under the direct supervision of Defense Counsel or a member of Defense Counsel’s staff,” and prohibited either of them from retaining copies of the materials themselves or taking any notes with them after viewing any of the materials. The protective order and the restrictions it places upon Mr Trump are meant in part to prevent him from directing his followers to harass any witnesses against him or any FBI or DOJ personnel involved in the case. Magistrate Judge Reinhart also ordered that the discovery materials be kept only by Mr Trump’s legal team and stored securely on premises controlled by them. Read More Ivanka and Jared split over attending Trump 2024 launch – follow live Why was Donald Trump impeached twice during his first term? Four big lies Trump told during his 2024 presidential announcement

Former Texas Representative Will Hurd has launched a long-shot bid for the Republican presidential nomination. The ex-CIA officer was strongly critical of then-President Donald Trump while serving in the US House before leaving at the end of his final term in January 2021. The 45-year-old served three terms in the House, becoming the only Black Republican in the chamber in his last two years, the AP noted. Mr Hurd appeared on CBS Mornings on Thursday, pitching himself as a moderate alternative in the growing field of GOP candidates. “We need common sense,” he said. “I believe the Republican Party can be the party of the future, not the past.” More follows... Read More Ivanka and Jared split over attending Trump 2024 launch – follow live Why was Donald Trump impeached twice during his first term? Four big lies Trump told during his 2024 presidential announcement

The fanfare around Narendra Modi’s visit to the US has been punctuated by protests over accusations that his right-wing administration is cracking down on human rights in India. Several trucks bearing banners calling upon Joe Biden to question the Hindu leader were seen in the streets of New York on Wednesday even as several Democratic lawmakers urged Mr Biden to “directly” put across questions about human rights violations to Mr Modi. Addressed to Mr Biden, digital posters on the trucks carried slogans like “Did you know mob lynching of Muslims, Christians and Dalits have surged under Modi’s rule. With almost no accountability” and “Hey Joe! Ask Modi why student activist Umar Khalid has been in prison for 1000+ days WITHOUT Trial?” Another banner addressed to Mr Biden asked “Why was Modi banned from the USA from 2005-2014?” and provided an answer for him. It read, for “particularly severe violations of religious freedom” and added that the Indian prime minister was the “only person ever to be denied a visa on these grounds”. The banners also labelled Mr Modi as the “Crime Minister of India”. As Mr Biden and Mr Modi enter the second day of the latter’s high-profile state visit and look to ink new partnerships in defence, semiconductor manufacturing and more, the visit has been overshadowed with calls to address violence and crimes against minorities in India. Notable progressive voices, like Democrats Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, have said they will boycott Mr Modi’s address to the US Congress, stating that a “joint address is among the most prestigious invitations and honours the United States Congress can extend”. “We should not do so for individuals with deeply troubling human rights records – particularly for individuals whom our own State Department has concluded are engaged in systematic human rights abuses of religious minorities and caste-oppressed communities,” Ms Ocasio-Cortez said in a statement. More than 70 lawmakers earlier wrote to Mr Biden and called on him to use his meeting with Mr Modi to raise concerns about the erosion of religious, press and political freedoms. “It is an important country to me, and we must call out some of the real issues that are threatening the viability of democracy in all of our countries,” said representative Pramila Jayapal, who was born in India and helped organise the lawmakers’ letter. “If India continues to backslide, I think it will affect our ability to have a really strong relationship with the country.” A week before Mr Modi was due to arrive in the country, US rights groups planned protests over what they call India’s deteriorating human rights record. The Indian American Muslim Council, Peace Action, Veterans for Peace and Bethesda African Cemetery Coalition planned to gather near the White House when the two leaders were expected to meet. The protesting groups prepared flyers that said “Modi Not Welcome” and “Save India from Hindu Supremacy”. Another event is planned in New York, featuring a show titled “Howdy Democracy”, a play on Mr Modi’s 2019 “Howdy Modi!” rally in Texas with Donald Trump. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch invited policy makers, journalists and analysts to a screening in Washington of India: the Modi Question, a BBC documentary that questioned Mr Modi’s leadership during the 2002 communal Gujarat riots. The documentary was banned in India, with the Indian government calling it a “propaganda piece” that displays “bias, [a] lack of objectivity, and frankly a continuing colonial mindset” on the part of the BBC. The BBC defended itself and said it adhered to the “highest editorial standards”. Since Mr Modi came to power in 2014, India has plummeted from 140th in the World Press Freedom Index, to 161st this year, its lowest dip ever, while also topping the list for the highest number of internet shutdowns globally for five consecutive years. Advocacy groups have also raised concerns over alleged human rights abuses under Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party. Read More Biden and Modi to unveil new science and defence cooperation between US and India India's Modi is getting a state visit with Biden, but the glitz is shadowed by human rights concerns Jill Biden is taking Indian Prime Minister Modi on side trip before Thursday's White House visit Biden ‘won’t lecture Modi’ on India’s human rights record even as 75 US lawmakers differ Modi US visit: Amnesty calls for human rights to be central in talks with Joe Biden

Three women were attacked in a string of Manhattan subway slashings in New York on Sunday, 18 June. Police on 19 June said they believed the same man was responsible for all three attacks, and released Metropolitan Travel Authority (MTA) surveillance footage of the alleged perpetrator. According to the New York Police Department (NYPD), the man attacked two women at the 86th Street and Lexington Avenue station, before slashing the leg of a third woman while riding a southbound 4 train. The first attack took place shortly after 4pm on Sunday, when a man wearing a Boston Red Sox cap approached 19-year-old Bianchelli Diplan and slashed her right leg with a sharp object. “I started up the steps and then I felt something [on] the back of my leg. So I like, hold on to it. And I saw there was blood.” Ms Diplan, who was on her way to buy a Father’s Day cake, told ABC7. “So I turned around I saw him and, like, he just stared at me and I was crying. And he just walked away.” She reportedly needed 19 stitches and is recovering at home. The NYPD believes he also attacked a 48-year-old woman at the same station before riding the 4 train to Brooklyn Bridge Station where he slashed a 26-year-old woman’s left leg at around 4.32pm. The cut was so deep that a tourniquet had to be applied on her leg before she was rushed to Bellevue Hospital with non-life threatening injuries, according to the New York Post. Surveillance footage shows the suspect jumping the turnstile at the Brooklyn Bridge-City Hall station after slashing his third victim. During a briefing on 19 June, NYPD Chief of Transit Michael Kemper said he was confident the perpetrator’s “identity will be obtained shortly”. “I’m also confident that he’ll be apprehended shortly,” Mr Kemper said. Ms Diplan urged commuters to “be aware of your surroundings” while travelling on the subway “because this could happen to anybody”. Anyone with information about the attacker, who is 5ft 8in and weighs 220 pounds, can send the NYPD a direct message on Twitter or call 800-577-TIPS. The attacks come one day after the death of a man who was found with fatal stab wounds on a 4 train at Union Square Station. Police have charged Claude White, a 33-year-old homeless man, with the murder of Tavon Silver. Charges against Mr White also include criminal possession of a weapon. While Mr White didn’t know the victim, police believe they became embroiled in a dispute which ultimately led to Mr Silver’s death. Read More Russia tried to kill ‘CIA informant’ in Florida, report says Missing Titanic submarine with five onboard may have 50 hours left as US accused of hampering rescue – live Inside Titan: Titanic-spotting submarine steered by video game controller Where is the Titanic wreckage? British Navy expert warns ‘timescale’ of missing Titanic sub is ‘very concerning’

Donald Trump was left speechless during his latest interview with Fox News journalist Bret Baier when the host pointed out that, had Mr Trump’s proposed policy of executing convicted drug dealers been active during his presidency, among its victims would have been Alice Johnson, a woman to whom Mr Trump granted clemency after being persuaded to do so by a campaign led by Kim Kardashian protesting her innocence. “No, no. No. Under my pl.... Under that? UHHHHHHHHHHH...” Mr Trump flubbed, subsequently accusing the host of being “hostile” to him. Meanwhile, a new CNN poll has recorded a six point drop in support for the former president among conservatives, his approval rating down from 53 per cent in mid-May to 47 per cent in mid-June in the wake of his 37 criminal count federal indictment over the classified documents scandal. All of which follows Trump-appointed Judge Aileen Cannon moving on Tuesday to set a trial date of 14 August 2023 to hear that case in Fort Pierce, Florida. A federal grand jury indicted Mr Trump for allegedly willfully mishandling classified documents, obstruction of justice and making false statements, to which he pleaded not guilty at his Miami arraignment last week. Read More Trump drops below 50 per cent among GOP voters in new CNN poll following second indictment Fox News’s Bret Baier hits back at Trump conspiracy theorist after ex-president appears to incriminate himself in interview Attorneys spar in case of ex-Trump adviser who devised strategy to keep former president in power Trump claimed the Durham report would uncover the ‘crime of the century.’ Here’s what it really found

Florida governor and 2024 candidate Ron DeSantis continued his long-running rivalry with California governor Gavin Newsrom on Wednesday, claiming on Fox News that Californians are fleeing the state for Florida. “For decades in this country, people have beaten a path to California. It’s a beautiful state, great topography, all kinds diversity in terms of the different communities you can live in, and yet they never lost population until their current governor took office,” Mr DeSantis said. “Now they’re hemorrhaging wealth, now they’re hemorrhaging people…I never saw California license plates [in Florida] until the last 4 years.” Indeed, states like California and New York lost population in 2022, while Florida saw the biggest gains in in-migration, adding nearly 319,000 people, according to data from the National Association of Realtors. Experts attribute the changes to factors like the pandemic and taxes. Mr DeSantis also claimed he witnessed shocking street crime during a recent visit to what he’s taken to calling the “once-great city” of San Francisco. “I saw people defecating on the side walk. I saw people in an open-air drug market using fentanyl,” Mr DeSantis said. In a campaign ad released on Tuesday, Mr DeSantis blamed vague “leftist policies,” including a supposed refusal to prosecute criminals, and “riff raff running around” for San Francisco’s “collapse.” The remark was a likely reference to the false notion that progressive prosecutors in San Francisco refused to go after crime because they sometimes sought prison diversion programmes. Analysis from Mission Local shows that prosecutors like the recalled Chesa Boudin filed about as many charges as any other prosecutor in the city since 2011, while city police data shows overall crime and larceny theft on a downward trend in the years before and during when Mr Boudin was in office. In fact, violent crime rates have largely been declining in San Francisco since peaking in the 1990s, with the beginning of 2022 marking the lowest level of reported violent crime since 1985, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. According to data compiled by the CDC, Florida has a higher homicide rate per capita than California and a higher rate of drug overdose mortality. Read More ‘Small, pathetic man’: Inside the bitter rivalry between Ron DeSantis and Gavin Newsom New study says high housing costs, low income push Californians into homelessness Trump faces questions about whether he'll drag down the Republican Party after his indictments

The House descended into chaos on Wednesday afternoon as the chamber voted along party lines to punish a Democrat over the long-shuttered Trump-Russia investigation. Democrats booed and heckled Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy on Wednesday as the GOP voted to censure California representative Adam Schiff for his efforts to investigate the 2016 Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. On cameras of the House floor, Democrats could be seen rallying near the lectern and chanting, “Shame!” as the Speaker announced the result of the vote, which he said was punishment for “misleading the American public.” On Wednesday, the House voted 213-to-209 largely on party lines to censure Mr Schiff. Republicans have claimed that Mr Schiff had misled the American public about the Trump-Russia investigation, which ended without proof that the Trump campaign had coordinated with Russia but found that Russia’s actions had been taken to benefit the former president’s campaign and harm Hillary Clinton’s bid for the White House. Republicans argue that Mr Schiff lied when he argued that there was evidence to support the idea of collusion between the Trump campaign and Moscow. He was previously removed from the House Intelligence Committee by Speaker Kevin McCarthy for the same reason. A previous version of the censure, which had included a $16m fine, was voted down with some Republican opposition. In a speech from the floor, the California Democrat remained defiant, saying he was being punished for pursuing the truth by a party that’s attached itself to conspiratorial thinking about the election. “You who are the authors of the big lie about the last election must condemn the truth tellers and I stand proudly before you,” Mr Schiff said. “No matter how many false justifications or slanders you level against me, you but indict yourselves,” he added. “As Liz Cheney said, there will come a day when Donald Trump is gone. But your dishonor will remain.” New York Democrat Dan Goldman agreed, calling the censure vote a “phony ploy to punish Adam Schiff for speaking truth to power” in a floor speech of his own. “One of my colleagues says, ‘We will hold members accountable.’ You are the party of George Santos. Who are you holding accountable?” he added. Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi laid into them as well: "Today we are on the floor of the House where the other side has turned this chamber—where slavery was abolished, where Medicare and Social Security and everything were instituted—they’ve turned it into a puppet show." “They’ve turned it into a puppet show and you know what? The puppeteer, Donald Trump, is shining a light on the strings. You look miserable,” she added. You look miserable.” Mr Schiff’s enemies, meanwhile, accused him of supporting a narrative that supposedly caused a great divide between members of families all across the country. Anna Paulina Luna, the GOP lawmaker leading the resolution, personally accused him of having “permanently destroying family relationships”. “By repeatedly telling these falsehoods, Representative Schiff purposely deceived his Committee, Congress, and the American people,” the resolution read. Previously, Schiff had said the censure resolution “would accuse me of omnipotence, the leader of some a vast Deep State conspiracy, and of course, it is nonsense.” Beyond the Trump-Russia investigation, Mr Schiff also became a target of the Republican caucus due to his prosecution of Mr Trump during his first impeachment trial, when he was accused of improperly pressuring Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into launching a criminal investigation into Joe Biden — at the time, apparently, with the hopes of politically damaging the Democratic candidate ahead of the 2020 election. That investigation was never launched but Rudy Giuliani, who was a central figure in trying to make it happen, would later go on to become Mr Trump’s legal counsel in his bid to overturn the election following his defeat. The toothless censure of Mr Schiff is likely to be little more than a consolation prize for Republicans who had originally wanted an investigation into the origins of the Russia probe to uncover a vast “Deep State” conspiracy against Mr Trump, which never materialised. The leader of that investigation, John Durham, appeared on Capitol Hill for a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee separately on Wednesday where Mr Schiff grilled him over whether he had been concerned about efforts by a group of Russians to reach out to the Trump campaign and offer damaging information about Hillary Clinton. Republicans, meanwhile, voiced their displeasure over how Mr Durham’s investigation had fizzled without any major victories in the effort to prove a long-reaching shadowy conspiracy against Mr Trump. Read More The Body in the Woods | An Independent TV Original Documentary The harrowing discovery at centre of The Independent’s new documentary AOC implores Greene and Boebert to not waste time with Biden impeachment: ‘We should actually be working’ Dianne Feinstein expressed confusion over Kamala Harris presiding over Senate, report claims Marjorie Taylor Greene faces waves of mocking laughter after asking House to follow ‘decorum’

One of Fox News’s star journalists found himself battling his own viewers after an appearance by former President Donald Trump on his show that many independent observers said was damaging for the ex-president’s credibility. Bret Baier won compliments from his colleagues in the media this week for the no-ground-given interview with the ex-president, which aired in two parts over Tuesday and Wednesday. But the reaction from the twice-indicted ex-president’s fanbase was less enthusiastic. One commenter, a blue-check Trump supporter, wrote a tweet attacking both the interview and Baier’s upcoming gig moderating the first Republican primary debate, set to be held on 23 August. They attacked Baier as a “Murdoch mouthpiece” and suggested that Mr Trump should skip the Fox debate. A second commenter then seemingly admitted that Mr Trump had said something incriminating during their discussion, while questioning whether the journalist had coordinated with the Department of Justice. “Bret and Martha [MacCallum], two anti-Trumpers, will be moderating the first GOP debate. Why the hell would Trump show up to that? Especially after this interview that was actually a debate between Trump & Murdoch mouthpiece. Remember Murdoch’s are all in for DeSanctimonious!” wrote the first critic, Alex Bruesewitz. The second tweeter added: “The big question is did @BretBaier have any contact with the DOJ to try and entrap @realDonaldTrump into incriminating himself. Who wrote his questions. The DOJ will be using his interview against him.” Baier flatly rejected that conspiracy in a short statement: “I’ll answer that. No. I wrote my own questions. And frankly I didn’t know that I would get much on the indictment questions assuming he might say he couldn’t talk about it. Thanks for watching.” He would later go on to approvingly retweet another viewer who took a mocking shot at a third critic of the Trump interivew. The comments are a sign of the increasingly tight spot that Baier and others on Fox’s news side find themselves in. Their network faces a ratings slide following the ouster of star opinion host Tucker Carlson, and increasing disfavour from the channel’s largely pro-Trump audience over any journalism that conflicts with the former president’s conspiracy theories. Baier struck a nerve with the former president in the segment of the interview which aired on Tuesday, as he rejected Mr Trump’s claim that the 2020 election was stolen and pressed him to admit that all of his efforts to prove otherwise had failed. But that wasn’t the only moment when the two men clashed during the discussion. Baier would also question Mr Trump about his new push to expand use of the death penalty to those convicted of selling narcotics, a plan that would likely have little if any chance of success of being passed into law. The Fox journalist noted that a woman Mr Trump took public credit and admiration for having her sentence commuted would have instead been executed under his plan, forcing the ex-president to back off his hardline stance and qualify that degrees of severity would ideally be considered under this imaginary system. Read More Trump claimed the Durham report would uncover the ‘crime of the century.’ Here’s what it really found Capitol rioter filmed shocking police officer with stun gun shouts ‘Trump won!’ as he is sentenced Ousted incumbents, key matchups set: Takeaways from Virginia's primary election Trump drops below 50 per cent among GOP voters in new CNN poll following second indictment Television veteran Geraldo Rivera says he's quitting Fox News' political combat show 'The Five' John Eastman’s expert witness in disbarment hearing is barred for not being an expert

Authorities in Idaho have revealed an alleged quadruple murderer opened fire on his victims after one of them exposed himself to the suspect’s daughters. Majorjon Kaylor, 31, has been charged with the killings of Kenneth Guardipee, 65, his daughter Kenna 41, and her sons 18-year-old Devin Smith and 16-year-old Aiken Smith on Sunday. The victims lived below the suspect and his family in a duplex at 515 W Brown Ave in Kellogg. The carnage last week shocked the community of Kellogg, with court documents shedding some light on the circumstances surrounding the shooting. According to an affidavit unsealed on Tuesday, Mr Kaylor reportedly told law enforcement that he “snapped” and “lost it” during an argument with his neighbours. Mr Kaylor and his wife, Kaylie Kaylor, told police that they were upset because several days earlier, Devin had allegedly masturbated in front of his bedroom window in full view of the Kaylors’ young daughters. The families shared a duplex, and the girls were playing outside in the yard when the exposure allegedly occurred. The incident was reported to the police, and the report was forwarded to the county prosecutor so a criminal charge of indecent exposure could be filed. But on Sunday evening, the Kaylors had an argument with the Guardipees over how the allegations were being handled. Police arrived at the house after reports of a shooting at around 7.20pm on Sunday. Mr Guardipee, his daughter and youngest grandson were found shot in the temple at close range, while Devin was shot multiple times in the head. Kaylor is being held without bond and has not yet entered a plea. A preliminary hearing has been set for 3 July. This is a developing story ... check again for updates.