Good morning, and welcome to The Epoch Times News Brief for Tuesday, May 21, 2024. I’m Bill Thomas, and today, we’ve got some really interesting stories, from legal challenges and policy debates that are capturing the nation’s attention, to high-profile court admissions and federal gun control measures. Also, we’ll take a look at Supreme Court actions and critical health care decisions.
Star Witness Michael Cohen Admits Stealing Tens of Thousands From Trump Organization
In a dramatic turn of events in New York City yesterday, Michael Cohen, a former lawyer and associate of Donald Trump, admitted to stealing thousands of dollars from the Trump Organization during cross-examination by defense attorney Todd Blanche.Mr. Cohen told Mr. Blanche that he paid approximately $20,000 of the $50,000 that Trump’s company intended to pay a tech firm called Red Finch. He said that he took out cash, kept it in a small brown paper bag, and then gave it to the tech firm. He admitted that he never paid the full $50,000.
The Trump Organization later repaid Mr. Cohen with $50,000, and then doubled that payment to cover taxes he would incur by declaring the money as income rather than a tax-free reimbursement.
Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty to federal charges in 2018, but he has never faced charges for stealing from President Trump’s company. During the testimony, he confirmed that he had not repaid the stolen funds.
The former president looked directly at the witness stand as Mr. Cohen made the admission about stealing.
The New York judge overseeing the case said that he believes the closing arguments would end next week and that the trial will conclude on May 28.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office is expected to rest its case once Mr. Cohen is finished testifying, with the possibility of calling rebuttal witnesses if the defense presents its own witnesses.
President Trump said yesterday outside the courtroom: “There’s no crime. We paid a legal expense.” He did not respond to questions about whether or not he would testify in the case.
Judge in Trump Case Says She’s Concerned With Special Counsel Jack Smith
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who is handling a criminal case against President Trump over his alleged mishandling of sensitive documents, has recently expressed her disappointment with special counsel Jack Smith.Judge Cannon said that Mr. Smith and his team have been inconsistent during the case regarding which information should stay sealed and which should be hidden from the public. She said: “The sealing and redaction rules should be applied consistently and fairly upon a sufficient factual and legal showing,” and she asked for an explanation of the inconsistency.
In response to the inquiries, Mr. Smith explained that his intention behind unsealing certain documents was to directly address and refute the defense’s allegations of misconduct by prosecutors. However, Judge Cannon argued that such actions should not compromise the safety of witnesses or other sensitive aspects of the ongoing investigation.
All parties involved, including Judge Cannon, agree on the critical need to protect the identities of potential witnesses, their personal information, and other ancillary details. While Judge Cannon agreed to some of the redactions proposed by both sides, she rejected the redactions proposed by President Trump’s team regarding certain witness statements, stating they lacked a sufficient basis.
In this case, the 45th president faces dozens of felony counts accusing him of illegally keeping classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, that he took with him after he left the White House in 2021, and then obstructing the FBI’s efforts to get them back. He has pleaded not guilty and denied wrongdoing.
The court is expected to soon document the filings with the approved redactions.
Federal Judge Issues Stay on ATF Rule Restricting Private Gun Sales
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has successfully secured a temporary restraining order against a new federal rule concerning private gun sales.The new rule adopts a different definition of who is considered to be “engaged in the business” of selling firearms, as part of the Gun Control Act of 1968. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), which issued this rule in April, has the authority to administer and enforce this gun control act, which makes it unlawful for any individual other than a licensed dealer to engage in the business of dealing in firearms until they have received a license from the ATF.
In 1986, “engaged in the business” referred to an individual who devotes his time and attention to dealing in firearms as a regular course of business “with the principal objective of livelihood and profit” through such activities. The definition was expanded by a 2022 act signed by President Joe Biden to include those individuals engaged in firearms trade who need to “predominantly earn a profit” rather than “livelihood and profit.”
Mr. Paxton, leading a group of states and organizations, filed a lawsuit against the ATF and the U.S. Department of Justice, arguing that the new rule would unfairly penalize law-abiding gun owners who sell their firearms privately. Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk agreed, granting the temporary restraining order.
In response to the court’s decision, Mr. Paxton praised the move, saying that it was a victory for the protection of Second Amendment rights. However, for their part, Attorney General Merrick Garland and ATF Director Steven Dettelbach defend the rule, saying that it aims to curb the significant underground market of guns sold without background checks and licenses, thus potentially saving lives.
The temporary restraining order is set to remain in place until June 2, as the plaintiffs seek a permanent injunction to prevent the rule’s implementation.
Supreme Court Won’t Hear Parents’ Case Against School Transgender Policy
The Supreme Court has declined to review a controversial policy from a Maryland public school district, known as the “Parental Preclusion Policy,” despite concerns raised by three anonymous parents.This policy, implemented in 2020 by the Montgomery County school board, restricts the sharing of certain information about students with their parents who do not support their gender transition. The three parents, whose children attend schools within the district, argued that this policy infringes upon their rights to be informed about their children’s health and to make decisions in their best interests.
Frederick W. Claybrook Jr., a lawyer for the parents, told The Epoch Times in an email yesterday that he’s disappointed in the Supreme Court’s move not to intervene on their behalf. Mr. Claybrook also said that such regulations affect millions of students nationwide.
According to the court documents, the three parents are using “pseudonyms to protect their privacy and that of their minor children and to prevent retaliation against them and their children for raising this issue.”
Defending its stance, the school district argued that the policy safeguards students’ privacy and does not prevent parents from discussing transgender topics with their children. However, a federal appeals court ruled that the parents lacked standing to challenge the policy, suggesting they should instead express their disagreement through voting. A lower court had also dismissed the complaint, noting that the parents’ children were not directly affected by the policy.
Currently, the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on similar petitions related to transgender medical procedures for minors in Tennessee and Kentucky, and it remains unclear if they will address these cases before their term concludes in June.
Court Lets Lawsuit Over Refusal to Give Dying Woman Ivermectin Proceed
In a recent court decision, Mount Sinai South Nassau hospital in New York City faced a setback after a judge dismissed its claim of immunity under federal law. The hospital was twice under court order to give ivermectin to COVID-19 patient Deborah Bucko, who was close to death after the hospital’s normal treatment failed. Mrs. Bucko’s condition improved after she began taking ivermectin. However, the hospital stopped the second round of treatment before the prescription ended, and Mrs. Bucko then died.Mount Sinai argued that their actions were protected by the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act), which generally covers certain emergency medical responses. However, the court ruled that this case was not about the use of ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment but rather centered on the hospital’s alleged wrongful and negligent repeated refusal to administer it to the patient.
The lawsuit will move forward, with the next hearing scheduled for June 3.
Scott Mantel, Mrs. Bucko’s husband and the plaintiff in the lawsuit, expressed his satisfaction with the court’s ruling. The family is now seeking damages and accountability for what they believe was a preventable tragedy.
They view their legal battle as a fight not only for Mrs. Bucko but also to ensure proper patient care in hospitals in the future. The family is also raising funds to support their ongoing legal efforts, hoping to prevent similar incidents from happening to others.
Our time together is coming to a close today, so let’s make that one our final story on the Tuesday edition of The Epoch Times News Brief. Just one more day and we’ll be halfway through the week.
From Mike: “I haven’t enjoyed this kind of informative, matter of fact reporting since I was a kid watching the news with my dad over sixty years ago. Great energy too. Thanks for the nice work.”
From Ms. Caver: “I catch the News Brief program each day from my home in Ashdown, Arkansas and it’s a great way to start the day.” I know Ashdown ... just up the road a bit from Texarkana.
The News Brief is growing, and as we continue to grow the News Brief family, we’d sure appreciate it if you could tell some folks you know about our program, and let’s bring more News Briefers into the fold.
And finally, as we do each and every day on this program, we wrap things up with a very “notable” quote:
This one comes to us from Alexander Graham Bell, who said: “Before anything else, preparation is the key to success.”
Alexander Graham Bell was an inventor, scientist, and engineer who is credited with patenting the first practical telephone. He also co-founded the American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T) in 1885. It all began with Mr. Bell, and it morphed into call-waiting, three-way calling, smartphones, 5G, and so much more. A truly brilliant inventor.
For all of us here at The Epoch Times News Brief (another great invention), I’m Bill Thomas. We appreciate you being here, and it’s time now for both you and me to go out and take on the day! Have an incredible Tuesday, and we’ll see you right back here tomorrow for another edition of The Epoch Times News Brief. Bye for now.
