Judge Rejects Effort by Trump to Toss January 6 Lawsuits

WASHINGTON — 

A federal judge on Friday rejected efforts by former President Donald Trump to toss out conspiracy lawsuits filed by lawmakers and two Capitol police officers, saying in his ruling that the former president’s words “plausibly” led to the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.

U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta said in his ruling that Trump’s words during a rally before the violent storming of the U.S. Capitol were likely “words of incitement not protected by the First Amendment.”

“Only in the most extraordinary circumstances could a court not recognize that the First Amendment protects a president’s speech,” Mehta wrote. “But the court believes this is that case.”

The order is the latest example of growing legal peril for the former president. Just hours earlier, the National Archives said records found at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort contained classified information and that it had notified the Justice Department.

On Thursday, a judge in New York ruled that Trump and two of his children must answer questions under oath in New York state’s civil investigation into his business practices. Another judge ordered that his company’s financial chief be subjected to questioning in another probe by the District of Columbia attorney general’s office. And earlier this week, the firm that prepared Trump’s annual financial statements said the documents, used to secure lucrative loans and burnish Trump’s image as a wealthy businessman, “should no longer be relied upon.”

During a planned rally on the Ellipse just hours before Congress was to certify the results of the 2020 presidential election, Trump told his supporters to “Fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.” He said, “(We’re) going to try to and give (weak Republicans) the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country,” and then told the crowd to “walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.”

Mehta said Trump’s speech could have directed people to break the law. But the judge dismissed similar charges made against Trump’s son Donald Trump Jr. and lawyer Rudy Giuliani, saying their speech was protected by the First Amendment. Mehta did not yet rule on another motion to dismiss from Alabama Republican Rep. Mo Brooks, also named in the suits.

The lawsuits, filed by Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., officers James Blassingame and Sidney Hemby and initially by Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., argued that Trump, Trump Jr., Giuliani and Brooks made “false and incendiary allegations of fraud and theft, and in direct response to the Defendant’s express calls for violence at the rally, a violent mob attacked the U.S. Capitol.”

Thompson later dropped out of the lawsuit when he was named to lead the Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection. The NAACP continued in his stead.

The lawsuits cite a federal civil rights law that was enacted to counter the Ku Klux Klan’s intimidation of officials. They spell out in detail how the Trumps, Giuliani and Brooks spread baseless claims of election fraud, both before and after the 2020 presidential election was declared and charged that they helped to spin up the thousands of rioters before they stormed the Capitol. Five people died as a result of the violence on Jan. 6, including a U.S. Capitol Police officer.

They have all denied the allegations.

Mehta said Trump’s efforts to dismiss the case ignored the theory that his words sparked what followed, but that argument was plausible.

“In this one-of-a-kind case, the First Amendment does not shield the president from liability,” Mehta wrote.

US Vows Stepped Up Indo-Pacific Effort in Push Back Against China

WASHINGTON — 

The United States vowed on Friday to commit more diplomatic and security resources to the Indo-Pacific to push back against what it sees as China’s bid to create a regional sphere of influence and become the world’s most influential power.

In a 12-page strategy overview, the Biden administration said it would focus on every corner of the region, from South Asia to the Pacific Islands, to strengthen its long-term position and commitment.

“The PRC is combining its economic, diplomatic, military, and technological might as it pursues a sphere of influence in the Indo-Pacific and seeks to become the world’s most influential power,” it said referring to the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

“Our collective efforts over the next decade will determine whether the PRC succeeds in transforming the rules and norms that have benefited the Indo-Pacific and the world,” the overview said.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken speaks during a joint press availability at the Quad meeting of foreign ministers in Melbourne, Australia, Feb. 11, 2022.

Release of the document was timed to coincide with a visit to the Indo-Pacific by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and intended to emphasize the priority the United States attaches to the region, even as Washington grapples with a dangerous standoff with Moscow, which has massed more than 100,000 troops near Ukraine’s border, stoking Western fears of an invasion.

It also comes after China and Russia declared last week a “no limits” strategic partnership, their most detailed and assertive statement to work together — and against the United States — to build a new international order based on their own interpretations of human rights and democracy.

In its document, the United States vowed to modernize alliances, strengthen emerging partnerships, and invest in regional organizations. It particularly stressed the importance of “a strong India” as a partner in a positive regional vision.

It said the United States would pursue a “free and open Indo-Pacific … through a latticework of strong and mutually reinforcing coalitions.”

Under an action plan for the next 12-24 months, the document said Washington would “meaningfully expand” its diplomatic presence in Southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands and prioritize key negotiations with Pacific island states that cover access for the U.S. military and which have appeared to stall in the past year.

“We will refocus security assistance on the Indo-Pacific, including to build maritime capacity and maritime-domain awareness,” it said.

On the highly sensitive potential flashpoint of self-ruled Taiwan, which Beijing claims as its own, Washington would work with partners inside and outside the region to maintain peace and stability in the strait dividing the island from China, it said.

The action plan also vows to expand the U.S. Coast Guard presence and cooperation in South, Southeast Asia and the Pacific, where Washington has identified China as a threat to fishing and free-trade routes.

“We recognize the limitations in our ability to change China, and therefore seek to shape the strategic environment around China,” a senior U.S. administration official told reporters, adding that the document did not embody the administration’s broader China strategy.

“Our China strategy is global in scope. It recognizes the Indo-Pacific is a particularly intense region of competition,” he said.

The document reiterated U.S. plans to launch an Indo-Pacific Economic Framework in early 2022, an initiative the administration hopes will at least partially fill a big gap in engagement with the region since former President Donald Trump quit a multinational trade framework in 2017.

It said the United States’ approach to trade would “meet high labor and environmental standards,” a reference making clear that the administration will stick to its vow to avoid damage to America jobs in economic dealings with the region.

Assange Wins First Stage in Effort to Appeal US Extradition

LONDON — 

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on Monday won the first stage of his effort to overturn a U.K. ruling that opened the door for his extradition to U.S. to stand trial on espionage charges.

The High Court in London gave Assange permission to appeal the case to the U.K. Supreme Court. But the Supreme Court must agree to accept the case before it can move forward.

“Make no mistake, we won today in court,” Assange’s fiancee, Stella Moris, said outside the courthouse, noting that he remains in custody at Belmarsh Prison in London.

“We will fight this until Julian is free,” she added.

The Supreme Court normally takes about eight sitting weeks after an application is submitted to decide whether to accept an appeal, the court says on its website.

The decision is the latest step in Assange’s long battle to avoid a trial in the U.S. on a series of charges related to WikiLeaks’ publication of classified documents more than a decade ago.

Just over a year ago, a district court judge in London rejected a U.S. extradition request on the grounds that Assange was likely to kill himself if held under harsh U.S. prison conditions. U.S. authorities later provided assurances that the WikiLeaks founder wouldn’t face the severe treatment his lawyers said would put his physical and mental health at risk.

The High Court last month overturned the lower court’s decision, saying that the U.S. promises were enough to guarantee Assange would be treated humanely.

Those assurances were the focus of Monday’s ruling by the High Court.

Assange’s lawyers are seeking to appeal because the U.S. offered its assurances after the lower court made its ruling. But the High Court overturned the lower court ruling, saying that the judge should have given the U.S. the opportunity to offer the assurances before she made her final ruling.

The High Court gave Assange permission to appeal so the Supreme Court can decide “in what circumstances can an appellate court receive assurances from a requesting state … in extradition proceedings.”

Assange’s lawyers have argued that the U.S. government’s pledge that Assange won’t be subjected to extreme conditions is meaningless because it’s conditional and could be changed at the discretion of American authorities.

The U.S. has asked British authorities to extradite Assange so he can stand trial on 17 charges of espionage and one charge of computer misuse linked to WikiLeaks’ publication of thousands of leaked military and diplomatic documents.

Assange, 50, has been held at the high-security Belmarsh Prison since 2019, when he was arrested for skipping bail during a separate legal battle. Before that, he spent seven years holed up inside Ecuador’s Embassy in London. Assange sought protection in the embassy in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden to face allegations of rape and sexual assault.

Sweden dropped the sex crimes investigations in November 2019 because so much time had elapsed.

American prosecutors say Assange unlawfully helped U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning steal classified diplomatic cables and military files that WikiLeaks later published, putting lives at risk.

Lawyers for Assange argue that their client shouldn’t have been charged because he was acting as a journalist and is protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that guarantees freedom of the press. They say the documents he published exposed U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan.