White House confirms ‘concerning’ Russian weapons plan: Latest

Washington reacted like a bomb went off after news broke on Capitol Hill of a “national security threat” about which all members of Congress had received a classified briefing.

For hours on Wednesday morning, rumours churned on Twitter before details began to come together. An early leak indicating that the intelligence was related to both a “foreign” security threat as well as outer space even drew excited murmuring about the possible discovery of alien life.

But if you were hoping to see some little green men, you better stick to reruns of X-Files. A clearer picture of the issue emerged later Wednesday and early Thursday; US officials are concerned about a new Russian capability centred around what The New York Times called a “space-based nuclear weapon” with anti-satellite capabilities. The purpose of this system, the Times further reported, is alleged by US officials to be threatening America’s military, communications and private satellite network.

A few other details remain unclear as leaks trickle out. The capability was described as not based “in orbit” by several current and former US officials who spoke to Reuters. But others who spoke to the Times contended that the capability did indeed raise questions about whether Russia was prepared to violate an international ban on orbital nuclear weapons.

There’s reportedly no cause for alarm, not yet: Reuters separately reported on Thursday that a source who had received the briefing from US intelligence agencies on the matter described the threat as not “urgent”.

The language used to describe the classified information by those who have seen it has differed marginally; most agree with the description of the threat as “serious” but no cause for alarm. Reuters has also cited read-in sources as saying that the anti-satellite weaponry is not an “active” capability of the Russian military — likely meaning it is in early or late-stage testing.

The Times backed up that assertion, citing officials who said there was a “limited” window of time to prevent Russia from deploying this new weapons system.

Donald Trump has tried to claim that he intentionally confused Nikki Haley and Nancy Pelosi during a rally address last month when he falsely stated that his rival for the Republican presidential nomination had been in charge of Capitol security in Washington, DC, on 6 January 2021, rather than the then-House speaker.

The former president made the original blunder in New Hampshire on 19 January ahead of that state’s GOP primary – which he nevertheless went on to win – wrongly telling the crowd during an anecdote about the Capitol riot: “Nikki Haley is in charge of security. We offered her 10,000 people, soldiers, National Guard, whatever they want. They turned it down.”

The gaffe came a day after Mr Trump had confused Joe Biden with Barack Obama and prompted Ms Haley, whom he has nicknamed “Birdbrain”, to question his mental wellbeing, given that she was not even in DC that day, let alone responsible for its policing.

The mistake also provided an ironic counterpoint to the candidate’s repeated attacks on President Biden, whom he has derided as too old to run for the White House again at 81, even though Mr Trump himself is only four years younger.

But speaking at another rally in North Charleston, South Carolina, on Wednesday evening ahead of that state’s upcoming primary, Mr Trump insisted he had not made an error at all.

Rather, he claimed, he had knowingly mixed-up Ms Haley and Ms Pelosi so as to underline his contempt for both women, complaining about the subsequent adverse press coverage he received by observing bitterly: “It’s very hard to be sarcastic.”

He continued: “When I interpose – I’m not a Nikki fan and I’m not a Pelosi fan. When I purposely interpose names, they say he didn’t know Pelosi from Nikki.

“They make a big deal out of it and I say: ‘No, no, I think they both stink.’ They have something in common: they both stink.

Thursday’s hearing in Atlanta hinges not on whether Fulton County DAFani Willis and prosecutor Nathan Wade had a relationship — as the pair have already admitted they were romantically involved — but whether Ms Willis could be disqualified from the case. The defence has argued that the couple have financially benefited from Ms Willis hiring Mr Wade to prosecute the former president’s case.

The former DA’s office employee’s testimony came in direct contradiction to Nathan Wade’s testimony.

Robin Bryant-Yeartie, a former DA’s office employee and once “good friend” of Ms Willis, took the stand on Thursday morning. She testified that Ms Willis told her the pair first met at a municipal court judges conference in October 2019.

The pair “possibly” could have been dating in November 2019, Ms Bryant-Yeartie said.

“You have no doubt that their romantic relationship was in effect from 2019 until the last time you spoke with her?” defence attorney Ashleigh Merchant asked.

“No doubt,” she replied.

Mr Wade said his relationship with Ms Willis began in March 2022. His testimony on Thursday is consistent with the timeline he had written in a sworn affidavit. This would have been after Mr Wade began working for the DA’s office in November 2021.

The former president will stand trial on 25 March, what will likely be the first trial among the four criminal cases against him, as well as the first criminal trial against any current or former president.

With Mr Trump in attendance, New York Judge Juan Merchan held a pretrial hearing on Thursday in which he confirmed that the trial would go ahead as planned on the previously scheduled court date and rejected the former president’s attorneys’ attempts to dismiss the case altogether.

Mr Trump entered the courtroom in New York County Supreme Court in lower Manhattan at 9.30am ET on Thursday and strode past a velvet rope to the wide wooden defence table in front of the judge. He briefly stood by himself at the table before his attorneys joined him.

Based on that, Judge Merchan determined that “at this point, I can tell you we will plan for jury selection on 25 March”.

The trial is expected to last five to six weeks, with 15 to 17 days for the prosecution’s arguments, running from 9.30am to 4.30pm ET daily, except Wednesdays.

Mr Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche, who appeared caught off guard by the judge’s adherence to the trial schedule, called the decision a “grave injustice”.

“President Trump has been indicted in three other cases,” said Mr Blanche, who also is the lead attorney in a federal case charging Mr Trump for mishandling classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago property.

He said the former president faces an “extremely compressed” schedule to prepare for his four criminal cases, all tentatively set to go to trial in 2024, at a time when he is seeking the Republican nomination for president to face President Joe Biden in November.

As his legal battles grow more complex by the day, a serious question has emerged: what happens if Mr Trump wins the nomination and campaigns for the general election as a convicted criminal?

That possibility, in turn, raises another simpler question: could the 45th president of the United States go to prison?

Between his 91 felony counts, Mr Trump faces a total of roughly seven centuries in total jail time, spread between dozens of various charges of differing seriousness.

Obviously Mr Trump is not going to be sealed inside a federal penitentiary for all of eternity but the increasingly wide range of actions for which he is now being prosecuted is slowly chipping away at the likelihood that he will evade the inside of a cell forever.

The ruling by a federal appeals court on 6 February that he is not entitled to immunity from prosecution for crimes committed while he was in office dealt a serious blow to his bid to evade criminal charges.

The FBI source who claimed to have information regarding alleged bribes paid to President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, has been charged with fabricating the allegations during interviews with federal agents.

David Weiss, the special prosecutor and Trump appointee who is overseeing two federal cases against Hunter Biden, obtained a grand jury indictment in the Central District of California against Alexander Smirnov on charges that he made false statements to federal investigators during his time as a confidential human source for the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

According to the indictment, Mr Smirnov allegedly “provided false derogatory information” to agents about President Biden, who is described in the court documents as “Public Official 1, an elected official in the Obama-Biden Administration who left office in January 2017,” and Hunter Biden, who prosecutors describe as “Businessperson 1, the son of Public Official 1, in 2020, after Public Official 1 became a candidate for President of the United States of America.”.

Prosecutors allege that Mr Smirnov made the false allegations to agents in June 2020, when he allegedly told agents about two meetings with an executive from Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company which employed Hunter Biden as an attorney and later as a member of its’ corporate board.

Mr Smirnov allegedly told agents that “executives associated with Burisma, including Burisma Official 1, admitted to him that they hired [Hunter Biden] to ‘protect us, through his dad, from all kinds of problems”.

“We pray for the families who lost loved ones and wish a speedy recovery to those who suffered injuries,” press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said.

More than half of the 22 victims who suffered gunshot injuries are under the age of 16, police said.

The incident, which killed one person, unfolded close to Union Station in Kansas City on Wednesday 14 February.

So far, police have detained three individuals, two of whom are juveniles.

The Georgia prosecutor leading a sprawling election interference case against Donald Trump is on the witness stand for a hearing on allegations of misconduct levelled against her by the former president and his co-defendants – questions that could potentially disqualify them from the case.

The attorneys had already admitted to their relationship but firmly rejected the “meritless” and “salacious” allegations as “bad-faith” attempts to see her kicked off a case that Mr Trump has baselessly labelled a conspiracy against him, according to court filings.

Thursday’s hearing is scrutinizing allegations that the former couple financially benefited from Ms Willis hiring Mr Wade to prosecute the former president’s case.

“I’ve been very anxious to have this conversation with you today,” Ms Willis told defence attorney Ashleigh Merchant. “It’s ridiculous that you lied on Monday and yet here we are. … I’m actually surprised that the hearing continued. But since it did, here I am.”

Robin Yeartie, a friend of Ms Willis when they were in college in the early 1990s, previously testified that Ms Willis and Mr Wade were in a romantic relationship beginning in 2019. During her testimony, Ms Willis vigorously denied those claims and called an allegation that she slept with Mr Wade after meeting him “extremely offensive”.

“That’s a lie,” she told Ms Merchant, a criminal defense attorney representing Trump co-defendant Mike Roman.

“That’s one of your lies,” she said.

Washington reacted like a bomb went off after news broke on Capitol Hill of a “national security threat” about which all members of Congress had received a classified briefing.

For hours on Wednesday morning, rumours churned on Twitter before details began to come together. An early leak indicating that the intelligence was related to both a “foreign” security threat as well as outer space even drew excited murmuring about the possible discovery of alien life.

But if you were hoping to see some little green men, you better stick to reruns of X-Files. A clearer picture of the issue emerged later Wednesday and early Thursday; US officials are concerned about a new Russian capability centred around what The New York Times called a “space-based nuclear weapon” with anti-satellite capabilities. The purpose of this system, the Times further reported, is alleged by US officials to be threatening America’s military, communications and private satellite network.

A few other details remain unclear as leaks trickle out. The capability was described as not based “in orbit” by several current and former US officials who spoke to Reuters. But others who spoke to the Times contended that the capability did indeed raise questions about whether Russia was prepared to violate an international ban on orbital nuclear weapons.

There’s reportedly no cause for alarm, not yet: Reuters separately reported on Thursday that a source who had received the briefing from US intelligence agencies on the matter described the threat as not “urgent”.