Apprehensions at the southern border decreased in June, driven by a substantial drop in illegal border crossings between ports of entry.

According to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) figures, border officials encountered migrants 144,571 times at the border in June, down 30 percent from the 206,702 encounters a month prior.

While the overall number of encounters dropped, encounters with unauthorized migrants at ports of entry rose month-to-month, a sign that the Biden administration's efforts to funnel migrants toward ports of entry are working.

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials reported 45,026 encounters at ports of entry in June, up more than 27 percent from 35,315 in May.

That rise stood in contrast with the drop in Border Patrol encounters between ports of entry: 99,545 in June, down 42 percent from 171,387 in May.

The drop in Border Patrol encounters is the second significant contraction in fiscal 2022, after encounters plummeted nearly 40 percent from December to January.

June's figures show the lowest number of border encounters since President Biden's first full month in office, with a number nearly identical to former President Trump's highest posted encounter figures.

In May of 2019, the Trump administration reported 144,116 total encounters, a number that quickly came down, first as a result of Mexico's crackdown on migrants at its southern border and later because of the coronavirus pandemic.

While the two administrations have differed drastically in style, immigrant advocates say they share substance in many of their border and immigration policies.

The Biden administration in February rolled out new asylum regulations that activists said mirrored Trump's asylum ban, a charge the White House and DHS vehemently denied.

Those asylum rules have been challenged, and a hearing is scheduled before a federal court Wednesday.

If the asylum rules are blocked, the administration could lose one piece of the puzzle that it's used to convince migrants to avoid entering the country between ports of entry, and to avail themselves of parole programs designed to help them avoid land crossings altogether.

Updated: 6:47 p.m.

A Pennsylvania woman accused of directing Jan. 6 rioters into the Capitol building with a bullhorn was found guilty on federal charges.

Rachel Marie Powell, 41, was convicted of all charges brought against her, including eight felonies and one misdemeanor related to her actions during the Jan. 6, 2021, attacks on the Capitol, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington announced Tuesday. U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth heard testimony without a jury, and a sentencing hearing was scheduled for Oct. 17.

Obstruction of an official proceeding, destruction of government property, entering a restricted area with a weapon and engaging in violence on Capitol grounds were among her charges. According to evidence presented by the government, Powell was seen at the Capitol that day directing people on how to breach the building using a bullhorn.

Video footage also shows Powell giving detailed instructions on the layout of the building after individuals asked questions like, “What’s the floor plan?" according to the U.S. Attorney’s office. Officials added that in other video footage, Powell could be heard saying, “Coordinate together if you are going to take this building” and saying they “have another window to break.”

Court documents state that numerous videos and images show Powell at the Capitol on Jan. 6, including some moments where she used a large pipe to breach the building. The footage also reveals that she entered through the West Terrace exterior door with a crowd of rioters at 2:41 p.m., the office noted.

Powell was arrested in February 2021, shortly after she gave an interview with The New Yorker magazine, where she admitted to using the bullhorn to direct people at the Capitol.

“Listen, if somebody doesn’t help and direct people, then do more people die?” she said at the time when asked about her conduct that day. “That’s all I’m going to say about that. I can’t say anymore. I need to talk to an attorney.”

More than 1,069 people have been arrested in nearly all 50 states in connection to the Jan. 6 attacks on the Capitol. More than 350 people were charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement in the ongoing investigation.

Judge Aileen Cannon said she would issue a written order “promptly” after the nearly two-hour hearing in federal court in Fort Pierce, Florida, where Trump's lawyers pressed for an indefinite delay of a trial date.

The sparring over setting a trial date, a routine matter in criminal cases, underscores the unprecedented nature of prosecuting a former president who is also running to reclaim the White House in 2024.

Trump has denied any wrongdoing and slammed the prosecution as an attempt to hurt his campaign.

Trump's lawyers say the Republican can't get a fair trial ahead of the election and insist they need more time to review evidence and prepare for what they describe as a complex case.

The judge repeatedly pressed Trump’s lawyers to set some dates and a more concrete timetable, but acknowledged she understood they needed more time to review documents and footage.

“We need to set a timetable,” Cannon said. “Some deadlines can be established now.”

She also questioned prosecutors on whether there were other similar cases involving classified documents tried in such a short time frame.

Special counsel Jack Smith's team, which is pushing for the trial to begin in December, told the judge the case is not complex and there's no need for a lengthy delay. They rejected insinuations by the defense that Trump was charged because he's running for president. Prosecutor David Harbach said there was “no political influence.”

“No one in our team is a political appointee,” he said, noting that they are all career prosecutors.

It was the first time arguments were held in front of Cannon, who has been under increased scrutiny since a court ruling last year that critics said was unduly favorable to Trump. Trump’s co-defendant, Walt Nauta, attended the hearing, but Trump did not. He traveled Tuesday to Iowa, where he was taping a town hall with Fox News host Sean Hannity.

Trump and Nauta pleaded not guilty before a federal judge in Miami to a 38-count indictment that accuses them of conspiring to hide classified documents from Justice Department investigators that were taken from the White House to Mar-a-Lago at the end of Trump’s time in office in January 2021.

The court date unfolded hours after Trump disclosed that he had received a target letter from the Justice Department in a separate investigation into efforts by him and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. Such letters often precede an indictment.

Harbach told the judge that Trump’s legal team has repeatedly suggested he should be treated differently because he’s running for president.

“He should be treated like anybody else,” Harbach said. “He is not different than any other busy, important person.”

But Todd Blanche, one of Trump’s lawyers, pushed back against the idea that this case be treated like any other. Trump's team said it believes the circumstances to ensure a fair trial would improve after the election.

“It is intellectually dishonest to say this case is like any other case,” Blanche said. “It is not.”

Chris Kise, a Trump lawyer, asked the judge to consider the amount of attention the case was receiving and whether finding impartial jurors would be possible before an election. But Cannon said she wanted to first focus on discovery and set a concrete “road map” for the case.

Kise suggested meeting again in November to discuss scheduling the trial. As the hearing was about to end, Kise said a trial date of mid-November 2024 would be preferred.

Cannon also presided over a lawsuit that the Trump team filed last year over the August 2022 FBI search of Mar-a-Lago. Cannon drew criticism and second-guessing from legal experts for granting Trump's request for a special master to conduct an independent review of the classified documents removed by the FBI from Mar-a-Lago.

A three-judge federal appeals court later overruled that order and said she had lacked the authority for such a ruling.

___

Tucker reported from Washington and Richer reported from Boston.

Democrats and Latino organizations are lambasting Texas officials over a report this week that the state's troopers have been ordered to systematically violate the human rights of migrants, including by pushing children into the Rio Grande and denying water aid in extreme heat.

The Houston Chronicle report, based on an email written by a Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) trooper, detailed a series of incidents where migrants were seriously injured or killed by measures set in place by Texas to deter them from crossing the U.S.-Mexico border.

"If true, this is atrocious, barbaric, and downright wrong," wrote White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre in a tweet responding to the report.

"It would also not be surprising coming from a Governor who abandoned migrant children on the side of the road in below freezing temperatures on Christmas Eve," she added.

Much of the criticism over the human rights violations alleged in the report has been directed at Gov. Greg Abbott (R), who launched Operation Lone Star, a state-run border crackdown, in 2021.

“Texas is deploying every tool and strategy to deter and repel illegal crossings between ports of entry as President Biden’s dangerous open border policies entice migrants from over 150 countries to risk their lives entering the country illegally," Andrew Mahaleris, a spokesperson for Abbott, told The Hill in an email.

"The absence of razor wire and other deterrence strategies encourages migrants to make unsafe and illegal crossings between ports of entry, while making the job of Texas National Guard soldiers and DPS troopers more dangerous and difficult. President Biden has unleashed a chaos on the border that’s unsustainable, and we have a constitutional duty to respond to this unprecedented crisis,” said Mahaleris.

But Texas Democrats in the House of Representatives on Tuesday excoriated the governor, saying no amount of deterrence is worth the violations described in the trooper's email.

"We learned last night that a state trooper sent in what looks like an official email details about Operation Lone Star and directives by DPS leadership to not allow migrants — even those who may be struggling to survive in the water, perhaps on the verge of drowning — to not help them, to push them back towards Mexico in the water," said Rep. Joaquín Castro (D-Texas).

The email detailed cases including one where a pregnant woman miscarried trapped in the razor wire set up by DPS, one where a 4-year-old girl passed out from heat exhaustion as she attempted to pass through the wire only to be pushed back by Texas National Guard soldiers, and a case where a teenage boy broke his leg in the razor wire and had to be carried out by his father.

The trooper who wrote the email also alluded to an order to deny water to heat-stricken migrants and to "traps" set up to catch migrants off guard in the wire.

According to the report, DPS spokesman Travis Considine denied that an order to deny water to migrants was ever issued, but didn't comment on other allegations in the email.

DPS did not respond to The Hill's request for further comment, but the agency announced Tuesday it is conducting an internal investigation into the allegations.

Under Operation Lone Star, DPS agents have set up razor wire installations along known crossing points, as well as chains of buoys in sections of the Rio Grande to make crossing more difficult.

The Democrats also took aim at Abbott for the buoy system, both on the grounds that they could trap migrants underwater and because they allegedly violate international boundary regulations.

"I believe that they're drowning devices. Those buoys are not only set up on the surface of the water but also have net well below them so that people can get trapped in them and also can't go around them at all, even to try to save themselves," said Castro.

Rep. Henry Cuéllar (D-Texas), who represents the border city of Laredo, said the buoys had the potential to change the boundary with Mexico, which has raised concerns about the system.

"The problem we have is that the state is not cooperating, or working, or coordinating at all with the federal government," Cuéllar said.

"They're going solo on it, and I certainly stand with my colleagues to make sure that we find out exactly what's happening. Again, we want to see border security but at the same time you've got to treat the migrants with respect and dignity."

While Abbott has said his government is acting to fill gaps where the Biden administration is not performing its duties, Democrats say the state's foray into immigration and border policy is out of constitutional bounds.

"Let me be very clear: The jurisdiction of immigration is a federal constitutional grounded responsibility. It is the responsibility of President Joe Biden and his administration, and he has taken that responsibility seriously," said Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas).

The Texas Democrats called on Biden to act more aggressively to impose federal authority at the border, and even called for international organizations to intervene.

"I call on the Department of Justice to investigate these cruel actions toward migrants. Razor wire and barrels in the river, pushing children back into the river and denying water during extreme heat are just deliberate acts of torture," said Rep. Sylvia García (D-Texas). 

"It goes against everything that we have ever been taught as Texans, and it goes beyond politics and crosses the line into human rights violations. I would call in the United Nations to look at this."

But the lawmakers recognized that Abbott is politically motivated to stay the course.

"He's not going to listen because it's working for him. It's working for his base. And I don't really think that he thinks about children. He doesn't think about what he's doing to people and how he's hurting them. He's looking at how it works for his base, and whatever he deems he's going to do next in terms of his race, whether it's for governor or something else," García said.

Still, the Democrats took the opportunity to slam Abbott, who has comfortably won three gubernatorial elections.

Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) said he was reluctant to believe all the allegations in the letter but called for Abbott's impeachment if the email is accurate.

"If this is true, articles of impeachment ought to be brought against this governor. He is unfit to hold any office of public trust, especially one as high as being governor of the state of Texas. You don't do this. Children are at risk. Babies," said Green. 

"Governor, you have made a mistake. If this is true, you've crossed a line and you ought not continue to serve."

Domingo García, president of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the country's oldest Latino civil rights organization, called for Abbott to "answer" for Operation Lone Star.

"LULAC condemns the inhumane treatment of innocent people and denounces the use of razor wire, buoys, and any other barriers that jeopardize the safety of women and children seeking asylum. These are Christian refugees, and they deserve to be treated with dignity and respect," said García.

"Operation Lone Star is utterly barbaric, and Governor Abbott and all those supporting him must answer for their actions. What would Jesus say about such treatment of the most vulnerable in society?"

Federal Judge Aileen Cannon declined to make a decision Tuesday on when to schedule the Mar-a-Lago case trial for former President Trump after his attorneys asked for an indefinite delay.

Trump’s legal team and Justice Department prosecutors met in the Florida courtroom for nearly two hours attempting to set a schedule in the case. 

Prosecutors have proposed that the trial begin in December, saying the case is not complex and there’s no need for a lengthy delay. Trump’s attorneys had argued they’d need ample time to sort through the classified documents while his schedule as a 2024 candidate would make the trial difficult.

Prosecutor David Harbach told the judge that Trump’s legal team has repeatedly suggested he should be treated differently because he’s running for president.

“He should be treated like everyone else,” Harbach said.

Seeking an indefinite delay was an unprecedented move by Trump’s attorneys, who during Tuesday's conference suggested as an alternative that the trial be postponed until much closer to the election.

Attorney Todd Blanche said they would prefer "mid-November or later of next year" if the court decides to nail down a date, according to reporting from ABC News. 

For her part, Cannon, a Trump appointee, seemed skeptical of both a December trial date as well as the request to set no trial date at all, pledging to issue a decision “promptly.”

Trump and his co-defendant Walt Nauta, his valet, have pleaded not guilty to a 38-count indictment that accuses them of conspiring to hide classified documents from Justice Department investigators that were taken from the White House to Mar-a-Lago at the end of Trump’s time in office in January 2021.

Cannon also presided over a lawsuit that the Trump team filed last year over the August 2022 FBI search of Mar-a-Lago. Cannon drew criticism and second-guessing from legal experts for granting Trump’s request for a special master to conduct an independent review of the classified documents removed by the FBI from Mar-a-Lago.

A three-judge federal appeals court later overruled that order and said she had lacked the authority for such a ruling.

Meanwhile, Trump on Tuesday also said he received a letter from the Justice Department on Sunday notifying him that he is a target of its Jan. 6 inquiry, noting that could mean an imminent indictment in the matter.

The Associated Press contributed reporting.

Lev Parnas, once a right-hand man to Rudy Giuliani, asked the GOP’s top congressional investigator to abandon efforts to uncover wrongdoing by the Biden family in Ukraine, calling the matter “nothing more than a wild goose chase” that has been “debunked again and again.”

Parnas’s Tuesday letter to House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.), obtained by The Hill, notes that Parnas and Giuliani's repeated efforts to dig up dirt on President Biden or his son Hunter yielded nothing and confused Ukrainian prosecutors.

It also recaps the efforts taken by the Trump team that resulted in the launching of the first impeachment inquiry into former President Trump. Democrats alleged he withheld aid from Ukraine in an effort to pressure officials there to provide incriminating evidence on the Bidens.

“Throughout all these months of work, the extensive campaigns and networking done by Trump allies and Giuliani associates, including the enormously thorough interviews and assignments that I undertook, there has never been any evidence that Hunter or Joe Biden committed any crimes related to Ukrainian politics,” he said.

He said Giuliani and all others involved in the matter “knew that these allegations against the Bidens were false.”

“Never, during any of my communications with Ukrainian officials or connections to Burisma, did any of them confirm or provide concrete facts linking the Bidens to illegal activities. In fact, they asked me multiple times why our team was so concerned with this idea.” 

Comer dismissed the contents of Parnas’s letter.

“Now there's somebody that Giuliani was running around with and says we should drop investigations because Giuliani and him already looked into it. I mean, I don't think that that's credible,” he said.

“We're starting to see money from Ukraine coming in on some of these bank statements that we're going to release later,” he added, a reference to his investigation into Biden family finances.

Comer has based much of his investigation on an unverified tip to the FBI from a source who heard secondhand allegations Biden accepted a bribe. The bureau was unable to corroborate the tip.

Parnas has also previously provided a transcript of a conversation he says was with Mykola Zlochevsky, the reported source of the information, denying any improper conduct by President Biden or his son Hunter, who was serving on the board of energy company Burisma, which Zlochevsky owns. That information was turned over during the impeachment inquiry.

Parnas was convicted in court of making illegal campaign contributions to Trump.

His letter comes as Comer is under increasing pressure to advance his inquiry into President Biden, who he has alleged accepted a bribe.

Even some in the GOP have criticized his investigation, with former Trump advisor Steve Bannon saying last month Comer needed to “be prepared,” adding, “You are not serious. It’s all performative.” 

Comer acknowledged Monday the difficulties of explaining the financial crimes he has alleged.

“Two things I've learned: People don't know what a shell company is, and they don't know what an LLC is. They don't know what money laundering is. We're going to try to explain in a more simple form ‘this is what they did,’” he told reporters.

Those in Trump’s orbit have alleged President Biden sought to withhold aid from Ukraine because its top prosecutor was threatening to investigate his son. Biden, joined by the international community, actually sought to pressure Ukraine to remove the man, Viktor Shokin, over corruption charges. 

Parnas’s letter spends ample time breaking down the investigative efforts of Giuliani, which included trying to get Shokin’s replacement, Yuriy Lutsenko, to retain him for $200,000. 

It details the repeated dead ends they hit, and the numerous efforts to pressure Ukrainian officials.

“Giuliani’s message to the [then-Ukrainian] president [Petro Poroshenko], who was running for reelection, was that Trump would support him and help him win if he made an official announcement of an investigation against Joe Biden,” Parnas writes.

Parnas ends with a plea to Comer to halt his investigation.

“There is no evidence of Joe or Hunter Biden interfering with Ukrainian politics, and there never has been,” Parnas writes.

“With all due respect, Chairman Comer, the narrative you are seeking for this investigation has been proven false many times over, by a wide array of respected sources. There is simply no merit to investigating this matter any further. I hope my letter has provided you with additional clarity on this point.”

Former White House communications director Alyssa Farah Griffin asserted that former President Trump is profiting off legal woes after he announced Tuesday he was notified he is a target in the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Jan. 6 investigation.

In a Truth Social post Tuesday morning, Trump said he received a target letter Sunday. “Deranged Jack Smith, the prosecutor with Joe Biden’s DOJ, sent a letter (again it was Sunday night!) stating that I am a TARGET of the January 6th Grand Jury investigation, and giving me a very short 4 days to report to the Grand Jury, which almost always means an arrest and indictment,” he wrote.  

Speaking on ABC's “The View,” Griffin argued Trump is "kind of worshipping these lines of like, ‘I was indicted for you.’ He was not indicted for you, he was indicted because he refused to accept, or he’s likely going to be indicted, because he refused to accept, he lost the election.”

Griffin, a co-host of the show who has become a vocal critic of Trump, nodded toward a New York Times report last month that said 10 percent of money raised by the Trump campaign is now going to a political action committee that has paid the former president's personal legal fees.

“It’s all a grift. At the end of the day, this is simply a grift,” she declared.

Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed special counsel Jack Smith last year to oversee the Justice Department’s investigations into Jan. 6, 2021, covering “whether any person or entity unlawfully interfered with the transfer of power.” A large focus of the investigation has centered around Trump’s attempts to remain in office following the 2020 election.  

Griffin said Tuesday she voluntarily met with DOJ investigators and the House Jan. 6 committee, adding, "they were very interested in sort of whether he knew he lost the election.”

“[Trump] said to me directly that he acknowledged he lost, but I don’t know if he’s changed his mind since then,” Griffin said. “But that matters because it will allow them to prove that he knew he lost, and he still wanted to incite a mob to go to the Capitol and stormed the Capitol.”  

It is unclear the specific charges Trump could face if prosecutors move forward in the investigation surrounding the Capitol riot, though legal experts have offered a model prosecution memo arguing there is sufficient evidence to bring a case against Trump.

Smith and his team spoke with several witnesses on the matter over the past few weeks.

Former President Trump said Tuesday morning that he has been alerted he is a target of the Justice Department’s Jan. 6 investigation focusing on his efforts to stay in power after losing the 2020 election. 

Trump said he received the “target letter” Sunday evening.

“Deranged Jack Smith, the prosecutor with Joe Biden’s DOJ, sent a letter (again it was Sunday night!) stating that I am a TARGET of the January 6th Grand Jury investigation, and giving me a very short 4 days to report to the Grand Jury, which almost always means an arrest and indictment.”

It had been clear that Trump’s actions would be a central focus of the Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation, as Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed a special counsel to review the matter last year to determine “whether any person or entity unlawfully interfered with the transfer of power.”

But, as Trump states, receiving a target letter is often a sign someone could soon face charges in a matter where prosecutors have gathered substantial evidence.

Trump pursued a multi-pronged plan to remain in office, turning to the DOJ, state officials and even his own supporters, who ransacked the Capitol after then-Vice President Mike Pence refused Trump’s request to overturn the election results. 

It’s unclear what specific charges Trump could face if prosecutors decide to move ahead.

A model prosecution memo analyzing publicly available details about the DOJ investigation suggested the former president could face charges on conspiracy to defraud the United States after creating fake electoral certificates that were submitted to Congress. 

Creating those fake electoral certificates could also invoke statutes that prohibit obstruction of an official proceeding, a charge also leveled at numerous rioters who entered the building, including members of the Oath Keepers and military and chauvinist group the Proud Boys.

Prosecutors in recent weeks have called a number of Trump allies before the grand jury, including Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and former aide Hope Hicks. Prosecutors reportedly asked questions about whether Trump knew he had lost the election, as demonstrating intent is key for some charges. 

More on the Jan. 6 investigation from The Hill:

• Kushner, Hope Hicks testified before Jan. 6 grand jury: reports
• Legal experts see strong potential for Trump charges in Jan. 6 probe
• Ex-Arizona House Speaker says he’s spoken to FBI in 2020 election probe

An indictment would mark the third time this year Trump has been charged with a crime, and the second time in a matter of months that he would face federal charges. He was charged in Manhattan in April over an alleged hush money scheme to keep quiet an affair, and in June he pleaded not guilty to federal charges over his handling of classified documents upon leaving office.

The former president is still under investigation in Georgia over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in the state. The district attorney leading the investigation has signaled charges could be filed in August.

Trump has repeatedly claimed that the myriad investigations into his conduct are part of an attempt to undermine his 2024 White House bid, pointing to his sizable lead in Republican primary polls, as well as some surveys that have shown him narrowly leading President Biden in a hypothetical rematch.

“THIS WITCH HUNT IS ALL ABOUT ELECTION INTERFERENCE AND A COMPLETE AND TOTAL POLITICAL WEAPONIZATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT!” Trump said Tuesday. “It is a very sad and dark period for our Nation!”

The Biden White House has been adamant that they have had no contact with the DOJ about cases involving Trump.

In the case over his handling of classified materials, a May 19 letter from the DOJ notified Trump he was a target of the investigation, according to court filings. Trump posted on social media June 8 that he had been indicted. 

In this case, however, it appears Trump has been given until Thursday to appear before the grand jury in Washington.

Trump’s office did not immediately respond to questions about whether he will appear before the grand jury — a chance to offer his own evidence in the case — and Smith’s office declined to comment on the matter.

In the halls of Congress, Republicans defended Trump, repeating his claims that he is being unfairly targeted.

Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who in the days after the Jan. 6 attack said that Trump “bears responsibility” for the riot, sounded a different tune Tuesday morning.

“Recently, President Trump went up in the polls and was actually surpassing President Biden for reelection. So, what do they do now? Weaponize government to go after their No. 1 opponent,” he told reporters.

“This is not equal justice. They treat people differently and they go after their adversaries.”

On the day of the insurrection, McCarthy called Trump, pleading with him to make a public statement to call off his supporters, at one point reportedly telling the then-president that “they are trying to f‑‑‑ing kill me.”

"Yeah, it's absolute bulls‑‑‑,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) said. “This is the only way that the Democrats have to beat President Trump.”

But Democrats argued Trump’s plan to stay in power was an effort to subvert democracy, one that should carry serious consequences.

“A mob of insurrectionists violently attacked the U.S. Capitol on January 6th in order to halt the peaceful transfer of power,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) wrote on Twitter.

“The American people deserve to know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.”

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, called a potential case among the most serious Trump would face.

“If he'll be facing charges with respect to the Jan. 6 insurrection, those are perhaps the most serious charges,” he said. “If he's convicted of insurrection, he's ineligible to ever hold any office of profit or trust under the United States.”

Emily Brooks and Mychael Schnell contributed. Updated at 5:02 p.m. ET.

An Air National Guardsman accused of leaking classified documents online is asking a federal judge to treat him like former President Trump and allow him to be released ahead of his trial.

Attorneys for Jack Teixeira argued in a motion filed Monday that the government's efforts to keep the 21-year-old detained are "squarely undermined" by its "reasoned decision" not to seek pretrial detention for Trump or his personal aide, Walt Nauta.

Each of the cases involve the alleged mishandling of classified information and conspiracy to obstruct justice, the filing reads.

Teixeira's attorneys also argued that the government has said the former president had access to "the most sensitive classified documents and national defense information gathered and owned by the United States government" — plus multiple properties abroad and a private plane. Despite that, Teixeira's lawyers say, the government agreed to let Trump remain free ahead of his trial "without any suggestion" he might be a serious flight risk.

"The government’s disparate approach to pretrial release in these cases demonstrates that its argument for Mr. Teixeira’s pretrial detention based on knowledge he allegedly retains is illusory," Teixeira's attorneys wrote.

U.S. Magistrate Judge David Hennessy ruled in May that releasing Teixeira would pose the risk he'd flee the country or obstruct justice, pointing to his "fascination with guns," online statements and the reprimand by his military superiors over his handling of classified information ahead of his arrest.

Teixeira has pleaded not guilty to six counts of willful retention and transmission of national defense information, stemming from alleged violations of the Espionage Act. He was arrested in April after allegedly leaking classified military documents on Discord, an online messaging platform popular among video game players.

The letter, signed by members of both chambers, cites a Project on Government Oversight report from last year that found that more than 300 individuals of the far-right Oath Keepers militia “described themselves as current or former employees of the Department of Homeland Security.”

“While we commend your commitment to identifying and combatting domestic violent extremism within the Department of Homeland Security’s workforce, we write to you today calling for an update on the steps and actions you have taken to weed out extremists within your ranks,” lawmakers wrote in the letter, spearheaded by Reps. Daniel Goldman (N.Y.) and Robert Garcia (Calif.) along with Sen. Ed Markey (Mass.).

Last year, in response to a request from Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, the DHS issued a report that “found very few instances of the DHS workforce having been engaged in domestic violent extremism.” But the review acknowledged “significant gaps that have impeded its ability to comprehensively prevent, detect, and respond to potential threats related to domestic violent extremism within DHS.” 

The Democrats' letter asks about the status of a DHS directive that pledged to “prevent, detect, and respond to violent extremist activity within the DHS workforce” as well as spelling out DHS policies for interaction with such groups.

It also cites an internal report crafted by the FBI and reported by ABC News that white supremacists actively seek out connections with law enforcement to both further ideological goals and gain tactical knowledge. 

“Violent extremist groups and leaders, such as white supremacists and anti-government extremists, have been explicit about their desire to recruit current and former law enforcement personnel,” the lawmakers wrote.

“It is clear that the issue of extremists infiltrating federal law enforcement is a persistent and clear threat to the rule of law and national security, and urgent action is needed to root out domestic violent extremists from federal law enforcement agencies.” 

Lawmakers also seek answers on how DHS is monitoring interactions between DHS personnel and other groups tied to domestic violent extremism, including whether the department uses  “publicly available information, including social media” to do so.

The DHS did not respond directly to the content of the letter.

“DHS responds to Congressional correspondence directly via official channels, and the Department will continue to respond appropriately to Congressional oversight,” the department said in a statement.

According to multiple reports, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and former communications aide Hope Hicks were among those who gave testimony to the grand jury.

The group has reportedly faced questions about the extent Trump privately acknowledged that he lost the election, a line of questioning that could establish that the former president acted with intent in deceiving the public — a key detail for numerous charges prosecutors could bring.

Kushner, whose appearance was first reported by The New York Times, was said to have told prosecutors that Trump genuinely believed the election was stolen.

The content of Hicks’s testimony is unclear, though the select House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack shared texts from her expressing frustration over the Capitol attack, saying it made the White House team “look like domestic terrorists” and that they would be “perpetually unemployed.”

Former White House communications director Alyssa Farah Griffin also met with prosecutors in recent weeks, one of the few former aides who has said publicly that Trump knew he lost, saying words to the effect of, “Can you believe I lost to this guy?” after seeing President Biden on TV.

“In that moment, I think he knew he lost,” Griffin said in testimony shared last year by the committee.

Alan Hostetter, 56, was convicted of conspiring to obstruct and obstructing an official proceeding, as well as entering a restricted area and engaging in disorderly or disruptive conduct with a dangerous weapon, after defending himself at a bench trial.

According to the U.S. attorney’s office for the District of Columbia, Hostetter “coordinated and conspired” with several other rioters from California to travel to Washington, D.C., for the certification of the 2020 presidential election. 

On Jan. 6, the 56-year-old carried a hatchet in his backpack as he breached a police line and made his way to the upper west terrace of the Capitol. 

He later posted a photo of himself on the terrace on Instagram, saying, “This was the shot heard round the world!...the 2021 version of 1776. That war lasted 8 years. We are just getting started.”

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth noted Hostetter’s past career in law enforcement as he handed down his ruling Thursday. Hostetter briefly served as chief of police in La Habra, Calif., according to NPR. 

“No reasonable citizen of this country, much less one with two decades of experience in law enforcement, could have believed it was lawful to use mob violence to impede a joint session of Congress,” Lamberth said in court, according to The Washington Post. 

“Belief that your actions are for a greater good doesn’t negate consciousness of wrongdoing,” the judge added.

The indictment of a think tank leader charged with acting as an unregistered agent of China has inflamed an already heated debate over the Department of Justice (DOJ), with Republicans rallying around Gal Luft and arguing the charges against him are further evidence of politicization. 

Luft, co-director of the Maryland-based Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, is accused of recruiting and paying an unnamed former high-ranking U.S. government official on behalf of principals based in China in 2016 without registering as a foreign agent, as is required by U.S. law. He also faces arms trafficking and sanctions violations for trying to broker illicit arms deals.

But just a week prior, Luft claimed in a video first published by the New York Post that he was arrested to prevent him from testifying before the House Oversight Committee on shady Biden family business dealings.  

He also claims he shared allegations against the Biden family with FBI and DOJ officials during a March 2019 meeting, which he said they covered up. That made him “patient zero of the Biden family investigation,” he said in the video.  

Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), chairman of the Oversight and Accountability Committee, called Luft a “very credible witness on Biden family corruption” in a tweet last week. Comer and other Republicans have heralded Luft as a whistleblower in the Hunter Biden laptop probe. 

On Wednesday, Comer requested that FBI Director Christopher Wray provide the Oversight Committee with an unredacted copy of the FBI’s report after allegedly meeting with Luft in March 2019, when Luft supposedly shared his allegations. The ask followed a House Judiciary Committee hearing where Wray was grilled on the agency’s purported politicization. 

“To be clear, the Committee takes no position regarding the federal charges against Luft,” Comer wrote in a letter to Wray. “Instead, the Committee requests narrowly tailored information he allegedly provided the DOJ and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in March 2019 regarding his interactions with the Chinese company, CEFC.”

For some Republicans, the indictment has lent new credence to claims from within the party that the Biden administration has turned the DOJ into a weapon and pointed it at the political right — especially surrounding a purported double standard between conservatives and the Bidens. 

The president’s son is at the heart of GOP complaints.  

Last month, Hunter Biden took a plea deal with DOJ prosecutors, agreeing to plead guilty to misdemeanors for failing to pay income taxes in 2017 and 2018. He also said he would enter a pretrial diversion program for possessing a firearm while being an unlawful user or addicted to a controlled substance.  

In response to the deal, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) told reporters it perpetuates the perception of a “two-tier system” of justice in America. Other top Republicans, including Comer and Senate Republican Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) made similar remarks. 

“If you are the president’s leading political opponent, the DOJ tries to literally put you in jail and give you prison time. But if you are the president’s son, you get a sweetheart deal,” McCarthy said, referring to former President Trump, who faces a slew of legal woes. 

Trump called the younger Biden’s plea deal a “mere traffic ticket.” The former president faces New York charges alleging he falsified business records and federal charges alleging he violated the Espionage Act and obstructed justice in taking classified records from his presidency and not returning them. 

When FBI searched Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home in Florida last year in relation to the classified documents probe, Republicans threatened to “defund” the agency, accusing it of unfairly targeting the former president for political reasons.  

Those threats reemerged Wednesday at a GOP-led House Judiciary hearing, during which Wray faced relentless questioning from Republican members over his leadership of the investigative agency.

Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) accused the FBI of acting as a “political tool of the Biden administration,” pointing to the Mar-a-Lago search as proof of “the homes of conservative political opponents being raided.” 

Leaders of the House Judiciary, Oversight and Accountability, and Ways and Means committees have opened a joint investigation into the federal Hunter Biden case.

The Ways and Means Committee, led by Rep. Jason Smith (R-Mo.), released a transcript from an IRS whistleblower alleging the DOJ slow-walked its investigation into the younger Biden days after his DOJ deal was made public.  

Biden attorney Abbe Lowell wrote in a 10-page letter to Smith that ever since the GOP assumed a majority in the House in 2023, its leaders and committees ignored protocol to feed their “obsession with attacking the Biden family.” 

Jordan’s domain included Wray's testimony before the Judiciary Committee. The Ohio Republican has also asked the Justice Department to turn over information about special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into Trump. 

And Comer’s probe is tied to Luft, the indicted think tank leader. A dual citizen of the U.S. and Israel, Luft was arrested Feb. 17 in Cyprus but fled after being released on bail and remains a fugitive, the Justice Department said in a press release. His indictment was unsealed Monday.  

“The timing is always coincidental, according to the Democrats at the Department of Justice,” Comer told Fox News host Laura Ingraham Monday night.  

In light of the charges against Luft, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee asked the GOP to turn over information detailing its interactions with him. Luft has played a key role in Comer’s probe of Biden family business dealings and whether Biden and his son, Hunter, accepted a bribe.  

“We are concerned that an official committee of the House of Representatives has been manipulated by an apparent con man who, while a fugitive from justice, attempted to fortify his defense by laundering unfounded and potentially false allegations through Congress,” ranking member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) wrote in a letter alongside Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) 

Those allegations — and Luft’s indictment — were notably not mentioned during the House Judiciary Committee hearing, where lawmakers asked questions of the FBI director for nearly six hours.  

House Republicans have given no indication they’re weakening their focus on the Justice Department’s operations, calling on Democrats Wednesday to join in the fight. 

“I hope (Democrats) will work with us in the appropriations process to stop the weaponization of the government against the American people and in this double standard that exists now in our justice system,” Jordan said. 

While Rhodes received a lengthy sentence for seditious conspiracy and other convictions, the 18-year term was below the recommended range under federal guidelines and less than the 25 years the Justice Department had asked for in one of the most serious cases to go to trial in the Capitol attack.

Defendants routinely appeal their convictions and sentences, but it is more unusual for prosecutors to challenge the length of a prison term imposed by judges who have wide discretion when handing down punishments. Rhodes' was the longest sentence that has been handed down so far in more than 1,000 Capitol riot cases.

Rhodes' attorney, James Lee Bright, called the government's decision to appeal “surprising." At his sentencing hearing in May, a defiant Rhodes claimed to be a “political prisoner,” criticized prosecutors and the Biden administration and tried to play down his actions on Jan. 6.

The Justice Department filed notices in court that they they intend to appeal the sentences of other Oath Keepers, including Florida chapter leader Kelly Meggs, who was convicted of seditious conspiracy alongside Rhodes and sentenced to 12 years behind bars.

Three other Oath Keepers tried with Rhodes were acquitted of the sedition charge but convicted of other felonies. Four Oath Keepers were convicted of the seditious conspiracy charge at a second trial in January.

An attorney for Meggs declined to comment Wednesday.

During a series of sentencings for the Oath Keepers in May, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta agreed with prosecutors that Rhodes and the other Oath Keepers’ actions could be punished as “terrorism,” increasing the recommended sentence under federal guidelines. But the judge ultimately went below — in some cases far below — the sentence prosecutors were seeking for each defendant.

The Justice Department's announcement came after it suffered a rare setback in a related case involving Oath Keepers associates. A former “Jesus Christ Superstar” actor was acquitted Wednesday of conspiring with members of the far-right extremist group to obstruct Congress in the Capitol attack.

James Beeks — a Florida resident who was playing Judas in the traveling production of the musical when he was arrested — was cleared of conspiracy to obstruct Congress' certification of the 2020 election and civil disorder after a trial in federal court. Mehta convicted Beeks' co-defendant, Ohio resident Donovan Crowl, of the same charges after hearing evidence without a jury.

Beeks is only the second Jan. 6 defendant to be acquitted of all charges after a trial. Beeks represented himself at trial, though he was assisted by a lawyer who served as stand-by counsel and delivered his closing argument. Approximately 100 others have been found guilty of at least one count after a trial decided by a jury or judge, and more than 600 have pleaded guilty.

The trial for Beeks and Crowl was what's called a “stipulated bench trial,” which means the judge decided the case based on a set of facts that both sides agreed to before the trial started. Such trials allow defendants to admit to certain facts while maintaining a right to appeal any conviction.

Prosecutors had previously charged Beeks with other lower-level offenses — including illegally entering the Capitol — but agreed to only go to trial on the two felony offenses and dismiss the remaining counts.

Prosecutors say Beeks and Crowl were part of a group of Oath Keepers wearing paramilitary gear who stormed the Capitol alongside the mob of Trump supporters. Beeks joined the Oath Keepers in December 2020 and drove to Washington from Florida before meeting up with a group of extremists ahead of the riot, prosecutors said.

Beeks, who was also a Michael Jackson impersonator, wore a jacket from Jackson’s “Bad” World Tour along with a helmet and was carrying a homemade shield during the riot, according to court papers.

Mehta said Beeks — unlike other Oath Keepers charged with riot-related crimes — didn’t post any messages on social media or exchange text messages with other extremists that could establish what his “state of mind” was leading up to the Capitol riot. The judge also cited a lack of evidence about what Beeks did inside the Capitol that could support a conviction for interfering with police.

“His actions must rise and fall on their own," the judge said.

Beeks was arrested in November 2021 while he was traveling in Milwaukee with the “Jesus Christ Superstar" tour. He told reporters after the verdict that it “feels like a huge burden” has been lifted of his shoulders.

Beeks acknowledged that he joined the Oath Keepers through the group’s website but said he never met or communicated with any of his alleged co-conspirators before Jan. 6. He said never knew of any plan to attack the Capitol and mistakenly believed the Oath Keepers “were the good guys.”

“I met up with the wrong people,” he said. “I lost my whole career. (Jan. 6) is like a scarlet letter.”

Crowl was part of the Ohio State Regular Militia led by Jessica Watkins, who was acquitted of seditious conspiracy but convicted of other serious charges in the trial alongside Rhodes. In December 2022, Crowl sent a message in a group chat that included Watkins that said “law abiding citizens are fix'n to ‘act out of character’... Time for talk'in is over.”

Crowl’s attorney, Carmen Hernandez, said her client was exercising his First Amendment free speech rights on Jan. 6 without any intent to obstruct Congress from certifying President Joe Biden's 2020 electoral victory.

“His conduct was no different than that of many Americans who’ve gone to Congress to peacefully protest and have not been charged with felonies,” Hernandez wrote in an email.

___

Richer reported from Boston.

FBI Director Christopher Wray on Wednesday navigated hours of questions about the credibility of the bureau, as House Judiciary Committee Republicans increasingly seek to pin the agency as politically biased.

Wray, a Trump appointee, was at times aided by Democrats who sought to defend the bureau’s actions by highlighting wrongdoing by Trump or his associates.

Still, the blurry fault lines facing the agency were on display as some Democrats attacked the FBI’s handling of the Trump investigation and its spy tools, while Wray got a rare thank you from a Republican for his work helming the agency.

Republicans remained largely focused on a series of short-lived memos or prosecutions of conservatives they argue shows the agency unfairly targets the right.  

FBI Director Christopher Wray testifies before a House Committee on the Judiciary oversight hearing, Wednesday, July 12, 2023, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

Wray’s responses were some of the most pointed for the mild-mannered director, who has faced a brewing grudge match with the GOP all but guaranteed to take center stage following the Republican takeover of Congress.

In his opening remarks, he nodded to the work in a small bureau in Ohio – one that happens to rest in the district of Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), one of the bureau’s fiercest critics. 

“The work the men and women of the FBI do to protect the American people goes way beyond the one or two investigations that seem to capture all the headlines,” Wray said.

More from The Hill

• Trump puts Iowa victory at risk with attack on GOP governor
• Democratic jitters grow over Cornel West’s third-party bid
• White House warns reporter he may lose press pass over continued interruptions
• Liberal justices caught up in Supreme Court ethics scrutiny

And in a heated exchange with Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-Wyo.), Wray pointed to his longstanding registration as a Republican.

“The idea that I'm biased against conservatives seems somewhat insane to me, given my own personal background,” he said.

GOP lawmakers argued that Americans no longer trust the nation’s premier law enforcement agency.

“We're seeing the polling numbers that the FBI is tanking, and it's under your watch,” Rep. Barry Moore (R-Ala.) said. 

“The American people have lost faith in the FBI. All of our constituents are demanding that we get this situation under control, and we have to do that. That's our responsibility. This is not a political party issue, sir. This is about whether the very system of justice in our country can be trusted anymore. Without that no republic can survive,” Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) said.

“They've seen evidence that it's being used as a political tool by the Biden administration.”

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, chair of the House Committee on the Judiciary, speaks during an oversight hearing with FBI Director Christopher Wray, Wednesday, July 12, 2023, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

Democrats largely defended the FBI. New York Rep. Jerold Nadler, the top Democrat on the committee, countered GOP arguments of political bias by offering a timeline of the Mar-a-Lago case he said showed “all the opportunities Trump had to produce these documents.”

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) ran through a list of Trump associates — six in total — who have since pleaded guilty or been convicted in court of various crimes, all while the Department of Justice was under Republican leadership.

“What these facts show is we don't have a two tiered system of justice. We have one Department of Justice that goes after criminals regardless of party ideology,” Lieu said. 

“It is not the fault of the FBI that Donald Trump surrounded himself with criminals. Donald Trump brought that upon himself. Thank you to the FBI for exposing the cesspool of corruption of these Trump associates.”

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) addresses reporters during a press conference on Tuesday, April 18, 2023 following a Democratic Caucus meeting. (Greg Nash)

Not all the critiques or accolades were split along party lines. 

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) criticized the FBI for not being more aggressive, arguing “the FBI delayed and showed unprecedented caution before investigating the ex-president even when there was a potential threat to national security.”

And Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) thanked Wray for his work in “protecting law-abiding Americans from the evil that exists all around us.”

“You're still a registered Republican, and I hope you don't change your party affiliation after this hearing is over,” Buck said.

A pushback on GOP pet issues

FBI Director Christopher Wray departs during a break in a House Committee on the Judiciary oversight hearing, Wednesday, July 12, 2023, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

Republicans remained focused on two memos.

One directed the FBI to coordinate with local law enforcement as school boards and educators faced a rising number of violent threats.

Wray denied that the FBI took any improper actions against parents as a result of the memo, countering GOP claims the agency sought to label parents as domestic terrorists. He said a “threat tag” was created to track reports of threats, harassment and violence against school officials, but school board meetings weren’t linked to the reports received.

“We opened 25 assessments into reports that were tagged, but none of those involved incidents at school board meetings and, to my knowledge, FBI has not opened investigations on any parent for exercising speech at school,” Wray said.

Several lawmakers focused on a memo written by an agent in the Richmond, Va., field office that detailed growing overlap between white nationalist groups and “Radical-Traditionalist Catholics,” which it identifies as a small minority within the church. Wray swiftly ordered the memo removed, saying it violated the agency’s policies on conducting investigations based on religious affiliation.

“That product is not something that I will defend or excuse. It's something that I thought was appalling and removed it,” he said, calling it “a single product by a single field office.”

Wray was also asked to respond to calls from some within the GOP to defund his agency; Jordan has asked appropriators to withhold from the FBI any funding “not absolutely essential for the agency to execute its mission.”

“It would be disastrous for 38,000 hardworking career law enforcement personnel in their families, but more importantly, in many ways, it would hurt our great state, local law enforcement partners who depend on us every day to work with them on a whole slew of challenging threats,” Wray said.

“It would hurt the American people, neighborhoods and communities all across this country, the people we're protecting from cartels, violent criminals, gang members, predators, foreign and domestic terrorists, cyberattacks, I could go on and on. And the people that would help would be those same violent gangs and cartels, foreign terrorists, Chinese spies, hackers and so forth.”

The FBI director also made efforts to debunk claims the FBI played a role in instigating the Capitol attack as he faced numerous questions about Jan. 6, saying that the agency did not know of plans to breach the Capitol, though they were aware of potential violence.

"This notion that somehow the violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6 was part of some operation orchestrated by FBI sources and agents is ludicrous and is a disservice to our brave, hardworking, dedicated men and women,” Wray said.

Rep. Mary Jay Scanlon (D-Pa.) blamed the GOP for contributing to distrust of the FBI by “embrac[ing] dangerous conspiracy theories that undermine our federal law enforcement.”

“I find it disingenuous for members of Congress to harangue the head of the FBI about people losing faith in the FBI when those same members have been trumpeting lies and conspiracy theories about the agency for months,” she said.

Social media and FISA

Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) leaves a closed-door House Republican Conference meeting on Tuesday, June 6, 2023. (Greg Nash)

Republicans – and at times Democrats – also zeroed in on civil rights issues, focusing both on a court order limiting the Biden administration’s communication with social media companies over free speech concerns, as well as FBI spy tools.

After a GOP-led challenge to the administration’s efforts to curb disinformation, a federal judge ruled that several agencies and officials — including the FBI — cannot contact social media companies relating to the “removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech posted on social-media platforms.” DOJ has since appealed the order.

“It explains in detail that the FBI has been directly involved in what the court says is ‘arguably the most massive attack against free speech in United States history,’” Rep. Johnson, of Louisiana, said during the hearing.

Wray pushed back against lawmakers’ assertions, claiming the agency does not ask social media companies to remove content. Instead, he said it alerts the platforms when other intelligence agencies provide them with information about a foreign intelligence service operating accounts on the platform.

“We will call social media companies' attention to that, but at the end of the day, we're very clear that it's up to the social media companies to decide whether to do something,” Wray said.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle also asked about Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) authorities.  

The skepticism is a significant issue for the FBI. It, along with other national security agencies, is pushing for renewal of Section 702 of the law, which expires in December and allows for warrantless surveillance of foreign nationals located abroad.

But Americans’ communications with those individuals can be swept up in those searches.

Rep. Ben Cline (R-Va.) said the tool gives the FBI too broad of access to Americans’ data.

“It looks like a framework that enables the FBI to spy on countless Americans,” he said.

And Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) cited bipartisan concerns about reauthorization.

“Unless we really understand what measures the FBI is taking to ensure that people's privacy is protected, I think it's going to be a very difficult reauthorization process.” she said.

Wray said the bureau has had issues with 702 but has deployed new guardrails.

“Let's be clear, we have had problems,” he said, noting they have rolled out numerous reforms since problems have been identified.

“And so we're going to keep working at this. That is not a one and done from my perspective.”