Skip to Content Facebook Feature Image

In a revived case, a former congressman is charged with lying about an illegal campaign contribution

News

In a revived case, a former congressman is charged with lying about an illegal campaign contribution
News

News

In a revived case, a former congressman is charged with lying about an illegal campaign contribution

2024-05-10 01:28 Last Updated At:01:30

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former Rep. Jeff Fortenberry has been charged with lying to federal authorities about a foreign billionaire's illegal $30,000 contribution to his campaign, reviving a case that was derailed by an appellate court.

A federal jury convicted the Nebraska Republican in 2022, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Fortenberry's conviction last year, ruling that the case should not have been tried in Los Angeles.

A grand jury in the nation's capital indicted Fortenberry on Wednesday on two counts: falsifying and concealing material facts and making false statements.

Chad Kolton, a spokesman for Fortenberry, said the case should not have been brought in the first place and should not be pursued again after the 9th Circuit ruled in his favor.

“This case has defined overzealous prosecution from the earliest days of the investigation, and retrying it in D.C. just highlights the prosecutors’ vindictive obsession with destroying a good man’s life,” Kolton said in a statement.

After his conviction, Fortenberry announced his resignation from the office that he had held since 2005. He had been under pressure from congressional leaders and Nebraska’s Republican governor.

The case stems an FBI investigation of illegal campaign contributions made by Gilbert Chagoury, a Nigerian billionaire who lived in Paris at the time. Chagoury made the $30,000 contribution to Fortenberry through middlemen at a 2016 fundraiser in Los Angeles, his indictment says.

Chagoury later agreed to pay a $1.8 million fine. Foreign nationals are prohibited from directly contributing money to candidates for federal offices in the United States.

Fortenberry was charged after denying to the FBI that he was aware he had received illicit funds from Chagoury. A person who cooperated with the FBI investigation repeatedly told Fortenberry about the illegal contributions, his indictment says.

The 9th Circuit ruled that Fortenberry was improperly tried in Los Angeles because he was charged in connection with statements that he made to federal agents at his home in Lincoln, Nebraska, and at his lawyer’s office in Washington.

Fortenberry's trial was the first for a sitting member of Congress since Rep. Jim Traficant, D-Ohio, who was convicted of bribery and other felony charges in 2002.

FILE - U.S. Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, R-Neb., arrives at the federal courthouse in Los Angeles, March 16, 2022. Former Rep. Fortenberry has been charged with lying to federal authorities about a foreign billionaire's illegal $30,000 contribution to his campaign. The Nebraska Republican's indictment on Wednesday, May 8, 2024, revives a case that was derailed by an appellate court. The grand jury in Washington, D.C. indicted Fortenberry on two counts: falsifying and concealing material facts and making false statements. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)

FILE - U.S. Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, R-Neb., arrives at the federal courthouse in Los Angeles, March 16, 2022. Former Rep. Fortenberry has been charged with lying to federal authorities about a foreign billionaire's illegal $30,000 contribution to his campaign. The Nebraska Republican's indictment on Wednesday, May 8, 2024, revives a case that was derailed by an appellate court. The grand jury in Washington, D.C. indicted Fortenberry on two counts: falsifying and concealing material facts and making false statements. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)

Next Article

London court to decide whether WikiLeaks founder Assange is extradited to the US

2024-05-20 16:17 Last Updated At:16:34

LONDON (AP) — WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange faced a hearing Monday in the High Court in London that could end with him being sent to the U.S. to face espionage charges, or could provide him another chance to appeal his extradition.

The outcome will depend on how much weight judges give to assurances U.S. officials have provided that Assange’s rights won’t be trampled if he goes on trial.

In March, two judges rejected the bulk of Assange's arguments but said he could take his case to the Court of Appeal unless the U.S. guaranteed he would not face the death penalty if extradited and would have the same free speech protections as a U.S. citizen.

The court said that if Assange, who is an Australian citizen, couldn’t rely on the First Amendment then it was arguable his extradition would be incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, which also provides free speech and media protections.

The U.S. has provided those reassurances, though Assange's legal team and supporters argue they are not good enough to rely on to send him to the U.S. federal court system.

The U.S. said Assange could seek to rely on the rights and protections of the First Amendment but that a decision on that would ultimately be up to a judge. In the past, the U.S. said it would argue at trial that Assange is not entitled to the constitutional protection because he is not a U.S. citizen.

“The U.S. has limited itself to blatant weasel words claiming that Julian can ‘seek to raise’ the First Amendment if extradited,” his wife, Stella Assange, said. "The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family’s extreme distress about his future — his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in U.S. prison for publishing award-winning journalism.”

Assange, 52, has been indicted on 17 espionage charges and one charge of computer misuse over his website’s publication of a trove of classified U.S. documents almost 15 years ago. American prosecutors allege that Assange encouraged and helped U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to steal diplomatic cables and military files that WikiLeaks published.

Commuters emerging from a Tube stop near the courthouse couldn’t miss a large sign bearing Assange’s photo and the words, “Publishing is not a crime. War crimes are.” Scores of supporters gathered outside the neo-Gothic Royal Courts of Justice chanting “Free Julian Assange” and “Press freedom, Assange freedom.”

Some held a large white banner aimed at President Joe Biden, exhorting: “Let him go Joe.”

Assange's lawyers say he could face up to 175 years in prison if convicted, though American authorities have said any sentence would likely be much shorter.

Assange’s family and supporters say his physical and mental health have suffered during more than a decade of legal battles, which includes seven years spent inside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London from 2012 until 2019. He has spent the past five years in a British high-security prison.

Assange’s lawyers argued in February that he was a journalist who exposed U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sending him to the U.S., they said, would expose him to a politically motivated prosecution and risk a “flagrant denial of justice.”

The U.S. government says Assange's actions went way beyond those of a journalist gathering information, amounting to an attempt to solicit, steal and indiscriminately publish classified government documents.

If Assange prevails Monday, it would set the stage for an appeal process likely to extend what has already been a long legal saga.

If the court accepts the word of the U.S., it would mark the end of Assange’s legal challenges in the U.K., though it’s unclear what would immediately follow.

His legal team is prepared to ask the European Court of Human Rights to intervene. But his supporters fear Assange could be transferred before the court in Strasbourg, France, could halt his removal.

Judges Victoria Sharp and Jeremy Johnson may also postpone issuing a decision.

If Assange loses in court, he still may have another shot at freedom.

Biden said last month that he was considering a request from Australia to drop the case and let Assange return to his home country.

Officials provided no other details but Stella Assange said it was “a good sign” and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the comment was encouraging.

FILE - WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange being taken from court, where he appeared on charges of jumping British bail seven years ago, in London, Wednesday May 1, 2019. Assange faces what could be his final court hearing in England over whether he should be extradited to the United States to face spying charges. (AP Photo/Matt Dunham, File)

FILE - WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange being taken from court, where he appeared on charges of jumping British bail seven years ago, in London, Wednesday May 1, 2019. Assange faces what could be his final court hearing in England over whether he should be extradited to the United States to face spying charges. (AP Photo/Matt Dunham, File)

London court to decide whether WikiLeaks founder Assange is extradited to the US

London court to decide whether WikiLeaks founder Assange is extradited to the US

London court to decide whether WikiLeaks founder Assange is extradited to the US

London court to decide whether WikiLeaks founder Assange is extradited to the US

Recommended Articles