A police car is seen outside former U.S. President Donald Trump’s residence in Mar-A-Lago, Palm Beach, Florida on Aug. 8, 2022. (GIORGIO VIERA/AFP via Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — Donald Trump privately expressed concerns that turning over potentially classified documents in his possession after a May 2022 subpoena could result in criminal charges while repeatedly engaging in what prosecutors have described as an effort to enlist his lawyers to lie and destroy documents for his benefit, according to transcripts of audio notes reviewed by ABC News.
Prosecutors allege that rather than comply with the subpoena, Trump opted to hide dozens of classified documents from his own lawyers, and federal agents eventually seized 102 classified documents — including 17 top secret documents — after they executed a search warrant at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in August 2022.
The notes, which ABC News first reported on last year, are at the center of an ongoing legal battle in the former president’s federal classified documents case, where prosecutors have used the detailed notes about Trump’s behavior and statements as key evidence to demonstrate that the former president attempted to obstruct justice by hiding documents from investigators.
Aileen Cannon, the judge overseeing the case, is hearing arguments Tuesday on Trump’s effort to limit prosecutors’ use of the notes and to have the entire case dismissed based on the role of the notes in the government’s case.
Two months before agents searched Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s former lead attorney Evan Corcoran’s notes — which prosecutors have used to bolster their case against the former president — describe that Trump repeatedly blamed his legal troubles on his “political enemies,” was reluctant to allow the review of boxes that prosecutors say contained dozens of classified documents, and engaged in conduct that prosecutors believe was an effort to “corrupt” his attorneys by concealing Trump’s alleged retention of classified documents.
“He raised a question as to, if we gave them additional documents now, would they, would they, the Department of Justice, come back and say well, why did you withhold them and try to use that as a basis for criminal liability or to make him look bad in the press,” according to Corcoran’s notes about what Trump asked his attorneys in May 2022 after prosecutors subpoenaed the former president to turn over any classified documents in his possession, records reviewed by ABC News say.
“Well look isn’t it better if there are no documents?” Trump also asked his attorneys after raising concerns about prosecutors “opening up new fronts against him,” according to Corcoran’s notes.
A spokesperson for the special counsel’s office declined to comment to ABC News. A spokesperson with the Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
Prosecutors alleged in a recent court filing that Trump attempted to “enlist [Corcoran] in the corrupt endeavor” by suggesting he falsely tell the FBI that Trump did not have classified documents or that he hide or destroy them rather than turn them over.
“Trump tried to enlist his attorney in his criminal endeavor, tested his attorney’s receptiveness, and then manipulated his attorney to achieve his criminal ends when the attorney did not accept his overtures,” prosecutors wrote in a recent filing.
Trump pleaded not guilty last year to a 40-count indictment related to his handling of classified materials, after prosecutors said he repeatedly refused to return hundreds of documents containing classified information and took steps to thwart the government’s efforts to get the documents back. Trump has denied all charges and denounced the probe as a political witch hunt.
Defense lawyers have repeatedly argued that the notes from Trump’s lawyer are protected by attorney-client privilege, but a federal judge in Washington, D.C. last year determined that notes could be used as evidence after prosecutors demonstrated that Trump deliberately misled his attorneys in furtherance of a crime, piercing attorney-client privileges invoked by two of his lawyers.
‘I don’t want anybody looking through my boxes’
Corcoran made multiple audio recordings to memorialize his interactions with the former president, including meeting with Trump on May 23, 2022 to discuss his response to a subpoena for any classified documents stored at Mar-a-Lago.
During an approximately one-and-a-half-hour meeting with both Trump and attorney Jennifer Little, Trump brought a box to their first meeting to demonstrate its contents, showing the attorneys his newspaper clippings, Post-it notes, and photos, and other materials.
“I don’t want anybody looking, I don’t want anybody looking through my boxes, I really don’t, I don’t want you looking through my boxes,” Trump said, according to a portion of the notes included in the indictment against Trump. “Look I just don’t want anybody going through these things.”
Corcoran wrote that he attempted to focus on Trump’s response to the subpoena, though the former president frequently returned to the topic that he was being targeted by political opponents.
“He repeated many times that he felt he was really being targeted,” Corcoran noted.
“Look, you know, I have ten different actions against me. They are trying to get me. They’re going after me. These people are ruthless,” Trump remarked while boasting about his own administration. “I’ve done all these great things for the country. I improved the economy, I lowered taxes, I did this, I did that, built the wall.”
Corcoran recalled that he tried to steer the conversation back to the boxes and warned the former president about the legal consequences of not complying with the subpoena.
“Well what if we, what happens if we just don’t respond at all or don’t play ball with them?” Trump asked, according to a portion of the notes included in the indictment.
“Well, there’s a prospect that they could go to a judge and get a search warrant and that they could arrive here and get a search warrant,” Corcoran responded.
According to Corcoran, Trump repeatedly asked during their meeting if it would be “better if we just told them we don’t have anything here.”
During an interview with Smith’s team, Little largely corroborated Corcoran’s recollection of the meeting, telling investigators that she “very clearly” warned Trump about the seriousness of the subpoena and told him “it’s going to be a crime” if he failed to comply but swore otherwise.
After speaking about the subpoena for more than an hour, Trump concluded the meeting to attend a series of interviews before reconvening with the attorneys in the afternoon. According to Corcoran, Trump suggested that the attorneys — who he noted were both single — “take a walk along the beach” and that “maybe … sparks will fly.”
But while waiting poolside at Mar-a-Lago for their next meeting with Trump, Corcoran said Little warned — based on her conversation with two other Trump attorneys — that if they pushed Trump to comply with the subpoena, “he’s just going to go ballistic,” Corcoran noted.
Little added that “there’s no way he’s going to agree to anything and that, that he was going to deny that there were any more boxes at all,” according to Corcoran’s notes.
‘Isn’t it better if there are no documents?’
Later in the afternoon on May 23, 2022, Corcoran and Little met with Trump in a small library at Mar-a-Lago, ditching their phones outside the room at the direction of the former president, according to Corcoran.
Sitting feet from Trump across a small table, Corcoran said Trump asked about the legal consequences for complying with the subpoena while cautioning that prosecutors “really wanted to get him anyway they could.”
Trump blamed the investigation on his “political enemies” who wanted to “weaken him and get him not to run” for president. Trump said he was “just trying to understand what the best way” was to respond to the investigations and claimed that prosecutors would “keep opening up new fronts against him.”
According to Corcoran’s notes, Trump expressed concerns that returning “additional documents” following the subpoena could become the “basis for criminal liability.
“He asked again, he said — Well look, isn’t it better if there are no documents?” Corcoran noted.
Corcoran added that during their meeting, Trump repeatedly recounted that a lawyer for Hillary Clinton “deleted all of her emails” so “she didn’t get into any trouble.”
“He was great, he did a great job,” Trump told the lawyers, according to the notes.
Prosecutors allege that during the meetings with his attorneys, Trump attempted to test Corcoran’s receptiveness to evading the subpoena, though the meeting concluded with the two setting a plan for Corcoran to return to Mar-a-Lago to search through the boxes for documents responsive to the subpoena.
“Look, so you’re — so if I’m hearing you right, what you want is to come back and have me or somebody go through and find some, get any classified documents if there are any. That, that, sounds like that’s the plan you want, is it?” Trump said, repeating the plan multiple times, according to the notes.
“We will figure this out. Go through the documents, if we’ve got any classified stuff, get it to DOJ,” Trump said, according to the notes.
Prosecutors allege that Corcoran’s rebuff to Trump’s suggestions resulted in the former president adopting a different plan — deceiving his attorney by having his “trusted body man” and co-defendant Walt Nauta move the boxes from the storage room in Mar-a-Lago to prevent Corcoran from conducting a complete search.
In the days between the May 23 meeting with Trump and Corcoran’s June 2 review of the boxes at Mar-a-Lago, prosecutors allege that Trump coordinated for Nauta to remove 64 boxes out of the storage room to Trump’s personal residence, where Trump planned to “pick from them,” according to text messages between Nauta and a Trump family member. By the time Corcoran returned to Mar-a-Lago to review the boxes, only about 30 of the 64 boxes moved by Nauta were returned for the search.
‘Don’t call me with any bad news’
Corcoran described the process of searching through the boxes in the cramped storage room during a humid June day as a “laborious” and unpleasant task, though Corcoran noted that contents of the boxes — “thousands” of Post-it notes, magazines, emails with senators and heads of state, books, notebooks, and briefing materials — offered a unique window into Trump’s state of mind as president.
“If Robert Caro or some other presidential biographer had been in my position, they would have been absolutely in heaven,” Corcoran said in his notes.
Corcoran also noted that the boxes included an odd variety of contents, including presidential memorabilia, Make America Great Again hats, gifts from foreign leaders, clothing — including underwear and socks — and toiletries like mouthwash, toothpaste, and razors. Some of the boxes were sealed with white duct tape and many included a typed note about the destination for the box, such as “W-H to M-A-L.”
According to Corcoran, Trump’s description of the boxes’ contents suggested they became “catch-all depositories for what he’d gone through day after day” when he reviewed materials in the White House residence.
“I had to read these things at night so that I could be ready, that’s the only time I could read something, and I had to read them so I could be ready for calls or meetings the next day,” Trump told Corcoran about how briefing memos, notes, and emails ended up in the boxes. “I just had boxes in the, in my bedroom, you know, a lot of boxes and I’d just, you know, read these things and then throw them in there.”
While Trump told Corcoran he instructed others to declassify any of the documents that entered his residence, the former president appeared to acknowledge in his conversation with Corcoran that simply bringing the documents into his residence did not result in declassifying the documents.
“I told people to declassify — anything that comes into the residence should be declassified. And I told people. I told lawyers that. I don’t know what was done, I don’t know how they were marked. But that was my position,” Trump said, according to Corcoran.
Corcoran’s search of the room ultimately resulted in a half-inch stack of classified documents, which he sealed in a redweld envelope using duct tape.
“Did you find anything?” Trump asked Corcoran after he concluded his search. “Is it bad? Good?”
According to Corcoran, Trump asked Corcoran about how he planned to store the documents, particularly “anything really bad in there.”
“He made a funny motion as though — well okay why don’t you take them with you to your hotel room and if there’s anything really bad in there, like, you know, pluck it out. And that was the motion that he made. He didn’t say that,” Corcoran noted.
The following day, Corcoran coordinated for Jay Bratt, then the deputy chief of the Department of Justice’s National Security Division, and FBI agents to visit Mar-a-Lago to take custody of the responsive documents.
Corcoran received a panicked call from Trump about the visit from federal officials on the morning of their visit, according to Corcoran’s notes.
“Oh that’s very bad. What, you know, what do they want? What are they trying to, why are they trying to get something on me again?” Trump said, according to the notes.
While Corcoran emphasized that the meeting was a routine step that he coordinated, Trump still expressed concern that “this is very bad” and was particularly interested in Bratt’s attendance at the meeting.
“Why is the top guy coming? It’s very unusual, very unusual, you know?” Trump remarked, though Corcoran noted that Trump’s tone about the meeting appeared to change over the day.
According to Corcoran, Trump personally encouraged showing Bratt and the FBI agents the storage room where the documents were stored, over the advice of Corcoran. According to prosecutors, despite Corcoran’s search resulting in return of 38 documents bearing classification markings, Trump still possessed 102 classified documents in Mar-a-Lago — in part due to his effort to hide documents from Corcoran when he attempted to comply with the subpoena — which would be discovered when federal agents returned to Mar-a-Lago two months later with a search warrant.
“I’ve got nothing to hide. I’ve got nothing to hide. If they ask. I want you to show them,” Trump told Corcoran in June.
Later that day, Trump walked into the meeting where Corcoran handed over the classified documents to federal officials, personally shaking the hands of Bratt and the FBI agents.
“I’m glad you’re here. I — I appreciate what you’re doing. If you need anything at all just ask Evan,” Trump said, according to Corcoran.
After Trump left the meeting, Corcoran escorted the federal officials to the storage room where Trump’s boxes were stored, allowing them to look at the room but not touch any of the boxes.
Later that day, Corcoran noted that he received a phone call from Trump, who was onboard his plane en route to New Jersey for the summer.
“Well we’re taking off. But look, Evan, don’t call me with any bad news, okay? Don’t call me with any bad news,” Trump said, according to the notes.
(NEW YORK) — A 32-year-old woman has been arrested after police found a dead woman in the backseat of her car that authorities say was not a result of the single-vehicle accident she had been involved in.
The Olmstead County Sheriff’s Office in Minnesota responded to a single-vehicle accident at approximately 7 a.m. on Saturday morning on Interstate 90 going eastbound near the Highway 42 Exit in Olmstead county when police encountered Margot Lewis, a 32-year-old woman being tended to by a somebody passing by, according to a statement from the Olmstead County Sheriff’s Office released on Monday.
“The driver of the vehicle, identified as Margot Lewis, a 32-year-old female of an unknown residence, was out of the vehicle and being tended to by a passerby. In checking to see if anyone else was in the vehicle, a deceased individual, a 35-year-old female, was located in the back seat,” police said. “The condition of the deceased was suspicious, and it was immediately apparent that the death was not a result of the motor vehicle accident.”
Police were able to eventually identify the victim but said that the name of the deceased is currently being withheld until her next of kin has been notified.
“Ms. Lewis was transported by Mayo Clinic Ambulance Service (MCAS) to the hospital, where she was medically cleared. Ms. Lewis was then transported to the Adult Detention Center (ADC) and placed under arrest for Interference with a Dead Body,” authorities said.
Lewis is now expected to make an appearance in court on this case on sometime on Tuesday, according to the Olmstead County Sheriff’s Office.
Minnesota State Patrol, Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA), Eyota Fire Department, and Mayo Clinic Ambulance Service assisted with the initial call and authorities from the Olmsted County Sheriff’s Office said that they extend “sincere condolences to the friends and family of the deceased.”
The investigation into the incident is currently ongoing and no further information will be released at this time.
(NEW YORK) — A 26-year-old woman has drowned after being swept over a waterfall and getting trapped under the gushing water for several minutes, officials said.
The incident occurred on Sunday afternoon when authorities began receiving received multiple 911 calls routed through Glacier County dispatch at approximately 5:20 p.m. saying that an unnamed 26-year-old woman from Pennsylvania was swept over St. Mary’s Falls on the east side of Glacier National Park in Montana and fell approximately 35 feet into the water below, according to a statement from the National Park Service (NPS) released on Monday.
“According to witnesses, the woman was washed over the falls and trapped under water for several minutes,” NPS said. “Bystanders pulled her from the water below the falls and administered CPR until emergency responders arrived. Park rangers and Babb ambulance personnel took over CPR upon arrival.”
Park rangers were on the scene at 5:45 p.m., approximately 25 minutes after the incident was first reported, NPS said.
An ALERT helicopter landed nearby shortly after for further support at about 6:20 pm and assisted with resuscitation efforts but the victim never regained consciousness.
“Resuscitation efforts were terminated at about 7 pm and ALERT personnel pronounced the woman deceased,” NPS said. “ALERT flew the body to the 1913 Ranger Station near St. Mary, MT where they were met by the Glacier County coroner at about 7:30 pm. The coroner is transporting the body to the medical examiner in Missoula, MT for an autopsy.”
The death is currently under investigation while additional details are still being gathered and the victim’s next of kin is currently being notified in advance of releasing the woman’s name.
“Park staff would like to thank Glacier County, ALERT, Babb Ambulance and US Border Patrol for their support, along with numerous bystanders for their immediate assistance,” NPS said. “The park extends their deepest condolences to family and friends of the woman and asks that the public respect their privacy.”
U.S. President Joe Biden speaks during an event in Madison, Wisconsin, on Monday, April 8, 2024. (Daniel Steinle/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — In two court rulings Monday night, federal judges in Kansas and Missouri halted key aspects of President Joe Biden’s sweeping student loan repayment program.
The SAVE plan, a student loan repayment plan that ties how much someone pays each month to what their income is, has been in place for almost a year and is the jewel of Biden’s surviving student loan efforts — one that he has touted heavily in his re-election campaign.
The rulings Monday will stop the Biden administration from any further implementation of the program — in which eight million are enrolled — but allow people who are enrolled to keep using SAVE as is until the cases are fully litigated.
That means phase two of SAVE, which would’ve reduced monthly payments from 10% of a borrower’s discretionary income down to 5%, is on pause, as is any further cancellation of debt for people who took out smaller initial loan payments and have been paying for 10-plus years.
SAVE is similar to other income-driven repayment plans, which have been used for decades but are more generous because of lower monthly payments — people who make a minimum wage can pay as little as $0 a month — as well as a shorter path to debt relief.
Through SAVE so far, Biden has canceled $5.5 billion in debt for almost 414,000 borrowers.
The lawsuits were brought by Republican states who argued that the Biden administration lacked authority from Congress to enact the SAVE plan — the same states that fought to overturn Biden’s initial debt relief plan last year.
The Department of Education and the White House vowed to fight the rulings.
“We strongly disagree with the Kansas and Missouri District Court rulings, which block components of the SAVE Plan that help student loan borrowers have affordable monthly payments and stay out of default. The Department of Justice will continue to vigorously defend the SAVE Plan,” Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said in a statement late Monday night.
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre called out Republicans for depriving their constituents of lower student debt payments.
“It’s unfortunate that Republican elected officials and their allies have fought tooth and nail to prevent their constituents from accessing lower payments and a faster path to debt forgiveness — and that courts are now rejecting authority that the Department has applied repeatedly for decades to improve income-driven repayment plans,” she said.
(WASHINGTON) — During a two-hour hearing Monday morning, the judge overseeing former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case pressed government attorneys to provide more information about the funding of special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation, at one point remarking that the funding presents a “separation of powers concern.”
The hearing, conducted by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, was a continuation of Friday’s hearing in which defense attorneys sought to have the documents case dismissed on the grounds that Smith was unlawfully appointed as special counsel.
Trump pleaded not guilty last year to 40 criminal counts related to his handling of classified materials after leaving the White House, after prosecutors said he repeatedly refused to return hundreds of documents containing classified information and took steps to thwart the government’s efforts to get the documents back. Trump has denied all charges and denounced the probe as a political witch hunt.
Defense lawyer Emil Bove argued Monday that the funding of the special counsel’s office was unconstitutional because it relies on a “permanent indefinite appropriation” that is outside of the normal budget process.
“Is there any cap to the funding?” Judge Cannon asked.
“No, and I think that is part of the reason … to be very wary of who can access it and why,” Bove said. “There is no check on the scope of what’s going on here.”
As Bove hammered at the constitutionality of the special counsel’s office, Smith himself sat just feet away in the courtroom, occasionally jotting down notes during the argument. Smith did not attend Friday’s hearing.
While Cannon appeared skeptical of Bove’s argument at times — including accusing him of doing a “flip flop” on his position about the independence of the special counsel’s office — she pressed assistant special counsel James Pearce about the office’s budget.
“It is the full commitment of the DOJ that the special counsel has the funding to continue this prosecution,” Pearce said.
Pearce claimed that the change in funding source would result in “no effect or change whatsoever” to the case.
However, Bove argued that the Department of Justice funding the special counsel would result in a “very strong” response,” including congressional action and additional motions from defense counsel.
“It is difficult for me to imagine how that resolves the motion here,” Bove said. “I think there would be a very strong political response.”
Cannon appeared to backtrack on some of her comments during the hearing, remarking, “I am not indicating anything. I am just trying to cover the scope of what has been briefed here.”
Cannon heard arguments Monday afternoon about imposing a gag order on Trump to prohibit statements that endanger law enforcement. Previewing his argument at the end of the morning hearing, Bove described the proposed gag order as “truly extraordinary effort to gag [Trump’s] ability to speak at a debate and the campaign trail.”
(NEW YORK) — A historically expensive and fiercely contentious Democratic primary in New York’s 16th District has incumbent Rep. Jamaal Bowman fighting for his political future and has garnered national attention as a bellwether for the schism fissuring the Democratic Party over the Israel-Hamas war.
Bowman, a staunch progressive with ties to the Democratic Socialists of America, is being challenged by a local official who is seen, by some, as more moderate: Westchester County Executive George Latimer. Latimer has represented parts of Westchester County in some form since 2005.
High-profile Democrats have flooded the zone with endorsements, with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton endorsing Latimer on X two weeks before polls close. Meanwhile, progressives such as Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., are circling their wagons around Bowman, hosting rallies and spearheading get-out-the-vote efforts on his behalf.
Bowman’s progressive politics have been a frequent basis of attack for Latimer, whose core argument is that Bowman is “putting his extreme ideology ahead of progress.” Latimer has also criticized Bowman for voting against President Joe Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
Bowman has reciprocated these attacks, tying Latimer to Republicans and stressing his support from donors to former President Donald Trump, such as Alex Dubitsky, despite Latimer identifying as a progressive.
But it is the candidates’ stances on the Israel-Hamas war and their relationships with local groups that raise this race’s national profile.
Bowman has been one of Congress’ most ardent critics of Israel, referring to the Israel Defense Forces’ incursions in Gaza as a “genocide” and frequently calling for a cease-fire.
Resultingly, Latimer, a pro-Israel candidate, was recruited to run by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), according to The New York Times. Since reportedly encouraging Latimer to run, AIPAC has been his most powerful supporter — the organization’s United Democracy Project PAC alone makes up for 60% of ad spending in the race, according to AdImpact — which, as of Monday, clocks in at an eye-popping $23 million total, according to filings compiled by OpenSecrets.
AdImpact tracks that the race for N.Y.-16 is the most expensive House primary to date. Even still, whoever wins this primary is likely to win in the general election — a Republican hasn’t been elected in the district since 1949.
In an interview with ABC News, Sanders called the primary “one of the most important elections in the modern history of this country” and hoped that the influx of opposition advertising would not deter true progressives.
“What I would say to the people of the district, even if you disagree with Bowman on this or that issue, stand up to the billionaire class and tell them they cannot buy this election and buy the United States government,” Sanders said.
Bowman railed against AIPAC’s funding during a rally on Saturday in the Bronx flanked by progressives Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders.
“AIPAC is scared to death,” Bowman said. “That is why they are spending record amounts of money in this race because they are afraid they have already lost because the district, the American people, and the world are with us.”
“But they are the money — we are the mighty, they are the money, we are the many,” Bowman said.
Amanda Berman, founder of the progressive, pro-Israel group Zioness, told ABC News that Bowman’s “many versus money” framing encourages gross stereotypes about the Jewish community.
“That comment makes Jews’ skin crawl, that is petrifying that we are being called ‘the money’ in the way that singles us out as not part of ‘the many,’ and it activates a dangerous and age-old antisemitic stereotype about Jews and money. It suggests that there is something nefarious about wanting people who represent us in Washington to care about protecting our safety, especially at a moment of such exploding antisemitism,” Berman said.
Berman said she sees the influx of support around an alternative candidate as indicative that “progressive Jews and real progressives across the country who are seeing a perversion of progressive values want to reclaim what it means to be a progressive.”
Former Rep. Mondaire Jones, D-N.Y., who broke ranks from other congressional progressives by endorsing Latimer, attributed his decision to Bowman’s positions following Hamas’ attack on Israel and the effect it has had on the lower Hudson Valley Jewish community. Jones referenced Bowman’s denial that Hamas committed sexual violence on Oct. 7, which he has since apologized for, and Bowman’s support of the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.
Speaking to ABC News, Jones said he has “long disagreed with Mr. Bowman’s views and positions on Israel.”
“But since Oct. 7, they have taken on a different character, even for him. It has had dramatic effects on my Jewish neighbors in the Hudson Valley, and I will always stand up for my Jewish neighbors, especially when they are pointing to the words and actions of a former colleague which have directly contributed to anxiety, anger and fear that they experience,” he said.
Usamah Andrabi, the spokesperson for Justice Democrats, told ABC News that the United Democracy Project is “a Republican-funded super PAC that disproportionately targets progressive Democrats of color with Republican billionaire funding and endorsed alongside the same Republicans — hundreds of Republicans — who have voted to overturn President Biden’s election and support banning abortion.”
When reached for comment, AIPAC told ABC News in a statement: “It is a scurrilous lie to suggest that we target progressive Democrats of color — the truth is that we support many pro-Israel candidates of color. Our only criterion for supporting or opposing candidates is their position on the U.S.-Israel relationship. In fact, we support nearly half of the Congressional Black Caucus, Hispanic Caucus and Progressive Caucus.”
The way both men have responded to the conflict has led to a feeling of desertion by some members of the Jewish and Muslim communities within the district.
Rabbi Evan Hoffman, who leads the Orthodox congregation Anshe Sholom in New Rochelle and has known Latimer for years, told ABC News that he called the representative to request a statement condemning violence against Jews in advance of a feared “Day of Rage” shortly after the attacks in Israel on Oct. 7.
“And his reaction was to say, ‘That’s interesting,’ and then he hung up,” said Hoffman, who was then chair of the Westchester Board of Rabbis.
ABC News has reached out to Bowman’s campaign for a response.
Hoffman also noted that prior board members had tried to make inroads with Bowman in 2020 and 2021, but “felt that he was snubbing them, and it was impossible to develop positive relations.”
Another Westchester rabbi, who was granted anonymity to speak freely, told ABC News that Bowman had reached out to a number of rabbis around Hanukkah, but “none of the rabbis on the Westchester Board of Rabbis wanted to attend.”
Hoffman said he believes that the negative feelings toward Bowman extend to the larger Jewish community, arguing that “the average Jew on the street in Westchester has a very thin view of Jamaal Bowman and would express it even more heartily than I would.”
Both rabbis told ABC News that a supermajority of their congregation preferred Latimer over Bowman.
JVP Action — the political wing of Jewish Voice for Peace, which describes itself as a “progressive Jewish anti-Zionist organization” — said it disagrees with that characterization.
“The Jewish community is not a monolith. And that’s true nationally, and it’s true in the district, as well,” the organization’s spokeswoman, Beth Miller, told ABC News, “and no one can really claim to speak for the entire Jewish community.”
Prominent members of Westchester’s Muslim community have expressed a similar frustration with Latimer.
Donny Khan, a leader of Westchester Progressives — an organization that actively helped elect Latimer to county executive but now strongly supports Bowman — said that Latimer’s responsiveness to affluent, predominantly white communities has come at the expense of other constituents.
“When he needed our votes, he was here. He came to the community center and took pictures with women in hijabs, and with me and everything,” he said. “But then ever since he was recruited to run against Jamaal Bowman, he has cut all contact.”
Supporters of Bowman argue that part of their fear that Latimer will not be reliable comes from a history of the latter not holding firm positions while serving Westchester.
“George Latimer is willing to be anything for anyone,” said Andrabi, Justice Democrats spokesperson.
Khan offered a similar sentiment, saying, “I think his whole reputation — the way he survived 35 years in Westchester politics — is basically never taking a hard stance on anything.”
