Cuomo Blasts Reported DOJ Probe Against Him, Calls It Election Interference
Former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who is running in this year's New York City mayoral race, accused President Donald Trump's administration of engaging in election interference, following reports that the Justice Department had opened a criminal investigation into his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.
According to the New York Times, which first reported on the matter, the U.S. attorney's office in Washington opened an investigation into his testimony he gave to Congress about his handling of the pandemic, where several GOP lawmakers have accused him of lying.
In a statement shared with multiple outlets, a spokesperson for Cuomo said: 'This is lawfare and election interference plain and simple — something President Trump and his top Department of Justice officials say they are against.'
The spokesperson said Cuomo's team has not been informed about the investigation and asked why someone would 'leak it now,' implying that it was being done to impact the New York Mayoral race.
He then added that the former governor ' testified truthfully to the best of his recollection about events from four years earlier, and he offered to address any follow-up questions from the subcommittee.'
A Marist poll of the Democratic Mayoral Primary released last week showed Cuomo leading by a significant margin.
A former key aide for Cuomo, Melissa DeRosa, tweeted about the reported probe, saying: 'Trump wants a mayor who will bend the knee (or be up his butt)…Andrew Cuomo is his nightmare come true…enter law-fare…and a galvanized democratic base.'
74%. That is the percentage of New York City Democratic primary voters who want a candidate who 'will try to oppose President Donald Trump as much as possible,' according to the Marist Poll.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump dumps the Federalist Society — and even Republicans are shooketh
In a major about-face, Donald Trump is turning on the conservative powerhouse that built his judicial legacy, the Federalist Society. Yale Law professor Akhil Reed Amar warns that this break with the very group that helped propel him to power marks a dangerous shift. 'He just wants loyalty to himself—thugs and hacks,' Amar says, adding that Federalist Society judges are principled and loyal to the Constitution, not to Trump. 'The Senate needs to play a really important role now—especia
Forbes
28 minutes ago
- Forbes
Musk Follows Harvard In Biting The Hand That Feeds
Elon Musk and Harvard Both Bite the Governmental Hand that Feeds Them From an early age, children are taught essential lessons: do not play with fire, do not pet strange dogs, and if one cannot swim, stay out of the deep end. Another timeless rule—often forgotten by those in positions of immense wealth and influence—is this: do not bite the hand that feeds you. This lesson, while simple, has profound implications in the real world. It applies just as readily to billionaires and institutions as it does to children on a playground. Yet recent actions by both Elon Musk and prominent academic institutions—most notably Harvard, but also Columbia, MIT, and others—suggest that even the most successful individuals and organizations are capable of ignoring foundational wisdom. Harvard set the tone. Amid growing political scrutiny and a shifting cultural landscape, the university has drawn intense criticism over its handling of campus protests, particularly those involving slogans such as 'from the river to the sea.' The administration's decision to defend even the most controversial speech—widely viewed by many as antisemitic—has triggered investigations and jeopardized billions in tax-exempt status and government research funding. This raises a critical question: is this truly the hill worth dying on? Is preserving the right to controversial protest slogans worth risking Harvard's institutional future? It is doubtful that most students and faculty would knowingly trade funding, grants, and prestige for this fight. Elon Musk, the world's richest man, has now followed suit—this time turning his attention toward President Donald Trump, with whom he has launched a high-profile and personal feud. What makes this move especially striking is that President Trump is not a distant figure or a fading influence. He is once again sitting in the White House, wielding executive authority over regulatory agencies, defense contracting, and infrastructure initiatives—all areas that directly affect Musk's companies. Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI have flourished in part because of government partnership. SpaceX alone holds multibillion-dollar contracts with NASA and the Department of Defense. Tesla has benefitted from years of energy subsidies and EV tax incentives. Picking a fight with the sitting president—regardless of personal conviction—puts this entire ecosystem at risk. And again the question must be asked: is this battle worth the damage? Whatever principle Musk may be defending, the consequences extend far beyond himself. Shareholders, employees, and retail investors—many of whom placed their trust and savings in his leadership—are the ones left exposed. The parallel between Harvard and Musk is striking: both have been immensely successful, aided in large part by government funding, favorable regulation, and public goodwill. And both have, for different reasons, chosen to confront the very institutions and leaders that have helped sustain their growth. There is precedent for how this ends. Jack Ma, once the most powerful entrepreneur in China, famously criticized the Chinese government. The backlash was immediate and absolute. His companies were dismantled. His IPO was cancelled. His wealth and influence evaporated almost overnight. Even in less authoritarian systems, the lesson holds: those who antagonize the systems that support them may not survive the consequences. While Musk's personal net worth has dropped from nearly $450 billion to approximately $300 billion, the impact is more symbolic than practical for him. But for millions of investors, employees, and stakeholders, these battles matter. Market volatility, regulatory backlash, and reputational risk all come with tangible financial costs—costs borne not just by Musk himself, but by those who have trusted and invested in his vision. The same applies to Harvard and peer institutions. Their leadership may believe they are standing on principle, but the price of alienating government agencies and key financial backers could reshape the long-term trajectory of these universities. The erosion of public trust, the loss of bipartisan support, and the potential withdrawal of federal funding pose existential threats. Leadership—whether in business or academia—requires more than conviction. It requires judgment, timing, and the discipline to separate personal ideology from institutional responsibility. Founder-led companies often outperform when leaders are focused, visionary, and measured. But when ego replaces strategy, the consequences can be swift and severe. No one is demanding absolute political alignment or silence in the face of controversy. No one is asking Elon Musk to wear a MAGA hat. But his recent actions have been so volatile, so self-destructive, that investors may soon be tempted to hand him something else entirely—a MEGA hat: Make Elon Great Again. In today's polarized environment, the margin for error has narrowed. And for those who owe much of their success to public support—whether in Silicon Valley or the Ivy League—biting the hand that feeds is not just unwise. It is unsustainable. ---------------------------------- Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Please refer to the following link for additional disclosures: Additional Disclosure Note: The author has an affiliation with ERShares and the XOVR ETF. The intent of this article is to provide objective information; however, readers should be aware that the author may have a financial interest in the subject matter discussed. As with all equity investments, investors should carefully evaluate all options with a qualified investment professional before making any investment decision. Private equity investments, such as those held in XOVR, may carry additional risks—including limited liquidity—compared to traditional publicly traded securities. It is important to consider these factors and consult a trained professional when assessing suitability and risk tolerance.
Fox News
36 minutes ago
- Fox News
FBI arrests Michigan man who allegedly called in phony bomb threat after missing Spirit Airlines flight
A Michigan man who missed his flight was recently arrested after allegedly calling in a fake bomb threat that forced the evacuation of his scheduled Spirit Airlines flight at Detroit Metropolitan Airport early Thursday morning. In a Justice Department news release Friday, U.S. Attorney Jerome F. Gorgon Jr. said John Charles Robinson, 23, of Monroe is accused of using a cellphone to call Spirit Airlines with false information about a bomb threat to Flight 2145 departing from Detroit Metro bound for Los Angeles. During the call, Robinson said in part, "I was calling about 2145… because I have information about that flight," "there's gonna be someone who's gonna try to blow up the airport," and "there's gonna be someone that's gonna try to blow up that flight, 2145," according to an affidavit. After giving a description of an individual, he then stated, "they're going to be carrying a bomb through the TSA," and "they're still threatening to do it, they're still attempted to do it, they said it's not going to be able to be detected. Please don't let that flight board." The aircraft was moved to a remote location, and all passengers were safely deplaned and taken to the Evans Terminal for additional screening. Bomb-sniffing dogs and FBI agents conducted a thorough search of the plane for explosives, but nothing was found. Agents learned Robinson was booked on the flight, but missed it and was told at the gate that he needed to re-book. Robinson was arrested by the FBI when he returned to the airport to depart on another flight bound for Los Angeles. "No American wants to hear the words 'bomb' and 'airplane' in the same sentence," Gorgon said. "Making this kind of threat undermines our collective sense of security and wastes valuable law enforcement resources." Cheyvoryea Gibson, special agent in charge of the FBI Detroit Field Office, said the incident prompted a coordinated response by our FBI Detroit Joint Terrorism Task Force, in partnership with the Wayne County Airport Authority Police Department and the U.S. Federal Air Marshal Service. "We remain committed to protecting the public and confronting those who seek to spread fear in our communities," Gibson said. Robinson appeared in federal court in Detroit on Friday afternoon and was released on bond. His next court appearance is June 27 for a preliminary HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APPSpirit Airlines did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.
