Trump DOJ is investigating whether DC crime stats were manipulated
The investigation, which is being run by the US attorney's office in DC, is an escalation in the city's battle against a federal law enforcement takeover from the Trump administration.
President Donald Trump appeared to confirm the probe in a social media post, writing that 'D.C. gave Fake Crime numbers in order to create a false illusion of safety. This is a very bad and dangerous thing to do, and they are under serious investigation for so doing!'
The Justice Department declined to comment on the investigation. CNN has reached out to Washington, DC, Mayor Muriel Bowser and the Metropolitan Police Department for comment.
The investigation comes following reports that an MPD commander was placed on administrative leave amid accusations that the department was falsifying crime data in one district, marking offenses as lower-level crimes than they might actually be.
Trump and other administration officials have for months slammed the capital city, alleging that its Democratic leadership has allowed violent crime to run rampant for years. When federal police descended just over a week ago, the president said it was necessary to combat what he said was skyrocketing crime rates.
City officials have pushed back on the allegation, and the MPD's public statistics say that violent crime has dropped almost 30% from this time last year. And in January the DOJ said that in 2024, violent crime dropped 35 % from the previous year, marking the lowest it had been in more than three decades.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How the Trump administration could attack state laws it says stifle US economy
The Trump administration is hunting for state laws that drag down the US economy. But axing statutes it sees as problematic will depend on how it wields the Constitution's powerful Commerce Clause. Last Friday, the Justice Department and the National Economic Council announced a joint initiative to "address" state statutes that "significantly and adversely affect the national economy.' State regulations, policies, causes of action, and practices were also included as targets. The plan is meant to support the White House's deregulation agenda, which President Trump described in a series of separate executive orders issued in January, February, and April. Those orders emphasize the administration's goal of alleviating policies that it views as "unnecessary burdens" on Americans, small businesses, private enterprise, and entrepreneurship. In an unusual twist, the agencies also solicited help from US citizens, asking members of the public to point out economy-slowing state laws and to propose legal theories that could reverse the laws' adverse effects. "They're crowdsourcing their legal theories," said Emily Berman, a constitutional scholar with the University of Houston Law Center. However, the plan stopped short of explaining what theories the administration would rely on to undo suspected harmful state laws. Jeremy Rovinsky, a federal prosecutor who teaches constitutional law at Crestpoint University, said the language used in the DOJ's plan to attack state laws shows that the Trump administration has the Commerce Clause in mind. "It's clear that Trump's lawyers are thinking through it this way," Rovinsky said. "The Supreme Court has allowed the federal government to regulate state power in an almost unlimited way." But the Commerce Clause doesn't guarantee the administration power to alter state law. The provision vests power to regulate commerce in Congress, not in the executive branch. A more straightforward type of challenge, the lawyer said, is one where state law directly conflicts with federal statutes. In those cases, the Justice Department could raise preemption challenges under the Constitution's Supremacy Clause. Preemption challenges argue that a state rule essentially steps on the federal government's toes, Berman said. The Commerce Clause Absent such a clear-cut conflict, the administration would need more legal leverage to countermand state law. That leverage could come from the Commerce Clause, the constitutional scholar said, which empowers Congress to regulate interstate and foreign commerce. "Anything that regulates commerce falls within the scope of Congress's authority, which has been interpreted relatively broadly," Berman said. To tap into the federal government's authority over commerce, the administration would need to persuade lawmakers to pass new federal legislation invalidating state law. Ravinsky said he sees the DOJ's announcement as an opening salvo to persuade members of Congress. "I think the people that are in [Trump's] inner legal circle wrote that document the way they did, because they want to give Congress a heads up to have them codify what he's doing with executive actions into actual congressional legislation," Ravinsky said. Jonathan Entin, professor emeritus at Case Western Reserve School of Law, said it's possible, but not certain, that pressure on Congress from either President Trump or others in the executive branch would lead to new, preemptive federal laws. "If the president says this is a big priority, then maybe a fair number of people in both the House and the Senate would go along with it," Entin said. "Now, whether there will be enough votes, that's a separate question," he added. "Congress does not legislate very much." "If Congress wants to move legislation against state laws that they say hurt the economy, they need 60 votes in the Senate," Entin said. "And the chances of getting 60 votes in the Senate for much of anything these days are pretty slim." The Supreme Court has largely upheld Congress' power over interstate commerce in a series of cases evaluating the Commerce Clause stretching back more than 80 years. In 1942, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in Wickard v. Filburn that expanded the federal government's regulatory power under the Commerce Clause. The case involved an Ohio farmer who grew more wheat than permitted under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938. The court rejected the farmer's argument that the federal government could not regulate his excess wheat supply under the act because it was grown for personal, rather than commercial, use. In a unanimous 8-0 decision, the court reasoned that while a single farmer's excess crop may not substantially impact interstate commerce, the same actions, if taken in the aggregate by multiple farmers, could indeed influence the national market. Despite the Supreme Court's longstanding support for expansive application of the Commerce Clause, Entin suspects that even new federal legislation could fail to preempt certain state laws. States still retain their police powers, he said, and can exercise those powers as long as doing so doesn't interfere with interstate commerce. "It's not clear to me that Congress can use its commerce power to preempt the state's exercise of their police powers, even if state laws may, in fact, be unwise or even foolish," Entin said. The 'dormant' Commerce Clause Still another, and equally uncertain, path to challenge state laws could involve a judge-created theory known as the "Dormant Commerce Clause," the lawyers said. The concept further expands Congress' power over interstate and foreign commerce by limiting states' authority to regulate commerce even when Congress has not directly legislated on an issue. The theory is intended to prevent states from adopting discriminatory, protectionist laws that benefit local economies to the detriment of the national market. The theory was put to the test and shown to have limits in a recent case decided by the Supreme Court. In 2023, the court loosely upheld a California state law known as Proposition 12, which criminalized California sales of pork meat that came from pigs housed in pens measuring less than 24 square feet — 10 square feet larger than the industry standard. The Iowa Pork Producers Association and 23 states argued that the law discriminated against out-of-state pork producers, imposing excessive burdens on interstate commerce. However, Berman said, Dormant Commerce Clause challenges to state rules have historically been brought by private litigants, not the federal government. "It's going to be a private business sector actor saying, 'Our business is being harmed ... we shouldn't have barriers to markets along state lines." Entin agreed that it would be unusual for the federal government to sue states over their regulations. Alternatively, he said, Congress could try to persuade states to change laws through conditional federal spending. The administration may not find support from the high court for pushing Congress' authority over commerce even further, Entin added. Conservatives on the court in recent years have expressed "real skepticism" about whether courts should be in the business of enforcing the Commerce Clause, he said. Alexis Keenan is a legal reporter for Yahoo Finance. Follow Alexis on X @alexiskweed. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump to expand push to whitewash ‘woke' museum exhibits on slavery
President Donald Trump reportedly plans to expand his push to whitewash 'woke' museum exhibits on slavery and American history beyond the Smithsonian. After Trump tweeted that the Smithsonian is too focused on 'how bad slavery was,' the White House said it would eventually seek to use its power over funding to force other museums to toe the line on Trump's views about history. Trump will hold the Smithsonian 'accountable' and 'then go from there,' an unnamed official told NBC News. Trump this week renewed the attack on the Smithsonian that he unleashed this month when he ordered a sweeping review of its exhibits, policies and staffing. He suggested the revered cultural institution, which is an independent organization but receives significant funding from the federal government, is too focused on the evils of slavery. 'The Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our country is, how bad slavery was, and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been,' Trump wrote on his social media site. 'Nothing about success, nothing about brightness, nothing about the future.' Trump compared the push against the Smithsonian to his effort to force colleges and universities to bow to his policy goals including ending diversity programs, cracking down on student protests and curbing foreign students. 'I have instructed my attorneys to go through the museums, and start the exact same process that has been done with colleges and universities where tremendous progress has been made,' Trump added. The White House ordered up a wide-ranging review of the Smithsonian museums and exhibitions ahead of the country's 250th birthday, with a goal of aligning the institution's content with Trump's more-rosy interpretation of American history. In a letter sent Tuesday to Smithsonian Institution Secretary Lonnie Bunch III, the White House laid out in detail the steps it expects the organization to take as part of the announced review. The examination will look at all public-facing content, such as social media, exhibition text and educational materials, to 'assess tone, historical framing, and alignment with American ideals,' according to the letter. 'This initiative aims to ensure alignment with the President's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism, remove divisive or partisan narratives, and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions,' the letter said. The Smithsonian has said it's reviewing Trump's proposals and vowed to cooperate. It includes 21 museums, 14 education and research centers and a zoo and is considered the world's largest cultural organization of its kind.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
I sold $3K in gold via wire transfer, but then the buyer got their bank to reverse the payment. What can I do?
Buyer-beware scams are in the headlines every day, but a growing number of buyers are ripping off businesses by reversing charges on their purchases. This is a seller-beware scenario. Imagine you run a precious metals store and a customer wants to buy $3,000 worth of gold via wire transfer. You verify their identity, complete the sale and hand over the gold. All by the book, right? Don't miss Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 6 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast) Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says this 7-step plan 'works every single time' to kill debt, get rich in America — and that 'anyone' can do it Not quite. A month later, the customer calls their bank to dispute the charge, claiming they were tricked into buying the gold by a third party. The bank is convinced by the customer's story, cancels the wire transfer and withdraws money from your merchant account, leaving you without payment — and your store down $3,000 worth of gold, which is hard to trace. The same thing can happen with customers who request the reversal of electronic fund transfers (EFTs) or credit card charges. Such transactions are called 'friendly fraud" or "chargeback fraud." The customer may indeed have been the victim of a scam, or be pulling off a scam themselves. Either way, your business is left with a loss. Unfortunately, it's not an uncommon occurrence, particularly for businesses dealing in precious gems and metals, which are frequently targeted in scams. Here's what happens and how to protect your business. Banks often side with customers in cases of alleged fraud Banks typically allow chargebacks or payment reversals only under certain conditions: Unauthorized transactions. The customer claims they didn't authorize the purchase. Billing errors. The charge was duplicated, incorrect, or charged in the wrong amount. Fraudulent activity. The purchase was made under false pretenses or through deception. Failure to receive goods or services. The item was never delivered, was defective, or didn't match the description. In many cases, banks default to protecting the consumer, especially when fraud is alleged. However, with wire transfers, often considered final and irreversible, the rules are more complicated and the reversal takes more time. Read more: Nervous about the stock market? Gain potential quarterly income through this $1B private real estate fund — even if you're not a millionaire. Some banks will allow customers to file a complaint and launch an investigation, especially if they claim they were defrauded or coerced into making a purchase. If the bank believes the customer acted in good faith, it may choose to reverse the charge, even if the merchant did nothing wrong. That's what makes this type of situation so frustrating for business owners. What to do if your business falls victim to this scam Once a bank reverses a wire transfer, it's tough to undo. So be proactive. If a bank contacts your business about potential fraud, respond promptly. Providing proof, such as receipts, can help your case before the funds are reversed. After funds are reversed, you still have a few options: Dispute the reversal. Provide documentation showing the customer authorized the purchase and received the goods. This could include signed receipts, invoices, tracking data, or even video footage. File a police report. If the customer's story involves criminal fraud, getting law enforcement involved may help clarify who's actually at fault. Seek legal action. If the bank won't reverse its decision, the business may consider small claims court or civil litigation to recover the funds. Consult with the bank. Each bank has its own internal process. Sometimes, escalating the issue to a higher level of review can change the outcome. To avoid issues in the future, consider implementing more advanced due diligence processes for high-dollar sales — especially for gems and precious metals, which are frequently targeted in scams. You can leverage technology in your business's fight against friendly fraud. A number of companies offer AI-based fraud prevention software, including Signifyd — designed to protect online retailers — and Arctic Intelligence. Arctic Intelligence advises training staff to identify questionable purchases. They should ask for proof of the source of funds for any big transaction, particularly with a new client, and report suspected money laundering to law enforcement. What to read next Robert Kiyosaki warns of a 'Greater Depression' coming to the US — with millions of Americans going poor. But he says these 2 'easy-money' assets will bring in 'great wealth'. How to get in now Here are 5 simple ways to grow rich with real estate if you don't want to play landlord. And you can even start with as little as $10 Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they're banking on instead Here are 5 'must have' items that Americans (almost) always overpay for — and very quickly regret. How many are hurting you? Stay in the know. Join 200,000+ readers and get the best of Moneywise sent straight to your inbox every week for free. This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
