Federal prosecutors say Julie Chrisley's supervised release sentence should be readjusted
While it won't mean that Julie Chrisley will be getting out of federal prison any sooner, federal prosecutors filed a brief Thursday saying the court added two years to her supervised release when she was resentenced in September.
Julie and Todd Chrisley were charged with conspiracy to commit bank fraud, bank fraud, conspiracy to defraud the United States and tax fraud back in 2019.
Julie Chrisley was also charged with wire fraud and obstruction of justice. The couple were later found guilty.
After initially appealing her case, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated Julie Chrisley's sentence and sent the case back to the lower court for her to be resentenced.
The judge in Georgia's Northern District Court resentenced Julie Chrisley to 7 years in jail. But according to the brief filed on Thursday, she also sentenced her to two more years of supervised release.
Prosecutors admitted in the document Thursday, that the judge got it wrong.
'The five-year term of supervised release on counts 7 and 12 is plain error because it exceeds the maximum term authorized by statute,' prosecutors wrote. 'In such situations, this Court vacates the district court's judgment only with respect to the supervised release term and remands with instructions to correct that issue.'
RELATED NEWS:
Todd Chrisley says prison guard ripped MAGA sticker from jail cell, hopes Trump will pardon him
Savannah Chrisley says she's 'scared' where father Todd will end up once prison shuts down
Could Todd and Julie Chrisley be pardoned by President-elect Trump?
Todd Chrisley stopped from working as chaplain at federal prison for 'associating with inmates'
Todd Chrisley 'concerned about Julie's health and welfare' after she was resentenced to 84-months
Counts 7 and 12 were for wire fraud and obstruction of justice, respectively.
Prosecutors said they too missed the change and neither side objected to the sentence during September's hearing.
But now prosecutors are asking the appeals court to have the case sent back to district court to resentence Julie Chrisley to the same terms, but this time with 5 years supervised release.
The Chrisleys were initially indicted in August 2019. Prosecutors said the couple submitted fake documents to banks when applying for loans.
Julie Chrisley sent a fake credit report and bank statements showing far more money than they had in their accounts to a California property owner in July 2014 while trying to rent a home.
A few months after they began using the home, in October 2014, they refused to pay rent, causing the owner to have to threaten them with eviction.
The money the Chrisleys received from their reality television show, 'Chrisley Knows Best,' went to a company they controlled called 7C's Productions, but they didn't declare it as income on federal tax returns, prosecutors said.
The couple failed to file or pay their federal income taxes on time for multiple years.
The family had moved to Tennessee by the time the indictment was filed but the criminal charges stem from when they lived in Atlanta's northern suburbs.
Channel 2 Action News first started investigating the Chrisleys in 2017, when we learned that Todd Chrisley had likely evaded paying Georgia state income taxes for several years.
Court documents obtained by Channel 2 Action News showed that by 2018, the Chrisleys owed the state nearly $800,000 in liens.
The couple eventually went to trial and a federal jury found them guilty of bank fraud and tax evasion.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
4 hours ago
- Newsweek
Tucker Carlson Blasts Former Fox News Colleague Sean Hannity: 'Warmongers'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Right-wing commentator Tucker Carlson blasted his former Fox News colleague Sean Hannity on Friday, calling Hannity and other MAGA hawks "warmongers" for cheering Israel's missile strikes against the Iranian regime. The Context Israel launched a series of strikes against Iran early Friday, local time, which decimated the regime's military chain of command, hit critical nuclear facilities and took out top Iranian nuclear scientists. After the strikes, Iran pulled out of scheduled nuclear talks with the U.S. and retaliated against Israel with a wave of rocket attacks that struck Tel Aviv, Israel's commercial center and also home to the country's central military base. Israel and Iran have been engaged in an increasingly destructive array of tit-for-tat strikes against one another since Hamas—backed by the Iran-led Axis of Resistance—carried out its attack against Israel on October 7, 2023. But the strikes commenced by Israel early Friday marked the most serious escalation yet between Jerusalem and Tehran. What To Know When Israel struck Iran, it capped a long-running foreign policy battle being waged in President Donald Trump's inner circle. Carlson, a staunch isolationist, was among the voices urging against escalating tensions between Iran and Israel, which were at a tipping point before Israel's strikes against the regime early Friday. He also supported Trump's Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, as he spearheaded the nuclear discussions with Iran. Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson gestures during an interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the Kremlin in Moscow on February 6, 2024. Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson gestures during an interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the Kremlin in Moscow on February 6, 2024. Gavriil Grigorov, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP On the other side of the coin were Hannity and conservative media host Mark Levin, who, among others, were deeply skeptical that Iran would agree to end its nuclear program and expressed support for Israel taking military action. On Friday, Carlson tore into Hannity, Levin, conservative media mogul Rupert Murdoch and conservative megadonors Isaac Perlmutter and Miriam Adelson. "The real divide isn't between people who support Israel and people who support Iran or the Palestinians. The real divide is between those who casually encourage violence, and those who seek to prevent it — between warmongers and peacemakers," Carlson wrote on X, formerly Twitter. He added: "Who are the warmongers? They would include anyone who's calling Donald Trump today to demand air strikes and other direct US military involvement in a war with Iran. On that list: Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Rupert Murdoch, Ike Perlmutter and Miriam Adelson. At some point they will all have to answer for this, but you should know their names now." Newsweek reached out to Fox News for comment via email on Friday. Hannity and Levin took a victory lap on Fox News shortly after Israel carried out its first strike against Iran early Friday, with Hannity rattling off a list of Iran's provocations and nuclear threats and Levin saying that "the Iranians are about to get their asses kicked and it's been coming since Jimmy Carter." "They think this is Joe Biden's administration, that they would get away, get nuclear weapons and then the world would sit there, wouldn't know what to do about it," he said, adding that Israel "is not going to sit there and take it." Hours after the strikes, Carlson put out what he called his potential "final newsletter before all-out war" and accused Trump of being "complicit." "While the American military may not have physically perpetrated the assault, years of funding and sending weapons to Israel, which Donald Trump just bragged about on Truth Social, undeniably place the U.S. at the center of last night's events. Washington knew these attacks would happen," Carlson wrote. "They aided Israel in carrying them out. Politicians purporting to be America First can't now credibly turn around and say they had nothing to do with it. Our country is in deep." "Despite being complicit in the act of war, the president hopes last night's events will help his ongoing nuclear negotiations with Iran," Carlson added. "Steve Witkoff was scheduled to participate in the next round of talks on Sunday, but whether that will still happen is up in the air." Israel's strikes against Iran came after months of Trump urging Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to attack Tehran, saying that it would torpedo America's already tenuous negotiations with the Iranian regime. What People Are Saying On Friday, after Israel's strikes, Trump again pushed Iran to come back to the table, writing on Truth Social: "Iran must make a deal, before there is nothing left, and save what was once known as the Iranian Empire. No more death, no more destruction, JUST DO IT, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. God Bless You All!" After Iran initiated its retaliatory rocket attacks against Israel, a U.S. defense official told Newsweek: "Yes, the U.S. is assisting in shooting down missiles targeting Israel." What Happens Next Israel and Iran have been bombing each other since the first wave of strikes early Friday, with Israel saying it plans to "escalate" in response to Iran's retaliatory attack. Iran, meanwhile, has warned that it will target the military bases of any countries that assist Israel.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump's balancing act on the Israel-Iran conflict: From the Politics Desk
Welcome to the online version of From the Politics Desk, an evening newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team's latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail. In today's edition, we examine how the escalating tensions between Israel and Iran are splitting President Donald Trump's base. Plus, Kristen Welker writes that Trump's showdown with California is testing his political strength on a core issue. And Gordon Lubold answers a reader question on Trump's military parade this weekend. Sign up to receive this newsletter in your inbox every weekday here. — Adam Wollner As the percussion of Israeli munitions rattled Tehran on Thursday night, President Donald Trump's MAGA movement observed a rare silence — a sign, influential Republicans say, of the divide within their own party when it comes to the prospect of a war between Israel and Iran. It took Trump, who comments publicly more often than any president in recent memory, about 10 hours to put out a statement on his Truth Social platform, in which he urged Iran to give up its nuclear weapons program. The first official U.S. assessment had been issued by the White House under Secretary of State Marco Rubio's name, and it emphasized that America was 'not involved' in the strikes. In the meantime, Charlie Kirk, the co-founder of Turning Point USA, polled his 5 million X followers on the question of whether America should 'get involved in Israel's war against Iran.' By Friday afternoon, the poll showed more than 350,000 votes, with an overwhelming proportion in the 'No' column. When Kirk read Rubio's statement on the strikes during a podcast Thursday night, Jack Posobiec, a right-wing activist popular with the MAGA audience, interjected that it was 'not a supportive statement at all.' Earlier Thursday, before the strikes, Posobiec had warned on X that a 'direct strike on Iran right now would disastrously split the Trump coalition.' And Steve Bannon, host of the 'War Room' podcast, which is influential with MAGA adherents within the administration and outside of it, steered clear of public commentary Thursday night. It all adds up to a demonstration of the quandary facing Trump as he and other elected Republicans seek safe political turf. Trump's electoral success owes in no small part to his isolationist-leaning 'America First' platform and his fierce criticism of drawn-out U.S. engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan. But Israel's latest action pits traditional Republican support for the Jewish state — and antipathy toward Iran — against the MAGA base's fear that the U.S. will be drawn into a new foreign war. And even within Trump's MAGA wing, there's a long-running split over American backing of Israel. Trump has always been on the pro-Israel side of the divide. Read more from Jon and Henry → Catch up on our latest coverage of the Israel-Iran conflict: U.S. assists Israel in shooting down Iranian missiles, by Monica Alba and Courtney Kube How Israel's Iran strikes might open 'Pandora's box' for the region — and the U.S., by Alexander Smith Israel's strikes highlight its military superiority over Iran, experts say, by Dan De Luce Oil prices surge, stocks tumble as Israel and Iran clash, by Rob Wile Follow live updates → The ongoing protests in Los Angeles and legal standoff over President Donald Trump's decision to federalize California National Guard troops dominated the headlines this week, providing a pressure test for the president on one of his signature issues. Immigration has consistently been one of the bright spots for Trump when it comes to his poll numbers. Even as Americans soured on his handling of the economy and inflation throughout the course of his first 100 days in office, they tended to be split over his handling of immigration. It may still be too soon to gauge how Americans feel about the ramped-up immigration raids and the decision to deploy National Guard troops over Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's objections, since events are still unfolding. But a new Reuters-Ipsos poll released suggests some cracks may be emerging. Half of Americans surveyed said they do not approve of the president's response to protests in Los Angeles, with 35% approving and 15% saying they were unsure or did not answer. A similar share of Americans (49%) said Trump has gone too far with arrests of immigrants, while 40% did not believe he has gone too far, and 11% unsure or not answering. (The poll was conducted from June 11-12 and has a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points.) Around half of Americans (48%) said that the president should deploy the military 'to bring order to violent protests,' while 41% say he should not do so, and 11% were unsure or did not answer. California leaders have disputed Trump's claims that the L.A. protests were violent, saying the 'majority' have been peaceful. Surveys conducted as the Los Angeles protests were unfolding had mixed more results. A Quinnipiac University poll, which was in the field June 5-9, found majorities of registered voters disapproving of Trump's handling of deportations (56% disapprove and 40% approve) and immigration broadly (43% approve and 54% disapprove), though immigration was still one of Trump's better-testing issues. (The poll had a margin of error of +/- 2.8 points). An Economist/YouGov survey conducted June 6-9 found Americans gave Trump a net-positive rating on his handling of immigration, with 49% approving and 45% disapproving. That survey, which had a margin of error of +/- 3.5 points, also found varying levels of support for deportations, with less support for deporting those who have not committed violent crimes. And on Sunday, we'll have our own set of numbers. Steve Kornacki will join 'Meet the Press' to unpack our latest NBC News Decision Desk poll, powered by SurveyMonkey, which will look at Americans' views of the Trump presidency, including his handling of immigration and other issues. We'll also discuss the latest in Los Angeles and the future of Trump's sweeping domestic policy bill with Sens. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Rand Paul, R-Ky. Thanks to everyone who emailed us! This week's reader question is about this weekend's military parade in Washington, D.C. 'How much is it going to cost? Who approved spending it?' To answer that, we turned to national security reporter Gordon Lubold. Here's his response: The estimated cost for the parade was put at about $45 million by the U.S. Army, which pays for the range of things required to put it on, like transporting the slew of tanks, helicopters and vehicles as well as the roughly 7,000 soldiers brought from around the country to participate and provide support for the big event. The parade is celebrating the Army's 250th birthday, which happens to fall on President Donald Trump's 79th birthday. While the parade is the centerpiece event, the Army is planning several other events, including static stations for Americans to see its many vehicles, drones and other things, areas for group workouts, a flyover and even a jump by the Army's Golden Knights demonstration parachute team, weather permitting. The estimated cost includes the $3 million it cost to install large metal plates onto some of the streets in the nation's capital to mitigate damage that the tracks of the tanks was expected to cause. The $45 million also includes a $16 million estimate to repair the streets and other damage to the city following the event, which is expected to draw as many as 200,000 or more people. In an interview with NBC News' 'Meet the Press' last month, Trump said the cost of the parade was 'peanuts compared to the value of doing it.' 🔵 Finding their footing: The forced removal of Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., during Homeland Security Kristi Noem's news conference has galvanized Democrats, giving them some momentum after months of intraparty squabbling. Read more → 💨 Prison break: Four people detained at an immigration detention center in New Jersey have escaped, the Department of Homeland Security said. Read more → ⚖️ In the courts, part 1: The Trump administration can maintain control of several thousand National Guard troops in California and continue to deploy them in Los Angeles, a federal appeals court ruled, pausing a lower court ruling that determined the federalization of the guardsmen was unlawful. Read more → ⚖️ In the courts, part 2: A federal appeals court won't reconsider Trump's challenge to a $5 million verdict won by E. Jean Carroll after a jury found him liable for sexual abuse and defamation. Read more → ⚖️ In the courts, part 3: Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Maryland resident who was erroneously sent to a prison in El Salvador and returned to the U.S. last week, pleaded not guilty to human smuggling charges. Read more → 🪧 In the streets: Event organizers said thousands of 'No Kings' protests will be held across the country Saturday, including in Chicago, Philadelphia, Atlanta, New York City, Minneapolis and Houston. Millions of people are expected to attend. Read more → That's all From the Politics Desk for now. Today's newsletter was compiled by Adam Wollner and Dylan Ebs. If you have feedback — likes or dislikes — email us at politicsnewsletter@ And if you're a fan, please share with everyone and anyone. They can sign up here. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump embraces Israeli strike after arguing against it
President Donald Trump spent the bulk of this week saying he hoped Israel wouldn't strike Iran. But by Friday, he was all in. The president had hoped for more time to negotiate with Tehran over its nuclear program, but once Israel launched the massive attack, Trump embraced the new dynamic, using it as leverage to try to seal the deal he wanted all along. 'He didn't want them to go now,' a senior administration official said about Israel. 'He understands they're a sovereign nation, and he will support them because they're our ally,' added the official, who was granted anonymity to discuss a sensitive situation, 'but he wanted more time.' The administration's shift in tone in the first 24 hours after the attack underscores the balancing act the president is engaged in as he tries to assuage various factions in the administration while still maintaining pressure on Iran. The messaging served to assure Israel that the United States had its back, nod to the hawkish faction of the Trump coalition and try to calm the jittery MAGA isolationists who have long been wary of Middle East entanglements. The constant, however, was Trump's desire to bring Iran back to the table even as the Islamic Republic vowed retribution. 'There is still time to make this slaughter, with the next already planned attacks being even more brutal, come to an end,' Trump posted on Truth Social, his first public remarks after the Israeli attack. 'Iran must make a deal, before there is nothing left.' Trump's offer to Iran doubled as a 'direct push to Israel' to tap the brakes, the senior administration official said. But by Friday afternoon, with Iran firing dozens/hundreds of rockets toward Israel, the administration left little doubt that it was ready to support Israel's defense, a marked shift from the relatively neutral statement Secretary of State Marco Rubio released immediately after Israel's attack. 'Israel took unilateral action against Iran,' Rubio said Thursday night in a statement. 'We are not involved in strikes against Iran and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region. Israel advised us that they believe this action was necessary for its self-defense.' But by Friday morning, Trump was calling reporters and making it clear that he knew about Israel's plans in advance, describing it as a 'very successful attack' in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. The initial administration messaging was, 'we yellow-lighted it,' said Curt Mills, executive director of The American Conservative magazine. 'Today they said we greenlit it. Or they moved toward a light green.' The senior Trump administration official insisted that while Washington had been informed of Israel's plans ahead of time, the United States had no role in helping plan the attack. 'We did not help plan and they didn't give us every detail,' said the person, who was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive conversations within the administration. 'We purposely did not want to know the details,' they said, adding that the United States had the chance to participate in the action against Iran, but opted not to join. Though Trump might have preferred more time to negotiate, he appeared frustrated that talks had stalled, signaling early this week that time for Iran was running out. 'They are good negotiators, but they're tough,' he said Monday at the White House. 'Sometimes they can be too tough, that's the problem. So we're trying to make a deal so that there's no destruction and death. We told them that. I have told them that. I hope that is the way it works out. It might not work out.' The 'too tough' negotiations came as an influential group of hawkish conservatives lobbied Trump furiously to bless the Israeli government's efforts to destroy Iranian nuclear sites. Israel's attack further exposed a rift inside Trumpworld between those hawks, who see Iran as an existential threat to Israel, and the isolationists wary of Middle East entanglements informed by the long and costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. "A lot of people in the MAGA movement, and ones that have really invested a lot in electing Trump and [Vice President JD] Vance will be incredibly disappointed if this turns into a larger war and it will lead to some fractures," said a former Pentagon official granted anonymity to speak about the internal dynamics of the president's foreign policy team.
