Eliana Willis

More stories

  • 175 Shares199 Views

    in Elections

    Ukraine: US puts 8,500 troops on alert to deploy to bolster Nato – video

    The US military has put up to 8,500 troops on alert to be ready to deploy to Europe, potentially at very short notice, should the Nato alliance activate a rapid response force. It’s the latest sign of US resolve in the face of a Russian military buildup near Ukraine. The Pentagon spokesman John Kirby stressed that no decision had been made on whether to deploy the troops, and that any such deployment would separate from intra-European movements of US troops to Nato’s eastern flank, to reassure nervous allies. The White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, told US citizens in Ukraine that ‘now is the time to leave’

    US puts 8,500 troops on heightened alert amid fears over Ukraine
    US news live blog updates More

  • 138 Shares199 Views

    in Elections

    Outrage as Newt Gingrich says Capitol attack investigators could be jailed

    Outrage as Newt Gingrich says Capitol attack investigators could be jailed
    Committee member Zoe Lofgren: ‘I think Newt has really lost it’
    ‘Walls closing in’: Trump reels from week of political setbacks
    Newt Gingrich, a former House speaker and candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, stoked outrage on Sunday by predicting members of the House committee investigating the Capitol attack will be imprisoned if Republicans retake the chamber this year.Capitol attack committee has spoken to Trump AG William Barr, chairman saysRead moreOne of two Republicans on the committee, Liz Cheney, said: “A former speaker of the House is threatening jail time for members of Congress who are investigating the violent attack on our Capitol and our constitution. This is what it looks like when the rule of law unravels.”Gingrich made his name with scorched-earth opposition to Bill Clinton in the 1990s and ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012. He is now a prominent Trump supporter, rightwing gadfly and adviser to House Republican leaders.He made his prediction on Fox News, for which he is a contributor.Calling the members of the 6 January committee “wolves [who] are going to find out that they’re now sheep”, he said that if Republicans take Congress in November, “this is all going to come crashing down … they’re the ones who in fact, I think, face a real risk of jail for the kinds of laws they’re breaking”.The 6 January committee has recommended criminal charges for the former White House adviser Steve Bannon and Mark Meadows, Trump’s final chief of staff. Both refused to comply with subpoenas.Bannon has pleaded not guilty to contempt of Congress, a charge that carries a year in jail, with a trial set for the summer. The Department of Justice has not acted regarding Meadows.Gingrich said: “You have, both with Attorney General [Merrick] Garland and this select committee on 6 January, people who have run amok … they’re running over people’s civil liberties.“And what they need to understand is on 4 January next year, you’re going to have a Republican majority in the House and a Republican majority in the Senate. And all these people who have been so tough, and so mean, and so nasty are going to be delivered subpoenas for every document, every conversation, every tweet, every email.”Gingrich also said the committee was “basically a lynch mob”.Another member of the committee, the Democrat Zoe Lofgren, told CNN Gingrich’s comments were “just bizarre. I think Newt has really lost it. You know, it leaves me speechless.”Alluding to Trump’s attempt to overturn his defeat in part through the Capitol putsch, Lofgren added: “I mean, unless he is assuming that the government does get overthrown and there’s no system of justice.”Most observers expect Republicans to at least retake the House in November and to turn their sights on Democrats, who impeached Trump twice, and Joe Biden.But some see a legal net closing on Trump himself. Last week it emerged that the 6 January committee has requested interviews with figures including Ivanka Trump, a move that prompted the former president to complain about “vicious people” who “go after children”.Ivanka Trump is 40. Furthermore, Donald Trump’s niece was among observers to point out that Trump himself has no problem going after other people’s children.Speaking to MSNBC, Mary Trump accused her uncle of “enormous hypocrisy”, for going after Hunter Biden, the president’s son, “who last I checked never worked for the federal government, so his double standard is grotesque on its face”.Mary Trump also had a warning for her cousin, saying Trump “will throw anybody under the bus if he believes it’s in his best interest to do so”.Ivanka Trump asked to cooperate with Capitol attack committeeRead moreAlso on Sunday, the chair of the House committee, the Mississippi Democrat Bennie Thompson, told CBS the panel has spoken to William Barr, Trump’s second attorney general.Barr stoked criticism by overseeing investigation of Trump’s claims of electoral fraud in his defeat by Biden but infuriated the president when he said no evidence was found. He resigned before 6 January.Cheney and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois defied Republican leadership to join the select committee. Kinzinger will retire at the midterms. Cheney faces a Trump-endorsed challenger.Other senior Republicans, including Trump allies Jim Jordan and Scott Perry and the minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, have refused requests to co-operate with the House committee.TopicsRepublicansUS Capitol attacknewsReuse this content More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Elections

    MyPillow CEO faces defamation lawsuit from second voting machine maker

    MyPillow CEO faces defamation lawsuit from second voting machine makerMike Lindell is being sued by UK-based company Smartmatic over his claims that it switched votes from Trump to Biden in 2020 The MyPillow CEO, Mike Lindell, is facing another defamation lawsuit for promoting his conspiracy theory that the 2020 election was rigged against Donald Trump.Smartmatic, a UK-based voting machine company, filed a lawsuit against Lindell on Tuesday claiming that Lindell espoused lies about the company switching votes from Trump to Joe Biden in order to better sell his products.MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell turned away from Republican governors conventionRead more“Crazy like a fox. Mike Lindell knows exactly what he is doing, and it is dangerous,” Smartmatic said in the lawsuit, filed to a federal court in Minnesota. “Lindell intentionally stoked the fires of xenophobia and party-divide for the noble purpose of selling his pillows.”The company noted that the MyPillow brand was “a ubiquitous feature” and was “strategically placed” during his media appearances.Lindell is already facing a $1.3bn lawsuit from Dominion, another voting machine company, that was filed last February. In August, a federal judge gave the green light for the lawsuit against Lindell to move forward to a trial.Smartmatic is seeking unspecified monetary damages in its suit.Multiple investigations into the 2020 election have found no evidence of the widespread voter fraud that Lindell and other Trump allies have been claiming. Lindell has spent the last year advancing his conspiracy theory, funding a three-week bus tour and a three-day “cyber symposium” on the election.In response to Smartmatic’s lawsuit, Lindell said he was “excited” to present evidence that he has against the company.“They’re guilty. They’ve attacked us and were part of the biggest crime in history against our country. And they’re going to all go to prison,” Lindell told Business Insider. Lindell also pointed out that he had lost more than $80m after large retailers dropped his product and that he had spent $30m of his own money trying to prove his election fraud theories.In addition to Smartmatic’s lawsuit, the state of Idaho on Tuesday sent Lindell a cease-and-desist letter ordering him to remove false statements about the state’s election from his website. The state, which voted for Trump in the 2020 election, also billed Lindell $6,558.83 to cover the cost the state spent refuting Lindell’s claims.Despite the multiple lawsuits that he faces, Lindell is still actively promoting his theories on the 2020 election. Most recently, Lindell was seen on a conservative media site saying that he had “enough evidence to put everybody in prison for life, 300 and some million people”, though 159 million people voted in the 2020 election.TopicsUS newsUS elections 2020newsReuse this content More

  • 125 Shares159 Views

    in Elections

    Georgia prosecutor seeks special grand jury into Trump’s election interference

    Georgia prosecutor seeks special grand jury into Trump’s election interferenceDA requests subpoena power to compel testimony from witnesses, such as Brad Raffensperger, who Trump asked to ‘find’ 11,780 votes The prosecutor for Georgia’s biggest county on Thursday requested a special grand jury with subpoena power to aid her investigation into former US president Donald Trump’s efforts to influence the state’s 2020 election results.In a letter to Fulton county’s chief judge, first reported by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution newspaper, district attorney Fani Willis wrote that multiple witnesses have refused to cooperate without a subpoena requiring their testimony.“Therefore, I am hereby requesting … that a special purpose grand jury be impaneled for the purpose of investigating the facts and circumstances relating directly or indirectly to possible attempts to disrupt the lawful administration of the 2020 elections in the State of Georgia,” Willis wrote.The investigation by Willis, a Democrat, is the most serious inquiry facing Trump in Georgia after he was recorded in a phone call pressuring Georgia’s secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, to overturn the states election results based on unfounded claims of voter fraud.Criminal inquiry into Trump’s Georgia election interference gathers steamRead moreThe prosecutor specifically mentioned that Raffensperger, whom she described as an “essential witness”, had indicated he would only take part in an interview once presented with a subpoena.A spokesperson for Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A Trump adviser previously criticized the investigation as a “witch-hunt” designed to “score political points”.A spokesperson for the superior courts in Fulton county, which encompasses most of the state capital Atlanta, said there was no immediate timeline for a response to Willis’s request.In the letter, Willis said a special grand jury, which can subpoena witnesses, was needed because jurors can be impaneled for longer periods and focus exclusively on a single investigation.During the 2 January 2021 call, the former Republican president urged Raffensperger to “find” enough votes to overturn his Georgia loss to Democrat Joe Biden. The transcript quotes Trump telling Raffensperger: “I just want to find 11,780 votes,” which is the number Trump would have needed to win Georgia.Legal experts have said Trump’s phone calls may have violated at least three state election laws: conspiracy to commit election fraud, criminal solicitation to commit election fraud, and intentional interference with performance of election duties.The possible felony and misdemeanor violations are punishable by fines or imprisonment.TopicsGeorgiaUS politicsDonald TrumpUS elections 2020newsReuse this content More

  • 150 Shares119 Views

    in Elections

    Supreme court rejects Trump bid to shield documents from January 6 panel

    Supreme court rejects Trump bid to shield documents from January 6 panelCourt’s move leaves no legal impediment to turning National Archives documents over to congressional committee The US supreme court has rejected a request by Donald Trump to block the release of White House records to the congressional committee investigating the deadly January 6 attack on the Capitol, dealing a blow to the former president.The order, which casts aside Trump’s request to stop the House select committee from obtaining the records while the case makes its way through the courts, means more than 700 documents that could shed light on the attack can be transferred to Congress.The only member of the high court who signaled he would have granted Trump’s request for an injunction was justice Clarence Thomas. The order did not provide a reasoning for turning down the application, which is not uncommon for requests for emergency stays.Trump’s defeat in court allows the select committee to obtain from the National Archives some of the most sensitive White House records from his administration, including call logs, daily presidential diaries, handwritten notes and memos from his top aides.The documents, which Trump tried to shield behind claims of executive privilege, also included materials in the files of his former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, deputy counsel Pat Philbin and advisor Stephen Miller.“These records all relate to the events on or about January 6, and may assist the Select Committee’s investigation into that day,” justice department attorneys, acting on behalf of chief archivist David Ferriero, wrote in an earlier filing.The supreme court’s action, which follows the earlier rejection of Trump’s request by two lower courts, is also likely to have a cascading effect on other lawsuits filed against the panel, which hinged on the success of Trump’s pending litigation.Lawyers for Trump had urged the supreme court to take the case as they disagreed with the unanimous ruling of the US appeals court for the DC circuit that the current president Joe Biden could waive executive privilege over the objections of a former president.The lower court rulings directing the National Archives to turn over the records “gut the ability of former presidents to maintain executive privilege over the objection of an incumbent, who is often, as is the case here, a political rival”, they said.Trump’s legal team argued that the select committee also lacked a legitimate, legislative need for seeking the documents and was instead engaged in a partisan investigation seeking evidence to cause political damage to the former president.“These sweeping requests are indicative of the committee’s broad investigation of a political foe, divorced from any of Congress’s legislative functions,” Trump’s lawyers said of the panel.But in an unsigned opinion, the nation’s highest court rejected those arguments, upholding the appellate court ruling that found that although Trump had some limited power to exercise executive privilege, it was not sufficient to overcome Biden’s waiver.The court cited a 1977 supreme court decision in a dispute between former president Richard Nixon and the National Archives, which said the sitting president was in the best position to decide whether the protection should be asserted.The appeals court said that as long as the select committee could cite at least one legislative purpose for the documents – reforming laws to prevent a repeat of January 6, for instance – that would be enough to justify its request for Trumps’ records.The select committee has also rebutted Trump’s claim that forcing the National Archives to hand over White House documents could discourage future presidential aides from providing candid advice.That argument was misguided, the select committee said, because the conduct by Trump and some of his most senior aides under investigation went far beyond any usual deliberations concerning a president’s official duties.Moments after the supreme court handed down its decision, investigators working in the select committee’s offices on Capitol Hill were heard clapping in celebration, just as the panel subpoenaed more individuals connected to the January 6 insurrection.In its latest investigative action, the panel issued subpoenas to far-right Trump activists Nicholas Fuentes and Patrick Casey who received thousands of dollars in funds potentially connected to illegal activity and the Capitol attack.The new subpoenas demanding documents and testimony from Fuentes and Casey suggest the panel is drawing closer to the source of funding for the rallies that preceded the Capitol attack and the coordinated travel plans of thousands of pro-Trump rioters.Congressman Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the select committee, said that House investigators are interested in the pair since they were intimately involved in the transfer of money surrounding the Capitol attack and were present on Capitol grounds on January 6.The select committee said in the subpoena letters that Fuentes and Casey led the “America First” or “Groyper” movement and promulgated lies about voter fraud as they sought to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s election win and get Trump a second term.TopicsDonald TrumpUS supreme courtLaw (US)Trump administrationUS Capitol attackUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • 138 Shares169 Views

    in Elections

    US Capitol attack committee subpoenas Rudy Giuliani and other Trump lawyers

    US Capitol attack committee subpoenas Rudy Giuliani and other Trump lawyersHouse special committee demands documents and testimony from ‘war room’ team involved in effort to overturn election result The US congressional committee investigating the Capitol attack has issued a blitz of subpoenas to some of Donald Trump’s top lawyers – including Rudy Giuliani – as it examines whether the former president oversaw a criminal conspiracy on 6 January 2021.Capitol attack panel grapples with moving inquiry forward: to subpoena or not?Read moreThe House panel subpoenaed four of Trump’s legal team on Tuesday: the former president’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani and his associate Boris Epshteyn, as well as Sidney Powell and Jenna Ellis, who all defended Trump’s baseless voter fraud claims as he attempted to overturn the election result.Congressman Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the select committee, said in a statement that the panel issued the subpoenas to the four Trump lawyers because they were “in direct contact with the former president about attempts to stop the counting of electoral votes”.The move by the select committee amounts to another dramatic escalation in the investigation, as the orders compel Trump’s lawyers to produce documents and testimony, suggesting the panel believes the lawyers may have acted unlawfully.In its most aggressive move, the select committee ordered Giuliani to testify under oath about his communications with Trump and Republican members of Congress regarding strategies for delaying or overturning the election results.Thompson said in the subpoena letter to Giuliani that House investigators also wanted to question him about his efforts to subvert Biden’s win, urging Trump to unlawfully seize voting machines and pressuring certain state legislators to decertify their results.Epshteyn is the former communications director for Trump’s 2016 inauguration, who worked alongside Giuliani in the Willard hotel in the days before January 6 as Trump sought desperately to grant himself a second term.Citing a report by the Guardian about how Trump pressed his lieutenants at the Willard hotel to prevent Biden’s certification hours before the Capitol attack, Thompson said in the subpoena letter to Epshteyn that the panel wanted to ask about his discussions with Trump.The Guardian report revealed a direct line between the White House and the Trump “war room” at the Willard hotel, and showed that Trump personally pushed to stop Biden’s certification, which was also the purported aim of the Capitol attack.The select committee noted Epshteyn was also close to the former president’s disinformation effort about widespread voter fraud, as he attended a Trump campaign press conference promoting lies about a stolen election.House investigators have been mulling subpoenas to Giuliani and Ephsteyn for weeks, according to a source close to the inquiry. The fact that the panel moved ahead with the orders suggests they suspect criminality that could overcome claims of attorney-client privilege.“The attorney-client privilege does not operate to shield participants in a crime from an investigation into a crime,” Congressman Jamie Raskin, a member of the select committee, said of a subpoena to Trump’s lawyers in an earlier interview with the Guardian.Thompson, the chairman of the select committee, also suggested that its investigation into Giuliani and Epshteyn would focus on Trump’s calls to the Willard hotel, saying that the panel would scrutinize White House call detail records held by the National Archives.In the subpoena letter to Powell, who is already sanctioned by a federal judge for misconduct relating to her lawsuits challenging Biden’s win, Thompson said the panel wanted the evidence she used to advance disinformation about the election.He said the panel was also interested in her role as an external lawyer for the Trump campaign, which saw her urge Trump to seize voting machines around the country in an attempt to find evidence that foreign adversaries had hacked the machines and caused Trump’s defeat. No such evidence was found.In the subpoena letter to Ellis, the select committee said it was interested in her efforts to overturn the election results and her two memos that erroneously said then-Vice President Mike Pence could reject or delay counting electoral votes for Biden on January 6.The select committee gave the four lawyers until the start of February to produce documents requested by its investigators and appear for depositions scheduled later in the month. Giuliani, Powell and Ellis could not be reached for comment. Epshteyn declined to comment.TopicsUS Capitol attackRudy GiulianinewsReuse this content More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Elections

    Recruitment of veterans by extremists may increase, top Democrat warns

    Recruitment of veterans by extremists may increase, top Democrat warnsChair of House veterans affairs committee holding hearings on issue highlighted by veterans’ participation in US Capitol attack A top US lawmaker who heads a congressional committee investigating the targeting of veterans by extremist groups has warned that the problem is a serious one and could get bigger unless it is effectively combated.In an interview with the Guardian Mark Takano, a Democratic congressman from California, said he was concerned about the recruiting strategy being deployed by violent rightwing extremist groups, especially in America’s increasingly fraught political climate in the wake of the 6 January attack on the US Capitol.Leader of Oath Keepers militia group faces sedition charge over Capitol attackRead moreTakano is the chairman of the House veteran affairs committee, which has begun hearings into the rising threat to veterans. The first of three hearings occurred in October last year, but Takano has been concerned about the threat for years.“Targeting of veterans by violent extremist groups is a problem and it could become a bigger problem if we don’t understand what’s involved and the dimensions of it,” Takano said.Takano said the issue was bipartisan and the definition of extremism did not favor liberal or conservative. “We define extremism not by the content of the ideology of the group, but whether a group espouses, advocates, endorses or promotes violence as a way to achieve their ends,” said Takano.But he was clear the current threat of veteran recruitment comes more from the extremist right.“We are seeing that this violence is occurring to a far greater degree among rightwing groups, especially within the last six years,” said Takano. “As far as we can tell, rightwing extremist groups are the ones targeting veterans for recruitment. And there’s not really any evidence that we’re seeing that leftwing groups are targeting veterans,” said Takano.Data shows violent attacks from rightwing groups in the United States are significantly more prevalent than from leftwing or international or Islamist terrorist groups. An analysis by the Center for International Strategic Studies, a non-partisan thinktank, looked at 893 terrorist plots and attacks in the United States between January 1994 and May 2020.It found that “far-right terrorism has significantly outpaced terrorism from other types of perpetrators, including from far-left networks and individuals inspired by the Islamic State and al-Qaeda.”The report also found that “‘rightwing extremists perpetrated two-thirds of the attacks and plots in the United States in 2019 and over 90% between January 1 and May 8, 2020.”The 738 defendants charged in the 6 January attack on the Capitol include 81 with ties to the military, while five were active-duty service members. Air force veteran Ashli Babbitt was shot dead by police while attempting to break into the House chamber. Recently, three retired army generals wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post warning of the threat of a coup in the 2024 US election, saying it could succeed with the aid of rogue military elements.Takano’s committee conducted its first hearing in October. “We looked into how and why veterans were being recruited by violent, extreme groups: at the history and the track record of groups like the Proud Boys, Three Percent militia, Oath Keepers, Boogaloo Boys and others,” said Takano.Takano said extremist groups see an advantage in having veterans in their ranks. “In that sense they are a greater target for recruitment than non-veteran Americans,” said Takano.Takano described friction in addressing the problem among some Republican lawmakers on his committee. “At least two members … wouldn’t even engage the subject,” said Takano. “When it came for their turn, they didn’t ask the witnesses any questions, including the witness that was chosen by the Republican team.“The two members instead just used their five minutes to attack me for holding the hearing,” said Takano.Takano sees the issues that leave veterans vulnerable to extremism as being the same as for the general population. “The things that contribute to veterans being vulnerable are the same things that affect all Americans: social isolation, addictions, mental health issues and emotional trauma,” said Takano.“We need to recognise that there is a problem that we have politically motivated violent extremist groups that are targeting veterans. We need to look at ways that we can protect veterans,” he added.TopicsUS militaryThe far rightUS Capitol attackHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • 113 Shares149 Views

    in Elections

    Mike Pence equates voting rights protections with Capitol attack

    Mike Pence equates voting rights protections with Capitol attackEx-vice-president says Democratic push to expand voter access and 6 January effort to overturn the election are both ‘power grabs’ Mike Pence has equated Democratic efforts to pass voting rights protections with the 6 January attack on the US Capitol, writing in a staggeringly misleading and inaccurate op-ed that both were “power grabs” which posed a threat to the US constitution.Guns, ammo … even a boat: how Oath Keepers plotted an armed coupRead moreAs vice-president to Donald Trump, Pence refused to overturn the 2020 election, rebuffing pressure to reject valid slates of electors at the Capitol on 6 January 2021.Such an effort would have amounted to a coup d’état, the rightful winner of the presidential election – Joe Biden – denied the Oval Office.Some rioters chanted “Hang Mike Pence” as they roamed the halls of Congress. Others erected a gallows outside.Fight to VoteSign up for the Guardian’s Fight to Vote newsletterBut in the Washington Post on Friday, Pence argued that Democratic proposals to expand voter access – such as requiring mail-in ballot drop boxes, loosening voter ID requirements and allowing for same-day registration and voter access – were just as unconstitutional as an attempt to upend constitutional procedure with violence.The other Democratic proposal Pence said was akin to the Capitol siege was a proposal to restore a key piece of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that required places with a history of voting discrimination to get changes approved by the federal government before they go into effect.“Their plan to end the filibuster to allow Democrats to pass a bill nationalizing our elections would offend the founders’ intention that states conduct elections just as much as what some of our most ardent supporters would have had me do one year ago,” Pence wrote.“The notion that Congress would break the filibuster rule to pass a law equaling a wholesale takeover of elections by the federal government is inconsistent with our nation’s history and an affront to our constitution’s structure.”The characterization was inaccurate. The US constitution explicitly gives Congress a role in setting the rules for federal elections.Article I, Section IV reads: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations.”Pence also falsely wrote that Democratic proposals would require states to adopt “universal mail-in voting”, a term typically used to describe the process in states like Colorado and Washington that automatically mail ballots to registered voters.Legislation proposed by Democrats would require states to allow anyone who wants to vote by mail to be able to request a ballot, but would impose no requirement that states automatically send them to all voters.The former vice-president has previously downplayed the Capitol attack by saying there was too much focus on “one day in January”. In his column for the Post, he said: “Lives were lost and many were injured.”Seven people, law enforcement officers among them, died in connection with the attack. More than 100 officers were injured.More than 700 people have been charged in connection with the attack. On Thursday, 11 members of the Oath Keepers militia were charged with seditious conspiracy.Democrats charge that elections laws passed in Republican-run states since 6 January 2021 seek to restrict voting by groups liable to vote Democratic, African Americans prominent among them.Biden has spoken forcefully on the issue, saying federal voting rights protections are needed to counter such racist moves. Republicans have protested the president’s rhetoric.Republican legislators have also sought to make it easier to overturn election results, while Trump allies seek to fill key elections posts from which they would control the counting of votes in future elections.‘Breeding grounds for radicalization’: Capitol attack panel signals loss of patience with big techRead moreVoting rights bills proposed by Democrats would increase protections for election officials who have faced an unprecedented wave of harassment over the last year. They would also prevent partisan actors from removing elections officials without cause and make it easier for voters to go to court to ensure valid votes are not rejected.In short, Democrats aim to put in place legal standards to guarantee that no other vice-president is put in the position Pence was on 6 January 2021.While Biden has made a strong push in support of the voting rights legislation, its prospects look dim. Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin, staunch defenders of the filibuster, the 60-vote rule required to advance most legislation in the Senate, said on Thursday they would not vote to amend the requirement.Because no Republicans support doing away with the filibuster, the Democratic voting rights bills cannot pass right now.TopicsUS voting rightsThe fight to voteMike PenceUS Capitol attacknewsReuse this content More