Evelyn Reynolds

More stories

  • 138 Shares199 Views

    in US Politics

    Are US campus protests antisemitic? Jewish students weigh in | Panel

    Theo Goldstine: ‘I didn’t join the protests because of slogans’I was in California for Passover when the encampment first came up. I was excited because I want to see an end to what Human Rights Watch calls a system of apartheid, which refers to the fact that there are over 65 laws discriminating against Palestinian citizens of Israel, roads in the West Bank are segregated, Israelis have civil law while Palestinians have military law, water allotment is unequal and so much more.I was hopeful because we urgently need a ceasefire, an end to crimes against humanity such as mass starvation in Gaza and to bring the hostages home. I assumed I would hear chants of “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” Even though I prefer a confederation so that both people can maintain national sovereignty while having their core interests met, that slogan is not a dealbreaker for me as long as it means one-person one-vote in an equal binational arrangement, which would end Israel as a Jewish state.However, at NYU and across the country, protestors regularly chanted “From the water to the water, Palestine is Arab” in Arabic. There were chants of “Settlers, settlers [referring to all Israeli Jews] go back home, Palestine is ours alone.” They were justifying and normalizing the egregious crimes Hamas committed against civilians on October 7 and glorifying Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis under the banner of “by any means necessary.”The protesters’ dream of a liberated Palestine looked a lot like pure revenge, rather than justice. I understand the desire for revenge, particularly for those between the River and the Sea. But I hold my peers – privileged US-based college students disconnected from the violence and existential antes — to a different standard. I support justice, freedom, liberty for the Palestinian people, but I could not and would not stand by a message filled with so much hate so I never joined the protests.However, I kept sticking around on the outside of the encampment because I did agree with a fair amount of what protesters were saying and wanted to see what was going on. I witnessed and heard many awful things said by both Pro-Palestine protesters and Pro-Israel counterprotesters. But then, something magical happened. I started having conversations with others at the protests where I realized how much we have in common.I realized that a sizable number of people did not in fact want the expulsion, subjugation, or death of Israeli Jews. Most important, these were conversations with Palestinians! In fact, I found the people I had common ground with the most were Palestinians.While eliminationist rhetoric divides us, I believe it is possible for the non-extremists on all sides to unite behind two goals: ending the war and bringing justice, freedom, and equality to Palestinians not at the expense of or dehumanization of Israelis. I believe that this vision could change the face of the earth. I will continue to do whatever small thing I can to make it reality.
    Theo Goldstine is an undergraduate at New York University studying international politics and computer science
    Benjamin Kersten: ‘It’s not antisemitic to criticize Israel’As a Jewish student who participated in the UCLA Palestine solidarity encampment, I find the charge that the encampments are antisemitic to not only be misleading but dangerous. All were welcome in the encampment who abided by the community agreements and engaged in good faith with its demands, including for the university to divest from weapons manufacturers and companies profiting from Israeli violence against Palestinians and to stop repressing pro-Palestinian advocacy on campus.For me, the encampments offered opportunities for Jewish learning and community building. We organized a Passover Seder and observed Shabbat and Havdalah, and we were part of a multicultural, interfaith space – a glimpse of the world we hope to build. Inside the encampment, students learned, imagined, disagreed and recommitted. We recommitted to the values of justice, equality and dignity for all without exception. The world we built was torn apart by outside agitators wielding two-by-fours, by police in riot gear and by UCLA administrators who opted to remain invested in genocide and violently suppress free speech rather than take seriously our calls for freedom for all. It was the administrators, counter-protesters and police that created an unsafe environment – not those protesting for an end to genocide.It is not antisemitic to criticize the state of Israel or to reject Jewish supremacy. The pervasive misidentification of antisemitism hinders our ability to understand and dismantle real antisemitism, which is expressed most violently by an increasingly empowered right wing. As we strive to end all forms of oppression, we must not look away from Gaza. Israel’s devastating assault on Palestine has killed tens of thousands, displaced millions, and left homes, hospitals and universities destroyed. I advocate for Palestinian freedom because Palestinians, like everyone, deserve to be free, and because our safety and liberation are intertwined.
    Benjamin Kersten is a PhD candidate in art history at UCLA, a fellow at the Leve Center for Jewish Studies and a member of Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) at UCLA
    Maya Ilany: ‘By casting out hateful ideas, the protestors can keep the focus on their demands’Student protesters I spoke to at Harvard’s encampment are obviously motivated by an ambition to halt the death and destruction in Gaza, not by antisemitism. But to deliver on that crucial goal, the movement must improve at rejecting hateful and unjust ideas it has played host to on some US campuses.There have been expressions of archetypal antisemitism: like a cartoon of a hand with a Star of David and a dollar sign holding a noose around the neck of two men. Calls for violence against Israelis or “Zionists” have been similarly concerning. It was no less than the leader of Columbia’s student protest who explained why Zionists “don’t deserve to live”.It serves no one to flatly deny these incidents, or to ignore the impact they have on Jewish students and faculty, including many that share the protesters’ views about the war, Israel’s far-right government and the wrongs of the occupation. This denial masquerades as solidarity with Palestinians, but undermines the movement and its aims.By casting out these hateful ideas, the protesters can keep the focus on their just demands. As a longtime campaigner for a two-state solution, I believe some of their demands are not just the wrong ones, but are unjust, unethical and unworkable. Though these calls are protected free speech, I absolutely reject demands that amount to more violence (“globalize the intifada”), the end of a state of Israel (“from water to water, Palestine will be Arab”) or a “repatriation” of Israeli citizens (“go back to Europe”). But while these conversations may be uncomfortable, I am ready to argue for a just resolution to the conflict that allows millions of Israelis and Palestinians to live in dignity.
    Maya Ilany is a graduate student in the MPA program at the Harvard Kennedy School and a research fellow at Molad: the Center for the Renewal of Israeli Democracy
    Matan Berg: ‘I will continue to advocate for a just peace’Before leaving for the summer, I visited the encampment on “the Diag” in the heart of the University of Michigan’s campus. I brought a banner proudly displaying the flags of both Israel and Palestine. This was my way of expressing support for a negotiated ceasefire and hostage release deal, an end to the cycle of violence, a fight against antisemitism and Islamophobia, a future of mutual self-determination and equality enshrined in a two-state solution, and peace and justice for all Palestinians and Israelis.The reactions I received (a combination of friendly conversations mixed with extreme opposition to dialogue), as well as the general conduct and rhetoric of the encampment, helped me to realize two things. First, I believe this movement is counterproductive and does perpetuate antisemitic tropes. In my view, the messaging at these encampments often justifies and glorifies the attacks of 7 October with chants like “resistance is justified under occupation” and “free Gaza by any means necessary”. Their activism glorifies the actions of terrorists through “teach-ins.” They have even gone as far as to retweet an official statement signed by Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine that thanked Michigan students. All of this is morally reprehensible and antithetical to any rational strategy that can end the plight of the Palestinian people.However, a second thing is also true: it is neither helpful nor right to chastise these encampments and the larger movement they represent as antisemitic. Many of the protestors I interacted with agreed with my goals, even though they often had different beliefs for how to achieve them. Moreover, rebuking a group of people pleading for an end to the deaths of innocent civilians in Gaza by calling every single one of them antisemitic is grossly uncharitable and severely lacks the empathy that we desperately need.I will continue to advocate for a just peace, and I will continue to insist that, as hard as it may seem, this moment is not “us v them”, but rather “all of us – together”.
    Matan Berg is an undergraduate at the University of Michigan and the chair of its chapter of J Street U More

  • 113 Shares189 Views

    in US Politics

    Ex-Capitol officer Harry Dunn loses congressional primary in Maryland

    Former US Capitol police officer Harry Dunn has lost his congressional primary election in Maryland, after a pro-Israel group spent millions of dollars supporting another Democrat in the crowded race.Dunn, a first-time candidate who gained national attention after publishing a book about his experiences protecting lawmakers during the January 6 insurrection, lost to state senator Sarah Elfreth in Maryland’s third congressional district.When the Associated Press called the race at 10.27pm ET, about two and a half hours after polls closed in Maryland, Elfreth was leading Dunn by 11 points. Their 20 other primary opponents lagged far behind.With the primary over, Elfreth is heavily favored to replace the retiring Democratic congressman John Sarbanes in the House of Representatives. The Cook Political Report rates the district, which covers Annapolis and the suburbs of Washington and Baltimore, as “solid Democrat”.Dunn’s defeat concluded a contentious election that ultimately cost several million dollars. Dunn proved himself to be an impressive fundraiser, bringing in $4.6m across the election cycle. Small-dollar donors made up most of Dunn’s fundraising base, as the candidate often boasted, and his team told the Guardian that the average campaign contribution was $21.64.Elfreth raised roughly a third as much money as Dunn, bringing in $1.5m, but her candidacy received substantial outside financial help from the group United Democracy Project (UDP), a Super Pac affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac). UDP spent at least $4.2m supporting Elfreth’s campaign, according to documents filed with the Federal Election Commission.Elfreth’s victory comes one week after UDP notched a major win in Indiana, with the primary loss of former Republican congressman John Hostettler. UDP spent $1.6m in its effort to prevent Hostettler, who was criticized for making comments that were deemed antisemitic, from returning to the House. In March, UDP suffered a defeat in California’s 47th congressional district, where Democrat Dave Min advanced to the general election despite the Super Pac spending $4.6m against him.UDP’s decision to invest in the Maryland primary came as somewhat of a surprise, given that neither Dunn or Elfreth had been especially outspoken about US-Israel relations or the war in Gaza. However, fellow candidate and labor lawyer John Morse, who received the endorsement of senator Bernie Sanders, made his support for a ceasefire in Gaza the focal point of his campaign. (When the primary race was called, Morse had captured just 1% of the vote.)Morse’s candidacy may have motived UDP to get involved in the race. In a statement to HuffPost last month, UDP’s spokesperson acknowledged Dunn’s “support for a strong US-Israel relationship” but suggested concern about other candidates in the primary.“There are some serious anti-Israel candidates in this race, who are not Harry Dunn, and we need to make sure that they don’t make it to Congress,” spokesperson Patrick Dorton said.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionFaced with an onslaught of UDP spending in support of his biggest rival, Dunn chose to turn the Super Pac’s involvement in the primary into a campaign issue. In a statement to the Guardian last week, Dunn framed the infusion of Super Pac money into the race as a threat to democracy and an insult to the legacy of Sarbanes, who made campaign finance reform one of his top priorities over his nine terms in Congress.“These groups, funded by Republican extremists, are coming after our movement to protect American democracy. Congressman John Sarbanes spent his career trying to get dark money out of politics; now those same dark money groups are trying to buy this seat,” Dunn said. “When I get to Congress, I know who I will work for and I will be accountable to – and it won’t be the dark money donors or the special interest groups.”But that argument was not enough to carry Dunn to victory, and Elfreth now appears poised to win a House seat in November. More

  • 213 Shares149 Views

    in US Politics

    What’s behind the US tariffs on Chinese EVs and what do they mean for Biden’s re-election chances?

    Joe Biden has unveiled US tariffs on an array of Chinese imports, unleashing a potential trade war with Beijing, as the president seeks to woo American voters less than six month out from what’s set to be a close election rematch with Donald Trump.The new measures affect $18bn in imports, including steel, aluminium, computer chips solar cells, cranes and medical products – however its the 100% tariff on Chinese-made electric vehicles (EVs) that has dominated headlines.Why have the tariffs been imposed?Biden’s national economic adviser, Lael Brainard, perhaps best summed up the purpose of the huge new tariffs when she said that they would ensure that government investments in jobs are not undercut by “underpriced exports from China.”The US is concerned by the prospect of cheap, subsidised Chinese goods flooding US markets and undercutting the billions of dollars of government investment that have been poured into key manufacturing sectors via Biden’s Chips and Inflation Reduction acts.In the electric vehicle market, for instance, there are reports that China is producing 30m EVs a year, but can only sell 22m to 23m domestically.The Alliance for American Manufacturing has said the dumping of Chinese EVs to the US market would be an “extinction-level event” for its carmakers.“We’re not going to let China flood our market, making it impossible for American auto manufacturers to compete fairly,” Biden said in his speech announcing the tariffs.What will the tariffs mean for the sale of Chinese electric vehicles in the US?The huge new tariffs on Chinese-made EVs are unlikely to have any immediate impact on US consumers; that’s because China currently sells almost zero EVs in the US.However, experts say that the new tariffs are likely a preventive measure to stop China flooding the US market with its surplus product – and by that measure they’re likely to be effective.View image in fullscreenChinese EVs could still enter the US through other avenues though, as tariffs are applied based on where the final assembly for the vehicle takes place.Some experts are warning that there could be an accelerated shift of Chinese production to Mexico, as carmakers seek to bypass the tariffs, with some signs that this is already occurring.Hours after Biden announced the fresh tariffs, Chinese automaker BYD unveiled the Shark, a hybrid-electric pickup truck that will be exclusive sold in Mexico.The US is mindful of this risk, according to trade representative Katherine Tai, and there will probably be future efforts to head off tariff evasion problems.How will China respond?China’s commerce ministry said it would retaliate and take measures to defend its interests.An editorial in Chinese state media said US consumers would bear the consequences of the moves, adding that the Biden government was “writing a new chapter in undermining fair trade and environmental protection.”Late on Tuesday, Biden looked ahead to a potential response from China, saying Beijing will probably try to raise tariffs as well, possibly on unrelated products.Biden has said in the past that he is not seeking to launch a trade war, nor does he want the new economic measures to undercut efforts in recent months to ease tensions with Chinese president Xi Jinping.What do the new trade measures mean for the US election?Despite the high-profile economic legislation pushed through by his administration, polling shows Biden has struggled to convince voters of the efficacy of these policies.Against a background of low unemployment and economic growth above that of most other western nations, the White House will be hoping that the new tariffs don’t worsen inflation levels that have already angered US voters.“Some US industries and manufacturers will experience cost increases and supply-chain disruptions as a result of these tariffs but the Biden administration is clearly taking the view that these will be modest and can be managed,” said Cornell University’s policy experts, Eswar Prasad.Biden has followed the hard line on trade that Trump took as president, but says his measures are more targeted and less likely to harm US consumers than that of his Republican rival.Trump, who has floated the idea of tariffs of 60% or higher on all Chinese imports, said on Tuesday Biden’s new tariffs should be applied to other types of vehicles and products – and has threatened to go even harder on Chinese-made EVs by applying tariffs of 200%, should he be elected in November.With Reuters More

  • 188 Shares179 Views

    in US Politics

    Top House Democrat demands answers on Trump dinner with oil executives – as it happened

    The top Democrat on the House oversight committee is demanding answers after a report emerged that Donald Trump promised oil executives he would repeal regulations intended to lower climate emissions if they each contributed $1bn to his campaign.In a letter to the executives of nine major petroleum companies, including ExxonMobil and Chevron, Jamie Raskin cited a Washington Post article from last week that said Trump promised to rescind a Biden administration moratorium on permits for liquified natural gas exports and allow more drillings in the Alaskan Arctic and Gulf of Mexico, among other policies.In response, Raskin wrote in letters to nine oil industry executives:
    I write to request any information you may have about quid pro quo financial agreements related to US energy policy that were reportedly proposed at a recent campaign fundraising dinner with ex-president Donald Trump at his Mar-a-Lago Club that you appear to have attended. Media reports raise significant potential ethical, campaign finance, and legal issues that would flow from the effective sale of American energy and regulatory policy to commercial interests in return for large campaign contributions.
    House speaker Mike Johnson traveled to New York to appear alongside Donald Trump at his ongoing business fraud trial, which Johnson called a “disgrace” in a press conference outside the courthouse. An array of other Republican politicians were also on the scene, all of whom have one thing in common: they are said to be potential running mates for Trump or, as the Democrats have dubbed them, “emotional support”. Back in Washington DC, the Republican-led House oversight committee released a report saying that attorney general Merrick Garland should be held in contempt for not handing over recordings of interviews with Joe Biden and his ghostwriter conducted by a special counsel. The committee’s top Democrat, Jamie Raskin, was also busy, demanding answers from petroleum industry executives over Trump’s reported promise to roll back all sorts of environmental regulations if they each raise $1bn for his campaign.Here’s what else happened today:
    Johnson’s appearance in New York comes as the House GOP plans to shift into “campaign mode” before the 5 November election.
    Federal prosecutors asked a judge to send far-right strategist Steve Bannon to jail after an appeals court rejected overturning his conviction for contempt of Congress. Bannon has until Thursday to respond.
    Biden announced new tariffs against China, and took shots at Trump’s trade policies.
    Maryland is traditionally a Democratic stronghold, but this year’s Senate race is shaping up to be surprisingly competitive. The state’s voters are choosing their candidates in today’s primary.
    Why are Biden’s approval ratings so stubbornly low? Here’s what White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre had to say, when asked at her briefing today.
    At her daily briefing today, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was asked about Joe Biden’s low approval ratings, and why they have not moved much for years.The question from a Fox News reporter came a day after the New York Times, the Philadelphia Inquirer and Siena College released polling showing the president trailing Donald Trump in five of six key swing states. Here’s what Jean-Pierre had to say:The reporter who posed the question, Peter Doocy, is the conservative network’s main man in the White House, and something of a thorn in its side. Two years ago, Biden appeared to insult Doocy by name, then later reportedly called him to “clear the air”:Earlier today, Republican House speaker Mike Johnson condemned the prosecution of Donald Trump outside the New York courthouse where Trump’s business fraud trial is taking place.That drew a strong rebuke from Democratic representative and Trump foe Jamie Raskin, who aired his grievances in a statement to the Daily Beast:Federal judge Carl J Nichols has given far-right strategist Steve Bannon until Thursday to respond to a request by justice department prosecutors that he report to jail to serve his four-month sentence after being convicted of contempt of Congress.Nichols’ order came after an appeals court rejected Bannon’s appeal of his July 2022 conviction for ignoring a subpoena and an order to appear for a deposition from the January 6 committee. Here’s more on that:The traditionally blue state of Maryland suddenly finds itself in an unfamiliar role: political battleground.Whoever wins the race for its open Senate seat, vacated by retiring Democrat Ben Cardin, could decide control of the chamber. On the Democratic side, representative David Trone is locked in a competitive primary with Prince George’s County executive Angela Alsobrooks. Whoever wins the primary will almost certainly face Larry Hogan, the former Republican governor whose high-profile clashes with Donald Trump made him a household name.The Democratic primary contest to succeed Trone features as many as a dozen candidates. The field is led by former Biden official April McClain Delaney and state delegate Joe Vogel.The Guardian caught up with Vogel shortly after he cast his ballot in Gaithersburg on Tuesday morning. At 27, Vogel is among a handful of gen Z candidates running for federal office this year.Vogel said he is appealing to voters of all ages by channeling his generation’s urgency to address the most pressing problems of our time.“The experience that I have is not only the experience as a legislator, but the lived experience of sitting in a classroom with the doors locked and the windows down in the dark in a school-shooting drill. I have the experience of fearing what the climate crisis is going to hold for our generation,” he said.“What we need are people with the lived experiences to bring urgency to all of these issues.”The sixth district, a seat that spans the diverse suburbs of Montgomery county to conservative western Maryland, is expected to remain in Democratic hands but is still the most competitive open House seat in the state.If elected, Vogel, born in Uruguay, would be the first Latino and first openly LGBTQ+ member of Congress from Maryland.An election to watch is taking place today in Maryland, where Democratic voters will select a candidate to face off against Republican former governor Larry Hogan for its open Senate seat. The Guardian’s Joan E Greve reports on how the race in the heavily Democratic state has become surprisingly competitive:Republicans have a rare opportunity to flip a Senate seat in Maryland in November, and the outcome of that race could determine control of the upper chamber. The high stakes of the Maryland Senate election have put intense scrutiny on the state’s primaries this Tuesday.Maryland primary voters will cast ballots in the presidential race as well as congressional elections, and leaders of both parties will be closely watching the results of the Senate contests. The retirement of Senator Ben Cardin has created an opening for Republicans to potentially capture a seat in a reliably Democratic state, thanks to former governor Larry Hogan’s late entry into the race. A Hogan victory would mark the first time that a Republican has won a Maryland Senate election since 1980, and it could erase Democrats’ narrow majority in the chamber.Ten Democrats will compete for the party’s Senate nomination, but two candidates have become the clear frontrunners: Congressman Dave Trone and the Prince George’s county executive Angela Alsobrooks. The race has historic implications, as Alsobrooks would become the first Black person elected to represent Maryland in the Senate and just the third Black woman to ever serve in the chamber.The battery of tariff increases on China Joe Biden announced is a symbolic move intended to head off the possibility that Beijing one day steps up its exports of vehicles and other technologies to stimulate its economy. The policy is also not quite as different from that of the Trump administration as the White House would have you think, the Guardian’s Larry Elliott reports:The US president, Joe Biden, has announced a 100% tariff on Chinese-made electric vehicles as part of a package of measures designed to protect US manufacturers from cheap imports.In a move that is likely to inflame trade tensions between the world’s two biggest economies, the White House said it was imposing more stringent curbs on Chinese goods worth $18bn.Sources said the move followed a four-year review and was a preventive measure designed to stop cheap, subsidised Chinese goods flooding the US market and stifling the growth of the American green-technology sector.As well as a tariff increase from 25% to 100% on EVs, levies will rise from 7.5% to 25% on lithium batteries, from zero to 25% on critical minerals, from 25% to 50% on solar cells, and from 25% to 50% on semiconductors.Tariffs on steel, aluminium and personal protective equipment – which range from zero to 7.5% – will rise to 25%.Despite the risks of retaliation from Beijing, Biden said the increased levies were a proportionate response to China’s overcapacity in the EV sector. Sources said China was producing 30m EVs a year but could sell only 22m-23m domestically.Biden’s car tariffs are largely symbolic because Chinese EVs were virtually locked out of the US by tariffs imposed by Donald Trump during his presidency. However, lobby groups have suggested there is a future threat as Beijing seeks to use exports to compensate for the weakness of its domestic economy.Top Republicans traveled to New York to appear alongside Donald Trump at his ongoing business fraud trial, which House speaker Mike Johnson called a “disgrace”. Also on the scene were an array of politicians who share one thing in common: they are all said to be potential running mates for Trump, or, as the Democrats dubbed them “emotional support”. Back in Washington DC, the Republican-led House oversight committee released a report saying that attorney general Merrick Garland should be held in contempt for not handing over recordings of interviews conducted by a special counsel and Joe Biden. The committee’s top Democrat Jamie Raskin was also busy, demanding answers from petroleum industry executives over Trump’s reported promise to roll back all sorts of environmental regulations if they each raise $1bn for his campaign.Here’s what else has happened today so far:
    Johnson’s appearance in New York comes as the House GOP plans to shift into “campaign mode” as the 5 November election draws ever nearer.
    Federal prosecutors asked a judge to send far-right strategist Steve Bannon to jail after an appeals court rejected the appeal of his conviction for contempt of Congress.
    Biden announced new tariffs against China, and took shots at Trump’s own trade policies.
    The top Democrat on the House oversight committee is demanding answers after a report emerged that Donald Trump promised oil executives he would repeal regulations intended to lower climate emissions if they each contributed $1bn to his campaign.In a letter to the executives of nine major petroleum companies, including ExxonMobil and Chevron, Jamie Raskin cited a Washington Post article from last week that said Trump promised to rescind a Biden administration moratorium on permits for liquified natural gas exports and allow more drillings in the Alaskan Arctic and Gulf of Mexico, among other policies.In response, Raskin wrote in letters to nine oil industry executives:
    I write to request any information you may have about quid pro quo financial agreements related to US energy policy that were reportedly proposed at a recent campaign fundraising dinner with ex-president Donald Trump at his Mar-a-Lago Club that you appear to have attended. Media reports raise significant potential ethical, campaign finance, and legal issues that would flow from the effective sale of American energy and regulatory policy to commercial interests in return for large campaign contributions.
    In a White House address where he announced his administration’s moves to counter Chinese industries, including by imposing a 100% tariff on electric car imports, Joe Biden took a number of shots at Donald Trump and his policies.“My administration is combining investments in America with tariffs that are strategic and targeted,” Biden said. “Compare that to what the prior administration did. My predecessor promised to increase American exports and boost manufacturing. But he did neither, he failed. He signed a trade deal with China. They’re supposed to buy $200bn more in American goods. Instead, China imports from America barely budged.”He also said that Trump has proposed “across-the-board tariffs on all imports from all countries if re-elected”, and accused the former president of wanting to drive up prices. “He simply doesn’t get it,” Biden said.Asked later by a reporter about Trump’s comments that China has been eating America’s lunch, Biden responded, “He’s been feeding them a long time.” More

  • 163 Shares99 Views

    in US Politics

    Mike Johnson skips vital US House session to support Trump in New York

    The US House was in session on Tuesday with vital business to complete but its speaker, Mike Johnson, was 200 miles north, attending another day in the criminal trial of Donald Trump, the former president and presumptive Republican presidential nominee charged over hush-money payments to an adult film star who claimed an affair.“President Trump is innocent of these charges,” Johnson said outside court in Manhattan, where Trump faces the first 34 of 88 criminal counts.Michael Cohen, who as Trump’s lawyer and fixer made the payments to Stormy Daniels, was on the witness stand.Trump has used his trial as a loyalty test for supporters and vice-presidential hopefuls, both at the courthouse and on social media and TV. On Tuesday, Johnson was joined by the governor of North Dakota, Doug Burgum, the Florida representatives Byron Donalds and Cory Mills, and Vivek Ramaswamy, a biotech entrepreneur who ran for the Republican presidential nomination.Before proceedings began, as Johnson and other supporters stood behind him, Trump spoke to reporters.“I do have a lot of surrogates and they are speaking very beautifully,” he said. “They come from all over Washington, and they’re highly respected and they think this is the biggest scam they’ve ever seen.”Regarding such surrogates’ ability to comment on the trial unencumbered by a gag order over which Trump has been fined and threatened with incarceration, Trump told reporters: “You ask me questions that I’m not allowed to answer.”Complaining about the courtroom, Trump said: “I’ve been here for nearly four weeks in the ice box.”The charges against Trump cast the hush-money payments, made around the 2016 election, as a form of election subversion.Trump also faces four federal and 10 Georgia state charges arising from his attempts to overturn his 2020 defeat by Joe Biden, and 40 federal charges concerning his retention of classified information.He has also been hit with multimillion-dollar civil penalties, over his business practices and a defamation suit arising from a rape allegation a judge called “substantially true”.Nonetheless, the devoutly Christian (and porn-monitoring) Johnson rushed to Trump’s side as Trump’s affair with Daniels, the star of films including Dirty Deeds and Right Amount of Wrong, was once more examined in court.One of Johnson’s former Republican colleagues, the anti-Trump conservative Liz Cheney, jibed: “Have to admit I’m surprised that Speaker Johnson wants to be in the ‘I cheated on my wife with a porn star’ club. I guess he’s not that concerned with teaching morality to our young people after all.”Back on Capitol Hill, the House was due to consider final passage of the Federal Aviation Authority Reauthorization Act. House Democrats were also set to face a series of messaging bills, proposed legislation designed not to pass but to ensnare the other party in difficult political choices.“Otherwise,” Politico reported, “Speaker Mike Johnson is ready to move squarely into campaign mode.”View image in fullscreenIn Manhattan, Johnson – the only member of Trump’s cheer squad not to wear a distinctly Trumpian red tie – spoke to reporters. He said: “President Trump is innocent of these charges.“It’s impossible for anybody to deny, that looks at this objectively, that the judicial system in our country has been weaponised against President Trump. The system is using all the tools at its disposal right now to punish one president to provide cover for another.“These are politically motivated trials and they are a disgrace. It is election interference, and they show how desperate the opposition that President Trump is, how desperate they truly are.”Johnson said he was making the appearance “on my own, to support President Trump, because I am one of hundreds of millions of people and one citizen who is deeply concerned about this”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionJohnson and his fellow visitors were not the first. On Monday the Ohio senator JD Vance gave his impressions of proceedings.Vance posted: “Michael Cohen admitting he secretly recorded his employer. Just totally normal conduct, right? The best part is he said he did it only once and only for Trump’s benefit. A stand-up guy!”Vance also called the trial “election interference”, because the gag order constrained Trump’s speech, representing “a violation of the constitution and an insult to the American people”.Before court on Tuesday, Ramaswamy claimed a “sham trial” and a “politically motivated assault on the leading candidate for US president, greenlit by his political opponent, Joe Biden, and carried out at the highest levels of the White House and Department of Justice”.Ramaswamy also attacked the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg; the prosecutor Matthew Colangelo; and the judge, Juan Merchan.“The American people will deliver the ultimate verdict in November,” Ramaswamy said. “Say NO to the weaponisation of justice.”Other surrogates also complained. Donalds, who as a young man had a marijuana charge dismissed and a bribery charge expunged, said proceedings against Trump represented “a tragedy for the American justice system”.For Johnson, staying close to Trump has paid off, particularly as the speaker has overseen passage of government funding and military aid to Ukraine, neither favoured by Trump and his supporters on the far right of a far-right Republican party.Last week, with support from Democrats, Johnson defeated an attempt to remove him mounted by Marjorie Taylor Greene, the Georgia extremist who has touted herself as a Trump running mate.In a statement on Tuesday, Alex Floyd, rapid response director for the Democratic National Committee, mocked Trump’s need for “emotional support” from Johnson and others, and took a shot at the speaker for absenting himself from the House.“Donald Trump is convening the saddest posse of Maga loyalists … desperate for emotional support and political cover as he spends another week tending to his personal affairs rather than talking to actual voters,” Floyd said.“Trump’s pathetic band … seemingly have nothing better to do than echo Trump’s lies and nod approvingly in the background – because they certainly aren’t doing their day jobs of serving their constituents or running a functional political operation.” More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in US Politics

    Arizona supreme court delays enforcement of 1864 abortion ban

    The Arizona supreme court on Monday granted a motion to stay the enforcement of an 1864 law that bans almost all abortions, a win for reproductive rights activists in the swing state.The state’s highest court agreed to the Arizona attorney general Kris Mayes’s request for a 90-day delay of the near-total ban, further pushing back enforcement of the 1864 legislation after a repeal of the ban was passed earlier this month.The stay will last until 12 August. A separate court case on the legislation which granted an additional 45-day stay means the law cannot be enforced until 26 September, Mayes said in a statement.“I am grateful that the Arizona supreme court has stayed enforcement of the 1864 law and granted our motion to stay the mandate in this case for another 90 days,” she said.Mayes added that her office is weighing the “best legal course of action”, including a petition to the US supreme court.The latest decision comes two weeks after the Democratic Arizona governor, Katie Hobbs, signed a law to repeal the ban.But the most recent repeal can only take place 90 days after the Arizona legislative session ends, possibly allowing for a small window when the ban could be enforced.Last year’s session ended on 31 July, NBC News reported. If lawmakers adhere to that timeline, the ban could be in effect for approximately a month, until late October.Hobbs has said that she will not prosecute any medical practitioners under the 1864 law.The Arizona supreme court rejected a motion from Planned Parenthood Arizona on Monday to hold off on enforcing the 1864 ban until the repeal takes effect.On the latest court ruling, the reproductive health organization vowed to continue fighting to “[ensure] all Arizonans can access the care they need in a safe, caring environment”, according to a statement.“We will not be intimidated or silenced by anti-abortion extremists, because our bodies and our autonomy are at stake.”In Arizona, abortion is currently banned after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The 1864 abortion law bans nearly all abortions, except to save a woman’s life. The US civil war-era law does not make exceptions for rape or incest.Residents of the swing state will probably vote on a referendum on abortion come November after a coalition of reproductive rights organizations collected enough signatures to get the issue on the 2024 ballot. More

  • 213 Shares109 Views

    in US Politics

    Trump’s hush-money case has proven he’s a low-life. Can it prove he’s a criminal? | Margaret Sullivan

    When you set out to explore Donald Trump’s personal life and business practices, you don’t expect to meet any paragons of virtue.Sleazy media figures who buy and “kill” damaging stories? Yes. An adult film actor ready to tell all to make a buck? Certainly. A parade of spokespeople and staffers who compromised their own integrity during his presidential administration? No doubt.A conman, philanderer and grifter himself, the ex-president always has surrounded himself with dicey characters. That’s how he rolls. So it’s hardly surprising that Michael Cohen, the star prosecution witness in the so-called “hush-money” case unfolding in New York City, fits right in.The former Trump lawyer and fixer pleaded guilty in 2018 to campaign-finance violations, tax fraud and bank fraud. He pleaded guilty to lying to Congress. He went to jail. And he was disbarred.That’s why it would be funny – if it weren’t so cringe-inducing – to hear the way Cohen is being praised by some commentators in the endless talk loop of cable-news trial coverage.“Michael’s one of the good guys,” was the assessment of CNN guest-talker Anthony Scaramucci, who memorably lasted less than two weeks as Trump’s communications director and who is now vehemently opposed to Trump winning a second term.I’m all for redemption, but I wouldn’t go that far. I certainly wouldn’t hold up Michael Cohen as an example of a great American.But, against the odds, Cohen’s testimony does ring true. (Not that one can hear it directly; unfortunately, the trial is not being televised or even recorded for audio only.)His words, and the description of his demeanor from those inside the courtroom, make a kind of consistent and logical sense. What’s more, much of it has been “pre-corroborated” by testimony and evidence earlier in the trial.We’ve heard from people such as David Pecker, who ran the National Enquirer, where he caused damaging stories to be given the “catch-and-kill” treatment to help Trump gain the presidency in 2016. We’ve seen supporting text messages and emails and documents.On the stand on Monday, Cohen didn’t spare himself. He admits he lied and falsified in protecting his boss. He even admitted to secretly recording Trump during a one-on-one meeting and, because the audio has gone public, we can hear the two of them hashing out one of their seedy arrangements; respectable lawyers don’t do that to or with their clients.And he certainly didn’t spare Trump, instead portraying him as the equivalent of a mob boss, as well as someone intimately involved with every decision in keeping his tawdry relationships secret as he sought the presidency in 2016.What the New York district attorney must prove, though, is criminality, not low-life behavior.Will a jury decide that Trump’s behavior amounted to criminal election interference? That will require a lot of connecting the dots – that Stormy Daniels not only was paid off to keep quiet about the time she claims to have had sex with Trump, but that the payment was then recorded falsely in a way that violates campaign finance law.If those dots are going to be connected, it’s Cohen who must connect them.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIt’s not an airtight case. Rather, it is “the least muscular and existentially threatening of the four criminal prosecutions Trump faces”, wrote the Trump biographer Tim O’Brien this week.But it’s likely to be the only case that’s going to come to trial before the election. For those who want a shred of accountability for Trump’s endless misdeeds, this is the one they’ve got. And, given that, Cohen is essential.Can jurors find him credible, given his checkered past? Even if they do, is it possible to make the leap to criminal violations of campaign-finance law? And could every one of them then agree to convict?That’s an Everest-high mountain to climb. Trump’s lawyers are sure to bombard Cohen with his foibles during cross-examination later this week.My take is that Michael Cohen is – finally – telling the truth. He’ll hold up well under the hostile questioning. Jurors will believe him and will buy most of his story, given his consistency and the corroborating evidence and earlier testimony.Finally, Michael Cohen will come off like an honest broker.As for a jury then connecting that credibility to criminal election-law interference? And then, unanimously, deciding to convict the former president?That’s a big stretch.I can believe Michael Cohen’s testimony, but – at least right now – I can’t believe in that outcome.
    Margaret Sullivan is a Guardian US columnist More

  • 138 Shares99 Views

    in US Politics

    Pressure on Democrats as Republicans look to flip Maryland Senate seat

    Republicans have a rare opportunity to flip a Senate seat in Maryland in November, and the outcome of that race could determine control of the upper chamber. The high stakes of the Maryland Senate election have put intense scrutiny on the state’s primaries this Tuesday.Maryland primary voters will cast ballots in the presidential race as well as congressional elections, and leaders of both parties will be closely watching the results of the Senate contests. The retirement of Senator Ben Cardin has created an opening for Republicans to potentially capture a seat in a reliably Democratic state, thanks to former governor Larry Hogan’s late entry into the race. A Hogan victory would mark the first time that a Republican has won a Maryland Senate election since 1980, and it could erase Democrats’ narrow majority in the chamber.Ten Democrats will compete for the party’s Senate nomination, but two candidates have become the clear frontrunners: Congressman Dave Trone and the Prince George’s county executive Angela Alsobrooks. The race has historic implications, as Alsobrooks would become the first Black person elected to represent Maryland in the Senate and just the third Black woman to ever serve in the chamber.Alsobrooks’s victory is far from guaranteed, as polls have shown her running neck and neck with Trone in the primary. Trone, the owner of the beverage chain Total Wine & More, has used his personal fortune to boost his Senate campaign. According to documents filed with the Federal Election Commission, Trone has already loaned $61.8m to his campaign.Trone has pitched his ability to self-fund his campaign as a crucial asset for the general election, which has become unexpectedly competitive because of Hogan’s candidacy. Hogan, who is expected to easily win the Republican primary, presents a formidable threat to Democrats. When Hogan left office last year, a poll conducted for Gonzales Research & Media Services showed that 77% of Marylanders, including an astounding 81% of Democrats, approved of the governor’s job performance.Hogan’s candidacy will force Democrats to allocate resources to a Senate race that they had previously assumed would be an easy win in the general election. In 2020, Biden beat Trump by 33 points in Maryland, but Hogan also won his 2018 re-election race by 12 points. Polls of potential general election match-ups have produced mixed results, but both parties will almost certainly have to spend heavily to compete in the state. The Cook Political Report currently rates the Maryland Senate race as “likely Democrat”.View image in fullscreenElsewhere in the state, the Democratic primary in Maryland’s third congressional district has turned increasingly contentious, after a Super Pac dropped millions of dollars into the race. Of the 22 Democratic contenders running to replace retiring congressman John Sarbanes, the former US Capitol police office Harry Dunn, who wrote a bestselling book about his experience protecting lawmakers during the January 6 insurrection, has the largest national profile. But polls show a close race between him and state senator Sarah Elfreth, who has won the backing of the pro-Israel Super Pac United Democracy Project.Dunn, a first-time candidate, has proven himself to be a prodigious fundraiser, bringing in $4.6m across the election cycle. In comparison, Elfeth’s campaign has raised just $1.5m, but she has received outside help from UDP, which is affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac). UDP has spent at least $4.2m in support of Elfreth’s campaign, flooding the district with ads promoting her candidacy. Dunn has now turned UDP’s involvement in the race into a campaign issue, framing the “dark money spending” as corrosive to democratic principles.The race to succeed Trone in representing Maryland’s sixth congressional district has also attracted a crowded field of candidates. In the Democratic primary, the former Biden administration official April McClain Delaney and state delegate Joe Vogel have emerged as the frontrunners, while former state delegates Dan Cox and Neil Parrott are viewed as most likely to win the Republican nomination. Of Maryland’s eight congressional districts, the sixth is viewed as the most competitive for the general election, and Cook rates the seat as “likely Democrat”.Although Joe Biden and Donald Trump have both secured their parties’ nominations, Marylanders will still have a chance to weigh in on the presidential race on Tuesday. Biden’s name will appear on his party’s ballot alongside those of the Minnesota congressman Dean Phillips and self-help author Marianne Williamson, but Maryland Democrats also have the option to choose “uncommitted to any presidential candidate”.Mirroring similar efforts in states like Michigan, pro-ceasefire advocates have urged Maryland voters to cast ballots for uncommitted to protest against Biden’s handling of the war in Gaza. The Listen to Maryland campaign hopes that at least 15% of Democratic ballots will be cast for uncommitted, and they have reached out to hundreds of thousands of voters leading up to Tuesday.In the Republican presidential primary, only the names of Trump and the former UN ambassador Nikki Haley will appear on the ballot. Although Haley dropped out of the race in March, she has continued to win votes in the weeks since, which has been viewed as a potential warning sign for Trump heading into the general election. In the Indiana primary held last week, Haley secured nearly 22% of the Republican vote, and leaders of both parties will be watching for a similar result in Maryland. More