Evelyn Reynolds

More stories

  • 188 Shares159 Views

    in US Politics

    Joe Biden’s memory lapses: might he take a leaf out of LBJ’s book? | Letters

    Re Joe Biden’s response to questions about his memory and mental capacity (Biden was in a fighting mood for surprise speech – but he didn’t win, 9 February), on 31 March 1968, Lyndon Johnson made a speech supporting his decision not to run for a second term in the White House, on the grounds that he wanted to devote his remaining months in office to finding a way of bringing the Vietnam war to a peaceful conclusion. The subtext of course was that, if he ran, he would almost certainly lose on the grounds of his association with events in Vietnam.Surely here is a precedent that Biden and his advisers might consider seriously? He might announce his withdrawal from the presidential race on the grounds of his determination to use his considerable powers, contacts and experience to resolve issues in Gaza as well as in Ukraine. By doing so, he would turn the focus of the age-related issues sharply towards Donald Trump while giving his party the time and opportunity to create a campaign that would command greater support from members of his party and electors more generally.Michael J RyanHull Marina Hyde is quite right (Trump is too old and incited a coup. Biden is too old and mixes up names. America, how to choose?, 9 January). Biden is too old, he doesn’t walk like a 40-year-old and he does not have the memory of one either. However, he does have the sense to employ younger people who have all their marbles and are law-abiding, and he does not want to be a dictator. Common sense and decency are rare in politics, but essential for the president of the US. His only weakness is that he has not yet found out how to deal with Benjamin Netanyahu.Jeffrey FrankelLisbon, Portugal Re Marina Hyde’s article about Joe Biden, I’m 81, and active and healthy, as are many of my friends. All with long professional careers behind us. We know we couldn’t do it now. Neither can Joe Biden. A fact, not a fault. Paula JonesLondon Regardless of his age, Joe Biden should reassure the US electorate that, like any effective leader, he surrounds himself with experts in every field and relies on their wise counsel to make smart decisions. Only a fool would hire gullible yes men and expect anything other than a disaster.Andrew LugtonHarrow, London More

  • 125 Shares129 Views

    in US Politics

    Biden blames Putin for Navalny’s death as Republican ‘apologists’ condemned

    Joe Biden put the blame for the reported death of the Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny on Friday squarely on Vladimir Putin, as many US politicians condemned Putin but also reacted angrily to the silence of some Republican lawmakers.“Make no mistake: Putin is responsible for Navalny’s death,” the US president said from the White House.“What has happened and evolving is yet more proof of Putin’s brutality. No one should be fooled, not in Russia, not at home, not anywhere in the world. Putin does not only target citizens of other countries, as we have seen in what’s going on in Ukraine right now, he also inflicts terrible crimes on his own people.”Meanwhile some leading Republican politicians also decried Navalny’s death, while pointing the finger at some in their own party for appearing to appease the Russian leader.“There is no room in the Republican Party for apologists for Putin. RIP Alexey Navalny,” wrote the former vice-president Mike Pence on social media.Pence added: “Putin is a war criminal and only understands strength”, and urged Congress to “set aside the politics of the moment” and to pass legislation supporting aid to Ukraine.The North Carolina senator Thom Tillis also criticized Republicans who have expressed qualified sympathies for the Russian president.“Navalny laid down his life fighting for the freedom of the country he loved,” Tillis said.“Putin is a murderous, paranoid dictator. History will not be kind to those in America who make apologies for Putin and praise Russian autocracy. Nor will history be kind to America’s leaders who stay silent because they fear backlash from online pundits.”Both men were apparently referring to members of the Republican party who have in recent weeks slowed the passage of a $60bn military aid package to Ukraine.Last week, the Republican senator Ron Johnson was apparently moved to vote against the aid after watching Vladimir Putin’s interview with Tucker Carlson. Johnson said that while Putin “is a war criminal [who is] obviously not telling you the whole truth”, his sit-down with the former Fox News host was “very interesting”, and that “an awful lot of what Vladimir Putin said was right … accurate and obvious”.Others, including the Republican congressman Clay Higgins of Louisiana, a House Freedom caucus member, have recently expressed open admiration for the Russian president.“Putin is a studied man of resolute spirit, and he always comes across as very sincere in his beliefs. You come away from a conversation with him thinking ‘I may not believe what he says, but I know he believes what he says,’” Higgins has said.In his address on Friday, Biden said that “history is watching the House of Representatives” and a “failure to support Ukraine at this critical moment will never be forgotten. It will go down in the pages of history. It’s consequential, and the clock is ticking. This has to happen. We have to help now.”While none of the leaders immediately put out statements about Navalny, the Republican congressman Michael McCaul, who heads the foreign affairs committee, said: “If confirmed, the death of Alexei Navalny is a tragedy. He was a voice for a better Russia amid the corruption and brutality of Putin’s genocidal regime. The Kremlin must be held to account for this outrage.”Democratic leaders, for their part, expressed united outrage at Navalny’s death. The vice-president, Kamala Harris, called Navalny’s death in prison “a further sign of Putin’s brutality”.Whatever story they tell, let us be clear: Russia is responsible, and we will have more to say on this later,” Harris said at the top of keynote remarks at the Munich Security Conference.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionReports of Navalny’s death come days after the likely Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump, said the US would not defend Nato allies from Russian attack, a core principle of the alliance, if they did not meet their obligation to spend 2% of their national economic output on defense.On Friday, before the Navalny news, the Biden re-election campaign pushed out a fresh ad targeting Trump’s comments. “Trump wants to walk away from Nato. He’s even given Putin the green light to attack America’s allies,” it states, calling the former president’s rhetoric “shameful”, “weak” and “un-American”.Speaking at the White House, Biden took another swipe at Trump for his Nato comments, saying: “All of us should reject the dangerous statements made by the previous president that invited Russia to invade our Nato allies if they weren’t paying up.”Referring to Trump, Biden went on: “He said if an ally did not pay their dues, he encouraged Russia to, quote: ‘Do whatever the hell they want.’“I guess I should clear my mind a little bit and not say what I’m really thinking, but let me be clear – this is an outrageous thing for a [former] president to say. I can’t fathom it.“As long as I’m president, America stands by our sacred commitment to our Nato allies.”Trump did not mention the Navalny reports on Friday in their immediate aftermath, and instead posted a message about how he would save the Teamster union from the effects of immigration and another about the Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis.The Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley hit out at Trump for his past praise of the Russian leader.“Putin did this,” Haley wrote on Friday morning on X, in response to news of Navalny’s death in prison. “The same Putin who Donald Trump praises and defends. The same Trump who said: ‘In all fairness to Putin, you’re saying he killed people. I haven’t seen that.’”Biden, asked directly by a reporter at the White House whether Navalny’s death was an “assassination”, responded:“We don’t know exactly what happened but there’s no doubt that the death of Navalny is a consequence of something Putin and his thugs did.” More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in US Politics

    Joe Manchin announces he won’t be running for president

    Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia has announced that he will not be launching a presidential campaign, ending speculation about a run for the White House that would have thrown more chaos and confusion into an already tumultuous 2024 election season.Manchin, a centrist Democrat from a deep red state, has long been a thorn in the side of his party and especially its left wing. Since announcing his decision not seek re-election to the Senate, Manchin, 76, has toyed with the idea that he might launch an independent or third-party bid for the White House.“I will not be seeking a third-party run. I will not be involved in a presidential run,” Manchin said during remarks in Morgantown, West Virginia, on Friday. He insisted that his focus was on bridging divides at a moment of deep political polarization, and said he would not want to play the role of “spoiler” in an all-but-certain rematch between Joe Biden and Donald Trump.“I just don’t think it’s the right time,” Manchin said. “Democracy is at stake right now.”His announcement comes against a backdrop of widespread voter dissatisfaction with both the incumbent, who at 81 years old is seen by many as being too old for a second term, and his predecessor, 77, whose legal travails and extremist rhetoric have spurred fears of a political crisis in the US should he win.“I will be involved in making sure that we secure a president that has the knowledge and has the passion and has the ability to bring this country together,” Manchin said. “And right now we’re challenged.”Following his decision in November to forgo a re-election campaign, Manchin had embarked on a nationwide listening tour as he stoked speculation of a presidential run. He aligned himself with No Labels, a centrist organization that has been exploring ways to field a bipartisan, third-party presidential ticket for voters who say they are disenchanted by the prospect of a Biden-Trump repeat in 2024. In July, the senator joined an event hosted by the organization in the early primary state of New Hampshire.As recently as Thursday, a day before his announcement, Manchin told an audience in Cleveland, Ohio, that his top choice of running mate would be Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee and retiring Utah senator.“Hypothetically, if I was picking my running mate, really who I would ask right now is Mitt Romney,” Manchin said during a Q&A at a City Club of Cleveland breakfast on Thursday. He also named former Ohio senator Bob Portman, a moderate Republican known for crossing the aisle.Manchin, whose once reliably Democratic state is now overwhelmingly pro-Trump, has been a fierce critic of Biden and sought to portray him as a leftist. But he also has said repeatedly that he did not want his actions to help return Trump to office.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWhile his decision not to seek re-election was a setback for Democrats’ hopes of holding their slim Senate majority, the news that he would not run for president was a welcome one for his party.Democrats are already confronting third-party challenges from Robert F Kennedy Jr, who is considering running on the Libertarian ticket, as well as from Jill Stein, the Green party nominee, and and Cornel West, who is running as an independent.Republicans are favored to claim Manchin’s Senate seat in November, with the governor, Jim Justice, and Congressman Alex Mooney battling for the GOP nomination. More

  • 125 Shares129 Views

    in US Politics

    Biden ‘privately defiant’ over chaotic 2021 Afghanistan withdrawal, book says

    Joe Biden is “privately defiant” that he made the right calls on the US withdrawal from Afghanistan in summer 2021, a new book reportedly says, even as the chaos and carnage that unfolded continues to be investigated in Congress.“No one offered to resign” over the withdrawal, writes Alexander Ward, a Politico reporter, “in large part because the president didn’t believe anyone had made a mistake. Ending the war was always going to be messy.”Ward’s book, The Internationalists: The Fight to Restore Foreign Policy After Trump, will be published next week. Axios reported extracts on Friday.Ward adds: “Biden told his top aides, [national security adviser Jake] Sullivan included, that he stood by them and they had done their best during a tough situation.”Ward quotes an unnamed White House official as saying: “There wasn’t even a real possibility of a shake-up.”The US invaded Afghanistan in October 2001, a month after the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington. The Taliban, which had sheltered the leader of al-Qaida, Osama bin Laden, was soon ousted but fighting never ceased.Figures for the total US death toll in the country since 2001 vary. The United States Institute of Peace, an independent body established by Congress, says that 2,324 US military personnel, 3,917 US contractors and 1,144 allied troops were killed during the conflict. More than 20,000 Americans were wounded.“For Afghans,” the institute goes on, “the statistics are nearly unimaginable: 70,000 Afghan military and police deaths, 46,319 Afghan civilians (although that is likely a significant underestimation) and some 53,000 opposition fighters killed. Almost 67,000 other people were killed in Pakistan in relation to the Afghan war.”Hundreds of thousands were displaced. Furthermore, according to the Watson Institute of International and Public Affairs at Brown University, “four times as many [US] service members have died by suicide than in combat in the post-9/11 wars [including Iraq and other campaigns], signaling a widespread mental health crisis”.Biden entered office determined to withdraw, and in late summer 2021 US forces pulled out, leaving the defense of the country to US-trained Afghan national forces.The Taliban swiftly overran that opposition, and soon scenes of chaos at Kabul airport dominated world news. Tens of thousands of Afghans who sought to leave, fearing Taliban reprisals after a 20-year US occupation, were unable to get out. More than 800 US citizens were left behind, notwithstanding Biden’s promise on 18 August that troops would stay until every US citizen who wanted to leave had done so.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWard, Axios said, quotes a senior White House official as saying: “There’s no one here who thinks we can meet that promise.”On 26 August, 13 US service members were killed in a suicide attack. Three days later, a US drone strike killed 10 Afghan civilians, seven of them children. No Americans faced disciplinary action over the strike, which a US air force inspector general called “an honest mistake”.According to Axios, Ward also details extensive infighting over the withdrawal between the Departments of State and Defense.Biden, Ward says, tended to favour the state department, having been chair of the Senate foreign affairs committee, and to be wary of the Pentagon, having been vice-president to Barack Obama through eight years of inconclusive war. More

  • 88 Shares159 Views

    in US Politics

    Georgia voters shrug off Biden-Trump age question

    Next week, Frank Stovall turns 103. The retired Lockheed engineer has until recently been a lifelong Atlantan, is a veteran of two wars, and is old enough to remember when Republicans were rare in Georgia.“Well, yes, I think they’re both healthy,” Stovall said, when asked at the Church at Wieuca in Buckhead about the mental fitness for office of President Joe Biden and former president Donald Trump. “I’m a Republican, but I’m not going to vote for Trump, if I can help it. I hate to say this, but I think he was a traitor to the country on January 6.“Biden? I’ve been really impressed with him on everything except the border thing. But yeah, I think Biden is a good man. If he got mental lapses … goodness, most of us do when you get a few years on you.”Buckhead, an affluent neighborhood of Atlanta, is split between Republicans and Democrats. Georgia is often described as a politically purple state, with strong Democrats and strong Republicans competing to be seen in nearly equal numbers – though spaces where they cohabitate are scarce.So when a special prosecutor at the Department of Justice released a report last week alleging striking gaps in Biden’s memory and mental acuity, political pundits jumped to assess how the issue of age will affect the American presidential election in places like this. But in the US, broad opinions matter much less than those of the relatively small number of persuadable voters.“Basically, you’re catering to a million voters, in a few states,” said Clarence Blalock, a political consultant in Georgia who is competing in the Democratic primary to challenge Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene. The average age of voters tends to be older than the general public, he said, and any strategy questioning the competence of the president – or Donald Trump – due to age may backfire. “They may feel insulted by it. I don’t think it’s a good strategy.”Certainly, many on the right saw in the report’s accusations a confirmation of what they already believe about Biden – that he is largely a figurehead, with decisions being made by others. “I feel sorry for him,” said Chris Swindell, 68, a self-described libertarian from Marietta. “He comes out, and he’s not running the country. The people in the background are running the country.”But few will flip their votes over the age issue, Blalock said. He noted that most partisans had already decided to overlook the flaws of their own candidates.One of those is Jimmy Bennett, 67, a staunch Republican and Trump voter.“Listen, we know a lot of older people that are on the money with their mindset,” said Bennett over a slice of pie at Matthew’s Cafeteria in politically ecumenical Tucker, Georgia.“But if they start making these crazy decisions, and start doing things way off, and then you can see the degrade, then that’s the time to step in.”Only about 10% of voters in Georgia consider changing their votes for any reason at all, and no matter who is running. In 2022, despite the threats of defection by stalwart Trump supporters, the Republican governor, Brian Kemp, defeated Democrat Stacey Abrams by about 300,000 votes out of roughly 4m ballots, but on the same day, the Democratic senator Raphael Warnock beat his Republican challenger, Herschel Walker, by about 40,000 votes (and later won a runoff by about 100,000).“We’re never going to have a 60-40 election,” said Brian Robinson, a Republican strategist and political commentator here. “We wouldn’t have a 60-40 election if Biden died and people were voting for a dead person.”Nonetheless, the age issue is top of mind for Americans of both parties, he said, consistently ranking along with immigration and the economy as the main concerns voters express. In that regard, the special prosecutor’s report was a blow to the Biden campaign. “Democrats are hoping that independent voters are coming to Biden because they don’t like Trump. The [age] issue nullifies some of that Democratic advantage,” Robinson said.“The Biden campaign has, in some way, to provide optics that he’s healthy mentally and physically – and that’s a risk.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBut Trump has to be careful too, Robinson said. “The Democrats are trying to create an equivalency there. [Trump] has to avoid providing Democrats with ammo showing equivalent incapacity.”That may prove difficult, given Trump’s own propensity for mental lapses – for every time Biden confuses a Macron with a Mitterrand, Trump takes a Haley for a Pelosi – and equally advanced age: currently 81 and 77, both Biden and Trump would, if elected, be the oldest presidents ever.“I think Donald Trump is a fool and an idiot, and I think he has no mental acuity – period – because he doesn’t live in a world of reality. He lives in a fantasy world where facts are not facts,” said Jackie Goodman, 74, a fourth-generation Atlantan.For Goodman, her choice is about policy – she identifies as a pro-choice voter – and less about either man running.“I wish we could have a younger candidate who has a lot more vitality,” she admits. “But I definitely would not vote Republican – and I definitely would not vote for Trump.”Indeed, the question may be less about whether the age issue makes anyone switch their vote, but rather if it makes voters simply check out, said Blalock. Given the importance of turnout in US elections, how many Americans decide not to vote at all could prove crucial.“The idea that Biden doesn’t have it together, so I’m going to vote for Trump … I mean, do people think Trump has it together [either]?” he asked.“Or [do they] just stay home?” More

  • 188 Shares199 Views

    in US Politics

    Why do so many Americans believe the Taylor Swift and Joe Biden conspiracy? – podcast

    Just under a fifth of Americans believe Taylor Swift is part of a conspiracy to help Joe Biden win re-election in November, a new poll found this week. The global pop star has been a regular feature at NFL games since September, when she was first spotted linking arms with the Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce.
    Before the Chiefs won the Super Bowl on Sunday, rightwing commentators had suggested the championship was rigged by the Biden administration and Swift was secretly helping in order to sway the election in November.
    So where did this conspiracy theory come from? Why are conservatives so obsessed with Swift? And did the Biden team do the right thing by jokingly feeding the conspiracy? Jonathan Freedland speaks to Nikki McCann Ramírez of Rolling Stone magazine to try to figure it out

    How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know More

  • 138 Shares129 Views

    in US Politics

    FBI informant charged with lying about Bidens’ role in Ukraine business

    An FBI informant has been charged with lying to his handler about ties between Joe Biden, his son Hunter and a Ukrainian energy company.Alexander Smirnov falsely told FBI agents in June 2020 that executives associated with the Ukrainian energy company Burisma paid Hunter and Joe Biden $5m each in 2015 and 2016, prosecutors said on Thursday.Smirnov told the FBI that a Burisma executive had claimed to have hired Hunter Biden to “protect us, through his dad, from all kinds of problems”, prosecutors said in a statement.The allegations became a flashpoint in Congress over the summer as Republicans demanded the FBI release the unredacted form documenting the allegations as they pursued investigations of Biden and his family. They acknowledged at the time that it was unclear if the allegations were true.The new development sharply undermines the thrust of congressional Republicans’ corruption accusations that the US president was making money from his son Hunter’s business dealings in Ukraine.Smirnov, 43, was charged with making a false statement and creating a false and fictitious record. No attorney was immediately listed for him in court records.Smirnov appeared in court in Las Vegas briefly on Thursday after being charged with making a false statement and creating a false and fictitious record. He did not enter a plea. The judge ordered the courtroom cleared after federal public defender Margaret Wightman Lambrose requested a closed hearing for arguments about sealing court documents. She declined to comment on the case.The charges were filed by the justice department special counsel David Weiss, who has separately charged Hunter with firearm and tax violations.Hunter’s legal team did not immediately return a message seeking comment.The informant’s claims have been central to the Republican effort in Congress to investigate the president and his family, and helped spark what is now a House impeachment inquiry into Biden.Prosecutors say Smirnov had contact with Burisma executives, but it was routine and actually took place in 2017, after Barack Obama, the US president, and Biden, his vice-president, had left office – when Biden would have had no ability to influence US policy.Smirnov “transformed his routine and unextraordinary business contacts with Burisma in 2017 and later into bribery allegations against public official 1, the presumptive nominee of one of the two major political parties for president, after expressing bias against public official 1 and his candidacy,” the indictment said.He repeated some of the false claims when he was interviewed by FBI agents in September last year and changed his story about others and “promoted a new false narrative after he said he met with Russian officials”, prosecutors said.If convicted, Smirnov faces a maximum penalty of 25 years in prison.The House oversight committee chairman James Comer, a Republican representing Kentucky, had subpoenaed the FBI last year for the so-called FD-1023 document as Republicans deepened their inquiries into the US president and Hunter ahead of the 2024 presidential election.Working alongside Comer, the Republican senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa released an unclassified document that Republicans at the time claimed was significant in their investigation of Hunter.It added to information that had been widely aired during Donald Trump’s first impeachment trial involving Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani’s efforts to dig up dirt on the Bidens ahead of the 2020 election. The White House said at the time that the claims had been debunked for years.The impeachment inquiry into Biden over his son’s business dealings has lagged in the House, but the panel is pushing ahead with its work. Hunter is expected to appear before the committee later this month for an interview.The Associated Press contributed reporting More

  • 175 Shares169 Views

    in US Politics

    Personal questions, and a witness stays mum: key moments from the Fani Willis hearing

    On the first day of a heated hearing, the Fulton county district attorney Fani Willis and her deputy, special prosecutor Nathan Wade, took the stand, hoping to put an end to the allegations that their past relationship threatens the criminal case against Donald Trump and his allies in their attempts to overturn the 2020 election.A defendant in the Trump case, Mike Roman, is seeking to have Willis and Wade disqualified, alleging their relationship constituted a conflict of interest. His lawyer attempted to prove Willis financially benefitted from her relationship with Wade.If Roman is successful in having Willis relieved from bringing the case, it would result in the disqualification of the entire district attorney’s office.Here were some key moments from the hearing on Thursday.A key witness decided to stay mumTerrence Bradley, a former law partner of Nathan Wade, was supposed to be the witness that set up the dominoes to fall by testifying that the district attorney’s relationship began earlier than Wade had asserted in an affidavit. Superior court judge Scott McAfee implied that a decision to quash subpoenas for Wade, Willis and others depended in part on whether Bradley’s testimony was powerful enough to overcome suspicions that the whole legal gambit was a fishing exercise and a distraction.But Bradley, who served as Wade’s divorce lawyer for a time, cited attorney-client privilege and refused to testify about the details of his knowledge about the relationship between Wade and Willis.For a moment, it appeared that this would be the beginning and end of the hearing.A former friend gave perhaps the most damning testimony – if trueRobin Bryant-Yeartie, a former friend of Willis’s, testified that she was aware that Willis was romantically engaged with Wade. Bryant-Yeartie said they had started dating in 2019, before Willis had been elected as district attorney and before Donald Trump’s “perfect phone call” to Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensberger, which set off the investigation.Bryant-Yeartie’s testimony directly contradicted Wade’s sworn statement in an affidavit in his divorce case, which said he had not been involved in a relationship with someone else while still married. Prosecutors noted in Willis’s defense that Bryant-Yeartie and Willis had had a falling out and that Bryant-Yeartie had left the district attorney’s office in acrimony, but the testimony was enough to open the door, compelling Wade, and then later Willis, to take the stand.Wade was backed into a corner, but he still surprised the courtWade’s testimony had twists and turns, revealing more of the timeline and that he had cancer in 2020, limiting his time for outside relationships during the pandemic. He also tried to underscore the way he and Willis say they shared the bills: with him paying by credit card and her reimbursing him with cash.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBut the lawyers, with their persistence, sometimes left him with no choice but to be direct.“Are you asking me if I had intercourse with the district attorney?” Wade said, after attorney Steve Sadow asked him if they had any kind of personal relationship after June 2023. Wade said no and that he has had no romantic relationship since.Fani came to fight, her wayOriginally objecting to taking the stand, Willis essentially overrode her lawyers to testify on Thursday afternoon. “I’m ready to go,” she said.With the spotlight on her, Willis attempted to explain and rebuff every allegation, and refocus the message. Sometimes, she was cheeky. “He likes wine. I don’t really like wine, to be honest with you,” she said, when explaining a trip to Napa Valley with Wade. “I like Grey Goose.”At other times, she called the lawyers liars, and tried to circumvent the questions to send a message to the public. “You’re confused … I’m not on trial,” she said to attorney Ashleigh Merchant. “These people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020.” More