Evelyn Reynolds

Good morning. The daily details of the horror being visited on civilians in Gaza can make any conversation about the language of ceasefire proposals being put forward in foreign capitals seem absurd.A massive majority at the UN general assembly backed a ceasefire in December; so did the pope. A few days later, both Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer backed a “sustainable” ceasefire. Twenty-six of 27 EU states again called for a ceasefire on Monday. Benjamin Netanyahu has not yet been persuaded by any of them.But the calls for a ceasefire, and the subtle ways that they’ve changed over time, do tell us something about Israel’s weakening position on the international stage. This week, in the UK and at the UN, rival propositions for what a ceasefire might look like have emerged. Behind the diplomatic wrangling, and a particular crisis today for the Labour party in Britain, is a complicated story about how the violence might end, and who might be able to influence it.The Guardian’s diplomatic editor, Patrick Wintour, has been covering these discussions. For today’s newsletter, I asked him whether any of them will make any difference. Here are the headlines.Five big stories
Health | Patients whose health is failing will be granted the right to obtain an urgent second opinion about their care, as “Martha’s rule” is initially adopted in 100 English hospitals from April at the start of a national rollout. The initiative follows a campaign by Merope Mills, a senior editor at the Guardian, and her husband, Paul Laity, after their 13-year-old daughter Martha died of sepsis at King’s College hospital in London in 2021.
UK news | Detectives hunting for Abdul Ezedi, the man wanted over a chemical assault that injured a vulnerable woman and her two young daughters, have recovered a body in the Thames that they believe is Ezedi, Scotland Yard has said. “We have been in contact with his family to pass on the news,” said Cmdr Jon Savell.
WikiLeaks | Julian Assange faces the risk of a “flagrant denial of justice” if tried in the US, the high court has heard. Lawyers for Assange are seeking permission to appeal against the WikiLeaks founder’s extradition, and say he could face a “grossly disproportionate” sentence of up to 175 years if convicted in the US.
PPE contracts | Michael Gove failed to register hospitality he enjoyed with a Conservative donor whose company he had recommended for multimillion-pound personal protective equipment (PPE) contracts during the Covid pandemic. When asked by the Guardian about not registering VIP hospitality at a football match he received from David Meller, a spokesperson for Gove apologised for the “oversight”.
Pakistan | Imran Khan’s political rivals have announced details of a coalition agreement, naming Shehbaz Sharif as their joint candidate for prime minister amid continuing concerns about the legitimacy of the recent elections. Candidates aligned with Khan won the most seats in the parliamentary elections but not enough to form a government.
In depth: ‘The use of the word ceasefire in a US resolution is a shot across Israel’s bows’View image in fullscreenThe prospect of an Israeli ground operation in Rafah, where about 1.5 million Palestinians have now sought sanctuary, has made the urgency over the question of a new ceasefire greater than ever. Israel says that unless Hamas frees every hostage by the beginning of Ramadan on 10 March, it will launch its offensive; if so, there could be dire humanitarian consequences, and a danger of more violence in the West Bank and escalation across the Middle East.Israel and Hamas have been participating in talks in Cairo brokered by the US, Egypt and Qatar. And while the Qatari prime minister, Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, said that recent days “were not really very promising”, discussions are still continuing, Patrick Wintour said: “The focus at the moment is on the number of Palestinian prisoners who would be released in exchange for each hostage. But the pressure is certainly growing.” Two resolutions at the UN and three motions and amendments in the UK parliament this week help make sense of the nature, and limits, of that pressure.The Algerian resolution | ‘Immediate humanitarian ceasefire’Algeria, the only Arab state currently on the UN security council, brought a resolution forward calling for a ceasefire to begin immediately – and endorsing the provisional orders issued by the international court of justice obliging Israel to take action to prevent genocide.13 security council members supported the resolution – but the UK abstained, and the US used its veto. Washington claimed that the Algerian text risked disrupting negotiations aimed at agreeing a hostage release deal in Cairo – although, as Patrick pointed out: “The Arab Group [including Egypt and Qatar] at the UN has made it very clear that they don’t agree with that.” Others suggest that the US, although now more distant from Israel, is simply not willing to back a resolution demanding it agree to an immediate ceasefire.“The Algerians did initially hope that they could win US support for this,” he said. “They were willing to make changes to try to accommodate the Americans. But at the weekend they decided they weren’t going to get that support, so they went ahead without them.”The US resolution | ‘A temporary ceasefire’ beginning ‘as soon as practicable’If the inevitability of the veto might make Algeria’s resolution appear pointless, the fruits of its efforts are not in the vote itself, but in another resolution which will likely be voted on later this week – brought forward by the US in response.Washington has now used its security council veto three times to protect Israel, Patrick noted: “They needed to show that they have some sort of solution to the impasse, not simply putting their hands up and saying ‘No’.”The language is sharp on the prospect of an attack in Rafah, which is said to hold “serious implications for regional peace and security”. The use of the word “ceasefire” in a US resolution for the first time also feels significant, Patrick added: “It’s a shot across Israel’s bows. They’re saying, you mustn’t start a ground offensive, and you must start to let aid in more substantially.”At the same time, he noted, “it’s important not to be bamboozled by the use of that word”. Probably more important is the phrase “as soon as practicable” – which would appear to give Israel total latitude over timing and terms. “It isn’t a demand for a ceasefire now, it’s a proposal for a ceasefire in the future,” Patrick said. “So it does put some sort of pressure on Netanyahu, but a lot less than, for example, stopping sending arms would do.”The SNP motion | ‘An immediate ceasefire’Opposition day motions in the UK House of Commons are non-binding, and obviously far less consequential than security council resolutions. But they do suggest that the centre of gravity on the issue in UK politics might be shifting – a little.The Scottish National party put forward a motion calling for an immediate ceasefire in November; their new motion today is substantively very similar. Although it calls for the release of all hostages taken by Hamas, it does not say that should be a prerequisite: “It calls for an immediate ceasefire without saying that there are any conditions attached,” Patrick said.Labour has been worried that a number of its MPs would break ranks to support the SNP motion, not least because it is substantively so close to what many of them have been saying already. That is part of why it finally came up with its own amendment yesterday.The Labour amendment | ‘An immediate stop to the fighting and a ceasefire that lasts and is observed by all sides’“I don’t think they would have tabled this now but for the SNP putting its own motion forward,” Patrick said. “They can point to external events, like the level of bombardment in Gaza – but ultimately this is the result of knowing that they were facing another very sizeable rebellion.”For more detail on the Labour text, see this analysis from Kiran Stacey. “The amendment is very long, but it does show that they’ve moved – for instance, it says: ‘Israelis have the right to the assurance that the horror of 7 October cannot happen again.’ Previously, they’ve said that Hamas can’t be left in a military position to mount such a strike again – so it seems to back away from that idea.”It is also the first time Labour has called for an “immediate” ceasefire. Nonetheless, it is much less straightforward than the SNP text: the left-wing campaign group Momentum says that “by making its call for a ceasefire so conditional and caveated, the Labour leadership is giving cover for Israel’s brutal war to continue”.Labour’s slowness to respond to growing public pressure, particularly among its own voters, on Gaza is because “they’re trying to stay as close to the UK government position as possible, and to the US”, Patrick said. “They would view it as politically risky to be too far from either.”But Labour’s manoeuvres have not headed off the risk of rebellion. While officials believed yesterday that they had persuaded potential rebels to support their motion over the SNP’s, the government later published its own amendment – and it is not yet clear whether that text or Labour’s will be put to a vote today. If Labour’s amendment is not on the table, dozens of MPs could yet rebel and back the SNP.The UK government amendment | ‘Negotiations to agree a … pause’For a long time, the British government (and Labour) position appeared defined by the term “sustainable ceasefire”. “That became a code, really, for saying that there’s no need for Israel to commit to anything until Hamas was obliterated,” Patrick said. “You hear that much less now. Foreign Office officials now say that the idea Hamas can be militarily destroyed is for the birds.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionNonetheless, the government repeats that language in its proposed amendment to the SNP motion. It endorses only “negotiations to agree an immediate humanitarian pause” and then “moves towards a permanent sustainable ceasefire” – and says that getting there will require the release of all hostages, and “Hamas to be unable to launch further attacks and no longer in charge in Gaza”. That ultimately still accepts that a decision about timing is in Israel’s power – which is why so many Labour MPs will struggle to back it.Do all of these triangulations, whether at the UN or in Westminster, really matter? “I doubt if you’re in Gaza you’re waiting with bated breath to hear what the Labour or SNP motions say,” Patrick said. “And even though Netanyahu’s not popular, the Israel public still doesn’t support a ceasefire. But diplomatic movements like these have brought accumulating pressure to bear on Israel, and placed limits on where they can go.”What else we’ve been readingView image in fullscreen
Members of Generation Z are allegedly going to bed at 9pm: Tim Dowling (above), who is a little older, spent a week trying it for himself. “I sleep fitfully and, after a certain point, not at all,” he grumbles. “My biological clock has blown its mainspring.” Archie
In 1974, a group of young families established the Old Hall community in an 18th-century manor house, running an ad in the Guardian seeking other “middle-class socialists” to join them. Emine Saner visited the commune to see how the project was fairing all these years later and the legacy it has created. Nimo
I absolutely loved Fergal Kinney’s headlong dive into the lore of Sex Lives of the Potato Men, a movie so bad that it arguably broke British cinema, and quite a few careers. Especially good are an extract from Peter Bradshaw’s brutal review, and the surprising turn to experimental theatre at the end. Archie
Gaby Hinsliff reflects on Breathtaking, a Covid drama written by a doctor about her experiences in hospital wards at the height of the pandemic, and asks whether it will shift public opinion on the forthcoming junior doctors’ strikes. Nimo
A gambling addiction treatment centre run by the charity Gordon Moody in Wolverhampton is the only one in the UK catering specifically to women. Jessica Murray reports on the life-changing benefits for those who use the services. Nimo
SportView image in fullscreenFootball | Erling Haaland (above) netted Manchester City’s only goal in a 1-0 victory over Brentford that lifted them into second place in the Premier League table, just one point behind leaders Liverpool. In the Champions League, Luuk de Jong rescued a PSV draw 1-1 against Borussia Dortmund, while a late goal from substitute Marko Arnautovic gave Inter Milan a 1-0 home victory against Atlético Madrid.Tennis | Andy Murray took his first step out of the worst slump of his career as he outplayed France’s Alexandre Müller for much of their battle before holding his nerve at the close to reach the second round of the Qatar Open with a confidence-boosting 6-1, 7-6 (5) victory. Murray entered the court in Doha on a six-match losing streak.Athletics | Radical proposals that could see foul jumps eliminated from the long jump have been criticised as an “April Fools’ joke” by four-time Olympic ­champion Carl Lewis. With around a third of all jumps disqualified at last year’s world championships, World Athletics is to trial a new “take-off zone” instead of the usual fixed wooden board.The front pagesView image in fullscreen“Labour leader faces threat of revolt over Gaza despite call for ceasefire” says our Guardian print edition splash this morning. “William: too many have died in Gaza conflict” – that’s the Daily Mail, while the Telegraph has “William: fighting in Gaza must be brought to an end”. “Prince issues Gaza plea for permanent peace” is how the Times reports it. “‘Cam’s govt knew’” – that’s David Cameron’s government and the wrongful Post Office prosecutions, in the Metro. “Barclays to return £10bn to investors in push for new revenues and balance” is the lead in the Financial Times. “PM: completely ridiculous for illegal migrants to jump the queue” reports the Daily Express. “Putin’s Brit targets” – the Daily Mirror touts as an exclusive its page one story about claims the Russian ruler is putting together a hitlist.Today in FocusView image in fullscreenWhy the NHS needs Martha’s ruleFollowing a campaign by her family in memory of Martha Mills, the NHS is introducing Martha’s rule giving hospital patients in England access to a rapid review from a separate medical team if they are concerned with the care they are receivingCartoon of the day | Ben JenningsView image in fullscreenThe UpsideA bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all badView image in fullscreenFor decades the role of Black Americans in space exploration was diminished and ignored. A new National Geographic documentary seeks to redress this erasure by chronicling the stories of African American pioneers in engineering, science and aviation, who battled violent systemic racism in society while trying to climb the ranks of an industry that was hell bent on keeping them out.Ed Dwight, a pilot who very nearly became the first Black American in space, is featured as a “golden thread” in The Space Race. Dwight, who grew up on a farm in the 1930s, knew he wanted to fly and, against the odds, went on to have a successful career in the US air force. With President John F Kennedy’s recommendation, he was invited to train to be an astronaut at Chuck Yeager’s test pilot programme at an air force base in California. Kennedy called Dwight’s parents to congratulate them and he featured on the covers of Black publications such as Jet. Though Dwight (pictured above in 1954) was not ultimately allowed to go into space, he was considered a hero by many. After retiring, Dwight became a sculptor. His contributions to space exploration were eventually recognised when Nasa named an asteroid after him, describing him as a “space pioneer” who paved the way for Black astronauts that followed.Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every SundayBored at work?And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day – with plenty more on the Guardian’s Puzzles app for iOS and Android. Until tomorrow.
Quick crossword
Cryptic crossword
Wordiply More

One of the benefits of being a regular Guardian supporter is that you get a weekly email with a direct line to the newsroom, giving you a behind-the-scenes look at how we report on the big news stories of the day.Last week, we wrote about our approach to covering Joe Biden’s age and asked our supporters for their feedback. Our inbox was deluged, and below you can find a cross-section of the replies we received – the good, the bad and the funny.The Guardian is a reader-funded news organization committed to keeping our global journalism free for all. You can help keep it that way by supporting us here. Every dollar helps. Thanks for engaging with serious journalism.Over to the readers:‘Age is not the most dangerous concern’“When you weigh Biden’s age against Trump’s selfish and unhinged craziness, age is not the most dangerous concern. Biden has never threatened to give our allies over to Putin or cure a virus by drinking bleach.” Suann S, choral music educator, Virginia‘We put too much emphasis on the individual’“I can’t help but think that it’s not one man we are electing as president, but an entire administration, staff, advisors, judges, and executive orders that will really make or break our nation and its fragile laws. I trust Biden to choose the people that will carry out the democratic principles I care about and to respect and defend the US constitution. I don’t expect perfection, but we are already better off with Biden as president. I can’t bear the thought of another Trump presidency. It’s a no-brainer. We put too much emphasis on the individual and not enough on the people who surround them.” Anonymous female Guardian supporter, 69, Montana‘I wish Biden had run as a single-term candidate’“I’m a true Independent. I vote for Democrats and Republicans. Trump is vile in so many ways. I would have no problem voting for Nikki Haley if she was on the ballot. I truly wish Biden had run as a single-term candidate. Shame on him. He does not inspire confidence in his physical and mental abilities. I think his administration has done as well as anyone could have, better than most. That sincere old man has done an excellent job despite his appearance of incompetency. In an election between Biden v Trump, I would vote for Biden even if he were institutionalized in a memory care unit of a nursing home.” Anonymous female Guardian supporter, Wisconsin‘He has sure gotten a lot done’“While I might share in some … voters’ wish to have a younger choice on the Democrat ballot, the bottom line is that I would take Biden any day over the horrifying prospect of another Trump presidency. I would take a senile Biden. I would take a dead Biden presiding from the grave over Donald Trump. If Biden is so mentally impaired he has sure gotten a lot done in the last four years.” Linda Lester, Boise, Idaho‘I see real, substantive merit and progress’“Biden does indeed have a history of gaffes and even plagiarism. I, a registered Republican, however, look at the issues Biden and his team focus on and the merits of their efforts and successes, and I see real, substantive merit and progress for the nation. Biden’s gaffes are merely innocent misstatements, not boldface intentional Trumpist lies. The choice is crystal clear. We cannot allow Trump to have the presidential platform to wreak self-aggrandizing havoc for our country and the world.” Paul Francis, 75, retired attorney, Houston, Texas‘Whatever happened to respecting our elders?’“I’m a blue collar worker in the construction trade in my late 60s and still climbing ladders, carrying heavy loads and making difficult decisions. I work beside people half my age and am better for my years of experience. If 60 is the new 40 then 80 is the new 60. Whatever happened to respecting our elders? Age brings wisdom and leaders should be wise.” Tobias R, late 60s, low voltage electrical installer/service technician, Ojai, California‘While Biden may forget a name, he has not forgotten the values’“I taught school for 30 years, was a master teacher who spent five days a week with 30 youngsters. The next year, invariably I would forget their names, reduced to: “Hi, sweetie!” when seeing these kids in the hall.We all have selective memories. Musician friends of mine are masters at memorizing music. Reader friends remember the plots of every book they’ve read. My husband can’t remember what I told him 10 minutes ago.While Biden may forget a name, he has not forgotten the values that truly make America great. It’s those actions and qualities that the media should focus on, reminding us all what’s at stake in this election.” Anne Anderson, retired teacher, 75, Santa Barbara, California‘I wish the media would knock it off’“I wish the media would knock it off. Until and unless there is some actual proof of Biden’s declining cognitive ability, you should stop talking about it. His age does not concern me, but I’m glad that he has the wisdom and experience that we used to respect. I think we should go back to respecting wisdom and experience. Please do.” Loree St Claire, 68, part-time home caregiver, Oregon‘A red herring’“Biden’s sure walking more stiffly and looking a tad more vacant at times than those days I used to run into him on the train between Wilmington and Washington. (As you know, he commuted every day.)But other than that, he’s the same damn guy. All the defects and flaws. But those flaws never then interfered with his judgment. (Though it sure wasn’t perfect, as he sometimes over-promised as he does now.) Why has the perception so radically changed? I’m afraid that you, the media, but less the print than the broadcast media, are on the hook for a lot of this.Every little jot and tiddle. And the GOP is ever so good as capitalizing on this rapt attention to Joe’s gaffes. The whole memory thing is, especially, a red herring. It’s about judgment, devotion to family and duty, and ability to pick good people arrayed around him. Talk about that, won’t you?” Dr Russ Maulitz, former family physician, US citizen in Tuscany, Italy‘No one mentioned Biden’s age’“I do weary of the news media’s harping on Biden’s age, certainly having the effect of campaigning against him. Age brings wisdom. I look forward to voting for Biden.Also, I spent a couple hours today canvassing door-to-door for the Democrats locally. I was cheered by how fervent Democrats are about voting, even in the primary. One swing voter told me that we all have to be Democrats now. No one mentioned Biden’s age.” Lynne Small, Del Mar, California‘I think that Harris would be a fine president’“There is a subtext to the ‘Biden’s age’ issue that the media will not acknowledge or engage. Nikki Haley has been quite explicit about it and that subtext is Kamala Harris. Vice-president Harris has been a tireless partner to the president and has been routinely vilified by the right. The focus on Biden’s age is not just about whether he can do the job (he has and will continue to do so) but whether Harris is an acceptable alternative. I, for one, think that Harris would be a fine president. The fact that she is a woman of color is apparently abhorrent to a large number of people who use Biden’s age as a cowardly surrogate for their actual fear. I have every confidence that Joe Biden will be able to capably execute his duties through the entirety of his next term building an unassailable legacy of competence and achievement. In the unfortunate event that VP Harris is required to ascend to the presidency, I have no fear of that whatsoever.” Kevin Judge, 67, retired physician, Riverwoods, Illinois‘You’re playing into the Republican strategy’“You talk about being careful about information being weaponized against Biden, but you’re helping to weaponize it. You’re playing into the Republican strategy of letting the media spread their lies for them. Did you learn absolutely nothing from Comey’s smearing of Hillary Clinton and how the mass media helped amplify those smears?” Roy W, 74, former senior director for AI and data science at a biotech company, Massachusetts More

A defiant Nikki Haley on Tuesday declared no fear of retribution from Donald Trump as she persists in her efforts to compete against the frontrunner for the Republican nomination, saying, “I feel no need to kiss the ring.”Haley approaches the South Carolina primary on Saturday, her home state where she was previously governor, a long way behind Trump but turning up the rhetorical heat.“We’ve all heard the calls for me to drop out,” she said in a speech in Greenville, South Carolina, on Tuesday. But she also said: “I refuse to quit.”And in an interview with the Associated Press, she vowed to stay in the fight at least until after Super Tuesday’s slate of more than a dozen contests on 5 March.“Ten days after South Carolina, another 20 states vote. I mean, this isn’t Russia. We don’t want someone to go in and just get 99% of the vote,” Haley said, adding: “What is the rush? Why is everybody so panicked about me having to get out of this race?”In a cutting remark on X, formerly Twitter, Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung posted in a riposte to Haley’s kissing the ring statement: “She’s going to drop down to kiss ass when she quits, like she always does.”Betsy Ankney, Haley’s campaign manager, responded with sarcastic humor on the same platform.“What a move. @TheStevenCheung is the key to winning back suburban women!” she posted.In Greenville, Haley taunted that maybe some people, especially reporters, turned out to hear if she was going to drop out of the race after Trump won the first three contests of the primary race, in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada.“Well, I’m not. Far from it, and I’m here to tell you why,” she said. “I’m running for president because we have a country to save,” she said, listing domestic issues such as crime, gun violence, illegal drugs, children struggling with their studies, migration at the US-Mexico border and the high cost of many things from groceries to buying a house.And on foreign policy, she said: “I’m talking about the American weakness that led to wars in Europe, and the Middle East, and the urgent need to restore strength before war spreads and draws America further in. These are the challenges I’m here to tackle.”Trump has been scathing about Haley’s performance and has been leading pressure from several directions for her to drop out, after she became the last opponent left standing following the end of the campaign trail for rivals including Florida governor Ron DeSantis and Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina.Haley said on Tuesday: “Many of the same politicians who now publicly embrace Trump, privately dread him. They know what a disaster he’s been and will continue to be for our party. They’re just too afraid to say it out loud. Well, I’m not afraid…I feel no need to kiss the ring. I have no fear of Trump’s retribution. I’m not looking for anything from him.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSome Republicans are encouraging Haley to stay in the campaign even if she continues to lose – potentially all the way to the Republican National Convention in July, as Trump faces numerous court cases.Haley said: “He’s going to be in a courtroom all of March, April, May and June. How in the world do you win a general election when these cases keep going and the judgments keep coming?”Meanwhile, Joe Biden was asked whether he preferred to compete against Haley or Trump this fall.“Oh, I don’t care,” the US president said.
The Associated Press contributed reporting More

The Republican senator Lindsey Graham, a key ally of Donald Trump, has been added to a list of “terrorists and extremists” kept by Russia’s state financial monitoring agency.Tass, the state-run news agency, first reported the move by Rosfinmonitoring, which allows authorities to freeze Russian bank accounts, though in Graham’s case is likely to be chiefly symbolic.The agency’s list includes more than 12,000 individuals and more than 400 companies, as well as domestic and foreign terrorist entities and Russian political opposition groups, according to the website opensanctions.org.Meta, the parent company of Facebook, was reportedly added to the list in October 2022, for supposedly tolerating “Russophobia”. Its chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, and other Meta employees have been banned from Russia or added to “wanted” lists.Graham, a South Carolina senator and foreign policy hawk who has long advocated arming Ukraine against Russian invaders, has also been subject to a Russian arrest warrant, for making “Russophobic statements” during a visit to Kyiv.“It’s difficult to imagine a greater shame for a country than having such senators,” Dmitry Peskov, the Russian government spokesperson, said at the time. Graham responded to the warrant by telling Reuters: “As usual the Russia propaganda machine is hard at work. It has been a good investment by the United States to help liberate Ukraine from Russian war criminals.” He said he would “wear the arrest warrant issued by Putin’s corrupt and immoral government as a badge of honour”.Nonetheless, Graham is also a prominent ally of Donald Trump, the former president and prospective Republican presidential nominee who is generally held to favour Russia and Putin.This month, Graham voted against a $95bn defense and foreign aid package that would significantly boost Kyiv. On Sunday, Graham told CBS he backed a $66bn counter-proposal from House lawmakers of both parties, adding: “I want to turn the aid package into a loan, that makes perfect sense to me.”That echoed Trump, who has demanded aid to Kyiv should be turned into loans. “I think that’s a winning combination,” Graham said. “Let’s make it a loan. I think that gets you President Trump on the aid part.”Lamenting the killing of Alexei Navalny, the most prominent leader of opposition to Putin, who died in a Russian penal colony last week, Graham also said Russia should be designated a state sponsor of terrorism.Republicans continue to seek to tie Ukraine aid to border and immigration reform, even though senators including Graham dynamited their own border deal with Democrats after Trump expressed opposition.On Tuesday, Graham tweeted: “I understand what happens if Putin wins in Ukraine. However, many members of Congress do not seem to understand what is happening to America every single day at our southern border. Count me in for helping Ukraine. But, we must help ourselves first. It’s time to get our broken border under control.”Speaking to the Hill, an unnamed Democratic senator bemoaned Graham’s flexible loyalties, saying: “He got sucked into the Trump orbit, and he is so zealously about his own self-preservation in South Carolina that he literally would push his mother in front of a train to get to where he needs to be.“I hate to say it because I actually like him.”’ More

Donald Trump’s legal calendar is coming into sharper relief after a New York judge affirmed last week that the ex-president’s first criminal trial – on charges that he manipulated the 2016 election by concealing hush-money payments to an adult film star – will proceed to trial in Manhattan next month.A federal case in Washington over the former president’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election had once been expected to go first. But when Trump filed appeals on grounds of presidential immunity last year, the presiding US district judge, Tanya Chutkan, was forced to put the case on hold.With Trump’s legal calendar otherwise clear, justice Judge Juan Merchan on Thursday scheduled Trump’s hush money trial to start on 25 March in Manhattan and last roughly six weeks. Allowing a week for jury selection and deliberation could mean a verdict might arrive around mid-May.That is the straightforward part.For the federal case in Washington, the timing of the trial depends on what the US supreme court decides to do with Trump’s immunity arguments, which contend Trump should be absolutely immune from criminal prosecution for what he claims were official acts he took as president.There are several options available to the court that could affect a trial date: refuse to hear the case and send it back to Chutkan with immediate effect, hear the case and issue a ruling expeditiously, or hear the case and issue a ruling late in the summer.Complicating matters, Chutkan isn’t expected to schedule a trial immediately even if the court denies the immunity claim and sends the case back to her, because Trump is technically entitled to the “defense preparation” time that elapsed since he first started appealing the immunity issue.(Trump filed his immunity claims to the US court of appeals for the DC circuit on 8 December. The moment he appealed, it paused the case before Chutkan, including her since-scrapped 4 March trial date. The clock ticking down to trial only starts again when all the appeals are done.)As a result, the way to estimate a potential trial date is to take the elapsed time between 8 December, and add that to when the case is returned to Chutkan’s control, assuming the supreme court won’t decide Trump has absolute immunity from all the charges.If the supreme court refused to take the case, for instance as early as this week, the total time elapsed that Trump would get back might stand at roughly 80 days, meaning Chutkan could schedule a trial around the final week of May.If the supreme court agrees to take the case with oral arguments set sometime in March, and then issues a quick decision in April, the total time Trump would get back might stand at roughly 100-120 days, meaning Chutkan could set a trial to commence in June.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBut in the worst-case scenario for the special counsel, Jack Smith, if the court agrees to take the case but puts off ruling on immunity until the end of its term, for instance at the end of June, there might not be a trial in Washington until after election day.The date that the federal election case goes to trial is important mainly because estimates for how long the trial itself might take has been estimated at roughly a week for jury selection, eight weeks for the prosecution, four weeks for Trump, and a final week for deliberation.Added together, the trial might take around 100 days. If voters wanted to go to the ballot box knowing whether Trump was guilty of conspiring to stop the peaceful transfer of power after losing the 2020 election, a trial would need to have started before the last week of July.All of this matters because Trump has made it no secret that his strategy is to seek delay – ideally even beyond the election – in the hopes that winning a second presidency could enable him to pardon himself or allow him to install a loyal attorney general who would drop the charges. More

Joe Biden has spent most of his presidency insisting to Americans that the economy is on the right track. Poll after poll has shown that most voters do not believe him. That may be changing.After months of resilient hiring, better-than-expected economic growth and a declining rate of inflation, new data shows that Americans are becoming upbeat about the US economy, potentially reversing the deep pessimism Biden has struggled to counter for much of the past three years.That trend could reshape campaigning ahead of November’s presidential election, in which Biden is expected to face off against Donald Trump, the frontrunner for the Republican nomination. Experts believe the president’s case for a second term will benefit from more optimistic views of the economy – but the hangover from the inflation wave that peaked a year and a half ago presents Republicans with a potent counterattack.“Over the last couple of years, people have been feeling the most pain on day-to-day spending, on things like groceries and gas prices and prescription drugs. And, fortunately, those prices are beginning to come down, which gives Democrats a stronger hand than we had just a few months ago,” said Adam Green, co-founder of advocacy group the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.“For a campaign that says that they want to finish the unfinished business of the Biden presidency, our polling shows that it’s perfectly OK to acknowledge that there has been pain, and there’s more business to do,” said Green.He added that the Biden campaign should “really focus the voters’ attention on the forward-looking agenda of one party wanting to help billionaires and corporations, and the Democratic party wanting to challenge corporate greed and bring down prices for consumers”.Biden has been unpopular with voters, according to poll aggregator FiveThirtyEight, even as employment grew strongly and the economy avoided the recession that many economists predicted was around the corner. While it’s not the only factor, pollsters have linked voters’ disapproval with Biden to the wave of price increases that peaked in June 2022 at levels not seen in more than four decades, and which have since been on the decline. An NBC News poll released this month showed Biden trailing Trump by about 20 points on the question of which candidate would better handle the economy, a finding echoed by other surveys.But new data appears to show Americans believe the economy has turned a corner. Late last month, the Conference Board reported its index of consumer confidence had hit its highest point since December 2021, while the University of Michigan’s survey of consumer sentiment has climbed to its highest level since July of that year.View image in fullscreen“The people who give positive views of the economy, they tend to point to, the unemployment rate is low, and they also point to that inflation is down from where it was,” said Jocelyn Kiley, an associate director at Pew Research Center, whose own data has found an uptick in positive economic views, particularly among Democrats.Trump and his Republican allies have capitalized on inflation to argue that Biden should be voted out, though economists say Biden’s policies are merely one ingredient in a trend exacerbated by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and global supply chain snarls that occurred as a result of Covid-19. Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor who is the last major challenger to the former president still in the race has said the economy is “crushing middle-class Americans”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBut voters’ improving views of the economy could blunt those attacks ahead of the November election, where the GOP is also hoping to seize control of the Senate from Biden’s Democratic allies and maintain their majority in the House of Representatives. Lynn Vavreck, an American politics professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, said Trump might have to fall back to tried-and-true tactics from his 2016 victory over Hillary Clinton, such as promising to institute hardline immigration policies.“The economy is growing. People don’t really say that they feel good about it, but if you’re gonna load up your campaign on those people’s feelings, I feel like that’s a little risky,” said Vavreck, who has studied how economic conditions can affect presidential campaigns.“You could do that, and that would be a bit of a gamble, or you could find an issue on which you believe you are closer to most voters than Joe Biden, that is not about the economy, and you could try to reorient the conversation around that issue.”There is already evidence that harnessing outrage over the flow of undocumented immigrants into the United States is key to Trump’s campaign strategy. The former president’s meddling was a factor in the death of a rare bipartisan agreement in Congress to tighten immigration policy in exchange for Republican votes to approve assistance for Ukraine and Israel’s militaries.With the economy humming along, Trump is apparently nervous that the US economy could enter a recession at an inconvenient moment. “When there’s a crash, I hope it’s going to be during this next 12 months because I don’t want to be Herbert Hoover,” he said in an interview last month, referring to the US president who is often blamed for the Great Depression that began 95 years ago.Even though the rate of inflation has eased, albeit haltingly, prices for many consumer goods remain higher than they were compared with when Biden took office, which his opponents can still capitalize on, said the Republican strategist Doug Heye.“Consumers go to the grocery store, and they spend money, and they’re upset with what things cost, and that should always be what they’re talking about,” Heye said.While Biden has been quick to take credit for the strong hiring figures during his administration, polls show that hasn’t landed with voters. In recent months, the White House has shifted strategy, announcing efforts to get rid of junk fees and accusing corporations of “price gouging”.Evan Roth Smith, head pollster for the Democratic research firm Blueprint, said that lines up with his findings that voters care less about job growth and more about the fact that everything costs more.“Voters just felt a prioritization mismatch between what they were experiencing, the kind of pressures they were under, which isn’t that they didn’t have jobs, it’s that they couldn’t pay their bills,” Smith said.“Makes all the sense in the world that if the White House and president and the Biden campaign are touting this stuff, that they are going to make headway, and are making headway with voters in getting them to feel like Joe Biden in the Democratic party do understand.” More

Joe Biden’s great-great-grandfather was charged with attempted murder after a civil war-era brawl – but pardoned of any wrongdoing by Abraham Lincoln, a newspaper said on Monday, reviving on the US holiday of Presidents’ Day the often contentious issue of presidential powers to grant pardons.Citing documents from the US national archives, the historian David J Gerleman wrote in the Washington Post that Biden’s paternal forebear Moses J Robinette was pardoned by Lincoln after Robinette got into a fight with a fellow Union army civilian employee, John J Alexander, in Virginia. Robinette drew a knife and sliced Alexander.The newspaper reported that Robinette worked as an army veterinary surgeon for the army during the US’s war between the states. He was convicted of attempted murder and sentenced to two years hard labor after failing to convince a court he had acted in self-defense.Three army officers appealed the conviction to Lincoln, arguing it was too harsh. Biden’s long-ago White House predecessor agreed, and Robinette was pardoned on 1 September 1864, seven months before Lincoln was assassinated.Gerleman wrote that the 22 pages of court martial transcript he found in the national archives helped to “fill in an unknown piece of Biden family history” – on a Presidents’ Day that fell a week after Lincoln’s 12 February birthday, to boot.The historian said that Robinette’s trial transcript had been “unobtrusively squeezed among many hundreds of other routine court-martial cases” and revealed “the hidden link between the two men – and between two presidents across the centuries”.Article II, section 2 of the US constitution authorizes American presidents “to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment”.The power is rooted in the monarch’s prerogative to grant mercy under early English law, which later traveled across the Atlantic Ocean to the American colonies. US presidents typically use the power to pardon at the end of their terms.Recent presidents have used the powers to differing degrees. George W Bush issued 200 acts of clemency; Barack Obama, 1,927: Donald Trump, 237; and Biden so far 14, excluding thousands pardoned for simple possession of marijuana.Biden’s marijuana pardons only apply to those who were convicted of use and simple possession of marijuana on federal lands and in the District of Columbia.Jimmy Carter issued 566 acts of clemency, excluding more than 200,000 for Vietnam war draft evasion.Lincoln’s pardon to Robinette was of 343 acts of clemency he issued.According to the Post, the fight between Robinette and Alexander took place on the evening of 21 March 1864, at the army of the Potomac’s winter camp near Beverly Ford, Virginia.Alexander, a brigade wagon master, had overheard Robinette saying something about him to the female cook. An argument ensued, and Alexander was left bleeding. Robinette’s charges included attempted murder. Though he was not found guilty on that charge, he was convicted on the others and imprisoned on the Dry Tortugas island near Florida.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThree army officers who knew Robinette later petitioned Lincoln to overturn his conviction, writing that the sentence was unduly harsh for “defending himself and cutting with a penknife a teamster much his superior in strength and size, all under the impulse of the excitement of the moment”.The request went through a West Virginia senator, who described Robinette’s punishment as “a hard sentence on the case as stated”. Then it went to Lincoln’s private secretary, who requested a judicial report and the trial transcripts.When the letter eventually reached Lincoln, he issued a pardon “for unexecuted part of punishment”. The then-president signed it: “A. Lincoln. Sep. 1. 1864.”Robinette was released from prison and returned to his family in Maryland to resume farming.A brief obituary following Robinette’s death in 1903 eulogized him as a “man of education and gentlemanly attainments”.The obituary made no mention of Robinette’s wartime court-martial or his connection to Lincoln, the Post said.Robinette died about 12 years before Biden’s late father – his great-grandson – was born. More

Donald Trump was already reeling from multiple legal setbacks when a New York judge last week handed the former president a staggering defeat in his civil fraud case, ordering him to pay roughly $450m to the state after finding him liable for conspiracy to manipulate his net worth.The decision by Justice Arthur Engoron capped a bad legal week for Trump, who had watched his lawyers attempt to get access to sealed filings in a classified documents case in Florida and then watched his lawyers lose their attempt to delay his first criminal trial in New York.There may be worse coming.The immediate priority for Trump’s legal agenda remains, according to people familiar with the matter, figuring out how to come up with $450m – a figure that includes pre-judgment interest – or finding a company prepared to help him post bond within 30 days of when the court entered the judgment, so that he can appeal the penalty.Trump saw the ruling as a two-pronged stab at his personal identity: it is likely to almost entirely drain his accounts of cash and it bars him from running the Trump Organization, the vehicle he used to attain his fame, for three years.Trump’s preference is to avoid using his own money while he appeals and his lawyers have contacted several companies to provide the bond, which essentially assures the state that Trump has the money to pay the judgment should he lose his challenge.To obtain the bond, Trump would first have to find a company willing to accept him. He would then have to pay a premium to the bond company and offer collateral, likely in the form of his most prized assets, which would accrue interest and fees.If the penalty is upheld on appeal, Trump will face a huge financial burden. In an interview under oath with the New York attorney general’s office last year, Trump said he had $400m in cash and cash equivalents, though that figure could not be verified.A proportion of that figure comes from Trump’s sales of two properties after he left the White House, as well as new ventures including a real estate branding deal in Oman.The deals were intended to give Trump a cash cushion in the event of a sudden financial setback. But even if Trump’s $400m claim was accurate, that would clearly be wiped out should the $450m penalty be largely upheld.Adding to the total sum Trump must disgorge is an $83.3m judgement entered against him last month after he lost the second defamation trial involving the writer E Jean Carroll. That figure is not payable immediately, but it is another massive figure for which he has to account.Trump may ultimately find himself without enough of a cushion and face the need to mortgage or sell some of his properties. While Trump is not expected to go bankrupt – his total holdings are in the billions – it would mark a particularly humiliating moment for the former president.The legal woes extend beyond causing him financial pain. On Thursday, it was confirmed Trump would face trial in New York on charges that he falsified business records over hush money payments to a porn star to shield himself from bad press before the 2016 election.Jury selection in the case is now scheduled for 25 March, despite a last-ditch attempt by Trump’s lawyers to stave off the trial.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBefore the hearing to affirm the trial date, people involved in the situation said, Trump’s advisers had retained some hope it might be delayed even if they believed it was the most politically advantageous case of all his four criminal indictments.If Trump must face a criminal case before the election in November, they would choose the hush money case because Trump may not face jail time even if he is convicted, an outcome that could desensitize voters to the other, federal criminal cases looming before him.But Trump may have to grapple with the fallout from another legal setback in Atlanta, after he and his co-defendants charged by the Fulton county district attorney over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election struggled to argue she should be disqualified from bringing the case.The second day of the evidentiary hearing examining whether Fani Willis’s romantic relationship with her top deputy, Nathan Wade, amounted to some sort of kickback scheme sufficient to generate a conflict of interest went sideways for the defendants.The defendants called Terrence Bradley, the former divorce lawyer for Wade, to testify that the relationship started before Willis hired Wade to work on the Trump case on 1 November 2021, in order to contradict Willis and Wade’s testimony.The objective was to have Bradley contradict under oath the testimony of Willis and Wade, in order to make the case that they committed perjury and argue the presiding Fulton county superior judge, Scott McAfee, to discredit their testimony.But Bradley was a particularly reluctant witness and testified he had privileged information about when the relationship started, but not personal knowledge he obtained separate from him representing Wade.By the end of the day, it appeared uncertain whether the defendants had met their burden of proof to force Willis off and make the criminal charges in Georgia go away. More