US Politics

In his speech at the White House, Joe Biden accused Republicans of caving to Donald Trump’s wishes and opposing a bill to tighten immigration policy that the party had demanded.“All indications are this bill won’t even move forward to the Senate floor,” the president said.“Why? A simple reason: Donald Trump.”He continued:
Because Donald Trump thinks it’s bad for him politically, therefore … even if it helps the country, he’s not for it. He’d rather weaponize this issue than actually solve it. So for the last 24 hours, he’s done nothing, I’m told, than reach out to Republicans in the House and the Senate and threaten them and try to intimidate them to vote against this proposal. It looks like they’re caving. Frankly, they owe it to the American people to show some spine and do what they know to be right.
Donald Trump’s strategy to get out of the charges brought against him for allegedly trying to overturn the 2020 election suffered a blow when a federal appeals court turned down his argument that he is immune from prosecution because he was acting in his capacity as president. Trump’s campaign vowed to appeal the three-judge panel’s unanimous decision. Meanwhile, the bipartisan bill to approve military aid to Israel and Ukraine and also impose hardline immigration policies is on the verge of death. Republicans in the House and Senate are assailing the legislation, even though the party demanded it as their price to approve the military aid. In a speech at the White House, Joe Biden accused the GOP of “caving” to Trump, and vowed to campaign on the bill’s failure.Here’s what else happened:
Republicans senators are reportedly interested in approving aid to Israel and Ukraine without changing immigration policy. Democrats tried to do that months ago, but were blocked by the GOP.
House Republicans may not have enough support to impeach the homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas. A vote on the charges is expected later this afternoon.
Trump’s allies in Congress are not pleased by the appeals court’s ruling against him.
The judges who rejected Trump’s immunity claim said the former president was arguing to make it impossible to hold presidents to account.
Will Trump and Biden debate? It’s not looking likely right now.
The House has kicked off debate over impeaching homeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, beginning with a procedural vote that succeeded:However, it remains unclear if the GOP has enough support to succeed in formally leveling charges against Mayorkas for his handling of the surge in migrants crossing the southern border during Joe Biden’s presidency. Two Republicans say they won’t vote for the articles, while others are reportedly on the fence, saying impeaching a cabinet secretary, which is already an exceedingly rare step, for policy issues rather than breaking the law is inappropriate.Speaker Mike Johnson has vowed that the chamber will vote on the articles later today. If they pass, they’ll go to the Senate, whose Democratic leaders are certain to reject them.With the immigration deal all but dead, the question becomes: can Congress pass aid to Ukraine and Israel?We may find out the answer to the latter question sometime this afternoon, when the House takes a vote on a standalone bill to fund Israel’s counterattack against Hamas. The legislation will need a two-thirds majority to pass, and seems unlikely to achieve that – Democrats are furious at the GOP for killing the immigration policy compromise, and their leader Hakeem Jeffries, whip Katherine Clark and caucus chair Pete Aguilar earlier today announced they’d vote against the Israel aid bill. Here’s what they said:
We are prepared to support any serious, bipartisan effort in connection with the special relationship between the United States and Israel, our closest ally in the Middle East. Unfortunately, the standalone legislation introduced by House Republicans over the weekend, at the eleventh hour without notice or consultation, is not being offered in good faith. Rather, it is a nakedly obvious and cynical attempt by MAGA extremists to undermine the possibility of a comprehensive, bipartisan funding package that addresses America’s national security challenges in the Middle East, Ukraine, the Indo-Pacific region and throughout the world.
And even if it were to pass, the White House says Joe Biden would veto it.As for Ukraine, funds for its defense against Russia face an even steeper hill to climb. Goaded on by Donald Trump, an increasing number of Republican lawmakers, particularly in the House, oppose assistance to Kyiv. However, Bloomberg News reports some Republicans senators are open to the idea – which is what Democrats called for months ago:
Hawkish Republicans on Tuesday began discussing moving ahead on a Ukraine aid package without the border restrictions. Pairing the two had once been considered a way to sweeten the deal for House conservatives but has since proven divisive.
Texas Republican John Cornyn, who has pushed for new border restrictions but opposes the latest deal, said he’d support moving forward with funding for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan and that such a bill would pass the Senate.
South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, a prominent Republican hawk, said he would vote for an aid package without US border provisions.
“If we fail on the border, we put our country at risk. There is no use letting the world fall apart,” he said.
The Senate’s top Republican Mitch McConnell told reporters this afternoon that he believes the immigration policy bill will fail to advance in tomorrow’s vote:McConnell had endorsed the legislation after its release this evening, but acknowledged his lawmakers won’t get behind it.Will Donald Trump, should he win the Republican presidential nomination, debate Joe Biden? The Guardian’s Jessica Glenza reports that the chances are not looking great:Joe Biden has dismissed calls from his White House predecessor Donald Trump to “immediately” schedule a presidential debate.Trump skipped every debate this primary season. He continues to refuse to debate his former United Nations ambassador Nikki Haley, a long-shot contender for the GOP’s nomination.“Well, if I were him, I’d want to debate me, too,” Biden told reporters when asked about Trump’s challenge while the president was at a small Las Vegas boba tea shop during a campaign stop. With a bubble tea in hand, Biden added: “He’s got nothing else to do.”Although the primary season is not yet over, both Biden and Trump are considered their parties’ presumptive nominees and have a clear desire to turn their attention to the general election.Biden, who is technically also still in the primary season, has also refused to debate several distant rivals for the Democratic nomination.Trump made his debate challenge on The Dan Bongino Show, NBC reported. Bongino is a conservative talkshow host who for years has boosted Trump as well as Republican conspiracy theories – all widely discredited – that the 2020 election was “rigged”.Also happening today is Nevada’s presidential primary, though its outcome is not expected to be a surprise, and its significance is not particularly big, as the Guardian’s Maanvi Singh reports:The first presidential primary election contest in the western US is underway in Nevada.Although Nevada has backed Democrats in every presidential election since 2008, it recently elected a Republican governor and remains a key swing state where slight changes in turnout could flip outcomes.After Joe Biden secured a victory in South Carolina’s Democratic primary over the weekend, he’s looking to build on his momentum in Nevada. More than 151,000 voters submitted early ballots, ahead of election day on Tuesday.Both Democrats and Republicans are holding presidential primaries on Tuesday, but the Republican competition will hold little meaning. The state’s GOP, which is led by a recently indicted fake Trump elector, will be allocating its delegates based on a separate caucus it is holding on Thursday, in which Donald Trump is the only major contender. Nikki Haley, who is running in the Republican primary but not in the caucus, is expected to grab a symbolic victory in the primaries, which her party is begrudgingly holding to comply with a state mandate.The two-track nomination scheme has been widely criticised as a confusing and cynical scheme to benefit the former president.Donald Trump’s strategy to get out of the charges brought against him for allegedly trying to overturn the 2020 election was dealt a blow when a federal appeals court turned down his argument that he is immune from prosecution because he was acting in his capacity as president. Trump’s campaign vowed to appeal the three-judge panel’s unanimous decision. Meanwhile, the bipartisan bill to approve military aid to Israel and Ukraine and also impose hardline immigration policies is on the verge of death. Republicans in the House and Senate are assailing the legislation, even though the party demanded it as their price to approve the military aid. In a speech at the White House, Joe Biden accused the GOP of “caving” to Trump, and vowed to campaign on the bill’s failure.Here’s what else is going on:
House Republicans may not have the votes to impeach the homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas. A vote on the charges is expected later this afternoon.
Trump’s allies in Congress are not pleased by the appeals court’s ruling against him.
The judges who rejected Trump’s immunity claim said the former president was essentially arguing to make it impossible to hold presidents to account.
Joe Biden closed his speech by again making his point that Republicans are undermining border security simply to benefit Donald Trump.“I understand the former president is desperately trying to stop this bill, because he’s not interested in solving the border problem. He wants a political issue to run against me on. They’ve all but said that, across the board, no one really denies that, that I’m aware of,” Biden said.He then vowed to turn the immigration bill’s fate into a campaign issue:
I’m calling on Congress to pass this bill, get it to my desk immediately. But if the bill fails, I want to be absolutely clear about something: the American people are going to know why it fails.
I’ll be taking this issue to the country. And the voters are going to know that it’s just at the moment we’re going to secure the border and fund these other programs, Trump and the Maga Republicans said no. Because they’re afraid of Donald Trump. Afraid of Donald Trump.
Every day between now and November, the American people are going to know that the only reason the border is not secure is Donald Trump and his Maga Republican friends. It’s time for Republicans in the Congress to show a little courage, to show a little spine, to make it clear to the American people that you work for them, not for anyone else.
Republicans demanded passage of immigration policy reforms in exchange for their votes to fund Ukraine’s military. But now the GOP is rejecting the immigration bill and there’s no apparent path for another round of funding for Kyiv, even amid reports that its military is rationing ammunition it needs to defend against Russia’s invasion.“If we don’t stop Putin’s appetite for power and control in Ukraine, he won’t limit himself to just Ukraine, and the costs for America and our allies and partners will rise,” Joe Biden warned in his speech.“For those Republicans in Congress who think they can oppose funding for Ukraine and not be held accountable: history is watching. History is watching. A failure to support Ukraine at this critical moment will never be forgotten.”After going through the immigration bill’s provisions, Joe Biden noted that he still wants to pursue historic Democratic priorities such as resolving the status of undocumented migrants already living in the United States, and people brought to the country as children.“Now, it doesn’t address everything that I want. For example, we still need a path of documentation for those who are already here. And we’re not walking away from true immigration reform, including permanent protections and a pathway to citizenship for young Dreamers who came here when they were children and who have been good citizens that contribute so much to our country,” the president said. “But the reforms of this bill are essential for making our border more orderly, more humane and more secure.”Most of the immigration bill’s provisions are hardline reforms demanded by Republicans, which have attracted opposition from immigrant rights groups. Nonetheless, the GOP has largely rejected the legislation.In his speech at the White House, Joe Biden accused Republicans of caving to Donald Trump’s wishes and opposing a bill to tighten immigration policy that the party had demanded.“All indications are this bill won’t even move forward to the Senate floor,” the president said.“Why? A simple reason: Donald Trump.”He continued:
Because Donald Trump thinks it’s bad for him politically, therefore … even if it helps the country, he’s not for it. He’d rather weaponize this issue than actually solve it. So for the last 24 hours, he’s done nothing, I’m told, than reach out to Republicans in the House and the Senate and threaten them and try to intimidate them to vote against this proposal. It looks like they’re caving. Frankly, they owe it to the American people to show some spine and do what they know to be right.
Joe Biden is expected to at any moment speak from the White House about the Senate’s bipartisan proposal to approve military aid to Ukraine and Israel while also enacting hardline immigration policies Republicans have demanded.All signs point to the president giving the bill its eulogy. The GOP is in open revolt against the legislation, and CNN reports that John Thune, the second-highest-ranking Republican in the Senate, expects it to be voted down on Wednesday:In an interview with MSNBC, Chris Murphy, the Democratic senator who was his party’s lead negotiator on the bill, seemed resigned to the bill’s imminent death:Elise Stefanik, the House Republican Conference chair who is widely viewed as a contender to be Donald Trump’s running mate, echoed his campaign’s talking points as she condemned the failure of his immunity claim.“The precedent set today by the DC Circuit’s decision means that future presidents who leave office will likely face politicized prosecutions by the opposing party,” Stefanik said in a statement.“The President of the United States must have immunity, like Members of Congress and federal judges, which is necessary for any presidency to function properly. I fully support President Trump’s efforts to appeal this unconstitutional ruling to the Supreme Court, where I expect a thoughtful decision to overturn this dangerous precedent.”Unsurprisingly, Donald Trump’s allies in Congress are attacking the unanimous appeals court decision denying him immunity from the federal charges brought against him for trying to overturn the 2020 election.Here’s Jim Jordan, the House judiciary committee chair and one of Trump’s best-known defenders:Without commenting on the decision, House speaker Mike Johnson condemned the prosecution as “lawfare”:As we await Joe Biden’s speech on the immigration and foreign aid bill, here’s the Guardian’s Hugo Lowell with a rundown of what we know about the appeals court’s decision in the foreign aid case, and how it may affect the start of his trial on election subversion charges:A federal appeals court on Tuesday rejected Donald Trump’s claim that he is immune from criminal prosecution on charges that he plotted to overturn the 2020 election results because it involved actions he took while president, declining to endorse such an expansive interpretation of executive power.The decision by a three-judge panel at the US court of appeals for the DC circuit took particular issue with Trump’s position that he could only be prosecuted if he had been convicted in a Senate impeachment trial first.“We cannot accept former President Trump’s claim that a president has unbounded authority to commit crimes that would neutralize the most fundamental check on executive power,” the unsigned but unanimous opinion from the three-judge panel said.“At bottom, former President Trump’s stance would collapse our system of separated powers by placing the President beyond the reach of all three branches,” the opinion said. “We cannot accept that the office of the Presidency places its former occupants above the law for all time thereafter.”The defeat for Trump technically returns the case and jurisdiction to the trial court. But the adverse ruling paves the way for Trump to seek further appeals that could delay for weeks or months the start of the 4 March trial date set by US district judge Tanya Chutkan in Washington. More

House Republicans cleared the way on Tuesday for a vote to impeach the homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, as Democrats denounced the move as a purely partisan exercise meant to boost the electoral prospects of Donald Trump.The historic vote, scheduled for early evening, would mark the first time since 1876 that the House has impeached a cabinet official, but with hours to go before a scheduled evening vote its prospects were unclear. But Democrats have retorted that Republicans were abusing the impeachment process to attack one of Joe Biden’s cabinet members during a crucial election year, in which immigration may play a key role.With Republicans in control of the House by a whisker-thin margin, and Democrats uniformly opposed, they can afford only a few defections. Two Republicans have already announced their opposition and a handful more appeared undecided as the House proceeded to debate the charges against Mayorkas.Congressman Ken Buck, a Republican of Colorado who declared himself solidly opposed to the impeachment effort, said the accusations leveled against Mayorkas amounted to a “policy difference”, not an impeachable offense.“If we start going down this path of impeachment with a cabinet official, we are opening a door as Republicans that we don’t want to open,” Buck said on MSNBC shortly before the afternoon vote.Republicans are seeking to impeach Mayorkas on charges that he willfully refused to enforce immigration law and breached the public trust, overriding the objections of legal experts, including some prominent conservatives, who say they have failed to produce compelling evidence that the cabinet secretary had committed high crimes and misdemeanors.“I respect everybody’s view on it,” House speaker Mike Johnson told reporters on Tuesday. “I understand the heavy weight that impeachment is.”He described impeachment as an “extreme measure”, but said that “extreme times call for extreme measures.”During the floor debate on Tuesday, Republicans leveled broad accusations that Mayorkas had mismanaged oversight of the US-Mexico border, where arrests for illegal crossings have reached record highs.“The constituents I represent do not understand why Texas has had to endure basically an invasion during the tenure of the secretary of Homeland Security,” Congressman Michael Burgess, Republican of Texas, said in floor remarks ahead of the procedural vote. “What are we left to do?”A Harvard-Harris survey conducted this month showed that immigration is now an important concern for voters, with 35% of respondents citing the issue as their top priority. But Democrats say that the Republican impeachment effort is a political stunt rather than meaningful reform.“Do we have a problem at the border? Absolutely,” said Democratic congressman Jim McGovern of Massachusetts. But, he said: “It’s clear that this is not about Secretary Mayorkas or a high crime and misdemeanor. It is about a policy disagreement with President Biden.”Trump has made the “crisis” at the border a focus of his presidential campaign and celebrated Republicans for impeaching Mayorkas on very shaky grounds.Meanwhile, Republicans barreled toward a vote as a border deal recently brokered by the Biden administration and a bipartisan group of senators appeared to be on the brink of collapse. After months of painstaking negotiations, Senate Republicans appear ready to oppose the agreement, all but ensuring it will fall short of the 60 votes needed to pass legislation in the chamber.In the event it does pass the Senate, Johnson has described it as an inadequate response to the situation at the border and has declared the deal will be “dead on arrival” in the lower chamber.House Republicans’ opposition to the bipartisan proposal and their support of Mayorkas’s impeachment sparked accusations of hypocrisy among Democrats, who argued their colleagues were uninterested in substantive changes to immigration policy even as they expressed outrage over the situation at the border.The impeachment of Mayorkas has attracted notable criticism from conservatives, including in an op-ed by the Wall Street Journal editorial board that was frequently cited by Democrats on Tuesday.“As much as we share the frustration with the Biden border mess, impeaching Mr Mayorkas won’t change enforcement policy and is a bad precedent that will open the gates to more cabinet impeachments by both parties,” the board wrote in an editorial published on Tuesday. “Grandstanding is easier than governing, and Republicans have to decide whether to accomplish anything other than impeaching Democrats.” More

The first presidential primary election contest in the western US is underway in Nevada.Although Nevada has backed Democrats in every presidential election since 2008, it recently elected a Republican governor and remains a key swing state where slight changes in turnout could flip outcomes.After Joe Biden secured a victory in South Carolina’s Democratic primary over the weekend, he is looking to build on his momentum in Nevada. More than 154,000 voters submitted early ballots, ahead of election day on Tuesday, 59,000 Republicans and 95,000 Democrats.Both Democrats and Republicans are holding presidential primaries on Tuesday, but the Republican competition will hold little meaning. The state’s GOP, which is led by a recently indicted fake Trump elector, will be allocating its delegates based on a separate caucus it is holding on Thursday, in which Donald Trump is the only major contender. Nikki Haley, who is running in the Republican primary but not in the caucus, is expected to grab a symbolic victory in the primaries, which her party is begrudgingly holding to comply with a state mandate.The two-track nomination scheme has been widely criticised as a confusing and cynical scheme to benefit the former president.The confusing calendar as well as the seeming inevitability of Joe Biden and Trump as the eventual nominees, has resulted in an eerily quiet election morning. It does not help that an atmospheric river storm is passing through, drenching what is typically the nation’s driest state.“It’s raining here and we’re not used to that here in Las Vegas,” said D Taylor, the president of the Unite Here union, at a press conference on Tuesday morning.While he is certain to win it, the Democratic primary will still be a test for Biden, who has been working to shore up the support of Black and Latino voters in this key swing state. In the last two elections, Nevada’s Latino voters, who make up about 20% of the electorate, played a decisive role and helped Democrats win with thin margins. This year, despite the support of the state’s powerful Culinary Workers Union, which represents tens of thousands of hospitality and casino workers in Las Vegas and beyond, the US president will have to drum up enthusiasm among working class voters of color.During a campaign rally on Sunday, Biden warned of the threat that Trump poses to democratic norms, as he and his rival barrel toward an increasingly likely rematch in November. There was no mention of the administration’s support for Israel amid its bombardment of Gaza, which has angered and disheartened many young progressives ahead of the primaries.But Biden acknowledged that voters might be weary.“I know, we know, we have a lot more to do,” he said. “Not everyone is feeling the benefits of our investments and progress yet. But inflation is now lower in America than in any other major economy in the world.” Despite high unemployment rates, voters have been feeling the pinch of rising costs, and the majority of Latino voters in the state named economic concerns as a top issue.Biden met with Culinary Union members Monday. “I came to say thank you. Not just to say thank you for the support that you’ve given me last time out, but to thank you for having the faith in the union,” he told them.But amid protracted negotiations with Las Vegas’ resorts and casinos, and the Super Bowl coming up this weekend, organizers have been focused on campaigns for fair wages and benefits for workers ahead of the biggest sports event of the year.“There will be plenty of time to talk about politics,” said Taylor – noting that the unions’ first priority now is making sure these workers at the Allegiant Stadium, which will host the Super Bowl this weekend, have the right to organize and can earn fair wages.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“At the end of the month, you know, you just work to just pay the bills, then go back to zero in the bank and start again, and again and again,” said Luis Medina, a 21-year-old who will be voting for the first time this year. Medina, who works as a floor installer in Las Vegas and organises with the progressive group Make the Road Action Nevada, said he’s still unsure who he’ll back for president.“I am worried about the economy and inflation. But, you know, I think some of that’s the aftermath of what Trump left,” he said. But he’s unsure if Biden has done much better.Biden could be bolstered by encouraging economic numbers in January, when average hourly earnings rose 0.6% and unemployment remained low.Turnout in the primaries is expected to be low, especially given that the races are not competitive. Local advocacy groups – both partisan and nonpartisan – are planning to ramp up canvassing efforts later in the spring and summer. A pro-Biden Super Pac recently has also reserved a record $250m in advertising across seven battleground states, including Nevada, with an eye on mobilising disaffected younger voters, Latino and Black voters.Leo Murrieta, the director of Make the Road Action in Nevada, said he was skeptical of polls and analysis indicating that Republicans had made gains among Latino voters. “The narrative that brown voters are defecting to the Republican side, that’s not true,” he said. “They’re not defecting – they are just going home. Our job is to go to their homes and pull them out to vote.”Linda Hunt, a server at El Cortez hotel and casino in Las Vegas, said on Tuesday that she isn’t too worried about a lack of voter enthusiasm in the state. “It may not be in the media, but I think people are on fire,” she said.Hunt, who has been a member of the Culinary Union for 45 years, voted early in the Democratic primary for Biden. “He’s the most pro-union president I’ve ever seen,” she said. “He’s for the workers.”She’s worried about the cost of housing and healthcare. But she doesn’t blame Biden’s economy. “This isn’t about the economy – it’s about corporate greed,” she said. As long as the president is able to tell voters how he plans to address rising costs and hold corporations accountable, she said, working class Nevadans will turn out for him. “I know Biden’s going to do it!” she said. “I don’t even worry about Trump. I’m maintaining my peace.” More

Joe Biden urged Congress to pass the bipartisan border bill in a pointed speech on Tuesday, accusing Republicans of “caving” in to Donald Trump’s demands to block the legislation from advancing.“All indications are this bill won’t even move forward to the Senate floor. Why? A simple reason: Donald Trump. Because Donald Trump thinks it’s bad for him politically,” Biden said at the White House. “He’d rather weaponize this issue than actually solve it.”With an eye toward the presidential race, Trump has attacked the bipartisan deal on Truth Social as “nothing more than a highly sophisticated trap for Republicans to assume the blame on what the Radical Left Democrats have done to our Border, just in time for our most important EVER Election”.As of Tuesday afternoon, it appeared that more than 20 Republican senators were prepared to oppose the border bill, raising serious doubts about its passage.In his speech, Biden pledged he would make sure that Republicans received the blame if the bill does not pass, indicating he would spotlight the issue on the campaign trail.“The American people are going to know why it failed. I’ll be taking this issue to the country,” Biden said. “Every day between now and November, the American people are going to know that the only reason the border is not secure is Donald Trump and his Maga [‘Make America Great Again’] Republican friends. It’s time for Republicans in the Congress to show a little courage, to show a little spine, to make it clear to the American people that you work for them – not for anyone else.”Biden’s remarks came one day before the Senate is expected to hold a procedural vote on advancing the border bill, which will require 60 “yes” votes to receive approval. But even the bill’s greatest proponents have expressed doubts that it can advance.“I would anticipate Wednesday, the cloture vote does not pass,” Senator James Lankford, a Republican of Oklahoma who helped broker the deal, told reporters after a conference meeting on Monday. “People are saying, ‘Hey, I need a lot more time to be able to go through this.’”A number of senators have already indicated they will not support the bill. Hard-right Republicans argue that it does not go far enough to address the situation at the US-Mexican border, where arrests for illegal crossings have hit record highs.“The border deal is even worse than we thought,” Senator Mike Lee, a Republican of Utah, said on Sunday. “No one who cares about our border security should support it. It is a betrayal of the American people.”But progressive Democrats insist the bill, which has been described as the most severe set of changes to border policy in decades, is far too restrictive. Senator Alex Padilla, a Democrat of California and chair of the Senate judiciary subcommittee on immigration, citizenship and border safety, said on Monday that the bill amounted to “dismantling our asylum system while ultimately failing to alleviate the challenges at our border”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe $118bn bill would grant the president a new power to shut down the border when daily crossings pass a certain limit while also expediting the asylum review process, which could lead to a quicker deportation for many migrants. The bill would also provide $60bn in military assistance for Ukraine, $14bn in security assistance for Israel, and $10bn in humanitarian assistance for civilians affected by war in Ukraine, Gaza and the West Bank.Supporters of the bill have framed the legislation as vital for those US allies abroad, warning colleagues that inaction could trigger disastrous consequences around the world.“If we fail the Ukrainian people, then Vladimir Putin will likely succeed in his invasion of Ukraine. Putin will be emboldened, and western democracy will face the greatest threat it has seen in decades,” the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, a Democrat of New York, said on Monday.But that argument has failed to sway the bill’s Republican critics, many of whom already oppose sending more money to Ukraine. Meanwhile, the House speaker, Republican Mike Johnson of Louisiana, is moving forward on Tuesday with a planned vote on a standalone bill to provide aid to Israel, but Biden has already threatened to veto that proposal.“It’s time to stop playing games with the world waiting and watching. And by the way, the world is waiting. The world is watching,” Biden said on Tuesday. “They are waiting to watch what we’re going to do. We cannot we can’t continue to let petty partisan politics get in the way of responsibility. More

President Joe Biden accused Republicans of giving in to Trump’s ‘threats’ and opposing a bill to tighten immigration policy, which the party had demanded. The $118bn package would pair federal enforcement policy on the US-Mexico border with wartime aid for Ukraine, Israel and others, overhauling the asylum system with tougher enforcement and giving presidents new powers to expel migrants if border authorities deem themselves overwhelmed by the number of people requesting asylum. In his speech at the White House, Biden said the bill would help the country, but because it would not aid Trump’s bid for presidency, it wold not make it to the Senate floor to be debated More

US authorities issued cease-and-desist orders on Tuesday against two Texas companies they believe were connected to robocalls that used artificial intelligence to mimic Joe Biden’s voice and discourage people from voting in New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary last month.During a news conference to discuss the investigation, officials described the calls as the clearest and possibly first known attempt to use AI to interfere with an election in the US.The New Hampshire attorney general, John Formella, said investigators have identified the source of the calls as Life Corporation and said they were transmitted by a company called Lingo Telecom.New Hampshire issued cease-and-desist orders and subpoenas to both companies, while the Federal Communications Commission issued a cease-and-desist letter to the telecommunications company, Formella said. In a statement, the FCC said it was trying to stop “behavior that violates voter suppression laws.”“That’s been something we’ve been concerned about in the law enforcement community for a while, and it’s certainly something that state attorneys general have talked about, but we had not seen as concrete of an example as this, days before a primary,” he said.A message left for Life Corporation’s owner, Walter Monk, at his company Wholesale Communication was not immediately returned. Alex Valencia, who was named in an FCC letter as the chief compliance officer at Lingo Telecom, did not immediately return an emailed request for comment.The recorded message was sent to between 5,000 and 25,000 voters two days before the 23 January primary. It used a voice similar to Biden’s, employed his often-used phrase, “What a bunch of malarkey” and falsely suggested that voting in the primary would preclude voters from casting a ballot in November’s general election.Biden won the Democratic primary as a write-in candidate after he kept his name off the ballot in deference to South Carolina’s new lead-off position for the Democratic primaries.The calls falsely showed up to recipients as coming from the personal cellphone number of Kathy Sullivan, a former state Democratic party chair who helps run Granite for America, a super Pac that supported the Biden write-in campaign. Formella said at least 10 people who received the calls then called Sullivan.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe apparent attempt at voter suppression using rapidly advancing generative AI technology is one example of what experts warn will make 2024 a year of unprecedented election disinformation around the world. Formella said the investigation is just beginning, but he wanted to send a strong message to deter others who might be tempted to interfere in this year’s elections.“Our message is clear: law enforcement across the country is unified on a bipartisan basis and ready to work together to combat any attempt to undermine our elections,” he said. More

Although Taylor Swift, 34, avoided discussing Democrats or Republicans in the earlier stages of her career, she has become more politically vocal over time. In 2018, she spoke out against Marsha Blackburn and supported Democratic candidates in Tennessee. During the 2020 election cycle, she endorsed Joe Biden and vowed to the then president Donald Trump on Twitter that “we will vote you out”.In recent weeks, a string of rightwing figures have begun to spread conspiracy theories claiming Swift is a “Pentagon asset” who will influence the next presidential election by endorsing Joe Biden.Here, six US voters from across the country share what they make of Swift taking a stance on US political issues, what issues they would feel comfortable having Swift talk about, and whether the superstar could influence their vote.‘Could Taylor Swift influence my vote? Yes, absolutely’“I love that Taylor is getting political! Every American has the right to their own political ideas, and to express them.“Taylor has a voice that is all caps, a megaphone. I’d like her to take a stance on women’s issues, youth issues, social issues, LGBTQ+ issues, the NFL draft, drug use, or anything else on her mind. Basically, any issue other than those affecting her personal business interests.“I think she could, potentially, absolutely change my mind politically, because she is a strong woman who is a role model to my 24-year-old daughter and who is unafraid to speak her mind to old, misogynistic, males who can’t find the ability to respect a woman, any woman. It is time we prepare the next generation of women for leadership. The far right are scared to death of Taylor, who has an opportunity to move the needle, to politically mobilise particularly young women and men, and I think she should.” Michael Dee, 67, an investment banker from Dallas, Texas‘Her words are a drop in the ocean compared to the Maga machine’“I am very supportive of Taylor taking political stances. Country stars have supported Republicans for years and it didn’t seem to bother anyone; now a smart successful woman has threatened the football Maga crowd. She’s a smart, aware woman and any speaking she does is a drop in the ocean compared to the Maga machine that is everywhere. If she can prevent another attack on our fragile democracy she should please speak up. She’d be a fool not to.“I’d like her to clear up issues [about which] Trump has gaslit people. He made a mess of things. Let her highlight his failures, his encouragement of the January 6 attack on the Capitol and his lies.“I live in a Republican state, with cowboys and Trump people and pickup trucks driving around with flags. I’m gonna vote for whoever will be the Dem candidate, but I’m hoping Taylor can get a few more people here to vote Dems, educate them politically, people who don’t read the papers.” Roberta, retired, from South Dakota‘If Taylor Swift endorsed a presidential candidate, I’d be angry’“It is concerning that Americans turn to icons like Taylor Swift, a musician, to advise them on how to vote. It further evidences that Americans are not really thinking for themselves but are under the sway of cultural and commercial influences.“Swift is part of a global elite, whether she acknowledges it or not and no matter how much charity she does. She is now a billionaire, and even if she had $500m, $50m or $5m, she would still be living in a completely different world from most of her fans and most people in the United States.“When Taylor Swift experiences an injustice, hundreds of millions of people hear about it in her songs or on the international news, creating the illusion that this injustice is significant to the lives of everyone else. I hate this new trend of celebrities becoming politicians and further capitalizing on their special privileges.“If Taylor Swift endorsed a presidential candidate, I would be angry. Americans do not need more noise in their already noisy election. We do not want musicians having that much power that they could sway a political election to one side or another. Leigh, 34, PhD student from San Francisco, California‘Taylor Swift’s endorsement can influence me more than any man in DC’“She should absolutely take a stance, as much as any American voter! Her stance and/or endorsement is one that I care about as much as my granddaughter does.“I would like to hear her speak out in support of human rights for all, especially women. And to support the asylum-seeking refugees risking their lives to contribute their hard work to the US. That’s what actually makes America great.“For me, Taylor Swift’s endorsement holds more influence than any man in DC or in the media. Why wouldn’t her opinion matter to me?” Louise*, 72, an unpaid family caregiver from Florida‘She should guide her followers if she cares about them’“People who have influence have a duty to speak the truth to their flock. A good leader stands by principles they believe in and advocates for the greater good. If Taylor Swift truly cares about her followers then she will guide them to make a good decision at this crucial moment in time. No one on the right would critique a pastor advancing his world view into sermons, so why can’t a singer?“I think Taylor Swift can speak well on inclusiveness, anti-racism, women’s rights, and democracy – fundamental values that shouldn’t be controversial in modern America, but have been made vulnerable by rightwing fearmongering. She should avoid [talking about] the climate until she leads by example and doesn’t fly from mansion to mansion on a private jet.“My vote would absolutely not be influenced by her: if she endorsed Trump I would just assume she’s horrible. If she endorsed Biden I would be glad that she isn’t a white supremacist.” Jacob Phelps, 38, a registered nurse from Pennsylvania‘She should encourage her fans to make up their own minds’“I tend toward the liberal end of the spectrum but I’m not dogmatic about it. Everyone should be engaged in our democracy. Because Taylor has built a successful career in music she can use her popularity to advocate for the things she cares about. More power to her.“I hope she encourages everyone to become more active in our country’s future. If she could convince people to value the diversity of our society and help to tone down the hate-filled rhetoric from both sides that would be a gigantic achievement.“I think she would be far more effective if she didn’t endorse a candidate but instead told her fans to study the issues and make up their own minds.” Geoff Lusk, 58, pilates instructor from Denver, Colorado*Name has been changed More

The United States’s first major climate legislation dismantled, a crackdown on government scientists, a frenzy of oil and gas drilling, the Paris climate deal not only dead but buried.A blueprint is emerging for a second Donald Trump term that is even more extreme for the environment than his first, according to interviews with multiple Trump allies and advisers.In contrast to a sometimes chaotic first White House term, they outlined a far more methodical second presidency: driving forward fossil fuel production, sidelining mainstream climate scientists and overturning rules that curb planet-heating emissions.“Trump will undo everything [Joe] Biden has done, he will move more quickly and go further than he did before,” said Myron Ebell, who headed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) transition team for Trump’s first term. “He will act much more expeditiously to impose his agenda.”The prized target for Trump’s Republican allies, should the former president defeat Joe Biden in November’s election, will be the Inflation Reduction Act, the landmark $370bn bill laden with support for clean energy projects and electric vehicles. Ebell said the legislation, signed by Biden in 2022 with no Republican votes, was “the biggest defeat we’ve suffered”.Carla Sands, a key environment adviser to the pro-Trump America First Policy Institute who has criticized Biden’s “apocalyptic green fantasies”, said: “Our nation needs a level regulatory playing field for all forms of energy to compete. Achieving this level playing field will require the repeal of the energy and environment provisions within the Inflation Reduction Act.”View image in fullscreenThe GOP-controlled House of Representatives has already pushed bills to gut the act. But fully repealing the IRA, which has disproportionally brought popular funding and jobs in solar, wind and battery manufacturing to Republican districts, may be politically difficult for Trump even if his party gains full control of Congress.However, Trump could still slow down the progress of the clean energy transition as president by redrawing the rules for the IRA’s generous tax credits.He would, his allies say, also scrap government considerations of the damage caused by carbon emissions; compel a diminished EPA to squash pollution rules for cars, trucks and power plants; and symbolically nullify the Paris climate agreement by not only withdrawing the US again but sending it to the Senate for ratification as a treaty, knowing it would fail.“The Paris climate accord does nothing to actually improve the environment here in the United States or globally,” said Mandy Gunasekara, Trump’s former EPA chief of staff. She argued that the agreement puts too little pressure on China, India and other developing countries to reduce their emissions.In recent rallies, Trump, the likely Republican nominee, has called renewable energy “a scam business” and vowed to “drill, baby, drill”. On his first day in office, Trump has said he would repeal “crooked Joe Biden’s insane electric vehicle mandate” and approve a glut of new gas export terminals currently paused by Biden.View image in fullscreenAreas currently off-limits for drilling, such the Arctic, will also probably be opened up to industry by Trump. “I will end his war on American energy,” Trump has said of the incumbent president, even though in reality the US hit record levels of oil and gas production last year.“I expect the Republicans will put together their own very aggressive reconciliation bill to claw back the subsidies in the IRA,” said Tom Pyle, president of the free market American Energy Alliance and previous head of the US Department of Energy’s transition team under Trump.“The president will benefit from having the experience of being in office before, he’ll get a faster head start on his agenda. He won’t be encumbered by the need to be re-elected, so there will be a short window of time but he may be more aggressive as a result.”‘There is no logic to it’Critics of Trump, who are already fretting over his potential return to the White House, warn this agenda will stymie clean energy investment, place Americans’ health at the mercy of polluters, badly damage the effort to address the climate crisis and alienate America’s allies.“A return of Trump would be, in a word, horrific,” said Andrew Rosenberg, a former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration official, now fellow at the University of New Hampshire.“It would also be incredibly stupid. It would roll back progress made over decades to protect public health and safety, there is no logic to it other than to destroy everything. People who support him may not realize it’s their lives at stake, too.”View image in fullscreenA second Trump term would be more ideologically extreme than the first, with fewer restraints, Rosenberg claimed. “There were people part of a reasonable mainstream in his first term who buffered against his craziest instincts – they won’t be there any more,” he said.Should Trump manage to repeal the IRA and water down or scrap EPA pollution rules, there would be severe consequences for a world that is struggling to contain an escalating climate crisis, experts say.The US, the world’s second biggest carbon polluter, would still see its emissions drop under Trump due to previous policies and a market-led shift away from coal to gas as an energy source, but at only half the rate of a second Biden term, according to an analysis by Energy Innovation shared with the Guardian.This would deal a mortal blow to the global effort to restrain dangerous global heating, with scientists warning that the world needs to cut greenhouse gas emissions by nearly half this decade, and eliminate them entirely by 2050, to avoid breaching agreed temperature limits and plunge billions of people into worsening heatwaves, floods and droughts.“I don’t think Donald Trump would actually be able to replace the IRA, but you couldn’t rule it out,” said Anand Gopal, executive director at Energy Innovation.“If he did, the global effect would be potentially disastrous. It would encourage everyone else to go backwards or slow down their climate pledges and put the world way off track to where it needs to be. It could prove the difference between staying under 1.5C warming or not.”Much will hinge upon any new Trump administration’s ability to better navigate arcane regulatory procedures and the courts. His previous term saw an enormous number of legal defeats for his hurried attempts at environmental rollbacks, as well as the departure of scandal-plagued cabinet members overseeing this effort.“You can’t just snap your fingers,” said Jeff Navin, a former chief of staff at the US Department of Energy. “You need to spend a lot of time redoing regulations. Is that something Trump really wants to do rather than just pursue other grievances? I don’t think so.”View image in fullscreenBut some conservatives believe Trump will prove more successful second time around, pointing to an amenably conservative supreme court and more detailed planning ahead of the election, such as the Project 2025 document put out by the rightwing Heritage Foundation, which details severe cuts to the EPA and Department of the Interior, as well as a greater politicization of the civil service to push through Trumpian goals.“We are writing a battle plan, and we are marshaling our forces,” Paul Dans, director of Project 2025, told E&E News last year. “Never before has the whole conservative movement banded together to systematically prepare to take power day one and deconstruct the administrative state.”Jeff Holmstead, who ran the EPA’s air office during George W Bush’s administration, said Trump’s administration would be “much more prepared” for a second term.“They know what they need to do to undo rules in a in a legally defensible way,” he said. A new Trump administration would take a more “surgical approach” to deregulation, he said, taking more of its cues from industry.Under Biden, Gunasekara said, there has been an “unnecessary tension” between the oil sector and regulators.“You have to work with the industry players,” she said. “Agencies should not be about suppressing or boosting particular technologies.”Early on, Trump officials will probably work with Congress to kill certain rules through a parliamentary procedure called the Congressional Review Act. The Clinton-era statute empowers Congress and the president to work together to overturn major federal regulations within 60 legislative days of finalization, by passing a joint resolution of disapproval signed by the president.“Generally in the past, anything that is finalized after mid- to late May is likely to be within that window,” said Holmstead. “So speed is of the essence for the Biden administration.”A fresh Trump term could engulf federal climate scientists, too, who were ignored but largely allowed to issue their work during Trump’s last term. A new Trump White House could intervene more to alter climate reports, or even stage a previously mooted public debate on the merits of climate science.View image in fullscreen“I expect that idea will be revived and I think we would get a much wider view of climate science that wouldn’t be controlled by a small cabal,” said Ebell. “That will start very quickly.”Trump’s plans come as Biden has struggled to inspire younger, climate-conscious voters who have been angered by his ongoing leasing of public lands and waters to the fossil fuel industry, such as the controversial Willow oil project in Alaska.Biden has overseen a boom in liquified natural gas exports that he has belatedly attempted to restrain and his administration has floundered in its attempts to sell the IRA to the American public, with most voters unaware of the climate legislation or its significance in driving down emissions.Still, the president’s position on climate change is incomparable to Trump’s, according to Rosenberg. “The contrast is incredibly stark between Biden and Trump,” he said. “Do I think Biden is the best of the best? Of course not. But compared to Trump? That’s just scary.“Anyone who cares about public health, the environment, science, international relations, you could go on, should be scared about another Trump presidency.” More