US Politics

Joe Biden will “have an LBJ moment” and decide not to run for re-election next year, the leftwing academic and independent presidential candidate Cornel West has predicted.“I’m not even sure whether I’ll be running against Biden,” West told Politico. “Biden – I think he’s going to have an LBJ moment [and] pull back.”West was referring to the moment on 31 March 1968 when Lyndon B Johnson, in office since the assassination of John F Kennedy in November 1963, announced that he would not seek re-election.Johnson cited the war in Vietnam and divisions at home. His former secretary, George Christian, said health was also a factor: Johnson was only 59 but had suffered a heart attack 13 years before. He had a fatal heart attack five years later.Already the oldest president ever sworn in, Biden is 81 and would be 86 at the end of a second term. In polling, clear majorities say he is too old.West told Politico he might end up running against a “B team” of younger Democrats including Gavin Newsom, governor of California, and Gretchen Whitmer, governor of Michigan, because Biden was “running out of gas”.He did not mention Kamala Harris, Biden’s vice-president.At 70, West is seven years younger than the most likely Republican candidate, the former president, 91-time criminal indictee and adjudicated rapist Donald Trump.Trump, West said, was a “bona fide gangster, neo-fascist Pied Piper leading the country for a second civil war”.But he called Biden “a milquetoast neoliberal with military adventurism, possibly leading the world toward world war three”.“I’m more concerned about Trump domestically,” West said. “I’m more concerned about Biden in terms of foreign policy.”The Biden campaign did not comment. A Trump spokesperson misspelled West’s name (“Cornell”) and said he should “go back to liberal academia instead of playing pretend politics. He still hasn’t graduated from the kids table.”West does not perform as strongly in polling as another independent seen as a potential spoiler in favour of Trump, the attorney and campaigner Robert F Kennedy Jr.West told Politico: “I don’t accept the spoiler category. A vote for Biden, a vote for Trump is a vote for Biden and a vote for Trump.“There might be slices of people [who say], ‘If I didn’t vote for West, I would have voted for Biden.’ But that’s not to me a spoiler. If you’re in a race, and you make a case, and they vote for you, how do you become the spoiler?”Polling indicates Biden’s weakness against all Republican candidates. West said he campaigned for Biden in 2020 but did not vote for him.“When I got in there,” he said, “I don’t know if it was the Holy Ghost [but] something hit me: I said, ‘Naw, I can’t vote for this gangster.’”West was linked to the People’s party and the Green party before becoming independent. He was, he said, “trying to touch that 38% who don’t vote at all and young people more and more wrestling with cynicism of various sorts”.Polling shows declining support for Biden among Black voters.West said: “If you are concerned, primarily and solely, with your president being married only one time, I’m not the one for you. And I’m certainly not the Black man for you.“But if you’re looking at somebody who has a record that encompasses a whole host of things, politically, intellectually, over time and space, alongside my personal life then I might in fact, be somebody you consider very seriously.” More

If the truth about UFOs is out there, the American government doesn’t want you to see it yet.Just months after US space agency Nasa appointed a research director of unidentified anomalous phenomena, and promised more transparency about what it knows, the US Congress has acted to throttle the flow of information that ultimately reaches the public.Measures to create a presidential commission to review UFO records, and to order the Department of Defense to declassify certain “records relating to publicly known sightings of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP)”, were stripped from the sweeping defense policy bill that passed Congress on Thursday with bipartisan support.What was left were provisions ordering the National Archives to collect reports of “unidentified anomalous phenomena, technologies of unknown origin and nonhuman intelligence”, but giving various government departments broad authority to keep the records secret.It follows claims from whistleblowers during an eye-raising congressional hearing this summer that the government knew more than it was letting on about its work on UFOs, and had evidence of “non-human beings” gleaned from a top secret decades-long program.“We got totally ripped off. We got completely hosed. They stripped out every part,” the Tennessee Republican congressman Tim Burchett said of the bill, according to the New York Times.Burchett, who co-chaired the House panel in July and had promised to “uncover the cover-up”, introduced the measure that would have required the defense department to make public records that “do not reveal sources, methods or otherwise compromise the national security of the US”.He said the intelligence community had “rallied” to kill his proposal, and in other comments on Thursday blasted House colleagues as “gutless” because “they won’t stand up” for legislation before them.Separately, the Times cited an anonymous person with knowledge of discussions over the defense bill, who said defense department officials had “pushed back forcefully” on the moves towards openness.The Guardian has reached out the the defense department for comment.A report in the Hill published earlier this month said a “powerful” group of Republican lawmakers, including the House armed services committee chair, Mike Rogers, and intelligence committee chair, Mike Turner, were working to block the measure that would have created a presidential commission to review and declassify government UFO records.The Democratic Senate leader, Chuck Schumer, called it “an outrage” that the House had refused to incorporate the proposal, which, according to the Times, was a quid pro quo for the Senate rejecting Burchett’s offering, resulting in a simplified compromise bill containing neither that passed both chambers.“It means that declassification of UAP records will be largely up to the same entities that have blocked and obfuscated their disclosure for decades,” Schumer said.He did, however, call the bill as passed “a strong foundation for more action in the future”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe action stalls what had appeared to be a growing willingness by US officials to answer calls for greater transparency over UFOs.With July’s congressional hearing, and Nasa’s appointment of the space agency’s former Pentagon liaison, Mark McInerny, as its first director of UAP research, the government had slowly begun to embrace the idea of information sharing and public engagement after years of secrecy.Last month the Pentagon launched an online reporting tool for current or former federal employees to impart knowledge of “US government programs or activities related to UAP dating back to 1945”, with the promise of a public portal to come.And one of the key recommendations of Nasa’s year-long independent study by experts was to encourage a global army of citizen skywatchers to help its research into the phenomena, as well as harnessing the power of artificial intelligence and machine learning as new tools to help evaluate and understand data that comes in.Nasa’s goal is to “shift the conversation about UAP from sensationalism to science”, its administrator, Bill Nelson, told reporters at the time.“There is a mindset. We all are entertained by Indiana Jones in the Amazon, and finding the Crystal Skull, so there’s a lot of folklore out there. That’s why we entered the arena, to try to get into this from a science point of view.”Nelson, however, pushed back on the suggestion Nasa had withheld evidence about extraterrestrial life, promising the agency would always be truthful and open about all of its findings. More

The US’s support for Israel’s bombing campaign in Gaza is facing new scrutiny in Washington following a proposed resolution by the independent senator Bernie Sanders that could ultimately be used to curtail military assistance.It is far from clear whether Sanders has the support to pass the resolution, but its introduction in the Senate this week – by an important progressive ally of the US president, Joe Biden – highlights mounting human rights and political concerns by Democrats on Capitol Hill.Citing the killing of nearly 19,000 people and wounding of more than 50,000 in Gaza since Hamas’s brutal 7 October attack, Sanders said it was time to force a debate on the bombing that has been carried out by the rightwing government of the Israel prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and the US government’s “complicity” in the war.“This is a humanitarian cataclysm, and it is being done with American bombs and money. We need to face up to that fact – and then we need to end our complicity in those actions,” Sanders said in a statement.If passed, the resolution would force the US state department to report back to Congress any violations of internationally recognized human rights caused by “indiscriminate or disproportionate” military operations in Gaza, as well as “the blanket denial of basic humanitarian needs”.The state department would also have to report back on any actions the US has taken to limit civilian risk caused by Israeli actions, a summary of arms provided to Israel since 7 October, an assessment of Israel’s compliance with international humanitarian law in Gaza, and a certification that Israeli security forces have not committed any human rights violations.“We all know Hamas’s brutal terrorist attack began this war,” Sanders said. “But the Netanyahu government’s indiscriminate bombing is immoral, it is in violation of international law, and the Congress must demand answers about the conduct of this campaign. A just cause for war does not excuse atrocities in the conduct of that war.”Any such resolution would have to clear the Senate but only require a simple majority. It would also have to pass the House and be signed by the White House.The resolution includes details about the extensive use of US arms, including massive explosive ordinance, such as Mark 84 2,000lb bombs and 155mm artillery, and includes “credible findings” by human rights monitors and press organizations about the use of US arms in specific strikes that killed a large number of civilians.If the resolution were to pass, the administration would have 30 days to produce the requested report. After it is received, Congress would under US law be able to condition, restrict, terminate or continue security assistance to Israel.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionCongress has not requested such a resolution since 1976.Sanders has come under pressure from progressive Democrats to support calls for a ceasefire. Instead, the senator has previously called for a “humanitarian pause” to allow more aid into Gaza.In a letter to Biden this week, Sanders called on the US president to withdraw his support for a $10.1bn weapons package for Israel, which is contained in a proposed supplemental foreign aid package, and for the US to support a UN resolution it has previous vetoed demanding an immediate humanitarian ceasefire. More

Last week, Donald Trump was asked whether he would use power as retribution if he were to win a second term in the White House. The former US president responded that he would in fact abuse his power – but only on his first day in office. He followed up by saying: “After that, I’m not a dictator.”
So what would a Trump presidency 2.0 look like? Would a second term be as catastrophic as the critics believe? And what would be the impact of a Trump sequel not only on the US but on the world?
This week, Jonathan Freedland speaks to Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic, whose latest issue is dedicated entirely to a single topic: If Trump wins

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

Jury deliberations have officially begun in Rudy Giuliani’s federal defamation case. The Guardian’s Sam Levine reports on the three categories of damages sought by Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss:There are three categories of damages that Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss are asking for in their federal lawsuit against Rudy Giuliani: compensatory damages, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and punitive damages.The compensatory damages are what the jury feels is necessary to repair the damages to the reputation Freeman and Moss suffered because of 16 defamatory statements Giuliani made about them. The two women are asking the jury to award $24m each in that category alone.The damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress are designed to separately compensate Freeman and Moss for emotional damage they suffered as a result of Giuliani’s statements. The plaintiffs simply asked the jury to use their best judgment there.Lastly, punitive damages are supposed to be an additional punishment for Giuliani for his reckless conduct. The plaintiffs did not ask the jury for a specific amount, but asked the jury to choose a number that would “send a message” to deter other powerful people from engaging in similar conduct.In case you missed some of the court action, here are some highlights from this week…
Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss both testified about the disastrous effects of lies spread by Rudy Giuliani and others who put them at the center of an election conspiracy theory. They shared examples of the racist, harassing, threatening messages they received after being publicly named by election deniers.
Freeman said she had to leave her home for safety reasons. She hired a lawyer to help keep her name off any home-related documents for her new place. She feels like she’s lost who she is, her good name, in this web.
Moss detailed how these actions made her anxious to even leave the house and caused her son to get harassed, eventually failing his classes. She said she still doesn’t really go out.
Giuliani was initially expected to testify. But after two separate incidents of him doubling down, his team did not put him on the stand. His lawyer said the women had been through enough, but also pointed to Gateway Pundit, the rightwing media outlet, as more culpable for the harassment.
Ashlee Humphreys, a professor from Northwestern University and an expert witness of Freeman and Moss, walked through the significant reputational damage done to Freeman and Moss, showing how their names are now associated with election fraud.
Freeman and Moss’ lawyer, Michael Gottlieb, said they hope the case sends a clear message to people launching smear campaigns not to do it.
The jury is now deliberating over the amount of damages to award Freeman and Moss, as the judge has already decided Giuliani defamed them. The award could be as much as $43 million.
As we await the jury, a reminder of what’s at stake for Rudy Giuliani…Most obviously, Giuliani could be on the hook for massive financial damages for defaming Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss. The jury has the ability to award up to $43 million. It’s unclear whether Giuliani has the kind of money – he didn’t turn over documents that would’ve shown his financial state.As a reminder, the judge in this case has already decided Giuliani defamed the former elections workers. The jury is deciding how much that should cost him.Beyond the money, the case serves as a harbinger for other defamation cases that seek to hold people or entities spreading election lies accountable. And beyond this case, Giuliani faces criminal charges in the sprawling Georgia election subversion case.Giuliani’s legacy – whatever was left of it after the past few years – will be cemented by these cases. As the Daily Beast’s Jose Pagliery wrote in a piece about Giuliani’s rough circumstances today: “For Giuliani, 2023 will likely end in penniless defeat. But 2024 could be even worse—it could actually end with him in prison.”Chuck Schumer has praised the Senate’s passage of the National Defense Authorization Act and criticized what he called the “partisan race to the bottom we’re seeing at in the House.”In a tweet on Thursday, Schumer went on to say:
“While the Senate is strengthening American national security, House Republicans are wasting time on a clown-car impeachment inquiry that will go nowhere.”
As we wait for the jury deliberations to complete in Rudy Giuliani’s federal defamation trial, the leaders of the House and Senate have issued two very different statements on the border crisis.In a tweet on Thursday, House speaker Mike Johnson wrote:
“The border is not just a crisis, it’s a catastrophe. The House took action to secure our border. It’s time for the Senate and the White House to do the same.”
Meanwhile, Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer wrote:
“Republicans say action on the border is urgent. If they’re serious about getting something done, they should not be so eager to go home. There is a lot of work left to do.”
Speaking of Donald Trump’s mounting legal issues, his defense in the 2020 federal election interference case may get a boost from the supreme court.The Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reports:A decision by the US supreme court to take a case linked to the January 6 attack on the Capitol could have consequences altering the trajectory of the criminal case against Donald Trump over his effort to overturn the 2020 election as well as for hundreds of other people prosecuted for the riot.The nation’s highest court has agreed to consider whether federal prosecutors can charge January 6 riot defendants with a statute that makes it a crime to obstruct an official proceeding of Congress – a charge also filed against Trump in his 2020 election interference case.The decision by the conservative-dominated court to take up the matter complicates and could delay Trump’s trial in federal district court in Washington, which is currently scheduled for next March.For the full story, click here:Meanwhile, Rudy Giuliani’s former boss, Donald Trump, is once again claiming that he is part of a “witch hunt.”Posting on Truth Social on Thursday, Trump wrote:
“Biden had 150 Suspicious Activity Reports!!! I never had one!!! As the media has reported, my banks were thrilled with me as a customer, yet I get sued by the Racist A.G. of New York State. WITCH HUNT!”
Trump has been indicted four times, including on cases surrounding the 2020 federal election interference, the Georgia state election interference, classified documents found at his Florida Mar-a-Lago resort, and hush money payments made to adult film star Stormy Daniels.With the jury in deliberations, here is the Guardian’s Sam Levine’s report on the plaintiffs’ plea to award them each with $24m in damages to repair their reputations:A Washington DC jury should “send a message” to other powerful people by granting substantial damages award against Rudy Giuliani for spreading lies about two Georgia election workers, a lawyer for the pair said.“The message is don’t do it,” Michael Gottlieb, a lawyer representing Ruby Freeman and her daughter Shaye Moss, said in his closing statement to eight jurors on the fourth day of the defamation case. “They say when someone shows you who they are, believe them. Mr Giuliani has shown us over and over and over again that he will not take our clients names out of his mouth. Facts do not and will not stop him.“He’s telegraphing that he will do this again. Believe him,” he said.For the full story, click here:Federal judge Beryl Howell said that usually the upper boundary of permissible punitive damage is four times the compensatory damages, the Guardian’s Sam Levine reports. Both Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss are asking the jury to award $24m to each of them in compensatory damages.Jury deliberations have officially begun in Rudy Giuliani’s federal defamation case. The Guardian’s Sam Levine reports on the three categories of damages sought by Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss:There are three categories of damages that Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss are asking for in their federal lawsuit against Rudy Giuliani: compensatory damages, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and punitive damages.The compensatory damages are what the jury feels is necessary to repair the damages to the reputation Freeman and Moss suffered because of 16 defamatory statements Giuliani made about them. The two women are asking the jury to award $24m each in that category alone.The damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress are designed to separately compensate Freeman and Moss for emotional damage they suffered as a result of Giuliani’s statements. The plaintiffs simply asked the jury to use their best judgment there.Lastly, punitive damages are supposed to be an additional punishment for Giuliani for his reckless conduct. The plaintiffs did not ask the jury for a specific amount, but asked the jury to choose a number that would “send a message” to deter other powerful people from engaging in similar conduct.US district judge Beryl Howell told the jury that the court has already found that the defendants’ statements harmed plaintiffs, the Guardian’s Sam Levine reports.Howell went on to tell jurors that it is their job to quantify that harm.During closing arguments, the plaintiffs’ lawyer Michael Gottleib pushed back against Rudy Giuliani’s lawyers who claimed that Giuliani should not be defined by what has happened in recent times.“This case is not about Rudy Giulani is or what he did in his past. It’s about what he did. What he did to Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss… It’s not about the Yankees and 9/11 or the US attorneys office and taking on the mob,” Gottlieb said.Closing arguments have now been completed in Rudy Giuliani’s defamation trial and US district judge Beryl Howell is reading instructions to the jury.Overall, the plaintiffs are asking for at least $24m in damages for Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss. They asked the jury to use their discretion to decide how much in additional damages to wayward.Michael Gottlieb, a lawyer for the pair, asked the jury to award an amount that would “send a message” to powerful figures who are seeking to spread lies about ordinary people like Moss and Freeman.In his own closing, Joeseph Sibley asked the jury to give a lesser award that was directly related to the documented amount of money the two women had lost.He also sought to distance Giuliani from the violent threats the women faced, placing the responsibility instead on the Gateway Pundit. “More likely than not, this is the party that sort of doxed these women,” he said.And he also asked the jury to judge Giuliani based not just on his conduct towards Moss and Freeman, but based on the totality of his career.He said:
“Rudy Giuliani is a good man. I know that some of you may not think that. He hasn’t exactly helped himself with some of the things that have happened in the last few days,” he said. “The idea of him being a racist, or him encouraging racist activity, that’s really a low blow. That’s not who he is. He overcame negative stereotypes.”
Speaking about Rudy Giuliani, his lawyer Joseph Sibley said, “If he actually encouraged violence against these women, one would hope he would be in jail but that’s not what he did,” Law & Crime’s Brandi Buchman reports.He went on to add that racist and violent vitriol does not “naturally flow” from Giuliani, Buchman reports.Sibley also said that Giuliani “is a good man,” adding, “I know some of you may not think that.”The defense has begun its closing arguments.Joseph Sibley, Rudy Giuliani’s lawyer, told the court that the plaintiffs’ are asking “to award a catastrophic amount of damages against my client,” Law & Crime’s Brandi Buchman reports.“When you see my client’s state of mind, you’re going to say, you should have been better but weren’t as bad as the plaintiffs make you out to be,” he said.Sibley added that Giuliani “showed up, it’s not like he completely didn’t participate in the litigation,” Buchman reports.Michael Gottlieb, one of the lawyers representing Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, has just completed his closing argument. In his final remarks, he asked the jury to send a message to other powerful people with whatever punitive damages it chose to levy against Rudy Giuliani.“The message is, ‘Don’t do it,’” he said. “He has no right to offer defenseless civil servants up to a virtual mob in order to overturn an election.”Gottlieb asked the jury to award Freeman and Moss $24m each in damages to repair the damage to their reputation from 16 defamatory statements Giuliani made about them.He asked the jury to use their discretion to determine punitive damages as well as much how much to award for intentional infliction of emotional distress.“Ruby Giuliani used his power to scapegoat Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss,” he said. “He didn’t see them as human beings.”Joe Sibley, Giuliani’s lawyer, is about to begin his closing statement. More

A Washington DC jury should “send a message” to other powerful people by issuing substantial damages against Rudy Giuliani for spreading lies about two Georgia election workers, a lawyer for the pair said.“The message is don’t do it,” Michael Gottlieb, a lawyer representing Ruby Freeman and her daughter Shaye Moss, said in his closing statement to eight jurors on the fourth day of the defamation case. “They say when someone shows you who they are, believe them. Mr Giuliani has shown us over and over and over again that he will not take our clients names out of his mouth. Facts do not and will not stop him.“He’s telegraphing that he will do this again. Believe him,” he said.Gottlieb asked the jury to award Freeman and Moss each at least $24m in damages to repair the damage to their reputation Giuliani caused by spreading lies about them after the 2020 election. He urged the jury to use their best judgment to determine how much to award in additional punitive damages to award as well as damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress.“Rudy Giuliani used his power to scapegoat Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss,” Gottlieb said. “He didn’t see them as human beings.”“He has no right to offer defenseless civil servants up to a virtual mob in order to overturn an election,” he added.In a reversal, Giuliani’s attorney announced he would not take the witness stand on Thursday. “We feel like these women have been through enough,” Joseph Sibley, Giuliani’s attorney, said in court.In his closing statement, Sibley sought to distance Giuliani from the threats and harassment Freeman and Moss endured. Instead, he laid the blame at the far-right news outlet The Gateway Pundit which he said was the first place Freeman and Moss were identified by name and urged readers to harass them. Freeman and Moss are separately suing the outlet for defamation in a Missouri court.“More likely than not, this is the party that sort of doxxed these women,” he said.Sibley acknowledged Giuliani had wronged Moss and Freeman, but urged the jury to judge the former New York City based on the context of his whole career.“Rudy Giuliani is a good man. I know that some of you may not think that. He hasn’t exactly helped himself with some of the things that have happened in the last few days,” he said. “The idea of him being a racist, or him encouraging racist activity, that’s really a low blow. That’s not who he is.”Invoking Abraham Lincoln’s call of “malice towards none and charity for all” he said that the jury should issue more moderate damages to send a message of compassion to the country during a moment of political divisiveness. Unmentioned, of course, was that Giuliani and Donald Trump have played a key role in creating that divisiveness with vitriolic rhetoric.Todays closing arguments mark the end of a closely watched trial that is seen as another key test of the ability of defamation law to police election misinformation.Throughout the week, Moss and Freeman, gave harrowing testimony about how Giuliani’s lies upended their lives. Among other things, Moss said she was afraid to go anywhere alone and Freeman said she was afraid to give anyone her name and still wears a mask and sunglasses in public so she will not be recognized.Beryl Howell, the US district judge, has already found him liable for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and civil conspiracy. The only question for the eight-member jury is how much to award in damages.Sibley, Giuliani’s attorney, has sought to undercut claims that Freeman and Moss need millions of dollars to repair their reputation and that they suffered harm that amounts to such a high sum.Giuliani was twice reprimanded by Howell this week for statements he made outside the courthouse. On Monday, he said he would prove what he said about Moss and Freeman was true. On Tuesday, he attacked lawyers representing Moss and Freeman.“When I testify, you’ll get the whole story and it will be definitively clear what I said was true and that whatever happened to them, which was unfortunate if other people overreacted, but everything I said about them is true,” he had said on Monday. “Of course I don’t regret it, I told the truth.”That never came to fruition. Gottlieb made sure the jury noticed.“Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, it turns out are miles and miles away from ordinary. They are heroes. After everything they went through, they stood up and they said no more,” Gottlieb said in his closing statement. “They opened themselves up to you and the public, and unlike some other people, they testified here under oath.” More

Congress passed a US defense policy bill on Thursday that authorizes the biggest pay rise for troops in more than two decades, while leaving behind many of the policy priorities that social conservatives were clamoring for.Lawmakers have been negotiating a final bill for months. Some of the priorities championed by social conservatives were a no-go for Democrats, so negotiators dropped them from the final product to get it over the finish line.The bill passed the House on Thursday by 310 to 118, with 73 Republicans and 45 Democrats opposing it. It passed the Senate a day earlier, by a vote of 87-13. House opponents were more vocal about their concerns than in the Senate. It now goes to the president, Joe Biden, to be signed into law.Most notably, the bill does not include language blocking the Pentagon’s abortion travel policy and restricting gender-affirming healthcare for transgender service members and dependents.Republicans prevailed, however, in winning some concessions on diversity and inclusion training in the military. For example, the bill freezes hiring for such training until a full accounting of the programming and costs is completed and reported to Congress.The bill sets key Pentagon policy that lawmakers will attempt to fund through a follow-up appropriations bill. Lawmakers were keen to emphasize how the bill calls for a 5.2% boost in service member pay, the biggest increase in more than 20 years.The bill authorizes $886bn for national defense programs for the current fiscal year that began 1 October, about 3% more than the prior year.The Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, a Democrat, said the bill would ensure “America’s military remains state of the art at all times all around the world”.The bill also includes a short-term extension of a surveillance program aimed at preventing terrorism and catching spies. But the program has detractors on both sides of the political aisle who view it as a threat to the privacy of ordinary Americans.The extension continues a program that permits the US government to collect without a warrant the communications of non-Americans located outside the country to gather foreign intelligence.US officials have said the tool, first authorized in 2008 and renewed several times since then, is crucial in disrupting terror attacks, cyber intrusions and other national security threats. It has produced vital intelligence that the US has relied on for specific operations, such as the killing last year of the al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri.But the administration’s efforts to secure reauthorization of the program have encountered strong bipartisan pushback. Democrats such as the senator Ron Wyden, who has long championed civil liberties, have aligned with Republican supporters of the former president Donald Trump to demand better privacy protections for Americans and have proposed a slew of competing bills.The White House called for swift passage of the defense bill, saying it “provides the critical authorities we need to build the military required to deter future conflicts while supporting the servicemembers and their spouses and families who carry out that mission every day”.On Ukraine, the bill includes the creation of a special inspector general for Ukraine to address concerns about whether taxpayer dollars are being spent in Ukraine as intended. That is on top of oversight work already being conducted by other agency watchdogs.On China, the bill establishes a new training program with Taiwan, requires a plan to accelerate deliveries of Harpoon anti-ship missiles to Taiwan, and approves an agreement that enables Australia to access nuclear-powered submarines, which are stealthier and more capable than conventionally powered vessels.Dozens of House Republicans balked because the bill would keep in place a Pentagon rule that allows for travel reimbursement when a service member has to go out of state to get an abortion or other reproductive care. The Biden administration instituted the new rules after the supreme court overturned the nationwide right to an abortion, and some states have limited or banned the procedure.Tommy Tuberville, a Republican senator, had for months blocked the promotion of more than 400 senior military leaders over his objections to the policy. More

Donald Trump is “not a conservative”, the former Republican House speaker Paul Ryan said, but “a populist, authoritarian narcissist”.The former vice-presidential pick, who led the House majority for two years when Trump was president, also praised the Republicans Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger for opposing Trump to the cost of their congressional careers.Ryan, from Wisconsin, left Congress in 2019 and now sits on the board of Fox Corp, parent company of Fox News. He was speaking to Kevin Kajiwara, co-president of Teneo Political Risk Advisory, in a podcast interview recorded in November but widely noticed this week.Voices on both sides of the main political aisle have criticised Ryan for not strongly opposing Trump when he ran for the Republican nomination in 2016, or through four chaotic years in the White House that ended in the deadly January 6 attack on Congress.When stepping down Ryan praised Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, widely blamed for increasing inequality and the national deficit, as one of his biggest achievements along with increasing defense spending.Trump was impeached twice, including for January 6, but escaped conviction and now dominates polling for the next Republican presidential nomination.He does so despite facing 91 criminal charges, including 17 related to attempted election subversion, and civil threats including a business fraud trial and a defamation suit arising from a rape claim a judge called “substantially true”.Kajiwara asked Ryan how he thought history would judge Kinzinger and Cheney, conservative Republicans from Illinois and Wyoming who stood against Trump and sat on the January 6 committee before being forced out of Congress.“Look,” Ryan said, “Trump’s not a conservative. He’s an authoritarian narcissist. So I think they basically called him out for that. He’s a populist, authoritarian narcissist.“… All of his tendencies are basically where narcissism takes him, which is whatever makes him popular, makes him feel good at any given moment.“He doesn’t think in classical liberal-conservative terms. He thinks in an authoritarian way. And he’s been able to get a big chunk of the Republican base to follow him because he’s the culture warrior.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHistorians searching for the roots of Trumpism have generally looked to the 1990s, when another Republican speaker, Newt Gingrich, turned Congress into a scorched-earth battleground; to the rise of Fox News; or to opposition to Barack Obama, the first Black president, particularly through the Tea Party movement.Ryan, an economic conservative who was Mitt Romney’s running mate in 2012, continued: “There has to be some line, some principle that is so important to you that you’re just not going to cross, so that when you’re brushing your teeth in the morning, look yourself in the mirror, you like what you see. I think Adam and Liz are brushing their teeth, liking what they see.“And I think a lot of people in Congress … on the second impeachment, they thought Trump was dead. They thought after January 6, he wasn’t going to have a comeback. He was dead, so they figured, ‘I’m not going to take this heat, vote against this impeachment, because he’s gone anyway.’“But … he’s been resurrected. There’s lots of reasons for that. But he has been. So I think there’s a lot of people who already regret not getting him out of the way when they could have. So I think history will be kind to those people who saw what was happening and called it out, even though it was at the expense of their wellbeing.” More