More stories

  • in

    Biden ‘not sure he’d be running’ in 2024 if Trump wasn’t: ‘We cannot let him win’

    The US president, Joe Biden, said on Tuesday that he is not sure he would be seeking re-election in next year’s election if he were not likely facing Republican Donald Trump.“If Trump wasn’t running, I’m not sure I’d be running,” Biden said at a fundraising event for his 2024 campaign outside Boston. “We cannot let him win.”The remarks came towards the end of his remarks as Biden spoke about the risks former President Trump poses to democracy, amid fears a second Trump term would be far more autocratic than the first.Biden also talked about Trump’s renewed calls to get rid of the Affordable Care Act and how America is “the only nation built on an idea”.In the past, Biden has spoken about how it was Trump’s remarks after the deadly white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017 that there were “fine people on both sides” that inspired him to challenge Trump in 2020.“In that moment, I knew the threat to this nation was unlike any I had ever seen in my lifetime,” Biden said in a 2019 video announcing his run for president.Last month senior Democrats sounded the alarm after an opinion poll showed Biden trailing the Republican frontrunner Trump in five out of six battleground states exactly a year before the presidential election.Biden turned 81 earlier this month while Trump is 77, and polls show voters have concerns that both are too old to run again for the White House.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionEarlier in Tuesday’s fundraising event Biden spoke at length about his support for Israel and the need to figure out what happens after the current conflict in Gaza.“I’ve been a strong, strong supporter of Israel from the time I entered the United States Senate in 1973.” More

  • in

    US imposes visa bans on Israeli settlers responsible for West Bank violence

    In a rare punitive move against Israel, the US has announced it will impose travel bans on extremist Jewish settlers implicated in recent attacks on Palestinians in theWest Bank.The secretary of state, Antony Blinken, announced the decision on Tuesday after warning Israel last week that Joe Biden’s administration would be taking action over the attacks. Blinken did not announce individual visa bans, but officials said those would be coming this week and could affect dozens of settlers and their families.“We have underscored to the Israeli government the need to do more to hold accountable extremist settlers who have committed violent attacks against Palestinians in the West Bank,” Blinken said in a statement. “As President Biden has repeatedly said, those attacks are unacceptable.”“Today, the state department is implementing a new visa restriction policy targeting individuals believed to have been involved in undermining peace, security or stability in the West Bank, including through committing acts of violence or taking other actions that unduly restrict civilians’ access to essential services and basic necessities,” Blinken said.He said the US would continue to seek accountability for settler violence against Palestinians as well as Palestinian attacks against Israelis in the West Bank and Israel, particularly as tensions are extremely high due to the conflict in Gaza.“Both Israel and the Palestinian Authority have the responsibility to uphold stability in the West Bank,” Blinken said. “Instability in the West Bank both harms the Israeli and Palestinian people and threatens Israel’s national security interests.”Some analysts described it as a positive step. Martin Indyk, a former US ambassador to Israel, tweeted: “Finally, settler vigilantes will pay a price for their violent efforts to uproot West Bank Palestinians. I hope their Israeli government sponsors will not be allowed to fly either.”But Aaron David Miller, a former state department analyst, negotiator and adviser on Middle East issues, expressed doubt that the decision would fundamentally alter the situation. “It’s necessary but not sufficient,” he said. “It’s a welcome demonstration the administration takes seriously the reality of settler vigilantism. But as a practical matter it’s not going to change many hearts or minds.”Miller added: “I wouldn’t call it virtue signalling but in some respects it’s similar to the administration’s ban in the wake of [journalist Jamal] Khashoggi’s murder by the Saudi regime. There were visa restrictions imposed on a number of Saudis as well.”Tuesday’s move comes just a month after Israel was granted entry into the US visa waiver programme, which allows its citizens visa-free entry into the US. Those targeted will not be eligible for the programme, and those who hold current US visas will have them revoked.The Biden administration has firmly backed Israel since the Hamas attack on 7 October, even as international criticism of its military operation has mounted. But in recent weeks, the White House has stepped up calls on Israel to do more to limit civilian casualties as it expands its offensive and targets densely populated southern Gaza.Joe Biden and other senior US officials have warned repeatedly that Israel must act to stop increasing violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians in the West Bank. During meetings in Israel last week, Blinken told officials that the US was “ready to take action using our own authorities”.The first bans under the new policy would be imposed on Tuesday and more designations will be made in the coming days, a state department spokesperson, Matthew Miller, told reporters, adding it would ultimately affect dozens of people.Any Israeli with an existing US visa who was targeted would be notified that their visa was revoked, Miller added.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSince a 1967 Middle East war, Israel has occupied the West Bank, which Palestinians want as the core of an independent state. It has built Jewish settlements there that most countries deem illegal. Israel disputes this and cites historical and biblical ties to the land.Daily settler attacks have more than doubled, UN figures show, since Hamas, which controls the separate Palestinian territory of Gaza, killed 1,200 Israelis and took about 240 hostage. Israel has since bombed and invaded Gaza, killing more than 16,000 people.James Zogby, the founder and president of the Arab American Institute in Washington, was sceptical of the Biden administration’s response, which he described as “cosmetic and not indicative of a serious effort to stem settler violence”.He said: “If we know who the people are then we ought to be pressing that they be prosecuted for the crimes they’ve committed. But no such effort is underway. A significant number of the settlers in the settler movement are American citizens. What is being done to deal with that issue? There’s been no answer on that at all.”On Tuesday, in a sign of the mounting pressure, the Israeli defence minister, Yoav Gallant, condemned the violence by Jewish settlers in the West Bank, saying in a state of law only the police and the military had the right to use force. “There is, sadly, violence from extremists that we must condemn,” Gallant told a press conference.“In a state of law – and Israel is a state of law – the right to use violence belongs only to those who are certified to do so by the government, in our case that’s the IDF [military], the Israeli police, the Shin Bet [security service] and such,” Gallant said.“Nobody else has any authority to use violence,” he said. More

  • in

    Zelenskiy unable to attend Senate briefing on Ukraine aid; Schumer blames Republicans for impasse – as it happened

    Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy will not be able to attend a scheduled briefing of senators on the situation in the country, the Senate’s Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said.“Zelenskiy, by the way, could not make it … something happened at the last minute,” Schumer said. The Ukrainian leader was scheduled to virtually address the classified briefing for all senators at 3pm.Schumer said earlier in the day that the Senate would hold a vote on legislation to approve more military aid to Ukraine, but the package is opposed by Republicans who are demanding stricter immigration policies.Things are looking grim for the prospect of Congress approving new aid to Ukraine before the current tranche of military assistance is exhausted at the end of the year. Republicans, most notably House speaker Mike Johnson and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, spent today making it plain that they won’t support any further aid unless a compromise is reached on changes to border policies to crack down on migrant crossings – the sorts of proposals Democrats refuse to entertain. Democrats are furious, with Senate leader Chuck Schumer accusing the GOP of “hostage taking” that Ronald Reagan would not approve of.Here’s what else went on:
    Volodymyr Zelenskiy was scheduled to make a video address to senators, but canceled unexpectedly, and also did not attend a briefing to House lawmakers. Top Ukrainian officials, including chief of staff Andriy Yermak, were reportedly at the Capitol in his stead.
    The House will vote on formalizing the impeachment inquiry against Joe Biden next week, which Johnson said will protect the investigation against court challenges.
    Republican senator Tommy Tuberville dropped his blockade of most military promotions, which he started in February to protest a Pentagon policy helping service members access abortions.
    Johnson will release footage of the January 6 insurrection recorded by House surveillance cameras – but with rioters’ faces blurred out, so they aren’t prosecuted, he said.
    Patrick McHenry, the North Carolina Republican who was briefly the acting House speaker after Kevin McCarthy’s overthrow, announced he will not seek re-election.
    Democrat Jack Reed chairs the Senate armed services committee, and in a statement simultaneously condemned Republican senator Tommy Tuberville for blocking military promotions while cheering his decision to end the blockade:The top Senate Republican Mitch McConnell says he is encouraging his party’s lawmakers to oppose a bill that would approve military assistance to Ukraine and Israel but does not include the changes to border policy that the GOP is demanding.The Senate’s Democratic leader Chuck Schumer announced earlier today that he would on Wednesday hold a procedural vote on legislation itoapprove the military aid, which Joe Biden request in October. But such a bill would require the support of a least nine Republicans to pass the Senate, and the GOP is demanding the inclusion of provisions to restart border wall construction and prevent many asylum seekers from entering the United States.Even though a growing number of Republicans are opposed to continuing aid to Kyiv, McConnell has previously argued the money is necessary to counter Russia – but now says changing border policy is equally essential:CNN reports that Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy also did not attend a briefing for House lawmakers that he was scheduled to address virtually:Earlier in the day, Politico reported that his chief of staff Andriy Yermak as well as Ukraine’s defense minister and the speaker of parliament were on Capitol Hill to meet with lawmakers.Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy will not be able to attend a scheduled briefing of senators on the situation in the country, the Senate’s Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said.“Zelenskiy, by the way, could not make it … something happened at the last minute,” Schumer said. The Ukrainian leader was scheduled to virtually address the classified briefing for all senators at 3pm.Schumer said earlier in the day that the Senate would hold a vote on legislation to approve more military aid to Ukraine, but the package is opposed by Republicans who are demanding stricter immigration policies.Republican senator Tommy Tuberville has agreed to end his blockade of most military promotions in protest of a Pentagon policy paying expenses for some service members who travel to seek abortions, Reuters reports.Tuberville’s blockade began in February after the defense department announced the abortion policy, but has come under increasing fire from both Democrats and Republicans alike for endangering US national security by preventing the military from filling high-ranking command posts.The senator has lifted his holds of the promotion of about 400 officers, as well as other lower-ranked positions, Reuters reports, but continues to block a handful of high-ranking positions.“I’ve still got a hold on, I think, 11 four-star generals. Everybody else is completely released by me,” Tuberville said. “It was pretty much a draw. They didn’t get what they wanted. We didn’t get what we wanted.”Having been booted from the House, big-time liar George Santos has apparently moved on to a new career, but that did not stop him from falling for one Democrat’s prank, the Guardian’s Gloria Oladipo reports:Pennsylvania senator John Fetterman enlisted a Cameo video from disgraced lawmaker George Santos in “support” of the also-disgraced New Jersey senator Bob Menendez, with Santos telling Menendez to “stay strong” amid his legal woes.In a rare example of bipartisan financial support, Fetterman paid Santos, a Republican, $200 for the personalized video as a prank. Santos did not know the “Bobby” he was recording the video for was Menendez.Santos was expelled from the House of Representatives on Friday following a scathing ethics report that detailed his misuse of campaign funds. Ever since he has been selling videos on Cameo, a website that allows users to buy short, personalized videos from celebrities.On X, Fetterman said he wanted to provide Menendez with “encouragement” amid the “substantial legal problems” the New Jersey senator faces.“So, I approached a seasoned expert on the matter to give ‘Bobby from Jersey’ some advice,” Fetterman wrote on X.Anti-Trump Republican Liz Cheney is considering jumping to the presidential race as a third-party candidate to stop the former president from winning another term in office, the Guardian’s Edward Helmore reports:Liz Cheney, a leading Republican critic and antagonist of Donald Trump, has said she is considering mounting her own third-party candidacy for the White House, as part of her effort to thwart the former president from returning to the Oval Office.In her most explicit public statements to date on a potential presidential run, Cheney told the Washington Post on Tuesday she would do “whatever it takes” to block a Trump return.Cheney, the daughter of former Republican vice-president Dick Cheney, has previously floated the idea. But she had never explicitly stated if she was thinking of running as a semi-moderate Republican party candidate or would run as an independent.“Several years ago, I would not have contemplated a third-party run,” Cheney said in the interview. “I happen to think democracy is at risk at home, obviously, as a result of Donald Trump’s continued grip on the Republican party, and I think democracy is at risk internationally as well.”Cheney echoed that sentiment in remarks with USA Today. She said: “I certainly hope to play a role in helping to ensure that the country has … a new, fully conservative party. And so whether that means restoring the current Republican party, which looks like a very difficult if not impossible task, or setting up a new party, I do hope to be involved and engaged in that.”Things are looking grim for the prospect of Congress approving new aid to Ukraine before the current tranche of military assistance is exhausted at the end of the year. Republicans, most notably House speaker Mike Johnson, have spent today making it plain that they won’t support any further aid unless a compromise is released on changes to border policies to crack down on migrant crossings – the sorts of proposals Democrats refuse to entertain. Democrats are furious, with Senate leader Chuck Schumer accusing the GOP of “hostage taking” that Ronald Reagan would not approve of.Here’s what else has been going on today:
    The House will vote on formalizing the impeachment inquiry against Joe Biden next week, which Johnson said will protect the investigation against court challenges.
    Republican senator Tommy Tuberville may or may not be about to drop his blockade of military promotions.
    Johnson will release footage of the January 6 insurrection recorded by House surveillance cameras – but with rioters’ faces blurred out, so they aren’t prosecuted, he said.
    North Carolina Republican Patrick McHenry, who unexpectedly found himself leading the House for three weeks after Kevin McCarthy was ousted as speaker in October, has announced he will retire from Congress.McHenry will have served for two decades by the time he steps down at the end of next year, and three weeks of that period was spent as acting speaker until the chamber elected Mike Johnson as McCarthy’s replacement later in October.McHenry’s western North Carolina district is seen as strongly Republican, meaning he is unlikely to be replace by a Democrat. From his statement announcing his retirement:
    I will be retiring from Congress at the end of my current term. This is not a decision I come to lightly, but I believe there is a season for everything and—for me—this season has come to an end.Past, present, and future, the House of Representatives is the center of our American republic. Through good and bad, during the highest of days and the lowest, and from proud to infamous times, the House is the venue for our nation’s disagreements bound up in our hopes for a better tomorrow. It is a truly special place and—as an American—my service here is undoubtedly my proudest. Since being sworn in January 3rd, 2005, I have worked everyday to uphold the Constitution and the system of government our founders so wisely created.

    There has been a great deal of handwringing and ink spilled about the future of this institution because some—like me—have decided to leave. Those concerns are exaggerated. I’ve seen a lot of change over twenty years. I truly feel this institution is on the verge of the next great turn. Whether its 1974, 1994, or 2010, we’ve seen the House evolve over time. Evolutions are often lumpy and disjointed but at each stage, new leaders emerge. There are many smart and capable members who remain, and others are on their way. I’m confident the House is in good hands.
    House Republicans will next week hold a vote to formalize their impeachment inquiry against Joe Biden, CNN reports:Former speaker Kevin McCarthy announced the start of the investigation in September, which centers on thus-far unproven allegations of corruption against the president in connection to his family members’ overseas business dealings.The House has thus far held one hearing as part of the inquiry, in which Republican-invited witnesses said they were not aware of any criminal activity by the president, but said the investigation was worth continuing.In a press conference today, the chamber’s Republican leader Mike Johnson said the vote is necessary to establish its authority to investigate the president:Reports have emerged that Republican senator Tommy Tuberville will drop his months-long blockade of most military officer promotions.According to CNN, the senator announced a press conference where he was expected to end to his campaign, only to quickly cancel it in favor of more informal remarks to reporters:Tuberville announced the blockade in February in protest of a Pentagon policy that will help active duty service members travel to seek abortions, if they are stationed in areas where the procedure is not accessible.The senator’s effort was criticized by Democrats and an increasing number of Republicans as jeopardizing national security by leaving important officer roles in the military unfilled. Last month, GOP lawmakers confronted him on the Senate floor about his blockade, while the chamber moved forward with a plan that would allow them to circumvent it:In yet another dismal sign for the prospects of Congress approving more military aid that Ukraine says it needs to fend off Russia’s invasion, Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer said Republican “hostage taking” brought negotiations to a standstill.Schumer’s remarks on the Senate floor were an indication that the two parties are far apart on an agreement on aid to Kyiv, with the New York Democrat blaming the GOP for insisting on passing immigration policies championed by Donald Trump – which his party’s lawmakers will never support.“If Republicans are unable to produce a broadly bipartisan immigration proposal, they should not block aid to Ukraine in response. They should not be resorting to hostage taking,” Schumer said. “That would be madness, utter madness. It would be an insult to our Ukrainian friends who are fighting for their lives against Russian autocracy. And it could go down as a major turning point where the West didn’t live up to its responsibilities and things turned away from our democracies and our values and towards autocracy.”He closed with a reference to Ronald Reagan, the Republican former president known for his opposition to the Soviet Union in the 1980s:
    Ronald Reagan would be rolling in his grave – rolling in his grave – if he saw his own party let Vladimir Putin roll through Europe.
    So, once again, I urge my Republican colleagues to think carefully about what’s at stake with this week’s vote. What we do now will reverberate across the world for years and decades to come.
    And history – history – will render harsh judgment on those who abandoned democracy for Donald Trump’s extreme immigration policies. More

  • in

    Tommy Tuberville says he will end blockade of 400 military promotions

    Senator Tommy Tuberville said on Tuesday he was ending his blockade of hundreds of military promotions, clearing the way for numerous generals and admirals to take new roles after a nearly 10-month protest over the military’s abortion policy.The Alabama Republican said he was “not going to hold the promotions of these people any longer”.More than 400 military nominations have been in limbo due to Tuberville’s blanket hold on confirmations and promotions for senior military officers. It is a stance that has left key national security positions unfilled and military families with an uncertain path forward.He finally relented after heavy pressure from fellow Republican senators who had grown increasingly alarmed about the damage his holds were having on US military readiness. More than half of the US military’s 850 senior general and admiral roles had been affected by Tuberville’s holds, and that number was expected to grow to three-quarters of all senior military officials by the end of the year.Tuberville, a former college football coach and neophyte lawmaker, was blocking the nominations in opposition to new Pentagon rules that allow reimbursement for travel when a service member has to go out of state to get an abortion or other reproductive care.Joe Biden’s 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.Critics said that Tuberville’s ire was misplaced and that he was blocking the promotions of people who had nothing to do with the policy he opposed.“Why are we punishing American heroes who have nothing to do with the dispute?” said his fellow Republican senator Dan Sullivan of Alaska. “Remember we are against the Biden abortion travel policy, but why are we punishing people who have nothing to do with the dispute and if they get confirmed can’t fix it? No one has had an answer for that question because there is no answer.”Tuberville had little choice but to back down. Senate Democrats had introduced a proposal that would let the Senate make a one-time exception to its rules to confirm the military appointees, and it had garnered enough Republican support that it was going to pass if Tuberville did not shift his position.He will now allow the Senate to vote to confirm almost all of the top-ranked military positions, but will keep his hold on four-star generals, blocking 10 or so of the most senior military promotions.The Associated Press contributed to this report More

  • in

    ‘Whatever it takes’: Liz Cheney mulls third-party run to block Trump victory

    Liz Cheney, a leading Republican critic and antagonist of Donald Trump, has said she is considering mounting her own third-party candidacy for the White House, as part of her effort to thwart the former president from returning to the Oval Office.In her most explicit public statements to date on a potential presidential run, Cheney told the Washington Post on Tuesday she would do “whatever it takes” to block a Trump return.Cheney, the daughter of former Republican vice-president Dick Cheney, has previously floated the idea. But she had never explicitly stated if she was thinking of running as a semi-moderate Republican party candidate or would run as an independent.“Several years ago, I would not have contemplated a third-party run,” Cheney said in the interview. “I happen to think democracy is at risk at home, obviously, as a result of Donald Trump’s continued grip on the Republican party, and I think democracy is at risk internationally as well.”Cheney echoed that sentiment in remarks with USA Today. She said: “I certainly hope to play a role in helping to ensure that the country has … a new, fully conservative party. And so whether that means restoring the current Republican party, which looks like a very difficult if not impossible task, or setting up a new party, I do hope to be involved and engaged in that.”Cheney added that she would make decision in the next few months, describing the threats facing the US as “existential”. She the country needed a candidate to “confront all of those challenges”, adding: “That will all be part of my calculation as we go into the early months of 2024.”The former Wyoming congresswoman was speaking as part of a book tour promoting Oath and Honor: A Memoir and a Warning, which calls on the US to back pro-constitution candidates against what she describes as Trump enablers in Congress.“Every one of us – Republican, Democrat, independent – must work and vote together to ensure that Donald Trump and those who have appeased, enabled, and collaborated with him are defeated,” she wrote, calling it “the cause of our time”.With Trump 40 points ahead of 2024 Republican presidential primary challengers, she told the Post, the “tectonic plates of our politics are shifting”, upending conventional wisdom about third party candidates.The primary system process that produces a single Republican and Democrat presidential nominee, Cheney added, is “pretty irrelevant, in my view, in the 2024 cycle, because the threat is so unique”.If Cheney decides on a third-party run, she will join Robert F Kennedy Jr, Cornel West and Jill Stein. Other potential candidates include West Virginia’s soon-to-retire senator Joe Manchin, the former Connecticut senator Joe Lieberman, and ex-Maryland governor Larry Hogan.In a Harvard CAPS-Harris survey in November, Kennedy led the declared pack in terms of favorability at 52%. Kennedy scored higher than the runner-up Trump, at 51%, and Joe Biden, at 46%.“Robert Kennedy has positioned himself to appeal to members of both parties, though it is unclear how much of his ratings are from in depth knowledge of Kennedy versus his popular family name,” Mark Penn, co-director of the Harvard Caps-Harris Poll, told the Hill.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAgainst a backdrop of warnings that third-party candidates may only succeed in helping Trump win a second term in the White House, and others that it would do the opposite, polling suggests that a year out from the election voters are open to alternatives to the two-party lock-up.According to a Gallup poll in October, 63% of US adults currently agree with the statement that the Republican and Democratic parties do “such a poor job” of representing the American people that “a third major party is needed”.According to Pew Research in September, Americans’ views of politics and elected officials are unrelentingly negative. Elected officials are widely viewed as self-serving, ineffective and locked in partisan warfare. And a majority said the political process is dominated by special interests as well as campaign cash.On Monday, efforts to oppose No Labels and other third-party presidential bids ramped up with a $100,000 political advertising campaign funded by Citizens to Save Our Republic, a bipartisan group that has warned that any effort to upset democratic norms will play into Trump’s hand.“We are worried about any third party. We realize it is a free country. Anybody can run for president who wants to run for president,” former US House minority leader Richard Gephardt told reporters on Monday. “But we have a right to tell citizens the danger they will face if they vote for any of these third-party candidates.” More

  • in

    Santos duped by Democratic senator to troll disgraced colleague Menendez

    Pennsylvania senator John Fetterman enlisted a Cameo video from disgraced lawmaker George Santos in “support” of the also-disgraced New Jersey senator Bob Menendez, with Santos telling Menendez to “stay strong” amid his legal woes.In a rare example of bipartisan financial support, Fetterman paid Santos, a Republican, $200 for the personalized video as a prank. Santos did not know the “Bobby” he was recording the video for was Menendez.Santos was expelled from the House of Representatives on Friday following a scathing ethics report that detailed his misuse of campaign funds. Ever since he has been selling videos on Cameo, a website that allows users to buy short, personalized videos from celebrities.On X, Fetterman said he wanted to provide Menendez with “encouragement” amid the “substantial legal problems” the New Jersey senator faces.“So, I approached a seasoned expert on the matter to give ‘Bobby from Jersey’ some advice,” Fetterman wrote on X.Menendez and his wife both face federal bribery and extortion charges, as the senator also faces calls to resign. Fetterman has been one of Menendez’s fiercest critics, questioning during a CNN appearance on Monday why Menendez should remain in office if Santos is expelled.In the Cameo video to Menendez, Santos begins with “Hey Bobby!”He continues: “I don’t think I need to tell you, but these people who want to make you get in trouble and want to kick you out and make you run away, you make them put up or shut up. You stand your ground, sir, and don’t get bogged down by all the haters out there.”Santos ends with “Stay strong” before wishing Menendez a “Merry Christmas”.Santos reportedly made the Cameo video just 16 minutes after receiving the request from Fetterman’s camp. “We did not expect to get it back so fast,” an unnamed Fetterman spokesperson told Business Insider.After Fetterman posted the Santos video online, Santos responded on X that he did not know which “Bobby” he was making the video for: “I love this! I wish I knew the Bobby in question! LOL.”Santos then publicly called for Menendez’s removal.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionMenendez, for his part, responded to Fetterman’s prank by telling NBC News: “I don’t think Mr Clickbait’s donors would appreciate him enriching George Santos.”Fetterman wasn’t the only one to cash in on Santos’s new career.Ohio Democrats also bought a Cameo from Santos in order to troll Senator Bernie Moreno for his donations to the Santos campaign.“A little message from [Santos] to his number one supporter in Ohio, [Moreno],” the group posted on X, along with the video in which Santos expressed his gratitude to “Bernie Moreno from Ohio” for “maxing out to my campaign”.“Unfortunately, you know, it ended, it’s over, but I want to say thank you very much for that donation and for all the support and I hope that in the future I can come back and be part of the game again,” Santos added. More

  • in

    Dozens of independent abortion clinics closed in 2023 post-Roe, study finds

    Dozens of independently owned reproductive health clinics shuttered in 2023, the year after the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade, according to a new report from the Abortion Care Network.The group found that 23 independently owned clinics closed this year, on top of the 42 that shuttered in 2022, leaving over a dozen states, mainly in the American south and midwest, without a single brick-and-mortar clinic that provides abortion.“Even before Roe fell, we were the only abortion clinic in a very rural, very underserved state with limited access to health care, and now that’s all been exacerbated,” said Katie Quinonez-Alonzo, executive director of Women’s Health Center of West Virginia.Like most independent clinics in the United States, the Women’s Health Center of West Virginia struggled to keep its doors open after the supreme court decision paved the way for the state to ban abortion last year. The clinic still provides other reproductive and sexual health services, like gender-affirming care for transgender patients.“We want to stay here in our community and help the patients that are still counting on us, but it’s been one uphill battle after another,” Quinonez-Alonzo told the Guardian.The Women’s Health Center of West Virginia is an especially crucial lifeline for low-income, uninsured people in the state, who rely on the clinic for routine gynecological check-ups. Those services became harder to offer after West Virginia banned abortion, slashing the clinic’s revenue by roughly half a million dollars.This year, Quinonez-Alonzo anticipates a roughly $350,000 budget deficit.Independently owned clinics – in contrast with bigger players like Planned Parenthood – provide the majority of abortions in the United States. According to the ACN report, “indie” clinics make up the majority of clinics operating in states that are most hostile to abortion, and offer the broadest range of options for patients seeking the procedure. ACN researchers found that 73% of indie brick-and-mortar clinics offer both medical and surgical abortions, compared with just 42% of Planned Parenthood affiliates – so as they dwindle in number, so do options for women seeking care.Before the supreme court overturned Roe, the West Alabama Women’s Center provided over half of the abortions in the state.“In the deep south, it was always indie providers that were the ones providing abortions. Very few Planned Parenthoods existed in our region,” said Robin Marty, executive director of West Alabama Women’s Center.“Alabama used to have three Planned Parenthoods, we have just one now, the others have closed,” Marty said. “We’re still here, though.”After Alabama enacted a sweeping ban on abortion, the Tuscaloosa clinic refocused on protecting newly pregnant people’s access to affordable prenatal healthcare.But Alabama is one of 10 states that has not expanded Medicaid, leaving roughly one in seven women of childbearing age without any form of health insurance. The state allows newly pregnant women to apply for Medicaid, but that requires a doctor’s letter confirming the pregnancy.“But of course, as these people do not have insurance, they can’t get into a doctor in order to get this letter for Medicaid,” Marty said. “This is why we’re seeing so many people in Alabama who don’t have prenatal care in the first trimester.”Even after a patient receives a doctor’s letter confirming their pregnancy, it can take four to six weeks for the state to approve coverage. To help care for uninsured and pregnant people in Alabama, Marty said her clinic provides free prenatal care until a patient’s Medicaid coverage is approved. If financial trouble forces the clinic to close, a bad maternal health landscape will get worse.“The people in our community need prenatal care and birth control and STI testing just as much as they need abortion,” Marty said. “For these patients, there isn’t another healthcare provider here for them.” More

  • in

    US ‘out of money’ to help Ukraine: six key things to know about aid budget standoff

    The White House issued an urgent warning to Congress on Monday, predicting that Ukraine will soon lose ground in its war against Russia without another infusion of financial aid from the US.“I want to be clear: without congressional action, by the end of the year we will run out of resources to procure more weapons and equipment for Ukraine and to provide equipment from US military stocks,” Shalanda Young, director of the Office of Management and Budget, wrote in her letter to congressional leaders.“There is no magical pot of funding available to meet this moment. We are out of money – and nearly out of time.”In October, the White House asked Congress to approve a $106bn supplemental funding bill that would provide assistance to Ukraine, Israel and allies in the Indo-Pacific while also strengthening border security. However, bipartisan negotiations over that bill have now stalled.Although previous funding packages for Ukraine have won widespread bipartisan support in Congress, the issue has become increasingly contentious in the Republican-controlled House.Given hard-right Republicans’ entrenched opposition to additional Ukraine aid, the new House speaker, Republican Mike Johnson, must walk a fine line in his negotiations with the Senate.Here’s everything you need to know about the path forward for Ukraine aid:How much additional aid has the White House requested?The supplemental funding request that the White House outlined in October included roughly $60bn in additional aid for Ukraine. Although Congress has already appropriated more than $111bn to bolster Ukraine’s war efforts, Young warned in her letter to congressional leaders that resources are quickly running out.According to Young, the defense department has already used 97% of the $62.3bn it received, while the state department has none of its $4.7bn remaining. Noting the global stakes of the war in Ukraine, Young stressed that Congress must act immediately to prevent disaster.“This isn’t a next year problem. The time to help a democratic Ukraine fight against Russian aggression is right now,” Young said. “It is time for Congress to act.”Where do negotiations over the bill stand now?Bipartisan negotiations to craft a supplemental aid package that can pass both chambers of Congress appeared to stall over the weekend. House Republicans have pushed to include harsher immigration policies in the bill, particularly on the issues of asylum and parole applications, but those proposals are a non-starter for many Democrats.One of the lead Democratic negotiators in the talks, Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, told Politico on Monday that hard-right Republicans wanted to “essentially close the border” in exchange for supporting more Ukraine funding.“Right now, it seems pretty clear that we’re making pretty big compromises and concessions and Republicans aren’t willing to meet us anywhere close to the middle,” Murphy said.Why do hard-right Republicans oppose additional aid?As more members of the Republican party have embraced Donald Trump’s “America First” approach to foreign policy, more rightwing lawmakers have grown suspicious of providing funding to Ukraine.They have argued the US should not be sending so much money to Ukraine when those funds could be better used to address border security, even though US assistance to Ukraine represents less than 1% of the nation’s GDP.But many prominent Republicans, including Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, continue to support funding for Ukraine, and that division has caused a growing rift in the party.The issue drew increased attention in October, when the hard-right congressman Matt Gaetz of Florida accused the then speaker Kevin McCarthy of cutting a “a secret side deal” with Joe Biden to provide additional funding to Ukraine. McCarthy rejected that characterization, but Gaetz’s charge underscored how the speaker’s support for Ukraine had become a wedge issue between him and the hard-right flank of his caucus.McCarthy was then removed as speaker, after Gaetz and seven other House Republicans joined Democrats in supporting a motion to vacate the chair.How has the new House speaker navigated the negotiations?Although Johnson initially expressed support for Ukraine following the Russian invasion in February 2022, his stance has since shifted. The group Republicans for Ukraine gave Johnson a grade of “F” on its congressional scorecard, noting that he has repeatedly voted against measures aimed at strengthening US support for Ukraine.Last week, Johnson said he was “confident and optimistic” that Congress would approve aid for both Israel and Ukraine, but he has suggested the two priorities should not be linked in one bill. Responding to Young’s letter on Monday, Johnson reiterated his demand that any aid for Ukraine must be tied to stiffer border policies.“The Biden administration has failed to substantively address any of my conference’s legitimate concerns about the lack of a clear strategy in Ukraine, a path to resolving the conflict, or a plan for adequately ensuring accountability for aid provided by American taxpayers,” Johnson said on X, formerly Twitter.“House Republicans have resolved that any national security supplemental package must begin with our own border. We believe both issues can be agreed upon if Senate Democrats and the White House will negotiate reasonably.”Can Congress still pass another aid package before the end of the year?That remains highly unclear, as the two parties currently appear far apart in their negotiations. But one of the lead Republican negotiators, Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma, voiced confidence on Monday that lawmakers would ultimately reach a consensus.“We continue to work to find a solution that will protect our national security, stop the human trafficking, and prevent the cartels from exploiting the obvious loopholes in our law,” Lankford said on X. “That is the goal [and] we will continue to work until we get it right.”What are the potential consequences if a deal fails?In her letter, Young predicted that the loss of US financial support would “kneecap Ukraine on the battlefield, not only putting at risk the gains Ukraine has made, but increasing the likelihood of Russian military victories”.Such a scenario could cause the war to spill over into a broader regional conflict involving America’s other European allies, Young warned, and that perilous situation may endanger US troops abroad.“I must stress that helping Ukraine defend itself and secure its future as a sovereign, democratic, independent, and prosperous nation advances our national security interests,” Young said. “The path that Congress chooses will reverberate for many years to come.” More