US Politics

Marjorie Taylor Greene’s surprise resignation from Congress late on Friday, saying she refused to be a “battered wife” following her public fallout with Donald Trump, has been slammed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the Democratic congresswoman and Greene’s frequent sparring partner.“She’s carefully timing her departure just 1-2 days after her pension kicks in,” Ocasio-Cortez said in a statement on her Instagram account, and criticized her voting record on healthcare.Greene abruptly resigned from Congress, effective 5 January, in a 10-minute video post outlining her unhappiness with Republicans on issues including the public release of the Jeffrey Epstein files in the government’s possession, US financing of foreign conflicts, Trump’s decision to potentially back a candidate against her, and the cost of living and healthcare.After her service to Trump, she said she objected to being “expected to defend the President against impeachment after he hatefully dumped tens of millions of dollars against me and tried to destroy me”.“I refuse to be a ‘battered wife’ hoping it all goes away and gets better,” Greene said.But Ocasio-Cortez said Greene “is saying a lot but her ACTIONS have not backed up the rhetoric. For all her talk, she’s STILL voting with them to gut healthcare … ”Greene voted in the summer for cuts to Medicaid and the reduction of enhanced tax credits for the Affordable Care Act, but then in October criticized the ACA cuts as premiums soared.Ocasio-Cortez also repeated some of her criticism of shares bought by Greene earlier this year before Trump said he was pausing tariffs. Greene has denied any impropriety in her stock trading.Kentucky Republican congressman Thomas Massie, who has also taken public stands against Trump including over the Epstein files release, said on X that he was “very sad for our country but so happy for my friend Marjorie. I’ll miss her tremendously.”Massie added that Greene “embodies what a true Representative should be. Everyone should read her statement; there’s more honesty expressed in these four pages than most politicians will speak in a lifetime.”Early on Saturday, Trump also reacted to Greene’s announcement, posting on Truth Social that “Marjorie ‘Traitor’ Brown” had decided to call it “quits” because of “PLUMMETING Poll Numbers, and not wanting to face a Primary Challenger with a strong Trump Endorsement (where she would have no chance of winning!) … ”Trump also said that Greene’s political relationship with Massie “did not help her”.“For some reason, primarily that I refused to return her never ending barrage of phone calls, Marjorie went BAD,” he added. “Nevertheless, I will always appreciate Marjorie, and thank her for her service to our Country!”But Trump later told NBC News he would like to see Greene resume her political career.“It’s not going to be easy for her” to revive her career in politics, he said, adding: “I’d love to see that.” In the meantime, “she’s got to take a little rest”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionDavid Hogg, a survivor of the Parkland school massacre in 2018 who briefly served as a co-vice-chair of the Democratic National Committee and tussled with Greene over gun control, posted: “See ya!” on X.Greene was seen in a 2019 video following a then-18-year-old Hogg outside Capitol Hill, calling him a “coward” for not defending his stance on guns and accusing him of “using” kids to pass gun control laws. Hogg and other Parkland survivors used the video as evidence to call for Greene’s resignation when she was appointed to the House Republican committee in 2021.Barbara Comstock, a former Republican House member and a Trump critic, lauded Greene’s decision on social media. “She doesn’t want to be a Republican ‘battered wife’ taking Trump’s abuse and getting death threats and pretending it’s all ok only to end up in the minority. Good for her,” Comstock posted.Greene’s decision to leave Congress came soon after another plot twist was playing out in the White House between Trump and New York City’s mayor-elect, Zohran Mamdani, who spoke of their shared commitment to the future of the nation’s most populous city.Trump, who had in the past called Mamdani a “100% Communist Lunatic” and a “total nut job”, spoke of how impressed he was with the man who had called his administration “authoritarian” and said he anticipates a productive relationship.“I expect to be helping him, not hurting him,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office after a private meeting on Friday afternoon that lasted under an hour. “Because I want New York City to be great.”Mamdani said that he appreciated that during their meeting they “had focused not on places of disagreement, which there are many, and also focused on the shared purpose that we have in serving New Yorkers”.Both said they had shared ideas about affordability and developing new housing in the city. “Some of his ideas are really the same ideas that I have,” the president said of Mamdani about inflationary issues. More

New Orleanians are bracing for a major deployment of US border patrol officers to the city, as Donald Trump forges on with his mass deportation agenda and sweeping federal immigration crackdown in Democrat-led cities.Despite falling crime, as many as 250 federal agents are expected to descend on New Orleans imminently to begin laying the groundwork for “Operation Swamp Sweep”, which the Associated Press reported is due to launch in south-east Louisiana and Mississippi on 1 December with the stated aim of arresting 5,000 people.Trump floated sending in federal troops in September, when he declared New Orleans had “a crime problem”, adding: “We’ll straighten that out in two weeks.” The city’s violent crime rate is actually 20% lower than last year, including a historic drop in the number of murders.The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) operation will be led by Gregory Bovino, a senior border patrol commander. Bovino has already overseen aggressive campaigns in Los Angeles, Chicago and, now, Charlotte and other cities in North Carolina, where the crackdowns have triggered large-scale protests and sometimes volatile interactions between federal agents and protesters amid aggressive arrest tactics.In Chicago, activists organized demonstrations and filed lawsuits over arrests and the use of excessive force, including deployment of teargas and pepper spray.Activists in Charlotte have already looked to their actions as a blueprint and now, following weeks of reports of raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) circulating across the greater metro area, New Orleans residents are preparing to resist also. Both border patrol officers from the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency and ICE agents come under the umbrella of DHS.Residents are sharing plans to report ICE sightings, alert landscapers and other manual workers to the threat of enforcement and help escort children to and from school when ICE is in the area. They are also rallying around neighbors believed to be under threat – often because they are undocumented or the Trump administration no longer recognizes a temporary status granted under the Biden administration – using community text threads, social media and whistleblowing – literally blowing whistles in the street if officers are believed to be approaching.There were reports of construction workers being instructed to stay home on Friday, in case border patrol arrived that early, and businesses such as restaurants and gas stations are being urged not to serve ICE agents.New Orleans’ Mexican-American mayor-elect, Helena Moreno, told the AP there is “a lot of fear” in the city and that she’s working to ensure those who could be targeted by federal agents know their legal rights. “I’m very concerned about due process being violated, I’m very concerned about racial profiling,” she said.Local immigrant advocacy group Unión Migrante already posts about ICE sightings and shares resources in English and Spanish on its social media pages. It also holds regular “Know Your Rights” workshops where people learn what protections they have during a immigration investigation, what to do if they get pulled over in the car by an agent, how to legally film ICE agents and police, and hear legal advice from immigration lawyers.With enforcement ramping up across the region, volunteer Alfredo Salazar said the workshops are crucial. “I look Latino and I worry I could be arrested for it,” he told local TV channel Fox 8. “It’s not just me, but thousands of us here that look Latino. So we have to educate people that we have rights to defend ourselves and freedom of speech.”The city is known for its rich blend of French, Spanish, African, Native American and Asian cultures, and 14% of its foreign-born metro population are Latino. In Kenner, a suburb of New Orleans, where 13 people were arrested earlier this month in a raid at a boat launch, it’s 30%, the highest in the state.Rachel Taber, also an advocate and organizer with Unión Migrante, told the news site NOLA.com that immigrants and their family members have been contacting lawyers, giving people power-of-attorney in case they are detained, and locating passports in the event they need to travel to reunite with relatives.The mission has the enthusiastic backing of Louisiana’s Republican governor, Jeff Landry, a staunch Trump ally, who has made a vigorous push to align state policy with sweeping federal immigration efforts and has targeted New Orleans’ immigration policies to make enforcement a priority.The GOP-dominated state legislature passed a law threatening prison time for law enforcement officials who delay or ignore federal enforcement efforts. Another measure directs state agencies to verify, track and report anyone in the country illegally who is receiving state services. Another more bans city policies that prohibit cooperation with federal immigration agencies.In September, Landry had also requested a national guard deployment to New Orleans even though violent crime is down and the city’s elected leaders maintained that violent crime is down and federal troops are unnecessary. Landry’s office has been approached by the Guardian for comment.Meanwhile, the New Orleans police department (NOPD) was released from a federal reform pact on Wednesday that has long shielded its officers from having to participate in immigration enforcement. Anne Kirkpatrick, NOPD’s superintendent, told WBOK radio earlier this week that officers would collaborate with federal agents, but not on raids or deportations.“We will not be participating in the removal, but we will always be there,” she said. “They’re coming, so I am going to be a collaborator. But I also want to emphasize something to our community: To be in our country undocumented is illegal. To be illegal is not criminal.”DHS assistant secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement: “Every day, DHS enforces the laws of the nation across the country. We do not discuss future or potential operations.” More

The US supreme court on Friday temporarily blocked a lower court ruling that found Texas’s 2026 congressional redistricting plan pushed by Donald Trump likely discriminated on the basis of race.The order, signed by Justice Samuel Alito, will remain in place at least for the next few days while the court considers whether to allow the new map, which is favorable to Republicans, to be used in the midterm elections.The court’s conservative majority has blocked similar lower court rulings because they have come too close to elections.The order came about an hour after the state called on the high court to intervene to avoid confusion as congressional primary elections approach in March. The justices have blocked past lower-court rulings in congressional redistricting cases, most recently in Alabama and Louisiana, that came several months before elections.The order was signed by Alito because he is the justice who handles emergency appeals from Texas.Texas redrew its congressional map in the summer as part of Trump’s efforts to preserve a slim Republican majority in the House in next year’s elections, touching off a nationwide redistricting battle. The new redistricting map was engineered to give Republicans five additional House seats, but a panel of federal judges in El Paso ruled 2-1 on Tuesday that the civil rights groups that challenged the map on behalf of Black and Hispanic voters were likely to win their case.If that ruling eventually holds, Texas could be forced to hold elections next year using the map drawn by the GOP-controlled legislature in 2021 based on the 2020 census.Texas was the first state to meet Trump’s demands in what has become an expanding national battle over redistricting. Republicans drew the state’s new map to give the GOP five additional seats, and Missouri and North Carolina followed with new maps adding an additional Republican seat each. To counter those moves, California voters approved a ballot initiative to give Democrats an additional five seats there.The redrawn maps are facing court challenges in California, Missouri and North Carolina.The supreme court is separately considering a case from Louisiana which could further limit race-based districts under section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. It’s not entirely clear how the current round of redistricting would be affected by the outcome in the Louisiana case. More

The prominent linguist and philosopher Noam Chomsky called it a “most valuable experience” to have maintained “regular contact” with Jeffrey Epstein, who by then had long been convicted of soliciting prostitution from a minor, according to emails released earlier in November by US lawmakers.Such comments from Chomsky, or attributed to him, suggest his association with Epstein – who officials concluded killed himself in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges – went deeper than the occasional political and academic discussions the former had previously claimed to have with the latter.Chomsky, 96, had also reportedly acknowledged receiving about $270,000 from an account linked to Epstein while sorting the disbursement of common funds relating to the first of his two marriages, though the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) professor has insisted not “one penny” came directly from the infamous financier.The emails disclosed on 12 November by the Republican members of the US House oversight committee generally detailed the correspondence Epstein had with political, academic and business luminaries, including the Bill Clinton White House’s treasury secretary Larry Summers and Steve Bannon, the longtime ally of Donald Trump. Further, they reveal Epstein and Chomsky were close enough to discuss musical interests and even potential vacations.Perhaps the most telling of the Chomsky-related documents in question was a letter of support for Epstein attributed to Chomsky with the salutation “to whom it may concern”. It is not dated, but it contains a typed signature with Chomsky’s name and citing his position as a University of Arizona laureate professor, a role he began in 2017, as first reported by the Massachusetts news outlet WBUR.Epstein pleaded guilty in 2008 in Florida to state charges of solicitation of prostitution and solicitation of prostitution with a minor. He served 13 months of an 18-month sentence and was released in July 2009.“I met Jeffrey Epstein half a dozen years ago,” read the letter of support from Chomsky that was reviewed by the Guardian after its Republican House oversight committee release. “We have been in regular contact since, with many long and often in-depth discussions about a very wide range of topics, including our own specialties and professional work, but a host of others where we have shared interests. It has been a most valuable experience for me.”It is unclear whether Chomsky sent the letter to anyone. Nonetheless, it exalts Epstein for teaching Chomsky “about the intricacies of the global financial system” in a way “the business press and professional journals” had not been able to do. It boasted about how well connected Epstein was.“Once, when we were discussing the Oslo agreements, Jeffrey picked up the phone and called the Norwegian diplomat who supervised them, leading to a lively interchange,” the letter read. The letter recounted how Epstein had arranged for Chomsky – a political activist, too – to meet with someone he had “studied carefully and written about”: the former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak.Epstein had – “with limited success” – aided efforts from Chomsky’s second wife, Valeria, to introduce him “to the world of jazz and its wonders”, the letter continued.It concluded, “The impact of Jeffrey’s limitless curiosity, extensive knowledge, penetrating insights and thoughtful appraisals is only heightened by his easy informality, without a trace of pretentiousness. He quickly became a highly valued friend and regular source of intellectual exchange and stimulation.”Another notable communication involving Chomsky and Epstein is a 2015 email in which the latter offers the former use of his residences in New York and New Mexico.The emails don’t indicate whether Chomsky took advantage of the offer, whose particulars surfaced as certain officials are striving to investigate allegations of crimes by Epstein at a ranch compound he owned outside Santa Fe, New Mexico.Interest in the Epstein case has surged in recent months after Trump – a former friend of his – pledged to release a full list of the late financier’s clients while successfully running for a second presidency in 2024. However, after he took office in January, Trump’s justice department declared no such list existed and said that it would not be releasing any additional files related to Epstein’s prosecution, igniting a bipartisan furor that the president sought to dismiss as a Democratic “hoax”.Yet the pressure was enough that Trump on Wednesday signed a legislative bill directing his justice department to release more of what has come to be collectively known as the Epstein files.Chomsky is not the only renowned Massachusetts academic to be ensnared in the Epstein scandal. On Wednesday, Larry Summers relinquished a teaching role at Harvard University – where he was once president – after his email correspondence with Epstein revived questions about their relationship.A statement that MIT provided to WBUR and the Guardian declined to comment on Chomsky but said the university in 2020 had reviewed its contacts with Epstein. “Following that review, MIT took a number of steps, including enhancements to our gift acceptance processes and donating to four nonprofits supporting survivors of sexual abuse,” the statement said.The University of Arizona did not immediately reply to a request for comment on Chomsky. Neither did Chomsky. Nor did Valeria Wasserman Chomsky, who is a spokesperson for her husband – and in January 2017 sent an email to Epstein apologizing for not wishing him a happy birthday a couple of days earlier.“Hope you had a good celebration!” she wrote to Epstein, according to the emails released by House oversight committee Republicans. “Noam and I hope to see you again soon and have a toast for your birthday.”Chomsky hasn’t spoken publicly since he was reported in 2024 to be convalescing in Brazil after a stroke.Anna Betts contributed reporting More

The elections of 4 November were the end of a grandiose illusion. After his 2024 victory, Donald Trump claimed he had an “unprecedented and powerful mandate”, that his “mandate” was “massive” and that his “Maga movement” was irresistible, the wave of the future. It lasted 10 months, in which he had betrayed his chief promise to lower inflation, turned the public against him on every issue and Republicans at last faced a battering by voters.Trump’s image of omnipotence has rested upon a pyramid of dread. His ability to maintain the servility of the Republican Congress, whose members are intimidated by the danger that if they defy him he would support primary opponents to run against them, has been the political foundation for all the other forms of fear he incites throughout American institutions. Trump could not have leveraged himself as “dictator on day one” without congressional abdication. The Republicans immediately fell into lockstep. But within two weeks of the 4 November elections, only one Republican in the House voted against the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files, which Trump had called a “hoax” before he felt compelled to bend in the cyclone to sign the bill – and yet still suppresses the files.The Republicans in Congress now have another fear that places them in a terrible tightening vise. They have allowed Trump to avoid accountability and in next year’s midterms – of which these elections are an augury – they will be held mercilessly to account in his stead. Trump is the cause for which they will suffer the effect. He will not be on the ballot. Only they will pay the butcher’s bill.The Republicans are helpless. Through their abject obedience to him they have permitted Trump to sever their organic connection to their voters. None dare venture any longer to town halls in their districts. They cower before their constituents’ wrath over Trump. He is more unpopular than any president of recent time, including himself after January 6, with the exception of George W Bush at the end of his presidency in the financial collapse. The colossus who proclaims “I have the right to do anything I want to do, I’m the president” has reduced the Republicans to ciphers. They are not public servants, but his sycophants. Their lord, however, is not their protector. The closer they attach themselves to him, the more vulnerable they become. The voters repudiate Trump by rejecting Republicans.If the Republicans had paid more attention to his career, they would have observed that he always maneuvers to set up fall guys to take the rap. Trump has his Roy Cohns and his Michael Cohens. “He directed me to make the payment,” Cohen testified about the hush money paid to Stormy Daniels in order to shut her up to affect the outcome of the 2016 election. Trump was ultimately convicted in 2024 of 34 felonies of business fraud in an election scheme. “Michael has great liability to me!” Trump tweeted. Cohen served two and a half years in prison for tax evasion, lying to a bank, and campaign finance violations for the payments to Daniels and Karen McDougal, a Playboy model with whom Trump had an affair. “The man doesn’t tell the truth,” said Cohen. “And it is sad that I should take responsibility for his dirty deeds.” Trump called Cohen, who testified in the trial, a “rat”, a Mafia term for an informant. “The more people that follow Mr Trump as I did blindly are going to suffer the same consequences that I’m suffering,” Cohen told a congressional committee in 2019. The Republicans collectively are now Michael Cohen.A Marist-NPR poll on 19 November sent a shock wave. Democrats held a towering 14-point advantage. Then a Marquette University poll rolled in later that day showing Democrats with an 11-point advantage among likely voters. In the 2018 midterms, a Democratic lead of around seven to eight points on the generic ballot translated into a gain of 40 seats. The latest numbers might project roughly 60 seats. The supposedly dead Democrats would easily carry a large majority. With those margins, they would also likely take the Senate.If that seems too breathless, consider what the recent 4 November elections portend. Republican turnout cratered; Democratic enthusiasm ran high. The polls, which were weighted on the basis of the 2024 results, were distorted in showing closer races than the final counts. In the New Jersey gubernatorial contest, in the highest voter turnout in an off-year election in two decades there, the Republican vote count declined 42% for the Republican candidate, Jack Ciattarelli, compared with Trump’s 2024 total. In the Virginia gubernatorial race, the Republican vote count dropped by nearly 45% compared with 2024, while the Democratic vote fell by only 22%.The final polls significantly underestimated the winning margins for the Democratic candidates, Abigail Spanberger in Virginia and Mikie Sherrill in New Jersey. Late polls had Spanberger leading by seven to 11 points, while others suggested a lead as narrow as 2.5 points or a virtual “dead heat”. In New Jersey, final polls had the race even closer. A RealClearPolling average showed Sherrill’s lead at approximately four to eight points, with some polls placing the race within a single point’s margin of error. Spanberger won by 15 points, Sherill by 13. The polls generally, in election after election, miscalculated the Democratic margin of victory by approximately five to nine percentage points compared with the actual results.All of Trump’s gains were swept away in every demographic group. In the two New Jersey cities with the greatest percentage of Hispanic voters, Union City and Perth Amboy, Sherill won by 69 points compared with Kamala Harris’ 17, and by 56 points compared with nine, respectively. Sherill won all 21 counties. The Democrats picked up enough state legislative seats, including in a district held by Republicans for more than three decades, to achieve a super-majority in the assembly.In Virginia, Spanberger outperformed Harris in more than 95% of Virginia’s counties and independent cities. The Democrats gained more than 16 points in small cities and 12 in rural areas. Before the election, Democrats held 51 seats and Republicans 48 in the house of delegates, with one vacancy. The Democrats won 13 seats and now have 64 delegates. Voter urgency to defeat Republicans was so persuasive that Jay Jones, the Democratic candidate for state attorney general, whose emails expressing his desire to shoot the Republican speaker of the house of delegates in the head were a central focus of the campaign, won by six points.Elections elsewhere demonstrated the same pattern. In Erie county, Pennsylvania, which Trump had narrowly won, the Democratic candidate for county executive beat the Republican by 25 points. For the first time since 2006, Democrats in Georgia won statewide nonfederal offices with two candidates gaining about 60% of the vote for seats on the Georgia public service commission. Little noticed, Democrats flipped two state senate seats in Mississippi, which broke the Republican super-majority.The claim that Trump’s 2024 election represented a fundamental realignment of American politics has swiftly turned into a mirage. He had won by a slender margin of 1.5 points, overwhelmingly on the issue of inflation, and dependent on winning the 7% of voters who decided in the last week for him by nine points, generally considered low-propensity voters. This time, many of them apparently either switched to vote for the Democrats or stayed home. The much touted newly consolidated Trump electorate has vanished. Trump in office has built no mandate. His coalition has disintegrated and been reduced to his base, which is beginning to splinter over continuing inflation, increases in premiums for Obamacare and the Epstein files.Projecting forward, accounting for the discrepancy between the polls and the results in 2025, conservatively giving the Democrats running for the Congress an additional five points to make up for it, and assuming similar party turnout, the outcome would be startling. If that formula is to be believed, Democrats would win more than 60 seats in the 2026 midterms and capture the Senate, too.The circumstances that produced the Democratic sweep in 2025 will not be replaced by election day next year with the dawning of Trump’s “Golden Age”. His economic damage through his draconian and chaotic tariffs, a major contributing factor to inflation and unemployment, the poisonous combination of stagflation, can hardly be unraveled quickly, even if the supreme court supports lower court rulings against his invocation of emergency authority as unlawful. The rest of Trump’s policies radically redistributing wealth and resources upward and immiserating the working and middle classes, which have had unanimous Republican support, will not be reversed. In 2026, the midterms will be fought on even more difficult ground for Republicans of an even lengthier period of economic decline.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTrump’s absence from the ballot eliminates his attraction to the low-propensity voters that previously backed him. In any case, they have mostly evaporated, as the 2025 results demonstrated. It is a further illusion about the past election that if Trump campaigns on the stump for Republicans it will benefit them. In fact, Trump’s vote in 2024 was for Trump, but even so the congressional Republicans actually performed better than Trump. Overall, Trump did better in 198 congressional districts and the GOP House candidates did better in 237. For districts with GOP incumbents, Trump did better in 29, but the House candidates did better in 191, according to calculations derived from the Downballot.Now Trump’s enveloping presence casts a shadow over Republicans which they cannot escape. His unpopularity is deep and settled. The more he appears next to them, the more intensely the larger public is galvanized against them, if they need the reminder that the Republicans and Trump are one and the same. The Republicans have trapped themselves, willingly so. He is their cement shoes.The key propulsive numbers for turnout in the 2026 election are to be found among those who strongly approve and disapprove of Trump. In the latest Marist Poll, 68% of Republicans strongly approve of Trump, while 81% of Democrats and 60% of independents strongly disapprove. Those numbers can get worse for Republicans. Polarization now works against them. The numbers are inexorable harbingers of 2026.Trump himself is an immutable factor. He is hardwired against flexibility and self-reform, which he believes is the core of his strength and appeal. He is certain that his intransigence is his greatest asset. If he never gives in, he will always win. His only road to victory is that everyone must fear him. He cannot admit a mistake. It would violate his canon of power. Any erosion of his followers’ subservience is taken as not only an unjustifiable attack on his authority, but on his very being.Trump perceives every challenge, no matter how sensible, as an existential threat. He prizes unstinting fealty above reason. He can respond in only one way. Refusing to acknowledge the repudiation of the 4 November elections, he explodes in rage and aggravates alienation.He must call Marjorie Taylor Greene for questioning him a “traitor”. He must shout at a Bloomberg News reporter for asking a question about the Epstein files: “Quiet, quiet, piggy!” He must label an ABC News correspondent who also asks a question about his suppression of the Epstein files “insubordinate”. He must declare that Democratic members of the Congress, all military and national security veterans, invoking the law that the armed forces and intelligence officials are obligated not to follow illegal orders, are “traitors” who should be “ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL” for “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”But in the midterm elections to come, however distant they may still seem, it is the Republicans in the Congress who will stand alone to receive the final verdict before the people for their cowardice in collaborating with Trump and as contemptible exemplars of all his collaborators.

Sidney Blumenthal, former senior adviser to the Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton, has published three books of a projected five-volume political life of Abraham Lincoln: A Self-Made Man, Wrestling With His Angel and All the Powers of Earth. He is a Guardian US columnist More

In just 14 months, Daniel Suhr, the 40-year-old president of a two-person, Chicago-based, conservative legal organization called the Center for American Rights, has emerged as a thorn in the side of the major US broadcast news networks at a time when they face both financial and political vulnerabilities.Suhr has had a key ally in Brendan Carr, who was hand-picked by Donald Trump to serve as the chair of the powerful Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as the Trump administration has sought new avenues to take on the mainstream media. Carr has resuscitated several complaints that were filed by Suhr and dismissed at the end of Joe Biden’s administration and has seemingly factored in Suhr’s suggestions when reviewing media mergers.One of those complaints, in October 2024, dealt with the editing of a 60 Minutes interview with then vice-president Kamala Harris. It preceded by about two weeks a $10bn lawsuit by Trump against CBS that made similar claims and upended the political-media world for the next nine months. Suhr’s complaint led to CBS’s unprecedented decision to release the full, unedited transcript and video library from the Harris interview under pressure from Carr. And when Carr’s FCC ultimately approved Paramount’s long-delayed merger with Skydance Media in July, it included conditions that Suhr had asked for: the appointment of an ombudsman to handle complaints of bias at CBS News and the elimination of all diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.“I think the commission did a great job in the final order,” Suhr said in a recent sit-down with the Guardian. “The commission’s order said that Paramount committed to news that was ‘fair, unbiased, and fact-based.’ I think those are great words. I would love to see all of our news be fair, unbiased and fact-based. I think that articulation of the standard is in many ways the fruition of what started with the one complaint.”It’s all a bit of a whirlwind for Suhr, who filed his first media complaint in September 2024. Critics of the way that Carr has used the commission’s limited regulatory oversight over the content of television networks to exert pressure have some questions – and some concerns – about how Suhr suddenly became such a key player in the administration’s regulatory apparatus, even as they say he’s very pleasant to deal with.“When you talk to him, he seems like a very reasonable, very articulate, smart guy,” said Gigi Sohn, a longtime consumer advocate who was nominated by former president Joe Biden to serve on the FCC but did not ultimately do so. “It’s just kind of curious that this person has come out of nowhere and is so active and is so tied with the chair. I think it raises questions that should be answered.”One of those questions is whether Suhr is taking his cues directly from Carr, who shares his belief that the mainstream media is biased in favor of Democrats.Over coffee recently in Washington DC, where Suhr had traveled to attend a dinner hosted by the conservative Federalist Society, he sought to explain how exactly his organization became a central actor in the conservative case against alleged bias in the media – and how he became what Sohn called “a cog in the Carr wheel”, though Suhr sees it differently.While Suhr said he’s a “big fan” of Carr, he pushed back on the notion that he works hand-in-glove with him. “I don’t run my complaints by [Carr] ahead of time,” he said. “I don’t run my complaints by his staff ahead of time.”Still, it’s undeniable that Suhr “has the ear of FCC Chairman Brendan Carr on a number of policy issues,” as former telecommunications association executive Ted Hearn wrote last week, noting that he had endorsed the $34.5bn merger between Charter Communications and Cox Communications.Suhr said he has only met Carr once – though he did not disclose that his one meeting had occurred just hours before meeting with the Guardian for an interview. Carr posted a photo of the two of them on X, writing that Suhr is “doing fantastic work advancing the public interest in media policy”. (Carr did not respond to a text message seeking further comment about Suhr.)Asked about it later, Suhr explained the visit as just a “get-to-know-you” session – they didn’t talk about pending cases, which means there won’t be an official notice of their meeting – just a photo that Carr posted on X.In late September 2024, Suhr filed a complaint against ABC over its handling of the presidential debate it hosted between Trump and Harris. There was also a complaint against NBC over a pre-election appearance by Harris on Saturday Night Live,which Suhr argued was a violation of the equal time rule.Both complaints were closed at the end of Biden’s term by then-FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel and then reopened by Carr – though the chair chose not to bring back a petition to deny a local Fox station a license because of the Fox News Channel’s coverage of the 2020 election.“The dismissals by the FCC were so obviously correct under established precedent that I became a little curious about who would be dumb enough to file these things,” said Robert Corn-Revere, a first amendment litigator for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, when asked how he first became aware of Suhr. “There is no reason whatsoever for these proceedings to still be open and there was never a basis for them to be open in the first place.” (“[Corn-Revere] is entitled to his opinion,” Suhr responded. “I think our results speak for themselves.”)When ABC indefinitely suspended late-night TV host Jimmy Kimmel’s show on 17 September Suhr was all over that as well. Earlier that day, he had filed a complaint to the FCC seeking consequences for ABC unless Kimmel’s show was taken off the air. That followed another complaint about two weeks earlier accusing Kimmel of using his show to benefit Democrats.Critics wonder whether Carr is keeping the complaints open to serve as a potential pressure point for networks – like NBC owner Comcast – that might need the FCC’s blessing for future transactions.Despite their issues with Suhr’s filings, which often allege violations of the FCC’s poorly defined “news distortion” standard, both Sohn and Corn-Revere acknowledged that there is nothing unusual about an outside organization filing motions that are aligned with an FCC chair’s priorities. But, Corn-Revere said, “I’ve just never seen it to be this sort of open and obvious as is going on now.”While he’s relatively new to taking on the media, Suhr is no stranger to politics. After graduating with a law degree in 2008, Suhr spent several years managing the Federalist Society’s law school chapters before joining the administration of Scott Walker, the Republican former Wisconsin governor . He then became a public interest lawyer, working for an organization called the Liberty Justice Center before forming the Center for American Rights with his partner Patrick Hughes. It was Hughes, who leads CAR’s board, who first suggested that Suhr should look into ways to combat what he saw as mainstream media misinformation after watching the ABC News-hosted presidential debate in September.“It was an unfair debate – the moderators were clearly in favor of the Democrats – and it made me think: ‘How can this be?’” Hughes recalled. “And so I said to Daniel: ‘We’ve got to do something about this. What are the standards under which the FCC regulates this?’ Because it can’t be right.”Hughes said he’s been pleased with the impact that Suhr has been able to have. “He’s brilliant,” he said. “He’s a terrific person and a fabulous lawyer and he’s doing a great job.”Sohn agreed that Suhr has “obviously been very successful” in his efforts.Suhr’s complaint against CBS is still open, even though the relief sought – forcing the network to release the 60 Minutes transcript – was already granted months ago. When asked recently why the FCC has not acted on complaints, Carr said they are still being investigated.Either way, Suhr is feeling better about CBS News these days, particularly after the selection of Bari Weiss as editor-in-chief and the appointment of a prominent Washington conservative, Kenneth R Weinstein, as ombudsman.“We appreciate the change that is happening. We applaud it. We’re going to continue to be vigilant for consumers, but so far I’ve been thrilled,” Suhr said. “We just want journalists to be better journalists.” More

Julie Inman Grant has been asked to testify to Congress. It’s a sign of an increasing US preoccupation with online censorship. More

In the lead-up to the much-discussed social media ban taking effect, Australian eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant is often in the headlines.

For all the attention she’s been getting, Inman Grant probably didn’t expect any of it to come from a foreign government committee, calling her to answer for a so-called “censorship regime”.

But the US House Committee on the Judiciary has asked her to appear before it to testify about laws governing the internet.

Chair of the committee, Republican Jim Jordan, was blunt in his request. In a letter to the commissioner, he wrote:

as a primary enforcer of Australia’s OSA [Online Safety Act] and noted zealot for global take-downs, you are uniquely positioned to provide information about the law’s free speech implications […]

While it seems an unusual move, censorship has grown into a hot-button issue in the United States. Inman Grant finds herself at the centre of a perfect storm of rhetoric, politicking and fierce American individualism.

Does she have to testify?

The committee has no jurisdiction over the activities of the Australian government. Indeed, it does not even have jurisdiction over US-Australian diplomatic relations, which are the provenance of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The Judiciary Committee can call anyone it wants to come and testify at a hearing, but potential witnesses outside the US cannot be compelled to do so. This means Inman Grant can decide whether she wants to appear.

Jordan, the committee’s chair, is a member of the House Freedom Caucus: a formal group of around 45 mostly libertarian conservatives in the Republican Party in the House.

The caucus does not necessarily represent the views of most Republicans. It has often been in conflict with House Republican leadership.

Mounting cynicism

The issue of internet censorship is fraught in US politics. At the height of the COVID pandemic, this issue became even more heated and controversial.

Many Americans were very upset to learn the Biden administration worked with Facebook to censor posts about the pandemic. Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg, who testified before the Judiciary Committee about this issue last year, has vowed his company would never do so again.

On his first full day in office this year, President Donald Trump signed an executive order banning government from censoring social media.

The backlash from Americans against any kind of censorship has at least two sources. The first the generalised resistance to taking any kind of direction from the government.

Americans don’t want to be told “no” by their government. Whether it’s guns, drugs, gambling, abortion, gay marriage or even seatbelts, Americans don’t want to be told what to do (although after a few years of clever advocacy, Americans accepted the need to wear seatbelts).

The idea that their own government would censor their social media posts – no matter how wrong that post might be on the facts or how counterproductive to the public interest – is anathema to many Americans.

Second, the backlash against the US government, specifically for actions taken during the COVID pandemic, has been fairly broad. Americans have criticised mask mandates, social distancing, working from home, and other measures taken to reduce exposure to the coronavirus.

Republican Congressman Jim Jordan chairs the House Judiciary Committee.
Alex Brandon/AP

While there certainly has been a lot of disinformation regarding COVID, the policies of and information from the US government itself during the pandemic have been widely criticised as ineffective or wrong-headed.

The confusing politics and fraught policies from the pandemic era have made many Americans – particularly represented by the Freedom Caucus – much more sceptical of government actions generally.

It’s against this backdrop that politicians like Jordan cast a wide net in the quest against censorship, real and imagined.

Ghosts of disputes past

Of course, many of the large social media platforms and internet technology companies are American (X, Meta, Google and Amazon, among others).

The people who run these companies have generally made a point of getting along with Trump and his administration. They are often seen funding his initiatives and supporting his policies.

No doubt they also would have done this if Kamala Harris had won the presidency.

Because VPN (virtual private network) technology can allow individual users to escape national restrictions, some foreign governments have asked American companies to take down all posts globally on a certain topic.

This is what Inman Grant did in the commission’s case against X, owned by former Trump administration figurehead Elon Musk. The commission wanted video of Wakeley church stabbing in Sydney removed everywhere, not just in Australia. eSafety ultimately dropped the case in 2024.

Read more:
Elon Musk vs Australia: global content take-down orders can harm the internet if adopted widely

Jordan cites this case in his letter to the commissioner. It clearly struck a sour note.

These sorts of requests, if granted, affect Americans because they wouldn’t have access to those posts. Libertarians in particular do not react well to this possibility, and that means it won’t land well with Congress.

The position of the House Judiciary Committee does not represent American foreign policy. Jordan, however, is an influential member of Congress and generally friendly with Trump. Jordan’s advocacy may come to impact Trump’s foreign policy, but for the time being, Inman Grant doesn’t have too much to worry about. More