US Politics

Corporate cowardice: M&M cave to the right with pause on their ‘woke’ spokescandiesTayo BeroThe brand made a vague symbolic gesture – and rightwing pundits twisted it into a devious agenda. Now they’re retreating They were inciting a communist takeover. They were promoting radical wokeness. Worst of all, they weren’t hot any more.A year after it first began, one of the most ridiculous back-and-forths between a large corporation and the media I’ve witnessed in my lifetime is finally over. The M&M’s have pulled their beloved spokescandies.It all started early last year when Mars Wrigley, the company that owns M&M’s, began making a number of changes to their colorful signature characters. In January, the green M&M traded in her signature go-go boots for more comfortable-looking pumps with lower, block heels, as did the brown one.Unfortunately for Fox News pundit Tucker Carlson, this new version of the lady M&M’s without heels simply weren’t hot enough. The woke mob wouldn’t be satisfied until all cartoon characters were completely unattractive, he moaned to an audience of millions of other adults.“When you’re totally turned off, we’ve achieved equity,” Carlson said. And, as if picturing yourself on a date with a button-shaped chocolate isn’t bad enough, the pundit Kat Timpf added that Ms Green was “an opportunistic, evil bitch” and warned that people “run from women like the green M&M”.And so it continued. M&M’s made some kind of symbolic stand on a pressing social issue, and conservative pundits twisted it into a devious agenda.In December, the company released a new all-female packaging to commemorate International Women’s Day. In response, Fox News personality Martha MacCallum suggested that the all-girl packaging was a distraction that left the US vulnerable to its communist enemies.No, actually. Here’s the quote if you don’t believe me: “I think this is the kind of thing that makes China say, ‘Oh good, keep focusing on that, keep focusing on giving people their own color M&M’s while we take over all the mineral deposits in the entire world.’”You can probably imagine what happened next – M&M’s completely ignored the naysayers, doubled down on their efforts and will now be releasing a new line of genderfluid spokescandies who reject societal convention and actually don’t wear shoes at all.Just kidding. That would require creativity and some actual guts.In reality, after months of this very legitimate, completely serious, totally-needed-a-response pressure from the right, M&M’s announced this week that the brand has decided to take “an indefinite pause from the spokescandies”.If you think this kind of outrage over anthropomorphized sweets is an aberration, then you clearly haven’t been paying attention. The M&M’s debacle is both a clear sign of our political times, and an elaborate distraction.Conservatives are carefully picking away at seemingly irrelevant parts of our everyday culture while they wreak havoc on the civil liberties of marginalized people. Teachers in Florida’s Manatee county are being forced to remove or cover up books in their classrooms unless approved by a librarian or “certified media specialist”. Mass shootings continue unabated, and drag queen book readings across the country are now regularly besieged by gun-toting bigots.Why M&M’s, in the midst of real problems in America, conceded to this conservative foolishness we’ll probably never know. And the brand’s statement doesn’t clarify matters much, either.“In [the spokescandies’] place,” the statement said, “we are proud to introduce a spokesperson America can agree on: the beloved Maya Rudolph. We are confident Ms Rudolph will champion the power of fun to create a world where everyone feels they belong.”Give me a break. Are we still talking about candy here? And what is it about a woman in sneakers, or campaigning for women’s rights, that is hard to relate to? Why are we giving legitimacy to this nonsensical posturing?Don’t get me wrong, Ms Green, Ms Blue and Ms Purple were never the answer to female oppression. And in the grand scheme of things, gestures like this can feel flat and meaningless.But still: so what if M&M’s was engaging in mindless corporate virtue signalling? Their unnecessary reaction to the pushback has shown that even their meaningless show of “inclusivity” apparently wasn’t worth fighting for – even when the fight is simply ignoring conservative trolls who are worried about losing their attraction to a sassy chocolate.
Tayo Bero is a Guardian US columnist
TopicsCultureOpinionUS politicsFox NewsChocolateFoodcommentReuse this content More

America continues to sacrifice its babies to the altar of gunsJill FilipovicWhy does America allow civilians to amass weapons of war, but not to live free of a constant threat of random violence? Three days. Three mass shootings. One state. Nineteen dead.These numbers are stark enough that, in a sane society, they’d engender outrage and then change. But this is the United States, and when it comes to our tolerance of mass gun deaths, we are truly exceptional. Thanks to our feckless supreme court and the Republican party death cult, even the most progressive parts of the country have no real ability to crack down on guns and keep their residents safe. We are collectively stuck living in a dangerous, weapon-happy dystopia, all because reactionary, fearful conservatives want to cosplay as tough guys with deadly toys.In three days, 19 people were killed and many more injured in two back-to-back mass shootings of mostly Asian people in California, over a weekend that should have been a celebration of Lunar New Year. One shooter, a 72-year-old man, opened fire at a dance hall frequented by senior citizens in Monterey Park, killing 11 and wounding nine. Another, a 66-year-old man, killed seven at a farm near Half Moon Bay. And finally, in what is sadly representative of typical mass shootings in the United States, a shooter killed one and injured four in what newspapers are describing as a “gun battle” in Oakland.That tally doesn’t even count last week, when six people were murdered in what police say was a cartel-style execution and likely a gang-related killing. The dead include a 16-year-old girl and her 10-month-old baby.In the first three weeks of 2023, there have been 39 mass shootings in America. Gun violence is now the leading killer of American children.What is there to say about a society that sacrifices its babies at the altar of firearms? What kind of “freedom” allows civilians to amass weapons designed to exact maximal damage on the human body, but doesn’t give citizens the basic right to go to the movies, the shops, schools, places of worship and even their living rooms or front porches without facing down the pervasive threat of deadly and random violence? How do you reason with people who continue to claim, in the face of all evidence and the very fact that America is the only nation not at war that experiences this level of death and destruction from guns, that guns are not the problem?The truth is that most Americans, including many who vote Republican, are sick of living like this. A whopping 71% of Americans want to see stricter gun laws, and significant numbers live in fear: nearly half say it’s likely that they will personally be a victim of gun violence at some point.In some liberal states, including California, legislators have acted. California’s gun laws are still remarkably lax compared with the rest of the world – there is not, for example, the kind of licensing process for a gun that any teenager needs to go through in order to drive a car – but the state nevertheless is on the stricter end of the deranged American spectrum: California has red flag laws, which allow police to seize guns from people deemed threatening; a ban on assault-style weapons; and magazine limits. The state has also, of course, been repeatedly sued by gun enthusiasts who want unfettered access to any weapon of their choosing, and believe even these small regulations are unreasonable.But California is not an island, and American states do not have enforced borders between them. There’s nothing stopping someone from buying a gun in a more conservative state and bringing it into a liberal one. This is exactly what happens in many cities with the highest rates of gun violence. Chicago, for example, sits in a state with strict gun laws (Illinois), but right next door to one that is basically a weaponry free-for-all (Indiana). One study found that 60% of illegal guns found in Chicago came from outside Illinois, with one in five from Indiana.States are also increasingly limited in what they can do about gun violence, thanks to a supreme court that has in the last 15 years radically revised a century of jurisprudence on guns to read into the constitution a ridiculous and ahistorical interpretation of the second amendment. Over and over again, when states try to pass the kind of commonsense gun legislation that voters want, rightwing gun groups sue; too often, they win.The scourge of gun violence in America remains not because Americans are an inherently violent people or because there are too many “bad guys” running around. The scourge of gun violence in America remains because the Republican party insists that it remain – because the Republican party works overtime to ensure that deadly weapons proliferate, does close to nothing to prevent even small children from being gunned down at school, and insists on appointing federal judges who will allow unlicensed and untrained citizens to amass weapons of war.What can you call this other than a party that embraces and perpetuates a culture of death, and shrugs off the mass murder of even its youngest and most vulnerable? Can a society reasonably call itself civilized, let alone great or free or “pro-life”, when it voluntarily allows its children to be slaughtered and calls it liberty?Liberal states can certainly do more to decrease gun violence, including ramping up enforcement and, crucially, requiring a license to have a gun. Unfortunately, however, we are hamstrung by a minority of barbaric, cruel and gun-crazed countrymen, and the party that represents them. Until the Republican party and its core supporters decide that they’re tired of living in a country where grandmas get gunned down while dancing and kindergartners are murdered in their classrooms, we will all be forced to live in a nation that offers nothing more than thoughts and prayers as the bullets fly and the body count mounts.
Jill Filipovic is the author of the The H-Spot: The Feminist Pursuit of Happiness
TopicsUS politicsOpinionUS gun controlCaliforniaGun crimecommentReuse this content More

Victor Navasky, the New York Times and a key moment in gay historyThe great editor, who died this week, prompted one of the most important pieces ever published about homosexuality Victor Navasky, who died this week aged 90, was famous for his books about the McCarthy period in the 1950s and Robert Kennedy’s justice department in the 1960s, his longtime editorship of the Nation magazine, and positions at Columbia University including chairing the Columbia Journalism Review.What almost no one remembers is how his homophobic reaction to a famously homophobic article in Harper’s magazine led him to commission the most pro-gay piece the New York Times had published up to that time – a foundational document which appeared in 1971, at the dawn of the movement for gay liberation.In September 1970, Harper’s, a famously liberal magazine, published a notorious article by Joseph Epstein: Homo/hetero: the struggle for sexual identity.Victor Navasky, award-winning author and editor of the Nation, dies at 90Read moreThe earliest long-form reaction to the budding gay movement in a liberal magazine, the article appeared 14 months after police raided the Stonewall Inn, a gay bar in New York’s Greenwich Village, sparking famous riots.Epstein wrote that homosexuals were “cursed … quite literally, in the medieval sense of having been struck by an unexplained injury, an extreme piece of evil luck”. He added that nothing any of his sons could do “would make me sadder than if any of them were to become homosexual. For then I should know them condemned”.Gay activists were horrified and soon staged a sit-in at the Harper’s office. As each employee arrived, a protester greeted them: “Good morning, I’m a homosexual. Would you like some coffee?”Merle Miller, a prominent novelist and magazine writer, was a regular contributor to both Harper’s and the New York Times Magazine. He had never told another straight person about his orientation.The week after Epstein’s article appeared, Miller lunched at Chambertin, a French restaurant that was a favorite Times hangout, with his two editors at the Times Magazine: Gerald Walker and Victor Navasky.Twelve years later, the Columbia Journalism Review (not then edited by Navasky) reported what happened.This was an era when the Harris Poll reported that 63% of Americans considered homosexuals “harmful” to society, and the official manual of the American Psychiatric Association stated that all homosexuals were mentally ill.Miller asked Navasky and Walker what they thought about Epstein’s diatribe. Both editors told him they thought it was a great article.Miller exploded: “Damn it, I’m a homosexual!”He then explained why the article was actually an abomination.Navasky responded to Miller’s outburst with an openness of which almost none of his heterosexual colleagues were capable.“Since you hated the piece so much,” Navasky told Miller, “you should write the response to it.”Miller did so. When his piece, What It Means To Be a Homosexual, appeared in January 1971, James Baldwin and Allen Ginsberg were two of the only openly gay writers in America. But Miller was the first ever to come out in the pages of the New York Times.His piece had all the knowledge, nuance and humanity Epstein’s lacked. The only things the two writers agreed about were that “nobody seems to know why homosexuality happens” and, surprisingly, 50 years later, the great fear that a son will turn out to be homosexual.But Miller added: “Not all mothers are afraid that their sons will be homosexuals. Everywhere among us are those dominant ladies who welcome homosexuality in their sons. That way the mothers know the won’t lose them to another woman.”For a 20-year-old gay man like myself, who had never read anything positive about gay people in the New York Times, Miller’s article was a gigantic source of hope.Forty one years later, Miller’s piece was republished as a Penguin Classic paperback, On Being Different: What It Means to Be a Homosexual. I wrote an afterword. I also invited Navasky to appear at a bookstore, for a panel discussion of his role in the gestation of Miller’s piece. He was delighted to participate. It was the first time he publicly described his momentous lunch with Miller.
Charles Kaiser is the author of The Gay Metropolis: The Landmark History of Gay Life in America
TopicsBooksLGBTQ+ rightsHistory booksPolitics booksNew York TimesUS press and publishingNewspapersfeaturesReuse this content More

Democrats urge McCarthy to deny George Santos access to classified dataCongressman, under intense scrutiny for largely fabricated résumé, a ‘significant risk’ to national security, letter says Two House Democrats have written to Republican speaker Kevin McCarthy demanding he deny New York congressman George Santos any opportunity to access classified information because he might be a “significant risk” to US national security.“We urge you to act swiftly to prevent George Santos from abusing his position and endangering our nation,” the two New York congressmen said.‘We don’t know his real name’: George Santos’s unravelling web of liesRead moreJoe Morelle and Gregory Meeks, published their letter to McCarthy on Wednesday.They wrote: “It is clear that Congressman George Santos has violated the public’s trust on various occasions and his unfettered access to our nation’s secrets presents a significant risk to the national security of this country.”Morelle and Meeks said “numerous concerning allegations” about Santos’s “behaviour over decades put his character into question and suggest he cannot be trusted with confidential and classified information that could threaten the United States’ national security”.McCarthy, they said, should therefore “limit to the greatest degree possible Congressman George Santos’s ability to access classified materials, including preventing him from attending any confidential or classified briefings for the foreseeable future”.McCarthy, however, said he would not take immediate action against Santos.The speaker has already named Santos to two committees, small business and science, space and technology. They are not prestigious panels but access to classified information is a hot topic in Washington, amid revelations that records were improperly retained by Donald Trump, Mike Pence and Joe Biden.Santos, 34, won election in Queens and Long Island in November but has come under enormous scrutiny over his largely made-up résumé, bizarre past conduct and suspect campaign finance filings.Amid a stream of reports and revelations, Santos has been revealed to be under investigation at local, state and federal levels and even in Brazil – where is alleged to have competed as a drag queen – over the use of a stolen chequebook.The scandal has grown so bizarre and labyrinthine that when asked to discuss precedents, the Princeton historian Sean Wilentz told Vox it would be better to look to literature, whether The Confidence-Man by Herman Melville or to the “kind of nothing man that drips all through the novels” of John Le Carré.On Wednesday a former roommate, Yasser Rabello, told Curbed about his experiences living in a small apartment with Santos, his mother, his sister, his boyfriend and a friend in 2013 and 2014. Santos was then known as Anthony Devolder, an identity now the subject of extensive reporting.Rabello said Santos/Devolder “said he was a reporter at Globo in Brazil” but “was home all day on his computer, just browsing the web, probably chatting with people”.He also said Santos claimed to be a model who “worked at New York Fashion Week and that he met all the Victoria’s Secret models and would be in Vogue magazine”.Amid ceaseless reporting and delighted mockery on national late-night TV, Republicans in Santos’s district and from other New York seats have joined Democrats in calling for Santos to resign.But though he has admitted “embellishing” his résumé, the congressman has denied wrongdoing and said he will not quit.Republican leaders continue to stand by their man.Santos backed McCarthy through 15 votes for speaker, a role McCarthy must now perform with a slim majority and under constant threat from rightwing rebels.On Wednesday, McCarthy said that was not why he had refused to tell Santos to go.“No,” he told reporters at the Capitol. “You know why I’m standing by him? Because his constituents voted for him. I do not have the power simply because if I disagree with somebody or what they have said that I remove them from elected office.”McCarthy and other House Republican leaders have repeatedly said allegations against Santos are a matter for the House ethics committee, even as they continue to attempt to gut the ethics process.McCarthy said on Wednesday: “If for some way when we go through ethics [it is found] that he has broken the law, then we will remove him, but it’s not my role. I believe in the rule of law. A person’s innocent until proven guilty.”Daniel Goldman and Ritchie Torres, two New York Democrats, have led calls for an investigation of Santos’s campaign finance filings, calls echoed by outside watchdog groups amid questions over the sources of Santos’s wealth and reports of links to a Russian oligarch and a company found to be a Ponzi scheme.TopicsRepublicansUS politicsKevin McCarthyGeorge SantosnewsReuse this content More

Pence discovery raises fresh questions over US handling of classified papersBiden, Trump and Pence cases prompt calls to tighten government procedures as Republican congressman says ‘process is broken’ The discovery of classified documents at the home of former US vice-president Mike Pence, following similar incidents involving Joe Biden and Donald Trump, is bringing new scrutiny to government procedures for handling and securing its most delicate secrets.George Santos admits ‘personal’ loans to campaign were not from personal fundsRead moreThe justice department and FBI are looking into how about a dozen classified-marked papers came to be found last week in an unsecure location at Pence’s Indiana residence, two years after he and Trump left office.The attorney general, Merrick Garland, has meanwhile appointed independent special counsels to investigate what is thought to be around a dozen documents found at Biden’s Delaware home and Pennsylvania office, and many thousands of papers seized by the FBI at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida last year.The latest revelations have led to calls from politicians and analysts for a tightening of how classified documents are handled at the conclusion of a presidency, and a demand for more oversight of the federal agency responsible for securing and transporting them during the handover.There are also questions whether the US has a problem with over-classification of materials given the number of documents so far uncovered in the possession of senior current and former elected officials.“Clearly the process is broken,” the Florida Republican congressman Mike Waltz, a member of the House armed services committee, told Fox News.“We’ve got to take a hard look at GSA (General Services Administration) and how they and the intelligence community pack these documents [and] get them to wherever the president or vice-president is going.”Republicans seeking to gain political capital from the discovery of papers at Democrat Biden’s home and office, from his two terms as Obama’s vice-president, were quelled by the revelation that Pence, their own party’s most recent vice-president, also apparently took sensitive papers with him.In both cases, the politicians insisted they were unaware of the existence of the documents and, immediately upon their discovery, their lawyers contacted the National Archives, which in turn alerted the justice department.That contrasts sharply with Trump’s handling of more than 11,000 papers, including hundreds of classified and top secret documents, which he took from the White House in January 2021 and stored in boxes at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.The former president resisted requests that he return the documents, which reportedly included a foreign power’s nuclear and military secrets, to the National Archives, prompting last summer’s FBI raid and, in November, the appointment by Garland of special prosecutor Jack Smith to look into the affair.“Quantitatively and qualitatively there are big differences between Trump’s situation on the one hand, and Biden and Pence on the other,” said Carl Tobias, Williams professor of law at the University of Richmond.“The FBI says Trump had 11,000 documents mostly at Mar-a-Lago, and several hundred classified documents. So far with Biden it’s a tiny number compared to that, maybe 25, and only some were classified, and it seems even smaller with Pence.“Also the behaviour, if you look at Pence and Biden, it may be negligent, or just not careful. There isn’t any notion of intent to do something, which is apparently the case with Trump. Those differences are pretty important.”The episode, nevertheless, is embarrassing for Pence, who insisted: “I did not” when asked by ABC News in November if he had taken classified material from the White House.Political allies have rushed to defend him. New York congresswoman and Trump loyalist Elise Stefanik, the House Republican conference chair, told reporters Pence did nothing wrong, while claiming without evidence that a “weaponized” FBI was engaged in a cover-up to protect Biden.Tobias said the episodes also suggested an issue with how the government decides what should be classified.“Hundreds of thousands of classified documents are generated every year, it’s difficult to keep track of all that and we may have an over-classification problem. Maybe Congress would pass some legislation to try to address that,” he said.“There’s just so many documents that you can’t expect all of them to be tracked. People should be more careful with the documents, but also not classify everything so much that you can’t handle it.”Representatives of three living former presidents, Barack Obama, George W Bush and Bill Clinton, told CNN they handed over all classified documents to the National Archives before leaving the White House, as did the office of the late George HW Bush.Legal analyst Chris Swecker, a former FBI assistant director, told Fox he was concerned that three current and recent occupants of the White House appeared not to have done so.“These politicians need to understand where this information comes from. They can’t just take it home,” he said.TopicsUS politicsMike PenceJoe BidenDonald TrumpRepublicansDemocratsnewsReuse this content More

It started in August when the FBI carried out an unprecedented search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort and carted away boxes of what the government revealed were secret materials he should not have left the White House with.It appeared the former president was in serious legal peril, particularly once it emerged that he’d sidestepped efforts by the National Archives to retrieve the materials, and after attorney general Merrick Garland said special counsel Jack Smith would look into the matter.But then, in January, it was revealed Joe Biden had found classified documents from his time as vice president at a former office in Washington DC, and later at his home in Delaware. When it was revealed that the White House discovered this just prior to the November midterm elections but didn’t make the news public, Republicans pounced. Earlier this month, Garland announced the appointment of another special counsel, Robert Hur, to handle the investigation into the Biden case.Then yesterday, news broke that the former vice president under Trump, Mike Pence, also found classified materials in his home in Indiana. That discovery has prompted something of a tonal shift in Washington, with both Democratic and Republican politicians now wondering if there isn’t a larger issue to be addressed with the government’s classification process – or perhaps its procedures for presidential transitions.Joe Biden announced that the United States will send Ukraine its Abrams battle tank, as western allies mobilize to provide Kyiv with the armor it argues is necessary to defend against Russia’s invasion. Back in Washington, lawmakers and experts are reacting to the cascade of classified documents discovered at the properties of former White House occupants, most recently ex-vice president Mike Pence’s home in Indiana.Here’s what else happened today:
Barack Obama’s office wouldn’t say whether the former president planned to check if he had any classified material in his possession.
A Georgia district attorney says a decision on prosecuting people involved in Donald Trump’s campaign to overturn the state’s 2020 election result is “imminent”.
House speaker Kevin McCarthy has made good on his promise to boot two Democrats from the intelligence committee, and plans to seek a vote on removing a third from the foreign affairs committee.
Former transportation secretary Elaine Chao responded to Trump’s repeated racist attacks.
George Santos’s former roommate went public with the tale of his brief and crowded time living with the admitted liar turned congressman.
Republican House representative Victoria Spartz had some harsh words for Kevin McCarthy and his quest for remove three Democratic lawmakers from committees:Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-IN) criticizes Speaker Kevin McCarthy for kicking Democrat Reps. Eric Swalwell, Ilhan Omar, and Adam Schiff off House committees:“I want to defend the due process of this institution because we’re becoming like a theater full of actors in the circus.” pic.twitter.com/ZErT2iaBiP— The Recount (@therecount) January 25, 2023
Spartz’s complaints are not to be taken lightly. The GOP only has a four-vote margin of control in the House. Elaine Chao was Donald Trump’s transportation secretary from the start of his term until her resignation following the January 6 insurrection, but despite her lengthy service, the former president has repeatedly targeted her with racist insults.In a statement to Politico, Chao – who is married to the top Senate Republican Mitch McConnell and also served as labor secretary under George W Bush – made a decision that was unusual for her: she responded to Trump’s attacks.“When I was young, some people deliberately misspelled or mispronounced my name. Asian Americans have worked hard to change that experience for the next generation. He doesn’t seem to understand that, which says a whole lot more about him than it will ever say about Asian Americans,” Chao said.Politico notes that Chao’s decision to speak out comes in the wake of two mass shootings targeting Asian Americans. In the past, Chao has avoided political bickering, but wound up in Trump’s crosshairs anyway due to his disagreements with McConnell. Trump has made social media posts suggesting that McConnell has inappropriate ties to China because of his wife. Chao was born in Taiwan, and immigrated to the United States when she was eight years old.CNN pounded the pavement of the Capitol to try to figure out what House Republicans make of the news that Mike Pence has joined the ranks of those possessing classified documents they should not have.Prior to the development, the GOP was gearing up to hold Joe Biden’s feet to the fire for keeping secret documents from his time as vice president and senator in two locations. They still plan to do that, but have yet to spell out how they’ll handle the similar conduct from Pence, a Republican former vice president who may run for the White House in 2024:GOP pressing ahead after Pence classified doc newsComer says Biden and Pence to be treated “exact” same way. Jordan sees a difference over how FBI treated Biden vs. TrumpWaltz says House Intel needs to learn “was there any damage” from the records Pence, Trump and Biden had pic.twitter.com/d7mgvtyrjW— Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 25, 2023
You know it’s bad when new outlets are willing to publish an interview with your former roommate about what it was like to live with you.But that’s the situation George Santos finds himself in, after telling a whole bunch of lies in his successful quest to be elected to Congress. New York Magazine secured an interview with Yasser Rabello, who recounted a brief stay in a crowded, two-bedroom apartment in Queens, New York that he found through his acquaintance with Santos – who he knew as Anthony Devolder.Even then, Santos was murky about his affairs. From the interview:.css-cumn2r{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}So he was always in the common space. What did he do all day?
He was home all day on his computer, just browsing the web, probably chatting with people. He said he was a reporter at Globo in Brazil.
Which was a lie, it seems.
Then he told me he was a model and that he worked at New York Fashion Week and that he met all the Victoria’s Secret models and would be in Vogue magazine.The $500-a-month apartment started out crammed and grew worse, with Rabello sleeping in one bedroom, Santos’s mother in the other and the future congressman on a couch in the living room, with his sister elsewhere in the apartment. The future congressman’s boyfriend later moved in and slept on a mattress, but the family would often have friends over, too.Rabello recounts how tensions rose as the Santos/Devolder clan at first occasionally offered to share meals with him, before cutting him off, saying it was getting too expensive, and later even hiding bottles of water from him. Matters reached a peak when the family – who did not take the property’s keys with them when they’d go somewhere – grew upset with Rabello when he didn’t answer the door quickly enough:.css-cumn2r{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}None of them carried their own keys, which is stupid. I don’t know who does that. So I wake up one day with my phone next to me ringing. They were yelling at me to let them in. They had been ringing the buzzer for the intercom, but it was broken, so I didn’t hear it. I let them in, and Fatima starts shouting in Portuguese for me to get out of her apartment. So I stopped staying there. But I had one more month on my lease, so I kept going in day by day to get my stuff.
How did that go?
I arranged with my friend who has a driver’s license to rent a truck so we could get my Ikea dresser. I arranged with Anthony a time to come. He said, “Okay.” I tried to take my dresser, and a fight started. His mother said, “You’re not gonna take my dresser.” I was like, “Excuse me, how come this is yours? Did you buy it? Do you have the receipt? The neighbors were coming to their doors because of the disturbance. It wasn’t that expensive, so I let it go. Later on, my friend with the truck helped me to write a letter to the property manager explaining that they were putting a lot of roommates in the apartment, which is illegal.
They were eventually evicted. Where do you think the dresser is now?
I don’t know. Ikea furniture is not sturdy enough for multiple moves. It probably broke a long time ago.Republican House speaker Kevin McCarthy has pledged to remove Democrat Ilhan Omar from her seat on the foreign affairs committee over allegations she used antisemitic language.At a press conference today, the Minnesota lawmaker hit back McCarthy:Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) rebukes Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s “purely partisan” decision to remove her from House committee assignments:“Not only [is it] a political stunt, but also a blow to the integrity of our democratic institution and a threat to our national security.” pic.twitter.com/AGefau1Eka— The Recount (@therecount) January 25, 2023
On Tuesday, the House speaker removed two Democratic foes from the intelligence committee, Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell. McCarthy has the power to do that unilaterally, but to oust Omar from her post on foreign affairs, he’ll need the votes of a majority of the House. It’s unclear if he has enough support, as at least two Republicans oppose the move.The discovery of classified documents at the home of former US vice-president Mike Pence, following similar incidents involving Joe Biden and Donald Trump, is bringing new scrutiny to government procedures for handling and securing its most delicate secrets.The justice department and FBI are looking into how about a dozen classified-marked papers came to be found last week in an unsecure location at Pence’s Indiana residence, two years after he and Trump left office.The attorney general, Merrick Garland, has appointed special counsels to investigate what is thought to be around a dozen documents found at Biden’s Delaware home and Pennsylvania office, and many thousands of papers seized by the FBI at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida last year.The latest revelations have led to calls from politicians and analysts for a tightening of how classified documents are handled at the conclusion of a presidency, and a demand for more oversight of the federal agency responsible for securing and transporting them during the handover.There are also questions whether the US has a problem with over-classification of materials given the number of documents so far uncovered in the possession of senior current and former elected officials.“Clearly the process is broken,” Florida Republican congressman Mike Waltz, a member of the House armed services committee, told Fox News.“We’ve got to take a hard look at GSA (General Services Administration) and how they and the intelligence community pack these documents [and] get them to wherever the president or vice-president is going.”Discovery at Pence’s home brings question: why were classified documents left unsecure?Read moreTwo House Democrats have written to Kevin McCarthy, to demand that the Republican speaker deny George Santos the opportunity to access classified information.Santos is a New York Republican who won election in November but has since come under enormous scrutiny over his largely made-up résumé, his past conduct and his campaign finance filings.Republicans in New York have joined Democrats in calling for Santos to resign. He has said he will not. McCarthy and other Republican leaders have stood by their man – not least because Santos backed McCarthy through 15 votes for speaker and McCarthy must now fill that role with a very slim majority under constant threat from rightwing rebels.In their letter to McCarthy, Joe Morelle and Gregory Meeks, both New York Democrats, write: “It is clear that Congressman George Santos has violated the public’s trust on various occasions and his unfettered access to our nation’s secrets presents a significant risk to the national security of this country. “We urge you to act swiftly to prevent George Santos from abusing his position and endangering our nation.” McCarthy has named Santos to two House committees: small business and science, space and technology.On Wednesday, the speaker told reporters: “If for some way when we go through [the] ethics [committee it is found] that he has broken the law, then we will remove him, but it’s not my role. I believe in the rule of law. A person’s innocent until proven guilty.”Morelle and Meeks said: “The numerous concerning allegations about his behavior over decades put his character into question and suggest he cannot be trusted with confidential and classified information that could threaten the United States’ national security.“As the newly elected Speaker of the House of Representatives, we call on you to limit to the greatest degree possible Congressman George Santos’s ability to access classified materials, including preventing him from attending any confidential or classified briefings for the foreseeable future.”More on Santos:George Santos admits ‘personal’ loans to campaign were not from personal fundsRead moreNBC News made a splash this morning by reporting that Marjorie Taylor Greene, the far-right bomb thrower from Georgia who has gone from pariah in a Democratic House to power-player in a Republican chamber, wants to be Donald Trump’s presidential running mate in 2024.Caution is advised, not least because in citing “two people who have spoken to the firebrand second-term congresswoman about her ambitions”, NBC quoted by name Steve Bannon, the former Trump campaign chair and White House strategist now a perennially controversial presence in far-right media and accused fraudster.“This is no shrinking violet, she’s ambitious – she’s not shy about that, nor should she be,” Bannon said. “She sees herself on the short list for Trump’s VP … when MTG looks in the mirror she sees a potential president smiling back.”The second source cited, unnamed, said Greene’s “whole vision is to be vice-president” and said she was likely to be on Trump’s shortlist.Greene has become an unlikely but key ally of Kevin McCarthy, the new House speaker, after backing him against a rightwing rebellion that forced him through 15 rounds of voting to secure the position.The New York Times reported that this week that McCarthy said of Greene: “I will never leave that woman. I will always take care of her.”Bannon told NBC Greene was “both strategic and disciplined – she made a power move, knowing it would run up hard against her most ardent crew. She was prepared to take the intense heat/hatred short-term for the long-term goal of being a player.”Greene did not comment. To the Times, she said McCarthy would over the next two years “easily vindicate me and prove I moved the conference to the right during my first two years when I served in the minority with no committees”.Here’s a reminder of some of Greene’s other comments, the sort of thing that got her kicked off committees when Democrats ran the House, and which McCarthy now thinks is no impediment to membership of panels on oversight and homeland security:
She advocated that Nancy Pelosi, the former speaker, be executed.
She harassed Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the prominent New York progressive.
She harassed David Hogg, a Parkland survivor and gun control activist.
She was condemned for racist and antisemitic videos made during her campaign.
She repeatedly flouted public health measures against Covid-19.
She repeated conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks.
She said Jewish-controlled “space lasers” caused forest fires.
She expressed sympathy for the QAnon conspiracy theory.
She landed in the soup over comments about “Nancy Pelosi’s gazpacho police”.
And so on. Vice-presidential material? In today’s Republican party, it would seem entirely possible. Trump dominates polling so far, with only Ron DeSantis of Florida anywhere close.Robert Draper of the New York Times, author of Weapons of Mass Delusion: When the Republican Party Lost Its Mind, knows something of “MTG” and her rise. Here’s some further reading:‘A nutso proposition’: Robert Draper on Trump, Republicans and January 6 Read moreJoe Biden has announced that the United States will send Ukraine its Abrams battle tank, as western allies agree to provide Kyiv with the armor it argues is necessary to defend against Russia’s assault. Back in Washington, lawmakers and experts are reacting to the cascade of classified document discoveries at the properties of former White House occupants, most recently former vice president Mike Pence’s home in Indiana. Here’s what else has happened today thus far:
Barack Obama’s office wouldn’t say whether the former president planned to check if he had any classified material in his possession.
A Georgia district attorney says a decision on prosecuting people involved in Donald Trump’s campaign to overturn the state’s 2020 election result is “imminent”.
House speaker Kevin McCarthy has made good on his promise to boot two Democrats from the intelligence committee, and plans to seek a vote on removing a third from the foreign affairs committee.
Washington has long been concerned about provoking Russia through its supply of weapons to Ukraine.Joe Biden nodded to that concern as he announced the United States would supply Kyiv with Abrams tanks.“That’s what this is about, helping Ukraine defend and protect Ukrainian land. It is not an offensive threat to Russia. There is no offensive threat to Russia,” the president said.As Biden wrapped up his announcement that the United States would provide Ukraine with Abrams tanks, a reporter asked if Germany had forced him to change his mind.Kyiv has been asking its allies for armor to blunt Russia’s invasion, but Biden had reportedly been hesitant to send the Abrams, arguing their training and logistics needs would make them unsuited for the conflict. Washington viewed Germany’s Leopard 2 tanks as a better option, partially because many of Ukraine’s neighbors had stocks that could be provided to Kyiv with Berlin’s permission. But German chancellor Olaf Scholz said his country would only green-light such transfers if the United States provided armor as well. The two leaders have spoken repeatedly in recent days, and Germany announced it would send some Leopards to Ukraine shortly before Biden made his announcement.“Germany didn’t force me to change (my) mind,” Biden said. “We wanted to make sure we’re all together. That’s what we’re going to do all along, and that’s what we’re doing right now.”Here’s the Guardian’s Lauren Gambino with more details on the Abrams tanks heading to Ukraine, and how the decision fits in with the overall western effort to supply Kyiv’s defenses:The Biden administration has approved sending 31 M1 Abrams tanks to Ukraine as international reluctance to send tanks to the battlefront against the Russians begins to erode.The news came after Germany confirmed it will make 14 of its Leopard 2A6 tanks available for Ukraine’s war effort, and give partner countries its permission to re-export other battle tanks to aid Kyiv.By agreeing to send the Abrams, the US is able to meet the demand of the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, for an American commitment but without having to send the tanks immediately.“Today’s announcement shows the United States and Europe continuing to work hand in hand to support Ukraine, united in our common values and our ongoing support to Ukraine, which the President and other leaders, including in the G7 format, have reiterated will continue for as long as it takes,” a senior administration official said.Much of the US aid sent so far in the 11-month-old war has been through a separate program drawing on Pentagon stocks to get weapons more quickly to Ukraine. But even under that program, it would take months to get tanks to Ukraine and to get Ukrainian forces trained on them.Ukraine says heavily armored Western battle tanks would give its troops more mobility and protection ahead of a new Russian offensive that Kyiv expects in the near future. They could also help Ukraine retake some of the territory that has fallen to Russia.US approves sending of 31 M1 Abrams tanks to Ukraine Read moreThe United States will provide Ukraine with Abrams tanks, as part of a push by western allies to send Kyiv heavy armor to defeat Russia’s invasion, Joe Biden said in a White House speech.“I’m announcing that the United States will be sending 31 Abram tanks to Ukraine, the equivalent of one Ukrainian battalion,” Biden said. Defense secretary Lloyd Austin “has recommended this step because it will enhance Ukraine’s capacity to defend its territory and achieve strategic objectives.” More

George Santos admits ‘personal’ loans to campaign were not from personal fundsNew campaign finance filings reported by Daily Beast do not shed light on real source of $600,000 in funding In a new twist to one of the most bizarre American political scandals in decades, the New York Republican congressman George Santos appeared to admit on Tuesday that more than $600,000 in loans to his campaign did not come from personal funds, as was originally claimed.‘We don’t know his real name’: George Santos’s unravelling web of liesRead moreBut new campaign finance filings first reported by the Daily Beast did not shed light on where the funds actually came from.One expert said he had “never been this confused” by a campaign finance form.Santos, 34, won election to Congress last year in New York’s third district, which covers parts of Long Island and Queens.But he swiftly came under pressure over a résumé which has been shown to be largely made-up; local, state, federal and international investigations; and increasingly picaresque allegations and revelations including an alleged past as a drag queen in Brazil.Republican House leaders have stood by him, however, not least because he supported Kevin McCarthy through 15 rounds of voting for speaker earlier this month, a process which installed the Californian atop a slim GOP majority prey to hard-right rebels. Last week, Santos was installed on two House committees.As well as joining New York Republicans in calling for Santos to quit, Democrats have demanded investigation of Santos’s campaign finance filings.This week, the saga continued at a familiar pitch as Santos complained about impersonations on late-night TV – a sure sign of fame, or infamy, in the American public square.“I have now been enshrined in late-night TV history with all these impersonations,” the congressman tweeted on Monday, “but they are all TERRIBLE so far.“Jon Lovitz is supposed to be one of the greatest comedians of all time and that was embarrassing – for him not me! These comedians need to step their game up.”Lovitz, who impersonated Santos on NBC’s The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon, responded: “Thanks the review and advice! You’re right! I do need to step my game up! My pathological liar character can’t hold a candle to you!”It was also reported on Monday that Santos once claimed to be the target of an assassination attempt, and that in a 2020 interview he claimed to have met Jeffrey Epstein, while suggesting the financier and sex offender did not kill himself in jail but was murdered or even alive.On Tuesday morning, Santos promised a surprise to reporters staking out his office in Congress – then served them coffee and donuts.Later, the Beast reported on weightier matters, spotting that on new campaign finance filings, a $500,000 loan was no longer listed as “personal funds of the candidate”, as was another for $125,000.The Beast said no indication was given as to where the loans actually came from.Amid questions about his apparent wealth, Santos has been linked to a Russian oligarch. It has also been reported that he was once hired by a Florida-based investment firm that was accused by the Securities and Exchange Commission of being a multimillion-dollar Ponzi scheme.Santos previously told a New York radio host the loans were “the money I paid myself” through his company, the Devolder Organization.Santos’s activities under the name Anthony Devolder are also the subject of intense scrutiny.He has admitted “embellishing” his résumé but denied wrongdoing. He has said he will not resign.Speaking to the New York Times, a lawyer for Santos, Joe Murray, said it “would be inappropriate” to comment on the new filings, because of pending investigations.Jordan Libowitz, a spokesman for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington or Crew, a watchdog group, told the Times: “I have never been this confused looking at an [Federal Election Commission] filing.”Brendan Fischer, deputy executive director of Documented, another watchdog, told the Beast: “I don’t know what they think they are doing.“Santos’ campaign might have unchecked the ‘personal funds of candidate’ box, but it is still reporting that the $500,000 came from Santos himself.“If the ‘loan from candidate’ didn’t actually come from the candidate, then Santos should come clean and disclose where the money really came from. Santos can’t uncheck a box and make his legal problems go away.”TopicsGeorge SantosUS politicsUS political financingRepublicansUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesNew YorknewsReuse this content More

McCarthy vows to block Schiff and Swalwell from House intel panelMove seen as retribution against House Democrats who booted Marjorie Taylor Greene and Paul Gosar from their committees Speaker Kevin McCarthy reiterated Tuesday that he will block Democratic Representatives Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell of California from serving on the House committee that oversees national intelligence, saying the decision was not based on political payback but because “integrity matters, and they have failed in that place”.Kevin McCarthy reportedly ‘will never leave’ Marjorie Taylor GreeneRead moreIn the previous Congress, Democrats booted Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Paul Gosar of Arizona from their committee assignments for incendiary commentary that they said incited potential violence against colleagues.Minority leader Hakeem Jeffries, in a letter sent to McCarthy over the weekend, asked that Schiff and Swalwell be reappointed to the House permanent select committee on intelligence, a prestigious panel with access to sensitive, classified information. There is no “precedent or justification” for rejecting them, Jeffries said.Unlike most committees, appointments to the intelligence panel are the prerogative of the speaker, with input from the minority leader.McCarthy said he would be submitting his reply later Tuesday, but “let me be very clear, this is not similar to what the Democrats did. Those members will have other committees, but the intel committee is different. The intel committee’s responsibility is the national security to America.”“Hakeem Jeffries has 200 other people who can serve on that committee,” he added.McCarthy was critical of Schiff’s actions as chairman of the panel during the first impeachment investigation of Donald Trump, asserting he used his position to “lie to the American public again and again”. He also asserted Swalwell couldn’t get a security clearance in the private sector, so “we’re not going to provide him with the secrets to America”.McCarthy tried to have Swalwell removed from the intelligence panel in March 2021 based on his contact with a suspected Chinese spy. His resolution against Swalwell, which was voted down in the Democratic-led House, cited information that the suspected spy, Christine Fang, came into contact with Swalwell’s campaign as he was first running for Congress in 2012 and participated in fundraising for his 2014 campaign.Federal investigators alerted Swalwell to their concerns and briefed Congress about Fang in 2015, at which point Swalwell says he cut off contact with her.Schiff told colleagues in 2021 that Republican leaders in 2015, including then House Speaker John Boehner and the then chairman of the intelligence panel, Republican Representative Devin Nunes, were briefed on the situation with Swalwell and “expressed no opposition to his continued service” on the intelligence committee.McCarthy insisted he was putting national security over partisan politics.“We’re going to make the intel committee back to what it was supposed to be. No longer will we miss what happened in Afghanistan. No longer will we miss what’s happening in China, Russia, Iran and others. That’s what this country believes should happen,” McCarthy said.McCarthy has also vowed to remove Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, from the foreign affairs committee. In a joint statement the three Democrats being targeted for removal from committees said “it’s disappointing but not surprising that Kevin McCarthy has capitulated to the rightwing of his caucus, undermining the integrity of the Congress, and harming our national security in the process”.They called their removal part of a bargain McCarthy made with GOP hardliners to become speaker “that required political vengeance against the three of us”.TopicsHouse of RepresentativesKevin McCarthyUS politicsnewsReuse this content More