US Politics

January 6 panel releases transcript of key witness ahead of 800-page report Cassidy Hutchinson, former aide to Trump, gave some of the most dramatic testimony during live hearings last summer Ahead of the release of its full report, the House January 6 committee published transcripts of witness testimony including that of Cassidy Hutchinson, a central figure in the investigation of Donald Trump’s election subversion and the Capitol attack.From Liz Cheney to Donald Trump: winners and losers from the January 6 hearingsRead moreOn Wednesday night, the committee released 34 transcripts from 1,000 interviews conducted over 18 months. Most interviewees invoked their fifth amendment right against self-incrimination. But Adam Schiff of California, a Democratic member of the committee, told CBS: “I guarantee there’ll be some very interesting new information in the report and even more so in the transcripts.”Hutchinson, a former aide to Trump and his last chief of staff, Mark Meadows, gave some of the most dramatic testimony during live hearings last summer. Then, she described how Trump accosted a secret service agent and lunged for the steering wheel of his vehicle when he was told he would not be driven to the Capitol himself.Further testimony, given by Hutchinson behind closed doors on 14 and 15 September, was released on Thursday. The first session lasted five-and-a-half hours, the second two-and-a-half. Early readings of more than 200 pages revealed a hitherto unknown episode aboard Air Force One early on 5 January 2021, as Trump was flying back to Washington after attending rallies in Georgia.The testimony would appear to allude to attempts to persuade the vice-president, Mike Pence, to deny certification of Joe Biden’s victory the following day.In a meeting attended by, among others, the far-right Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor-Greene, allies talked up the scheme and assured Trump it would succeed, Hutchinson says. But she says she then saw Meadows take Trump aside and caution him: “In case we didn’t win this [the election] sir, and in case, like, tomorrow doesn’t go as planned, we’re gonna have to have a plan in place.”According to Hutchinson, Trump replied: “There’s always that chance we didn’t win, but tomorrow’s gonna go well.”The remark is potentially crucial evidence that Trump knew his defeat was not the result of fraud.Hutchinson also says she felt she had “Trump himself looking over my shoulder” as she discussed with her attorney her testimony earlier this year. The former White House aide outlines what she saw as sustained campaign of pressure by lawyers paid by Trump to get her to mislead the panel.CNN reported on Wednesday that Stefan Passantino, the top ethics attorney in the Trump White House, allegedly advised Hutchinson to tell the committee she did not recall details that in fact she did.According to the new transcript, Hutchinson said: “It wasn’t just that I had Stefan sitting next to me; it was almost like I felt like I had Trump looking over my shoulder. Because I knew in some fashion it would get back to him if I said anything that he would find disloyal.“And the prospect of that genuinely scared me. You know, I’d seen this world ruin people’s lives or try to ruin people’s careers. I’d seen how vicious they can be.”Hutchinson, then 26, said she thought she was “fucked” because she couldn’t afford a lawyer, but was hooked up with Passantino through White House contacts. It turned out Passantino was paid by a Trump-aligned political action committee.Hutchinson added: “I want to make this clear to you: Stefan never told me to lie. He specifically told me, ‘I don’t want you to perjure yourself, but ‘I don’t recall’ isn’t perjury. They don’t know want you can and can’t recall’.That said, Hutchinson felt pressured into misleading the panel. The relationship with Passantino soured and ended, she said.Subjects of other transcripts included Jeffrey Clark, an official in the justice department who worked to advance Trump’s efforts to overturn the election, and John Eastman, a conservative lawyer and an architect of Trump’s attempt to stay in office. Each invoked his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination.Also included in the release was testimony from members of extremist groups involved in the attack. The Oath Keepers founder, Stewart Rhodes, convicted last month of seditious conspiracy, and the former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio both testified. Tarrio and four other Proud Boys will appear in court this month.Committee members hope for criminal charges against Trump and key allies. Only the justice department has the power to prosecute, so the panel recommended investigation of Trump for four crimes, including aiding an insurrection.On Wednesday the Democratic committee chair, Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, was asked if he had confidence charges would be pursued.He told MSNBC: “I am more comfortable with the fact that the special counsel” – Jack Smith, appointed last month – “has been actively engaged in pursuing any and all the information available. They have been in contact, asking us to provide various transcripts and what have you.”Thompson was asked if the committee was cooperating with the justice department. He said: “Yes … we made the decision [in] consultation with other members that we will cooperate.”He added: “There were people that we deposed that justice had not deposed. There were electors in various states that justice couldn’t find. We found them. We deposed them. And so we had a lot of information, but now we make all that information available. And if they come back and want to interview staff or any members, ask [for] any additional information, we’ll be more than happy to do it.”Trump is running again for the presidency but faces investigations including into the presence of classified documents at his Florida estate and his tax affairs. He has been blamed by Republicans for a poor showing in the midterm elections, leaving him politically vulnerable.Trump has slammed the House committee as “thugs and scoundrels”. In response to the criminal referrals, he said: “These folks don’t get it that when they come after me, people who love freedom rally around me. It strengthens me.”Republicans take over the House on 3 January. The committee will be dissolved.TopicsUS Capitol attackJanuary 6 hearingsUS politicsHouse of RepresentativesDonald TrumpnewsReuse this content More

The Guardian view on Zelenskiy in Washington: a pivotal momentEditorialThe Ukrainian leader went to the US this week for hard bargaining with the Americans, as well as to be feted President Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s highly choreographed visit to Washington was a significant international moment. Not long ago, Mr Zelenskiy had been adamant that his place was always on the frontline with his people. This week, however, he made a lightning trip in person, via Poland, to Washington itself, meeting President Joe Biden at the White House and delivering a primetime address to the US Congress before heading back into his suffering country less than 24 hours later.The visit was much more than a Christmas celebration of Ukraine’s defiance and of Mr Zelenskiy’s immense role in it. Instead, it was a political event with important future implications for Ukraine, the United States and Russia, and for the conflict more generally. It was clearly focused on what should happen in 2023 rather than what has happened already.Mr Zelenskiy had three principal objectives. The first was to rally American and, by extension, global support. The second was to intervene at a pivotal moment in the war and in US politics to advance that effort. The third was to make an ambitious pitch for even more financial and military support from the only state that is in a position to supply it, and thus to strengthen Ukraine’s resistance during a bitter winter, with the prospect of fresh fighting in the spring.02:12In public, Mr Zelenskiy produced another media-savvy performance, especially in his address to Congress. He spent every hour in Washington in his iconic olive-green fatigues, and emphasised the immediacy of his cause by presenting Congress with a battlefield Ukrainian flag that he had collected from soldiers on the frontline in Bakhmut on Tuesday. He skilfully mixed gratitude with fresh requests for support. US aid and support was not charity, he insisted, but an investment in the “global security and democracy” for which the US and its allies stand.It is clear that the Biden administration agrees with that. The deeper questions of the visit, however, are how urgently Washington wants that investment to bear fruit and what price it is willing to pay. Weapons and money are the twin keys to the answer. Mr Biden and his aides will have assured Mr Zelenskiy that the US wants Russia to be defeated in Ukraine. But they will also have told him that they do not want a wider conflict and that they may have a different definition of what defeat could look like.The toughest arguments behind closed doors will have focused on Ukraine’s demands for more and better weaponry, and on the terms to be set for ending the conflict. At home, though, finance is an even bigger political issue for Mr Biden. The US has already spent more than $48bn on humanitarian, financial and military support; another $2bn in military aid was announced during the visit. The administration also aims to get another aid package, worth almost $45bn, through Congress before the Republicans take over the House of Representatives in January.The US domestic political question is whether bipartisan support continues in January. Mr Zelenskiy’s visit was in large part directed towards ensuring that it does. But the real issues this week will have been military and strategic. Russia is preparing a fresh ground assault, perhaps during winter. Another Ukrainian counterattack is expected too. Mr Zelenskiy is the hero of the hour. But Washington is increasingly looking towards an endgame in 2023. The end of the conflict is increasingly in the US’s hands, not just those of Russia and Ukraine.Some on both sides of the Atlantic made the comparison between Mr Zelenskiy’s wartime flight from Kyiv this week and Winston Churchill’s visit to Washington after Pearl Harbor in 1941. For that comparison to be intellectually useful rather than merely sentimental, it is important to remember that Churchill’s visit marked the moment in the second world war when the US began to take charge of the allied cause in Europe. The same thing may be true this time over Ukraine.TopicsVolodymyr ZelenskiyOpinionUkraineBiden administrationUS politicsEuropeUS CongressJoe BideneditorialsReuse this content More

Republicans lead charge to ban noncitizens from voting in local electionsEight states have passed laws against ballot access, even as some progressive cities are extending local voting rights Louisiana voters recently approved a constitutional amendment barring anyone who is not a US citizen from participating in elections, becoming the eighth state to push back against the growing number of progressive cities deciding to allow noncitizens to vote in local elections.Conservative donors pour ‘dark money’ into case that could upend US voting lawRead moreWhile noncitizens are prohibited from voting in federal elections and no states allow noncitizens to vote for statewide office, ambiguous language in constitutions has allowed localities to pass statutes legalizing noncitizen voting in local or school board elections. A short but expanding list of cities include two cities in Vermont, almost a dozen in Maryland, and San Francisco.Other cities are trying to join that list, including Boston and Washington DC, where the latter city’s council in October passed legislation allowing noncitizens who have lived in the city for at least 30 days to vote in local elections. New York City’s council also passed a measure in December to allow close to 900,000 green card holders and those with work authorization to vote in local elections, but a state trial court struck it down in June, finding it violated the state constitution. The ruling is currently being appealed.The potential for major cities like DC and New York to expand their electorates prompted backlash from Republican lawmakers.“This vote sends a clear message that the radical election policies of places like San Francisco, New York City and Washington, DC have no place in Louisiana,” Kyle Ardoin, the Republican secretary of state, said in a statement after the passage of the constitutional amendment, which he said will “ensure the continued integrity of Louisiana’s elections”.Louisiana law already prohibits anyone who is “not a citizen of the state” from voting, so voting rights advocates say the new amendment is an effort by Republicans in the state to limit voting based on false allegations that noncitizens are committing voter fraud by participating in elections.Louisiana’s amendment made it on to the 10 December ballot after it was passed by both chambers of the state legislature. Over 73% of Louisiana voters approved it, making Louisiana the latest in a series of states moving to explicitly write bans into their constitutions.Before 2020, just Arizona and North Dakota specifically prohibited noncitizens from voting in local and state elections, but voters in Alabama, Colorado and Florida all approved constitutional amendments in 2020 and Ohio approved one in November.Ohio’s amendment came after one town in the state, Yellow Springs, passed an initiative in 2019 to allow noncitizens to vote, giving voting rights in local elections to just a few dozen people in the small town. A few years later in 2022, Republican lawmakers proposed what would eventually become the constitutional amendment banning the practice and revoking the right from noncitizens in Yellow Springs.Fulvia Vargas-De Leon, senior counsel at LatinoJustice PRLDEF, a New York-based immigrant rights group, said the movement for ballot amendments is just one way that some lawmakers are trying to restrict voting rights.“It is a response to the expansion of the right to vote, and our concern is that since 2020, we’ve seen such attacks on the right to vote,” she said, adding that the pushback was coming because of an anti-immigrant sentiment “but also a larger effort to try to ban who has access to the ballot”.The United States allowed noncitizens to vote for much of its early history. From the founding of the country through 1926, noncitizens could vote in local, state and federal elections. But anti-immigrant sentiment led to lawmakers in most states to push for an end to the practice.“Resurgent nativism, wartime xenophobia, and corruption concerns pushed lawmakers to curtail noncitizen voting, and citizenship became a voting prerequisite in every state by 1926,” William & Mary professor Alan H Kennedy wrote in a paper published in the Journal of Policy History this year.In 1996, Congress passed a law prohibiting noncitizens from voting in federal elections, making illegal voting punishable by fines, imprisonment and deportation.But on the local level, the subject has re-emerged as a topic for debate in recent decades, as the populations of permanent noncitizen immigrants has grown in many cities.Advocates for noncitizen voting argue that documented immigrants pay taxes and contribute to their local communities and should have their voices heard when it comes to local policy.“We should have a representative democracy, where everyone who is part of the fabric of the community, who is involved, who pays taxes, should have a say in it,” said Vargas-De Leon, whose group intervened in the New York litigation and has filed the appeal.But conservative groups say that allowing noncitizens to vote dilutes the votes of citizens. Republican strategist Christopher Arps started the Missouri-based Americans for Citizen Voting to help states amend their constitutions to explicitly say that only US citizens can vote. He said that people who want to vote should “at least have some skin in the game” by completing the citizenship process.“We’ve been hearing for the past five, six years about foreign interference, Russia and other countries,” he said. “Well to me, this is a type of foreign interference in our elections.”It would also be a “bureaucratic nightmare”, he said, for states to have to maintain two separate voter rolls for federal and local elections, and could lead to illegal voting if noncitizens accidentally vote in a federal election.Though noncitizen voting still has not been signed into law in DC, Republicans in Congress have already introduced legislation to block it. One bill, introduced by the Texas senator Ted Cruz last month, would bar DC from using federal funds to facilitate noncitizen voting.“Allowing noncitizens and illegal immigrants to vote in our elections opens our country up to foreign influence, and allows those who are openly violating US law or even working for hostile foreign governments to take advantage and direct our resources against our will,” Cruz said in a statement.But Vargas-De Leon pointed to the benefits of expanding the electorate to include the country’s 12.9 million legal permanent residents and other documented immigrants.“All we’re trying to do here is ensure that everyone has a say in our government,” she said.TopicsUS newsThe fight for democracyUS politicsLaw (US)LouisianaOhioFloridaVermontfeaturesReuse this content More

Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s speech in full to a joint session of US CongressUkraine’s president vows his country will never abandon resistance to Russian aggression, but said Washington’s support is vital

Russia-Ukraine war – latest news updates More

Hunter Biden hires Jared Kushner lawyer to face Republican investigatorsTarget of House GOP looks to Abbe Lowell, seasoned Washington attorney who represented Trump’s son-in-law Facing imminent investigation by House Republicans, Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, has hired a high-profile Washington lawyer who represented Jared Kushner in Congress, as well as during the investigation of Russian election interference and links between Donald Trump and Moscow.Trump left ‘shockingly gracious’ letter to Biden on leaving office, book saysRead more“Hunter Biden has retained Abbe Lowell to help advise him and be part of his legal team to address the challenges he is facing,” another attorney for the president’s son, Kevin Morris, told news outlets on Wednesday.“Lowell is a well-known Washington based attorney who has represented numerous public officials and high-profile people in Department of Justice investigations and trials as well as congressional investigations. [For Hunter Biden] Mr Lowell will handle congressional investigations and general strategic advice.”Lowell has worked across the political divide, representing Democrats including Bob Menendez, a New Jersey senator, and the former senator and vice-presidential nominee John Edwards, both in corruption cases that ended in mistrials; and acting as chief minority counsel to House Democrats in the impeachment of Bill Clinton.Recently, Lowell represented Tom Barrack, a Trump ally acquitted in a foreign lobbying case.Lowell, 70, has said that to be a trial lawyer, “you have to have a desire to be a performer at some level. If I hadn’t done this, it would have been Broadway”.But his work for Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and chief adviser, brought an uncomfortable sort of spotlight. Writing in the American Lawyer in late 2020, Lowell suggested criticism of his work for another client was generated “primarily because I later represented … the president’s son-in-law.“The resulting news coverage, and especially the more sensational headlines, triggered the all-too-common flurry of hate mail, threatening voice mails and anonymous criticisms for doing the very job that attorneys are supposed to do.”Hunter Biden is the focus of considerable criticism and threat from Republicans who will take control of the House next month.The president’s son is also under federal investigation over his tax affairs and personal issues including problems with drugs that have been widely documented, including in his own memoir.Biden has said he “handled my affairs legally and appropriately, including with the benefit of professional tax advisers”. He has not been charged with any crime.Politically speaking – where Lowell comes in – Republicans allege the younger Biden exploited his father’s roles as a senator, vice-president and president for financial gain, allegations Hunter Biden also denies.James Comer, the incoming chair of the House oversight committee, has said an investigation will seek to determine if Biden family business activities have “compromise[d] US national security and President Biden’s ability to lead with impartiality”.Republican allegations focus on Hunter Biden’s work in China and Ukraine, claims that in the case of Ukraine attracted the attention of Donald Trump, resulting in the scandal which led to his first impeachment.Beautiful Things by Hunter Biden review – the prodigal son and Trumpists’ targetRead moreIn November, Comer told reporters: “We want the bank records and that’s our focus. We’re trying to stay focused on: ‘Was Joe Biden directly involved with Hunter Biden’s business deals and is he compromised?’ That’s our investigation.”Republicans are also fixated on a laptop computer once owned by Hunter Biden, the contents of which were shopped to news outlets by Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s attorney, shortly before the 2020 election.The laptop and news and social media’s wariness of it and of Giuliani have recently emerged as a subject of the Twitter Files, a series of releases coordinated by the new owner of the platform, Elon Musk, as he has sought to demonstrate liberal bias.TopicsHunter BidenJared KushnerJoe BidenBiden administrationDemocratsHouse of RepresentativesUS CongressnewsReuse this content More

The battle to keep LGBTQ+books in Louisiana libraries Conservatives in the state are pushing for library systems to remove books with LGBTQ+ themes and charactersMel Manuel never expected to be an activist – they even shy away from the term.“No, no way,” they said with a laugh. “No, I’ve just been a teacher my whole life.”‘We’ve moved backwards’: US librarians face unprecedented attacks amid rightwing book bansRead moreBut earlier this month, Manuel found themselves at a St Tammany library board of control meeting, packed in a small room of the local library in Covington, Louisiana, a town of just over 10,000 people directly across Lake Pontchartrain from New Orleans. They were there to speak out against efforts to remove certain books from the library’s collection.Public library systems in Louisiana are seeing books and materials, many with LGBTQ+ themes and characters, challenged by conservative groups in the state, who are calling for them to be taken off the shelves. St Tammany parish, which includes Covington, is the latest parish – the term Louisiana uses for county – to see a showdown between pro and anti-censorship groups.Borrowing rhetoric already seen in other parts of the US, the pro-censorship groups say the books are inappropriate for children, labeling them as pornographic and pedophilic, and charging them with “grooming”, a term that refers to the process of earning the trust of a minor in order to lure them into sexual exploitation. Far-right groups are increasingly using the term as a homophobic slur against queer people.Attacks on books in public libraries come at a time when the U.S. is in a “heightened threat environment” and LGBTQ+ people are “targets of potential violence” according to a 30 November homeland security department bulletin. And young LGBTQ+ readers in St Tammany parish say they feel hurt when they see people in their community targeting books with characters like them.The anti-censorship groups that believe the books should stay on the stacks say they tell stories of marginalized and underrepresented people and their availability is important for a diverse and equitable society.“We have the highest murder and maternal death rates in the nation and the highest incarceration rates on earth,” Manuel told the library board during the meeting’s public comments, alluding to three of Louisiana’s most pressing endemic issues. “Louisiana has some serious problems, all of which directly harm our children.“We’re ignoring the very real issues our kids are facing and spreading hate in the name of protecting those very same children.”Manuel is trans and a lifelong resident of Covington. They teach high school Spanish and said it’s always been tough to meet new people like them in town. So, in January 2022, Manuel and a friend started a group called “Queer Northshore” to organize events and meet ups for LGBTQ+ people and allies in the area.The group ended up on the frontlines of the battle over local libraries after complaints from conservative groups about an LGBTQ+ Pride month display in one of the branches in July.Opposite them are conservative groups – mainly the St Tammany Library Accountability Project – which claims to be seeking the removal of books and materials they consider to be pornographic or pedophilic in order to “protect children from sexual exploitation”, according to written responses.In addition to other ordinary library business, the 13 December meeting, which drew Manuel and Accountability Project members, considered appeals for two children’s books about which the library had received complaints, or “statements of concern”.One was I Am Jazz, a picture book written by Jessica Herthel and Jazz Jennings, relating Jennings’ experience growing up as a trans child.“Transgenderism is a movement and ideology being promoted worldwide without regard to the long-term damaging effects to youngsters who fall victim to the perverting ideology and their promoters,” St Tammany resident Diane Bruni, who submitted the statement of concern, told the library board at the meeting. “The result of accepting this lie is that young children and teens are encouraged to mutilate their bodies with irreversible castrated hormones and surgery.”Bruni also submitted a statement of concern for another book being considered by the board, titled My Rainbow, an autobiographical picture book cowritten by DeShanna and Trinity Neal about a time when DeShanna made a rainbow wig for her trans daughter, Trinity, to boost her confidence.Self-love and acceptance are exactly what author DeShanna Neal said she intended with her book, along with loving family support. “We need to not only listen with our ears but with our hearts,” Neal told the Guardian. “That is what I hope people would take from My Rainbow. That every voice matters, especially when it’s from someone you love.”Ultimately, the library board found that the books did not contain any vulgar material that would warrant their removal and voted to keep them freely available on the stacks for all patrons to browse. “In these books that I’ve read,” library board member William Allin said during the board’s discussion period, “the common theme is, ‘We love you for who you are.’ That’s where the parents end up. That’s the message.”Attendees seeking the removal of the books were disappointed in the board’s decision but said the battle wasn’t over. Accountability Project attorney David Cougle reacted to the telling by telling the board his group would take its case to the parish council and seek a local law that would prevent the materials from being accessed.“We will not stop fighting this until … the children of this community are protected from a predatory library administration,” Cougle said. He predicted voters would ultimately reject a property tax set to be voted on next year that would affect the library system’s budget, essentially threatening to defund the libraries.Numbers do not back up Cougle’s claims that his group’s primary concern is child safety. To date, the St Tammany parish library system has received 82 statements of concern, but only 10% of them are for books classified as juvenile fiction or picture books. Only 1% of the books are for teens. An overwhelming 89% of the books being challenged are for young adults and adults.More than 50% of trans and non-binary youth in US considered suicide this year, survey saysRead moreEven so, the St Tammany library has adopted safeguards. Library director Kelly LaRocca, who was named the 2022 Library Director of the Year by the state’s library association in July, recently instituted new library cards that would prevent children from checking out adult books without a parent. Moreover, LaRocca said St Tammany libraries do not contain any pedophilic materials. “We do have materials that make mention of its existence,” LaRocca told the Guardian, “but we do not own materials with the expressed purpose of furthering pedophilia.”Adding fuel to the fire, Louisiana’s Republican attorney general, Jeff Landry, recently set up the “protecting minors” tip line where people can report complaints about librarians and teachers that connect children with books they say contain inappropriate content. “Rest assured that we are committed to working with our communities to protect minors from early sexualization, as well as grooming, sex trafficking and abuse,” Landry wrote in a Facebook post about the tip line.In a 19 December opinion in the local Times-Picayune newspaper’s website, Landry asserted without evidence that “graphic sexual content” in library books caused porn addiction in children as well as “violent and criminal sexual desires”.Even with the vast majority of the challenged books unavailable with children’s library cards in St Tammany, the Accountability Project and other conservative groups still don’t want them on public library shelves. One of the books that’s been a focus of attacks is Lawn Boy, a semi-autobiographical adult novel about Mike Muñoz, a 22-year-old biracial, non-binary, low-income character who educates himself by reading books at his local library.Author Jonathan Evison told the Guardian that he’s received death threats and has had people threaten to harm his children after his novel was brought before a Texas school board and charged with containing pedophilia last September, a claim that he denies. He said he believes books with LGBTQ+ characters and stories are needed now more than ever. “There’s a whole swathe of young, intelligent people looking for books that are about them, they’re looking to just belong and find their place in this larger culture,” Evison said. “Like Mike says in the book, ‘Where are the books about me?’”Some of the challenged books don’t contain any LGBTQ+ themes or characters, either. Among the list of titles the Accountability Project believes should not be on public library shelves is Toni Morrison’s first novel The Bluest Eye, which explores the cruelty and pain wrought by racism, and Rupi Kaur’s first poetry collection Milk and Honey.Kaur said she started writing the Milk and Honey poems when she was a young teen as a way to help cope with bullying, mental health issues, sexual assault, depression and anxiety. The collection aims to comfort young readers.How to beat a book ban: students, parents and librarians fight backRead more“It’s meant to help,” Kaur said of such literature, “and it’s so important they’re able to access it no matter where they are.”Bailey Cook, a 12-year-old St Tammany resident who identifies as non-binary and bisexual, told the Guardian that the books targeted by the Accountability Project “make me feel supported”.Cook, who is in Manuel’s daughter’s class in school, said they think the reason books with LGBTQ+-affirming stories are under attack is because some St Tammany parents don’t want their children to be queer.But that shouldn’t be an impediment, Cook said, adding: “Books don’t make people, a person makes a person. You don’t need to get them if you don’t want to. Every book is for somebody, but there is no book for everybody.”TopicsLouisianaLGBTQ+ rightsUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More

AnalysisVolodymyr Zelenskiy channels Churchill to briefly unite a polarised US CongressDavid Smith in Washington As he received thunderous cheers and standing ovations, Ukraine’s president made a case for financial support that would ensure his country’s survivalFor a former actor and comedian, it was the curtain call of a lifetime.His address delivered, Volodymyr Zelenskiy walked up the centre aisle of the House of Representatives chamber to thunderous cheers, a standing ovation, eager handshakes and some members clamouring to touch him with almost religious reverence. One group had brought a giant Ukrainian flag. Others wore blue and yellow, the national colours.They were last impressions to warm Zelenskiy as he flew back to bleak, wintry Ukraine. He could also reflect that he had written one more chapter in the strange, eventful history of America and Ukraine, two nations whose fates have become unexpectedly intertwined.Zelenskiy invokes fight against Nazi Germany in speech to US CongressRead moreThe 44-year-old president was making his first trip outside Ukraine since the Russian invasion in February. He was in Washington to thank Joe Biden, Congress and the American people for their support. The climax was his address to a joint session of Congress that included representatives, senators and members of Biden’s cabinet.There was a rising hubbub of voices as the chamber awaited his entrance. Kevin McCarthy, running for speaker, gave someone an elaborate wink. Matt Gaetz offered a quip to Lauren Boebert, who chuckled. January 6 committee members Liz Cheney and Elaine Luria chatted then posed for a photo together.It takes a lot to impress long-in-the-tooth politicians but the Time magazine person of the year’s combination of star quality and steel core was enough. As every member rose to their feet, applauding and hollering, even Zelenskiy was overwhelmed for a moment. “It’s too much for me,” he said.He stood at the same spot that American presidents do when delivering the State of the Union address but cut a very different figure with short dark hair, a moustache and beard. The House waived a rule that requires men to wear a jacket and tie inside the chamber, allowing him to wear a sweater in his trademark wartime olive. He read his speech from pages placed on the lectern before him, tracing the words with his index finger as he spoke English in a raspy, accented voice.“Against all odds and doom-and-gloom scenarios, Ukraine didn’t fall – Ukraine is alive and kicking,” he said, prompting one of many standing ovations.02:12More than one historian compared the visit to Winston Churchill sailing to America soon after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Churchill held a press conference with President Franklin Roosevelt and joined him in the ceremonial lighting of the National Christmas Tree. He also addressed Congress in the Senate chamber on 26 December 1941. At the end of his half-hour speech, the chief justice gave a “V” for victory sign and one reporter observed: “The effect was instantaneous, electric. The cheers swelled into a roar.”Cheers turned to roars again for Zelenskiy when, in a nod to Churchill, he declared: “Ukraine holds its lines and will never surrender.”He was also a polite guest, resisting the temptation to go all Oliver Twist and demand more. But he did remark: “Your money is not charity. It’s an investment in the global security and democracy that we handle in the most responsible way.”He added: “Your support is crucial. We have artillery, yes. Thank you. We have it. Is it enough? Honestly, not really.” Some members of Congress burst out laughing, which would have been fine in Zelenskiy’s old job playing a fictional president of Ukraine on TV, but must have been less welcome as his people freeze.America, of course, had its own celebrity turned president in the shape of Donald Trump. Whereas the Watergate rule was “follow the money”, the best advice in this era of American politics is “follow the ruble”.Top US conservatives pushing Russia’s spin on Ukraine war, experts sayRead moreTrump has made a habit of parroting the Kremlin’s talking points since a visit to Russia in 1987. Mysteriously, his campaign aides intervened during the 2016 Republican National Convention to block language from the Republican party platform that called on the US to send lethal arms to Ukraine.The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, undoubtedly meddled in that year’s election. Special counsel Robert Mueller did not establish a conspiracy but the Trump campaign and transition team is known to have at least hundreds of known contacts and dozens of known meetings with Russia-linked operatives. Once he became president, Trump shied away from criticising Putin over anything.Zelenskiy, already locked in a long conflict with Russia, had cause to wonder which side Washington was on. His face was a picture when Trump once told him: “I really hope that you and President Putin can get together and solve your problem.”So it was hardly a surprise when, in 2019, the US president withheld nearly $400m in military aid from Ukraine in an effort to pressure Zelenskiy into announcing a bogus investigation into Biden and his family. This led to a congressional inquiry in which Ukraine was suddenly dominating media headlines and experts such as Fiona Hill were the talk of the town. Trump was ultimately impeached by the House but acquitted by the Senate.When Joe Biden took office in 2021, Zelenskiy was not uppermost in his thoughts, but Russia’s invasion of the country in February this year changed all that. It gifted him an ‘Exhibit A’ in his oft-made argument that democracies face a struggle with autocracies for global preeminence. On his watch, the US has poured $20bn worth of military aid into Ukraine and is about send a battery of Patriot missiles.In vivid contrast to Trump, the personal chemistry between Biden and Zelenskiy was palpable on Wednesday. At a joint press conference in the White House east room, Biden, at his most tactile, pointed to the Ukrainian and said: “This guy to his very soul is who he says he is. It’s clear who he is. He’s willing to give his life for his country and all the folks who came with him today.”Zelenskiy, for his part, said through an interpreter: “As to what is the message for Putin, I am standing here in the United States with President Biden on the same podium because I respect him as a person, as a president, as a human being for his position. And for me, this is a historic moment.”Zelenskiy expressed confidence that, despite the upcoming change in control of the House, America will stand firm in backing his cause. Despite some in the Trump wing questioning the cost, plenty of Republicans seemed to show enthusiasm on Wednesday night. They joined the cheering as, near the end of a half-hour speech, Zelenskiy presented Vice-president Kamala Harris and speaker Nancy Pelosi – probably presiding over their last joint meeting of Congress – with a Ukrainian flag signed by its soldiers. “We are united,” he said. “Ukraine, America and the entire free world.”A decade ago few could have predicted that Ukraine would loom so large in Washington – in Donald Rumsfeld’s language, it was an unknown unknown. It would also have been hard to foresee that it would take a courageous leader from eastern Europe to bring Democrats and Republicans together. In the age of polarisation, unity at last. A sea of heads turned upwards as a Ukrainian contingent in the public balcony shouted: “God bless America! Thank you, thank you, thank you.”TopicsVolodymyr ZelenskiyThe US politics sketchUkraineRussiaUS politicsJoe BidenNancy PelosiHouse of RepresentativesanalysisReuse this content More

Zelenskiy invokes fight against Nazi Germany in speech to US CongressUkrainian president’s first foreign trip since Russia invaded was made amid concern that Republicans might oppose future funding proposals02:12The Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, has given a defiant address to a joint session of the US Congress in which he vowed that his country would never abandon its resistance to Russian aggression – but said that Washington’s continued support is key to ultimate victory.Zelenskiy was received with a standing ovation as he arrived to speak wearing his now trademark green military-style trousers and shirt. The Ukrainian leader was repeatedly met with long bursts of applause as he invoked US battles against Nazi Germany and President Franklin Roosevelt’s wartime commitments in a bid to keep American weapons supplies flowing for the war against Russia.“Our two nations are allies in this battle and next year will be a turning point. I know it. The point when Ukrainian courage and American resolve must guarantee the future of our common freedom. The freedom of people who stand for their values,” he said. Zelenskiy’s US visit to counter emerging opposition to support for UkraineRead moreThe Ukrainian president left his country for the first time since Russia invaded 300 days ago, crossing into Poland earlier in the day and then flying to Washington, to make a direct appeal to Congress for continued military aid amid concern that the incoming Republican leadership of the House of Representatives might oppose proposals for an additional $45bn in weapons and other assistance next year.The US has already supplied $22bn in military assistance to Ukraine since the Russians invaded in February. On Wednesday, the White House announced a further $1.85bn in aid including, for the first time, Patriot air defence missiles to protect Ukraine’s infrastructure, already crippled by Russian attacks.Zelenskiy sought to win sceptics over with a speech that tied the future of the war, and freedom, to America’s commitment to Ukraine.He said his country had defied expectations that it would not be able to hold out for more than a few weeks against Russia.“Against all odds and doom and gloom, Ukraine didn’t fall. Ukraine is alive and kicking,” he said.That survival had produced different kinds of victories, he said.“We defeated Russia, in the battle for minds of the world. We have no fear. Nor should anyone in the world have it. Ukraine’s gained this victory and it gives us courage, which inspires the entire world.”But, Zelenskiy said, the struggle on the battlefield remained, and America was central to what happened there.“I know that everything depends on us, on the Ukrainian armed forces. Yet so much depends on the world. So much in the world depends on you,” he told Congress.“Russia could stop its aggression, really, if it wanted to. But you can speed up our victory.”‘You’ll never stand alone’: Biden pledges support to Zelenskiy during US visitRead moreZelenskiy said that the day before flying to Washington he visited the frontline city of Bakhmut in the Donbas. He described the region as “soaked in blood”.“Russians use everything they have against Bakhmut and other our beautiful cities. The occupiers have a significant advantage in artillery, they have an advantage in ammunition, they have much more missiles and planes than we ever had,” he said. “It’s true, but our defence forces stand.”He compared Ukrainian soldiers to American troops who resisted Germans at the Battle of the Bulge in Christmas 1944.And then he got to his point: Ukranians are fighting and dying. The least America can do is provide them with the weapons to resist.“We have artillery. Yes. Thank you. Is it enough? Not really,” he said to laughter in the chamber.Zelenskiy also sought to define his enemy in terms American politicians understand – as a terrorist state allied with another of the US’s enemies, Iran, which has supplied drones used in attacks on Ukrainian cities.“Russia found an ally in this genocidal policy, Iran. The deadly drones sent to Russia in hundreds and hundreds became a threat to our critical infrastructure. That is how one terrorist has found the other,” he said. “It is just a matter of time when they will strike against your other allies if we do not stop them now. We must do it.”Zelenskiy also played to the American reverence for the flag. He unfurled a blue and yellow Ukrainian standard he said had come from the front line. The speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, and Vice-president Kamala Harris held it up.“This flag is a symbol of our victory in this war. We stand, we fight and we will win because we are united – Ukraine, America and the entire free world,” he said.It was not clear if Zelenskiy’s performance was enough to win over sceptical Republicans in Congress but he got the reassurance he wanted at a White House meeting earlier in the day.“You will never stand alone,” President Biden told the Ukrainian leader. TopicsVolodymyr ZelenskiyUkraineRussiaUS politicsNancy PelosiJoe BidennewsReuse this content More