US Politics

Duo plead guilty to plot to sell Biden daughter’s stolen diary to Project VeritasAimee Harris stole items from Ashley Biden’s room and conspired Robert Kurlander to sell them to activist group, prosecutors say Two people have pleaded guilty in a scheme to peddle a diary and other items belonging to Joe Biden’s daughter to the conservative group Project Veritas for $40,000, prosecutors said Thursday.The two, both from Florida, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit interstate transportation of stolen property, Manhattan US attorney Damian Williams’s office said.While authorities did not identify Biden, the type of property stolen or the organization that paid, the details of the investigation have been public for months.“Aimee Harris and Robert Kurlander pled guilty to conspiracy to commit interstate transportation of stolen property involving the theft of personal belongings of an immediate family member of a then former government official who was a candidate for national political office,” the US attorney’s office in the southern district of New York announced in a statement on Thursday.Ashley Biden stored the diary, tax records, a digital device with family photos and a cellphone in September 2020 in a Delray Beach, Florida, home where one of the defendants was living at the time, prosecutors said in a release.According to case interviews and documents reviewed by the New York Times, Biden left her belongings in the home of a friend at that time and planned to collect them later that year. The friend, who also knew Harris, allowed Harris to also stay at the home as she was embroiled in a custody dispute and was facing financial struggles.Prosecutors said Harris stole the items and got in touch with the other defendant, a man who contacted Project Veritas, which asked for photos of the material and then paid for the two to bring it to New York.According to Williams, the pair sold the property for “$40,000 and even returned to take more of the victim’s property when asked to do so. Harris and Kurlander sought to profit from their theft of another person’s personal property, and they now stand convicted of a federal felony as a result.”Trump applauds far-right provocateurs during ‘social media summit’Read moreProject Veritas has said it received the diary from “tipsters” who said it had been abandoned in a room. The activist group, which identifies itself as a news organization, said it turned the journal over to law enforcement and never did anything illegal.According to the group and its founder, James O’Keefe, Project Veritas “was not involved in any theft of property and that all of Project Veritas’s information on how the confidential sources found the property came from the sources themselves”.When asked earlier this year by New York magazine whether he had a right to publish the diary’s details, O’Keefe replied: “Someone can provide information to me – a third party – and I have a first amendment right to publish that.”Project Veritas is best known for conducting hidden camera stings that have embarrassed news outlets, labor organizations and Democratic politicians.In efforts to verify the diary’s authenticity, a Project Veritas operative attempted to deceive Biden during a phone call into confirming that the diary did actually belong to her.According to Biden’s lawyers, the group then contacted them in efforts to land an interview with her father prior to the election. Biden’s lawyers, who then reached out to federal prosecutors, accused the group of its “extortionate effort to secure an interview”.Both Harris and Kurlander, who were released from custody after the court hearing, apologized for their actions. “I sincerely apologize for any actions and know what I did was illegal,” said Harris, according to the New York Times.“I know what I did was wrong and awful and I apologize,” said Kurlander.The pair pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit interstate transportation of stolen property. The count carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison. They also each agreed to forfeit $20,000, according to the attorney’s office.Associated Press contributed to this articleTopicsUS crimeJoe BidenFloridaNew YorkUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

Slew of trigger laws kick in as three more US states ban abortionsTennessee, Texas and Idaho join eight other states as millions of women will lose access to abortion and in certain cases doctors will be punished for performing procedure A slew of trigger bans across three US states kicked in on Thursday as Tennessee, Texas and Idaho join eight other states that have formally outlawed abortion since the supreme court overturned Roe v Wade in June.Depending on the state, trigger laws are designed to take effect either immediately following the overturn of Roe or 30 days after the supreme court’s transmission of its judgment, which took place on 26 July.Currently, nearly one in three women between the ages of 15 to 44 live in states where abortion has been banned or mostly banned. According to data obtained by the US census, that is nearly 21 million women affected.“More people will lose abortion access across the nation as bans take effect in Texas, Tennessee and Idaho. Vast swaths of the nation, especially in the south and midwest, will become abortion deserts that, for many, will be impossible to escape,” Nancy Northup, CEO of the Center of Reproductive Rights, said in a statement.“Evidence is already mounting of women being turned away despite needing urgent, and in some cases life-saving, medical care. This unfolding public health crisis will only continue to get worse. We will see more and more of these harrowing situations, and once state legislatures reconvene in January, we will see even more states implement abortion bans and novel laws criminalizing abortion providers, pregnant people, and those who help them,” she added.Thursday’s trigger bans strip away the right to abortion access for millions of women in Tennessee, Texas and Idaho and in certain cases punish doctors and healthcare providers for performing the procedure.In Tennessee, the state’s previous abortion law that bans the procedure after six weeks of pregnancy has been replaced with a stricter law. Aside from the exception of preventing the mother’s death or permanent bodily injury, the law bans abortion completely. It does not make any exceptions for victims of incest or rape.The law, called the Human Life Protection Act, makes it a felony for those who are caught performing or attempting to perform an abortion. Consequences include fines, prison time and the loss of voting rights.According to the law, abortions are prohibited from being performed based on mental health claims, including claims that the woman may “engage in conduct that would result in her death or substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function”.Texas, which already passed one of the nation’s strictest abortion laws last yearbanning the procedure beyond six weeks of pregnancy and offering no exceptions for incest or rape, will see a new trigger law take effect that makes the provision of abortion a first-degree felony. Consequences include life sentences and a civil penalty of $100,000 for each violation.“The criminal penalties will further chill the provision of care to women who need it,” Elisabeth Smith, director of state policy and advocacy for the Center of Productive Rights, told the Washington Post.Texas’s trigger ban comes a day after a federal judge in the state blocked an order from the Biden administration issued in the wake of the supreme court’s overruling of Roe that required hospitals to provide emergency abortions.According to Judge James Hendrix, a Donald Trump-appointee, the US Department of Health and Human Services overreached in its guidance interpreting the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labour Act. The 1986 law, also known as Emtala, requires people to receive emergency medical care regardless of their ability to pay for the services.“That guidance goes well beyond EMTALA’s text, which protects both mothers and unborn children, is silent as to abortion, and preempts state law only when the two directly conflict,” Hendrix wrote in a 67-page ruling.The White House press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, condemned the decision, calling it a “a blow to Texans”, and adding, “It’s wrong, it’s backwards, and women may die as a result. The fight is not over.”Abortions in Idaho were previously limited to a six-week period into pregnancy. However, Thursday’s trigger law completely prohibits abortion with the exceptions of reported cases of rape and incest and to prevent the death of the mother – but not necessarily to safeguard her health.The ban makes performing an abortion in any “clinically diagnosable pregnancy” a felony that is punishable by up to five years of jail time.Despite the sweeping ban, an Idaho judge barred the state at the 11th hour from enforcing its abortion ban in medical emergencies, making the ruling the exact opposite of Hendrix’s decision in Texas. The ruling from federal judge Lynn Winmill on Wednesday evening says that the state cannot prosecute anyone who performs an abortion in an emergency medical situation.“At its core, the supremacy clause says state law must yield to federal law when it’s impossible to comply with both. And that’s all this case is about,” Winmill wrote. “It’s not about the bygone constitutional right to an abortion,” he added.With such conflicting rulings, both cases could be appealed and the supreme court may be asked to intervene.TopicsRoe v WadeUS supreme courtAbortionRepublicansUS politicsTennesseeTexasnewsReuse this content More

Trump is reading my memoir, Kushner claims of famously book-shy bossSon-in-law and former adviser says ex-president has ‘given me some compliments on’ critically panned 500-page tome Donald Trump was notoriously averse to reading his briefing papers as president but according to Jared Kushner he has started reading Breaking History, his son-in-law and former adviser’s 500-page White House memoir.Breaking History review: Jared Kushner’s dispiriting Trump bookRead moreSpeaking to the Fox News host Brian Kilmeade on Wednesday, Kushner said: “When I gave it to him, he said, ‘Look, this is a very important book. I’m glad somebody wrote a book that’s really going to talk about what actually happened in the room.’ And he says, ‘I’m going to read it.’“So he started reading and he’s given me some compliments on it so far. And again, I hope he’s proud of it. I don’t know if he’ll like anything [in it].”Critics have not liked much in Kushner’s book. For the Guardian, Lloyd Green called it “a mixture of news and cringe” which “selectively parcels out dirt”. In the New York Times, Dwight Garner called the book “earnest and soulless”, saying “Kushner looks like a mannequin, and he writes like one”.“Kushner’s fealty to Trump remains absolute. Reading this book reminded me of watching a cat lick a dog’s eye-goo,” Garner wrote.Kushner has said he “read that review and … thought it was hysterical” and wanted “to hang it on my wall”. He also said sales had increased since the Times piece. The book does not appear on the Times bestseller list.Married to Trump’s oldest daughter, Ivanka, Kushner was a senior adviser through a presidency that ended in a deadly attack on Congress as Trump attempted to stay in power.Kushner said: “Sometimes he listened. Sometimes he didn’t but we had a lot of fun.”Whether Trump will finish Kushner’s book remains to be seen. The former president has never been known to be much of a reader – although his first wife, Ivana Trump, did say he kept a volume of Hitler’s speeches by his bed.At the time, Trump told Vanity Fair: “If I had these speeches, and I am not saying that I do, I would never read them.”TopicsBooksJared KushnerDonald TrumpUS politicsRepublicansTrump administrationPolitics booksnewsReuse this content More

Biden says his student loan relief is ‘life-changing’. Will it fix the system’s inequities?The initiative’s income cap and unclear bureaucratic process could fail to address the racial disparities that already exist01:15As Joe Biden announced the details of his plan to help those with student loan debt, Kat Welbeck wrestled with the idea. For millions of Americans, the unprecedented relief would be “life-changing”, especially for low-income and Black and Latino Americans, who are disproportionately saddled with decades-long debt, she said.But the plans’ income cap on who can receive cancellation, and its unclear bureaucratic process for Americans seeking debt relief could perpetuate the inequities that underpin the nation’s student loan system, Welbeck, director of advocacy and civil rights counsel for the Student Borrower Protection Center, said.Student loan forgiveness: what you need to know about Biden’s planRead more“While a $10,000 cancellation is so meaningful for millions of student loan borrowers, there’s a lot that’s still to be done to fix this student debt crisis,” Welbeck says.On Wednesday, the White House released its long-anticipated plan on how to tackle the nation’s mounting $1.6tn student loan debt, accounting for more than 43 million people, with almost a third owing less than $10,000, according to federal data.The initiative would cancel up to $10,000 in debt for borrowers who earn less than $125,000 a year ($250,000 for married couples). Borrowers whose low income level qualified them for a Pell Grant will receive up to $20,000 in relief. The White House also extended a pause for “one final time” on student loan payments through January.The White House has projected that the plan would eliminate full debt balances for 20 million Americans and that 90% of debt relief dollars would go toward people with incomes less than $75,000. The White House also touted it as an effort to “advance racial equity”, pointing to its targeted relief for those who received Pell Grants. Officials noted that Black Americans were twice as likely to receive such grants as white Americans.Senator Elizabeth Warren, who, like others, have advocated for cancelling at least $50,000 in student debt, praised the administration’s plan as “transformative for the lives of working people all across the country” and would “help narrow the racial wealth gap among borrowers”.Still, some argue that the cancellation of just $10,000 for most borrowers would fail to substantially affect the racial disparities within the student loan system. Black and Latino borrowers disproportionately come from poorer households and, as a result, take on more debt than white Americans. At the same time, white American households have, on average, 10 times the wealth of Black households.Derrick Johnson, president of the NAACP, which had been advocating for cancellation of $50,000, wrote in an op-ed that Biden’s plan would “do little to help” Black Americans who, on average, hold nearly twice as much student debt as white borrowers. “Canceling just $10,000 of debt is like pouring a bucket of ice water on a forest fire,” he said. Canceling $10,000 in student debt when the average white borrower is $12,000 in debt, while Black women hold on average over $52,000 isn’t just unacceptable, it’s structural racism.— Nina Turner (@ninaturner) August 23, 2022
The emphasis on income in the White House’s cap represents a possible barrier that could exclude borrowers of color who meet the income threshold yet their families lack the wealth to tackle the debt, Welbeck says. A June 2020 report from the Student Borrower Protection Center found that 90% of Black Americans and 72% of Latino Americans took out student loans, a far cry from the 66% of white Americans.And 20 years after graduating college, the median Black borrower still owed 95% of their original debt while the median white borrower paid down the same amount. For Latinos, after 12 years, they owed 83% of their original debt, more than the white borrower over the same time.Given that Black and Latino Americans typically earn less than white Americans, borrowers of color will start from behind without the intergenerational wealth available to reduce the debt they already hold.“So if you’re already coming from a lower-wealth household, you now have more debt, and then that cuts into opportunities for you to build wealth for the next generation,” Welback says. “You might see higher-income households that are Black or Latino, but that does not take away the fact that you still have those wealth disparities.”Student loan forgiveness: what does it mean for the US debt crisis?Read moreHistorically, the education department has complicated access to loan forgiveness through the programs it creates, such as the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program for non-profit and public service workers seeking relief and the borrower defense program for those who were defrauded by predatory for-profit colleges.The White House initiative does nothing to address private student loan debt, which accounts for more than $140bn in debt. Although Latino borrowers were more than twice as likely to report struggling with private student loan debt as white borrowers, Black borrowers were a staggering four times as likely to fall behind on private debt payments, according to the Student Borrower Protection Center.An application process could make it harder for people to access relief, Welbeck says. But recent decisions by the education department to automatically discharge debts for hundreds of thousands of students who attended ITT Technical Institute and Corinthian Colleges, two for-profit college chains that imploded, show that a widespread relief without bureaucratic hurdles is possible. The two debt cancellations at the for-profit institutions amounted to roughly $10bn affecting more than 700,000 students.“The student debt crisis is a result of the longstanding history of racial discrimination that we have in our country, and it continues to perpetuate them,” Welback says. “So until we address student debt as a civil rights crisis, we’re not going to be able to make meaningful gains toward equity.”TopicsUS student debtBiden administrationUS student financeRaceJoe BidenUS politicsUS educationnewsReuse this content More

I’m 65 and have $300,000 in student debt. I and other older debtors are going on strikeLystra Small-CloudenWe know that this debt won’t go away – for us or Americans of any age – unless we stand up and fight it On Wednesday, the White House announced its long-awaited debt cancellation plan. Joe Biden will erase $10,000 for borrowers who make under $125,000 a year, and $20,000 for Pell Grant recipients. The federal student loan payment moratorium will also be extended until December 31.Sadly, this news does almost nothing for me and millions of others. It falls far short of what economic and racial justice demands. That’s why I have joined over 250 people, all over age 50, who are pledging to strike our student loans when payments resume. Our numbers are growing every day.Most people think of the student loan crisis as a problem affecting young people. As a 65-year-old woman, however, I am actually among the fastest-growing demographic of student debtors. We know that this debt won’t go away – for us or Americans of any age – unless we stand up and fight it. That’s why we’re prepared to strike.I have over $300,000 in student debt. The burden is negatively affecting my emotional and physical existence. You may wonder how it is possible to accumulate such a large amount of student debt, so let me explain.As a single, Black, immigrant woman, I always told my four kids that education was the most important part of their upbringing. But it didn’t take me long to realize that I was hardly following my own advice: I was not comfortable advising my children to achieve the highest level of education when I myself didn’t. I am a mentor, educator and adviser to my kids. I wanted my mentorship and advice to be built on a strong educational and intellectual foundation.In January 2010 I began a doctoral degree program in human resources management. My biggest mistake was enrolling in a for-profit school. I did achieve my academic goals in August 2016. That feeling of success was short-lived, however. After graduation, I had to begin repaying student loans.My school didn’t play fairly with me while I pursued my doctoral degree. The administrators changed the length of my program from three to six years. They actively steered me away from my research interest in the effects of slavery and globalization, adding more time to my program of study. Meanwhile, I continued to pay. From an initial loan payoff of $75,000 per year, my debt rose to $300,000.Then my children started college. Because of my own debt, I was unable to qualify for parent loans to help my younger two children pay for their undergraduate studies. I was also unable to plan for the future. I exhausted my retirement funds trying to repay these loans and have not been able to replenish them because, as a good citizen, I prioritized repaying my student loans above all else.Biden must cancel all student loan debt, including for those with graduate degrees | Derecka PurnellRead moreMy debt is an economic drain but it’s also an emotional one. I have been stressing over it for 12 years now, and the stress has taken a very real toll on my physical health. I suffer from hypertension and high cholesterol and recently had emergency surgery to remove my gall bladder due to digestive issues caused by unnecessary stress. I spend a lot of time thinking about the fact that I am 65 years old, with projected loan repayments for the next 21 years of my life – meaning I will be 86 when I pay them off. When you are burdened by student debt, there is no quality of personal or work life. You are stuck at home – foregoing vacations, visiting family and friends, professional conferences, everything.Like so many debtors, I’ve found it hard to see a way out. As an older person, I’ve often felt particularly alone as a student debtor. When I learned of the Debt Collective, the nation’s first debtors’ union, I realized I was not alone. I found others with similar stories and experiences, including many other older people. As a group, we understand that we’re stronger together. And we are taking action. If Biden won’t cancel our debt, we will go on strike.I joined the 50-over-50 debt strike to make sure that the world knows that older debtors exist, and that we are growing in number. Because student loans are structured as a debt trap, there are more and more older debtors every day. My fellow strikers and I can’t pay – and won’t. We shouldn’t have to take money from our retirement to pay for college. I accumulated this massive student debt because of the inhumane policies of lending institutions and for-profit schools, and the lack of support and intervention from government agencies. Biden has the power to cancel student debt for all of us, automatically and immediately. Why isn’t he using it?I am pleading with Joe Biden: please make things right – by cancelling all student debt.TopicsUS politicsOpinionJoe BidenBiden administrationDebt reliefUS student debtHigher educationHigher education policycommentReuse this content More

He challenged his all-white city council in Alabama. Now he’s on itEric Calhoun, a Black resident who sued Pleasant Grove’s discriminatory voting system in 2018, was sworn in as council member on Monday A few years ago, Eric Calhoun felt out of touch with his city council in Pleasant Grove, a small Alabama city of just under 10,000 people outside of Birmingham.Calhoun, who is 71 and has lived in the city for nearly three decades, couldn’t find contact information for any of the five council members online. During the 2016 election, none of the white candidates running asked him for his vote. Voters in the city had never elected a Black person to the city council. Calhoun, like 61% of the city, is Black.In 2018, Calhoun became a plaintiff in a federal lawsuit that argued the racial makeup of the city council in Pleasant Grove was not an accident. The way the city was choosing its city council candidates made nearly impossible for a Black candidate to get elected. Essentially, the city allowed city council candidates to run citywide, instead of in districts, allowing blocs of white voters in the city to come together and defeat candidates preferred by Black voters.The city eventually agreed to settle the lawsuit and change the way it held city council elections.The results were immediate – in the first election under the new system last fall, the city elected three Black candidates to the five-member council. And on Monday, Calhoun became part of that majority. He was sworn in to fill a vacancy on the council after one of the council members resigned.“Color is not the issue,” Calhoun said in an interview. “The issue is representation and to make sure that we have a diverse city.”Calhoun’s appointment cements a Black majority on the council, said Yolanda Lawson, another councilmember who was elected last year. The city’s white mayor has the option of voting with the council and had regularly been doing so, resulting in a 3-3 split. Calhoun is replacing a white council member.“Not knowing what it was like prior to us being on the council, but I do notice more constiuents will begin with ‘I just never said anything because I didn’t think it would make a difference,’” Lawson said. “I personally feel that it is helping us to accomplish one of the things that I said myself I wanted to see, which is someone to represent me as a citizen. Not necessarily because I’m Black, but because it’s someone that’s willing to listen to my issues and my concerns.”In his new role on the council, Calhoun wants to promote neighborhood associations, local businesses and local parks. And he wants to make sure that anyone who calls him up with a concern feels heard.Pleasant Grove has long not been welcoming to Black citizens – in 1985 a court observed it had “an astonishing hostility to the presence and the rights of black Americans”. But in recent years, the Black population has surged.After decades of being locked out from political power, the majority-Black city council showed the importance of having Black representation at the local level, said Deuel Ross, a lawyer with the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, which helped represent Calhoun in the suit.“The city council has a lot of power over the police force. Over distribution of municipal resources. All things that the Black community has felt like it was being ignored in the past. So it’s wonderful to see the Black community has not only representation but the majority of the board at this point,” he said.This fall, the US supreme court will hear a hugely consequential redistricting case involving Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act – the part of the law that Calhoun sued Pleasant Grove under. The provision prohibits racial discrimination in voting practices, but the 6-3 conservative majority on the court has signaled deep skepticism of the provision and appears poised to narrow it.Such a ruling could make it harder to bring future cases that challenge election systems, like the one that existed in Pleasant Grove, that prevent minority voters from exercising their full political power.“[What] Alabama is arguing in the supreme court, is that any consideration of race in redistricting raises constitutional concerns. And I think that is an extreme position that the supreme court has never taken,” said Ross, who is also involved in that case. “If it did take that position, it would make it difficult not just in Pleasant Grove not just to have Black representation, but in Congress and county commissions and state legislatures all over the country.”TopicsUS voting rightsFight to voteUS politicsAlabamanewsReuse this content More

More ways to listen

Apple Podcasts

Google Podcasts

Spotify

RSS Feed

Download

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share via Email

The division begins to reinvestigate Kuantay Reeder’s case, discovering new evidence that could hold the key to his freedom. The Guardian’s US southern bureau chief, Oliver Laughland, interviews Harry Connick, the district attorney from 1973 to 2003, to ask how he felt about presiding over an administration accused of rights violations and disproportionately punishing the city’s poorest Black residents

How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know

This week we are revisiting some of our favourite episodes from the year so far. This episode was first broadcast on 9 May. The division spends six months reinvestigating Kuantay Reeder’s case. They find new evidence, and the Guardian’s US southern bureau chief, Oliver Laughland, accompanies the team to court to see whether Reeder’s conviction will be overturned. Also present are members of Mark Broxton’s family, including his mother, Mary Green, who see Reeder face to face for the first time since 1995. Oliver also visits Harry Connick, the district attorney from 1973 to 2003. Many people argue his policies – such as routine use of the habitual offender law – were one of the main reasons New Orleans became the incarceration capital of the world. Oliver questions Connick on the use of multi-billing and the issue of Brady violations – where evidence is withheld – during his tenure. In 2011 the supreme court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said a lack of training on Brady was pervasive. In many ways, Connick and the new district attorney, Jason Williams, couldn’t be much further apart. A lot of what Jason Williams is doing now is a direct response to the policies and the legacy of Connick. But there are some parallels between them. Connick was in power during the biggest crime wave New Orleans had ever seen. And when Williams took office, the crime rate was soaring too. Oliver and the producer Joshua Kelly pay a visit to Williams to ask how he is responding to the pressure of the rising crime rates and his upcoming trial for alleged tax evasion. If found guilty, there are question marks over the future of the civil-rights division. Read Oliver’s reporting on his six months with the division: Inside the division: how a small team of US prosecutors fight decades of shocking injustice Life in prison for stealing $20: how the Division is taking apart brutal criminal sentences The Visiting Room is an online project documenting interviews with over 100 inmates serving life without parole sentences at Angola prison. Kuantay Reeder was filmed as part of the project while he was incarcerated: More

US says clashes with Iran-backed militias won’t affect Tehran nuclear talks Nuclear negotiations under way, as US-led mission against the Islamic State exchanges fire with armed groups in Syria and Iraq US-led forces and Iran-backed militias exchanged fire for the second day in a row, but the Biden administration said the fighting would not affect nuclear negotiations with Tehran.US Central Command said the two bases, Conoco and Green Village, used for the US-led mission against the Islamic State (IS) had come under rocket attack on Wednesday evening, but there were no serious injuries. The US struck back with attack helicopters, killing “two or three suspected Iran-backed militants conducting one of the attacks” and destroying vehicles.“The response was proportional and deliberate,” a CentCom statement said. “The United States does not seek conflict with Iran, but we will continue to take the measures necessary to protect and defend our people.”US officials have stressed there is no connection between the fighting between the US and alleged Iranian proxies, and the delicate endgame of negotiations to revive a 2015 agreement between Iran and major powers which has largely disintegrated since Donald Trump withdrew the US in 2018.The state department confirmed that the US had sent a response on Wednesday to Iranian proposals on ways to return to the deal. Iran said that it had received the US response and was studying it. Both the US and Iran responses follow a proposed EU blueprint for restarting the nuclear deal, by which Iran would roll back its nuclear program in return for sanctions relief.John Kirby, spokesman for the US national security council said Iran had made some concessions which had closed the distance between the negotiating positions but added: “Gaps remain. We’re not there yet.”As the nuclear negotiations appeared to end the final stretch, fighting flared up in Syria, where the US-led anti-IS coalition are in close proximity to Tehran-supported militia in Syria and Iraq. Wednesday’s clash came a day after US airstrikes against targets in Deir Azzour, which Washington said were arms bunkers used by militias affiliated to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). That action was taken in retaliation for drone attacks on US military outposts on 15 August.Kahl said Tuesday’s US strikes had struck nine bunkers, and had originally targeted 11 but people had been seen near two of them. The aim was not to cause casualties but to send a deterrent message, he said.“Our response was extraordinarily carefully calibrated. It was meant to be proportional to the attacks that the Iran-backed groups carried out on 15 August. It was very precise,” he said.There have been a succession of attacks on the residual US military mission in Syria, left behind to monitor and contain the remnants of IS. Kahl said the decision was taken to strike back after the 15 August drone attack in part because wreckage from a downed drone could be traced back directly to Tehran. He added that US airstrikes were also a cumulative response to a series of attacks by Iranian-based militias.“We don’t want Iran to draw the wrong conclusion that they can continue just doing this and get away with it,” he said.He insisted the US military operations in Syria were not linked to negotiations on the nuclear deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).“Whether the JCPOA is reborn or not, it actually has nothing to do with our willingness and resolve to defend ourselves,” Kahl said. “I think the strike last night was a pretty clear communication to the Iranians that these things are on different tracks.”Ellie Geranmayeh, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said there were signs of anticipation on both sides of a deal being clinched.“The US and Iranian governments have begun shifting the message for their audiences in expectation of something happening,” Geranmayeh said.The Iranian press has noticeably changed tone over recent weeks, swapping nationalistic and anti-western views for more neutral positions on the deal, which Iranian leaders have framed as a pillar of sovereignty.The Israeli government, which has struggled to prevent the JCPOA being reborn, struck a defiant tone as the prospect of a new deal rose.“We are not prepared to live with a nuclear threat above our heads from an extremist, violent Islamist regime,” the prime minister, Yair Lapid, said. “This will not happen, because we will not let it happen.”TopicsIranSyriaUS foreign policyUS militaryUS politicsMiddle East and north AfricanewsReuse this content More