US Politics

A Sacred Oath review: Mark Esper on Trump, missiles for Mexico and more The ex-defense secretary’s memoir is scary and sobering – but don’t expect Republican leaders or voters to heed his warningMark Esper was Donald Trump’s second defense secretary. Like James Mattis, his predecessor, he fell from Trump’s grace. Six days after the 2020 election, the 45th president fired him, via Twitter. Unlike Mattis, Esper now delivers a damning tell-all.This Will Not Pass review: Trump-Biden blockbuster is dire reading for DemocratsRead moreA Sacred Oath pulls no punches. It depicts Trump as unfit for office and a threat to democracy, a prisoner of wrath, impulse and appetite.Over 752 pages, Esper’s Memoirs of a Secretary of Defense During Extraordinary Times are surgically precise in their score-settling. This is not just another book to be tossed on the pyre of Trump-alumni revenge porn. It is scary and sobering.Esper is a West Point graduate and Gulf war veteran. No one confuses him with Omarosa Manigault Newman, Cliff Simms or Chris Christie. Esper ignores Trump counselor Kellyanne Conway and barely mentions Melania Trump. He is complimentary toward Jared Kushner.In general, Esper disliked what he saw. Trump’s fidelity to process was close to nonexistent, his strategy “narrow and incomplete”, his “manner” coarse and divisive. The ends Trump “often sought rarely survived the ways and means he typically pursued to accomplish them”.The book captures Trump’s rage when advised that Gen Mark Milley, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, lacked command authority over the active-duty and national guard troops Trump wanted to deploy against protesters in the aftermath of the murder of George Floyd.“‘You are losers!’ the president unloaded. ‘You are all fucking losers!’”In addition to Esper, Milley and William Barr, the attorney general, Trump also targeted Mike Pence.Esper writes: “He repeated the foul insults again, this time directing his venom at the vice-president as well, who sat quietly, stone-faced, in the chair at the far end of the semi-circle closest to the Rose Garden.“I never saw him yell at the vice-president before, so this really caught my attention.”Esper explains why he didn’t resign: “I didn’t think it was the right thing to do for our country.”His wife, Leah, framed it this way: “As your wife, please quit. As an American citizen, please stay.”The government attempted to censor A Sacred Oath, as it did The Room Where It Happened, a memoir by John Bolton, Trump’s third national security adviser. Fortunately, the powers that be buckled after Esper filed suit in federal court. Here and there, words are blacked out. The core of the story remains.At one point, Trump proposed launching “missiles into Mexico to destroy the drug labs”. The then-president said: “No one would know it was us.” He would simply deny responsibility. Esper looked at Trump. He was not joking.According to reports, the censors found this inflammatory. They did not, however, deny its veracity. Confronted with the story, Trump issued a “no comment”. Donald Trump Jr asked if his father’s scheme was “a bad thing”. Hunter Biden isn’t the only troublesome first son.Trump’s reliance on underlings who put their boss ahead of country distressed Esper too. Mark Meadows, Stephen Miller, Robert O’Brien and Ric Grenell all receive attention. Little is good.Esper found their bellicosity grating. After a meeting with Trump’s national security council, Esper commented to Milley about its lack of military experience and eagerness for war with Iran.“We couldn’t help but note … the irony that only two persons in the room that had ever gone to war were the ones least willing to risk doing so now.”Esper offers a full-throated defense of Trump’s decision to kill Qassem Suleimani. The Iranian general had American blood on his hands and was planning an attack on US diplomats and military personnel.Esper also writes about the state of the union.“I was worried for our democracy,” he says. “I had seen many red flags, many warnings, and many inconsistencies. But now we seemed on the verge of crossing a dark red line.”In the summer of 2020, the unrest that followed the murder of Floyd transported Trump to a Stygian realm. In the run-up to the election, Esper feared Trump would seek to use the military to stay in office.Esper met Milley and Gen Daniel Hokanson, the general in charge of the national guard, in an attempt to avert that outcome.“The essence of democracy was free and fair elections, followed by the peaceful transition of power,” Esper writes.Ultimately, Trump did not rely on the military to negate election results – a path advocated by Mike Flynn, his first national security adviser. Instead, the drama played out slowly. By early January 2021, Milley was telling aides the US was facing a “Reichstag moment” as Trump preached “the gospel of the führer”.On 6 January, Trump and his minions unleashed the insurrection.“It was the worst attack on the Capitol since the war of 1812,” Esper writes. “And maybe the worst assault on our democracy since the civil war.”The Presidency of Donald Trump review: the first draft of historyRead moreYet Trump and Trumpism remain firmly in the ascendant. In Ohio, in a crucial Senate primary, Trump’s endorsement of JD Vance proved decisive. In Pennsylvania, his support for Mehmet Oz may prove vital too.Down in Georgia, Herschel Walker, Trump’s choice, is on a glide path to nomination. Walker’s run-ins with domestic violence and death threats pose no problem for the faithful. Even Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, has bought in.Days ago, Esper told the New York Times Trump was “an unprincipled person who, given his self-interest, should not be in the position of public service”.Most Republicans remain unmoved. Esper is only an author. Trump spearheads a movement.
A Sacred Oath is published in the US by William Morrow
TopicsBooksPolitics booksDonald TrumpTrump administrationUS national securityUS militaryUS foreign policyreviewsReuse this content More

White House announces internet program for low-income AmericansWith new commitment from 20 internet providers, about 48m households will be eligible for $30 monthly plans The Biden administration announced on Monday that 20 internet companies have agreed to provide discounted service to people with low incomes, a program that could effectively make tens of millions of households eligible for free service through an already existing federal subsidy.The $1tn infrastructure package passed by Congress last year included $14.2bn in funding for the Affordable Connectivity Program, which provides $30 monthly subsidies ($75 in tribal areas) on internet service for millions of lower-income households.Jill Biden makes unannounced visit to Ukraine and meets first ladyRead moreWith the new commitment from the internet providers, about 48m households will be eligible for $30 monthly plans for 100 megabits per second, or higher speed, service – making internet service fully paid for with the government subsidy if they sign up with one of the providers participating in the program.Biden, during his White House run and the push for the infrastructure bill, made expanding high-speed internet access in rural and low-income areas a priority. He has repeatedly spoken out about low-income families have struggled to find reliable wifi, so their children could take part in remote schooling and complete homework assignments early in the coronavirus pandemic.“If we didn’t know it before, we know now: high-speed internet is essential,” the Democratic president said during a White House event last month honoring the National Teacher of the Year.The 20 internet companies that have agreed to lower their rates for eligible consumers provide service in areas where 80% of the US population, including 50% of the rural population, live, according to the White House. Participating companies that offer service on tribal lands are providing $75 rates in those areas, the equivalent of the federal government subsidy in those areas.Biden and Vice-President Kamala Harris on Monday were set to meet with telecom executives, members of Congress and others to spotlight the effort to improve access to high-speed internet for low-income households.The providers are Allo Communications, AltaFiber (and Hawaiian Telecom), Altice USA (Optimum and Suddenlink), Astound, AT&T, Breezeline, Comcast, Comporium, Frontier, IdeaTek, Cox Communications, Jackson Energy Authority, MediaCom, MLGC, Spectrum (Charter Communications), Starry, Verizon (Fios only), Vermont Telephone Co, Vexus Fiber and Wow! Internet, Cable and TV.American households are eligible for subsidies through the Affordable Connectivity Program if their income is at or below 200% of the federal poverty level, or if a member of their family participates in one of several programs, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap), Federal Public Housing Assistance (FPHA) and Veterans Pension and Survivors Benefit.TopicsUS newsBroadbandInternetBiden administrationIncome inequalityTelecommunications industryUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

Dr Oz embraced Trump’s big lie – will Maga voters reward him in Senate race? Trump holds rally to endorse celebrity doctor ahead of Republican Senate primary in Pennsylvania, which will have big consequences for the November election Say what you like about Donald Trump’s supporters, you cannot fault them for commitment. When the former president arrived for his latest rally in a deeply rural corner of western Pennsylvania, many had already been standing in solid rain for 10 hours.The field in which they were to greet their revered leader was a mud bath. By the time Trump finally arrived, 20 minutes late, the scene had taken on the qualities of the apocalypse – like the closing sequences of the Fyre festival.On this occasion, the seemingly boundless patience of Trump’s devoted followers was being put to the test for an additional reason. He had come to the Westmoreland Fairgrounds outside Greensburg to sprinkle Trump stardust on his preferred choice for the US Senate seat vacated by retiring Republican senator Pat Toomey.Whether Pennsylvanian conservatives go along with the endorsement when the primary is held on 17 May will have big consequences, not merely on Trump’s record of advancing his chosen people – and with it his grip on the Republican party. It will also have ramifications for the November election which, in tune with recent contests in the state, is almost certain to be nail-bitingly close and could be critical in determining whether the Republicans retake the Senate.The trouble is, many Trump supporters don’t know what to make of Mehmet Oz, the celebrity TV surgeon better known as Dr Oz.“We love Trump, but we’ll be booing Oz,” said Pam, 46, a local educator who asked to give only her first name. She admitted one of the reasons she had turned up in the first place was to see how hostile her fellow Trump supporters would be towards the candidate.In the end, after all that sodden waiting, Pam was disappointed. Occasional booing could be heard earlier in the evening whenever Oz was mentioned, but when the man himself took to the stage, whether by design or accident, the music was cranked up so loud that it was impossible to tell jeering from cheering.By now the pattern is well established. Prominent individuals are so desperate for Trump’s blessing that they suspend cognitive functioning and act as his slavish mouthpiece.The phenomenon was vividly illustrated after the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol last year. Republican leaders including Kevin McCarthy were at first critical of Trump’s role but then began faithfully repeating his big lie that the election had been stolen from him.More recently, JD Vance, the venture capitalist author of Hillbilly Elegy, ditched his earlier criticisms of Trump in order to win the former president’s endorsement in the race for a US Senate seat in Ohio. The humiliating gambit paid off last week, with Vance sealing the Republican primary having received a bounce from Trump’s backing.Of all the many examples of this form, there has rarely been as dramatic a shedding of fact-based reasoning in exchange for Trump’s universe of alternative facts than that displayed by Oz. He has descended from the scientific heights of a renowned cardiothoracic surgeon, down through his promotion of quack remedies on his daytime TV show, and into a full-Maga embrace of the Trump big lie.Oz, 61, has an impeccable medical background. Born in Cleveland, Ohio, he is the son of Turkish immigrants and followed his father into cardiothoracic surgery, with Ivy League training at Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania.At his peak, he was an innovator in minimally invasive heart surgery. At Columbia University, where he treated patients until 2018, he authored numerous peer-reviewed papers bearing impenetrable sentences like this one: “In the multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, CPB time, previous cardiac surgery, sternal wound infection, postoperative renal failure, and postoperative stroke were all associated with increased risk of mortality following MICS.”His weakness – or strength? – was the allure of fame and fortune. In 1996 he performed a heart transplant on the brother of the New York Yankees manager in the middle of a World Series which the Yankees won.Such extraordinary serendipity turned him into a media darling. Oprah Winfrey came calling, dubbing him “America’s doctor”, and the end result was The Dr Oz Show which ran until this January.His show included public-service broadcasting, bringing attention to type 2 diabetes and encouraging his viewers to eat more healthily. But over time he slid into controversial territory.By 2014 he was being called a “snake oil peddler” and hauled before a US Senate committee for touting “miracle” diet products on The Dr Oz Show. “I don’t get why you need to say this stuff because you know it’s not true,” Claire McCaskill, then senator from Missouri, berated him.During the pandemic, he championed several of the same discredited pseudoscience treatments such as hydroxychloroquine pushed by Trump.To complete the decline, the cardiothoracic surgeon has now incorporated into his Pennsylvania Senate campaign the falsehood that the 2020 presidential election that Trump lost was riddled with fraud. “I have discussed it with President Trump and we cannot move on,” he said at a recent televised debate for the Republican primary. “We have to be serious about what happened in 2020.”There is no evidence that fraud on a significant scale occurred in the 2020 election, in Pennsylvania or anywhere else.The problem with being a daytime TV host is that you leave a very long paper trail. Oz’s rivals for the Republican nomination have been bombarding Pennsylvania voters with attack ads portraying him as a “Hollywood liberal” and a Rino – Republican In Name Only.Among the inconvenient truths that the adverts regurgitate is the time that Oz invited Michelle Obama onto his show, his reflections on systemic racism and how it leads to disparities in health outcomes, and his discussions on how to reduce deaths and injuries from guns.The attack ads have featured a 2019 interview in which he questioned Republican states that were introducing bills to ban abortion at six weeks known as heartbeat bills. “But the heart’s not beating,” Oz is shown accurately saying.And then there was the segment on his show that he called “Transgender kids: too young to decide?” where he invited children experiencing gender dysphoria and their parents to talk about their journey.The downpour of negative political adverts carrying politically awkward clips from the Oz show has clearly had an impact on the race. Latest polls show the Republican primary race as too close to call, with the TV personality in a slim lead on 18% to the 16% of his main rival, the super-wealthy former hedge fund CEO David McCormick.By contrast, the Democratic field of candidates appears to be already settled with a clear frontrunner: Pennsylvania’s lieutenant governor, John Fetterman. He is a champion of labour unions, legalised marijuana and combating inequalities in income, health and housing.Certainly, doubts about Oz remained prevalent among the Trump devotees braving the Westmoreland rain on Friday night.“I’m leary,” said Ken Rockhill, 52. “I want to trust Trump’s candidate, but I’m leary. He’s going to have to prove himself.”Rockhill, an artist from Pittsburgh, said his doubts about Oz stemmed from the candidate’s time as a TV personality. Which was odd, given that Trump himself carries the same lineage.“Oz was caught up with that whole Hollywood thing with his show,” Rockhill said. “He was big with the Obamas, hobnobbing with all the stars – that never ends well.”Sharon Nagle, 60, a bartender from a small coalmining town, said she was troubled by Oz’s dual US-Turkish citizenship. That issue has also been seized upon by Oz’s Republican rivals who have called his Turkish ties a national security risk, forcing him to promise to renounce his Turkish citizenship should he win the Senate seat.Nagle also objects to Oz’s Muslim identity. “I love Trump, but he’s got this wrong. I will never vote for a Muslim – they plan to take over America from within and pass sharia-style laws. That’s what I think, and I’m not a bigot.”Pam, the Trump supporter who had come to see whether Oz would be booed off stage, said that as a Christian her antipathy to him stemmed from a 2010 episode of The Dr Oz Show that featured an eight-year-old girl who had transitioned from her male gender at birth. “To use your platform to say a boy aged eight can change gender – that’s evil,” she said.Did she think Trump had made a mistake in endorsing him? Yes, Pam said, showing a surprising willingness to question the former president’s judgment despite being a fervent Maga supporter.“The man is not God,” Pam said, referring to Trump. “He puts his pants on, one leg at a time.”Out of curiosity, the Guardian asked Pam whether she ever watched The Dr Oz Show.Her eyes lit up and she beamed. “Oh yes,” she said. “We love the Dr Oz show!”Political strategists at the rally worked extra hard to try and overcome the chilly response to the Oz endorsement. Vance was rolled out on stage, with the clear hope that the victory he pulled out of the hat last week might somehow rub off on Oz.The crowd was assailed through the evening with 30-second videos attempting to debunk the portrayal of the candidate given in the attack ads. Here was Oz surrounded by children insisting life begins at conception. Here was Oz dressed in lumberjack shirt brandishing a double-barreled shotgun – how could this man be against the second amendment?When Oz finally addressed the crowd he reassured them that he was one of them – a genuine Maga man. “The president endorsed me as an America First candidate … President Trump endorsed me because I am smart, I am tough and I will never let you down.”Then Trump himself bigged up his chosen candidate. “We endorse a lot of people a little out of the box,” he said, paying the subtlest lip service to his followers’ misgivings.He reminded the crowd how Oz had invited him onto his show in 2016, giving the then presidential hopeful a great bill of health though telling him to lose a few pounds. “Dr Oz has had an enormously successful career on TV and now he’s running to save our country from the radical lunatics,” Trump said.Being Trump, his most passionate argument for voting for Oz was also the most quizzical. “His show is great. He’s on that screen, he’s in the bedrooms of all those women telling them good and bad.”It’s not quite clear what Trump meant by that. Will it be the Trump magic needed to put Oz over the finish line? We’ll know in eight days’ time. TopicsPennsylvaniaDonald TrumpUS SenateRepublicansUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More

We must fight powerful bullies, whether they are Putin, Trump, or tech billionairesRobert ReichThroughout history, the central struggle of civilization has been against brutality by the powerful. Civil society doesn’t let might make right I keep running into people who feel overwhelmed by so many seemingly unrelated but terrifying things occurring all at once. “How can all this be happening?” they ask.But these things are connected. They are reinforcing each other. As such, they pose a clear challenge to a decent society.Putin invades Ukraine. Trump refuses to concede and promotes his big lie. Rightwing politicians in America and Europe inflame white Christian nationalism. Television pundits spur bigotry toward immigrants. Politicians target LGBTQ+ youth.Powerful men sexually harass and abuse women. Abortion bans harm women unable to obtain safe abortions. Police kill innocent Black people with impunity.CEOs rake in record profits and compensation but give workers meager wages and fire them for unionizing. The richest men in the world own the most influential media platforms. Billionaires make large campaign donations (read: legal bribes) so lawmakers won’t raise their taxes.What connects these? All are abuses of power. All are occurring at a time when power and wealth are concentrated in few hands.It is important to see the overall pattern because each of these sorts of abuses encourages other abuses. Stopping them – standing up against all forms of bullying and brutality – is essential to preserving a civil society.Throughout history, the central struggle of civilization has been against brutality by the powerful. The state of nature is a continuous war in which only the fittest survive – where lives are “nasty, brutish, and short,” in the words of the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes.Without norms, rules, and laws preventing the stronger from attacking or oppressing the weaker, none of us is safe. We all live in fear. Even the most powerful live in fear of being attacked or deposed.Civilization is the opposite of a state of nature. A civil society doesn’t allow the strong to brutalize the weak. The responsibility of all who seek a decent society is to move as far from a state of nature as possible.Certain inequalities of power are expected, even in a civil society. Some people are bigger and stronger than others. Some are quicker of mind and body. Some have more forceful personalities. Some have fewer scruples.Some inequalities of income and wealth may be necessary to encourage hard work and inventiveness, from which everyone benefits.But when inequalities become too wide, they invite abuses. Such abuses invite further abuses until society degenerates into a Hobbesian survival of the most powerful. An entire society – even the world – can descend into chaos.Every time the stronger bully the weaker, the social fabric is tested. If bullying is not contained, the fabric unwinds.Some posit a moral equivalence between those who seek social justice and those who want to protect individual liberty, between “left” and “right.”But there is no moral equivalence between bullies and the bullied, between tyranny and democracy, between brutality and decency – no “balance” between social justice and individual liberty.No individual can be free in a society devoid of justice. There can be no liberty where brutality reigns.The struggle for social justice is the most basic struggle of all because it defines how far a civilization has come from a Hobbesian survival of the most powerful.A civil society stops brutality, holds the powerful accountable, and protects the vulnerable.Putin must be stopped. Trump must be held accountable. Rightwing politicians who encourage white Christian nationalism must be condemned and voted out of office. Celebrity pundits who fuel racism and xenophobia must be denounced and defunded.Powerful men who sexually harass or abuse women must be prosecuted. Women must have safe means of ending pregnancies they don’t want. Police who kill innocent Black people must be brought to justice.CEOs who treat their employees badly must be exposed and penalized. Billionaires who bribe lawmakers to cut their taxes or exempt them from regulations must be sanctioned, as should lawmakers who accept such bribes.This is what civilization demands. This is what the struggle is all about. This is why that struggle is so critical.
Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His new book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com
TopicsUS politicsOpinionDonald TrumpVladimir PutinRoe v WadeThe far rightcommentReuse this content More

How GOP lawmakers are prepping to ban abortion as soon as legally possibleThe supreme court’s draft opinion overturning Roe v Wade gave lawmakers a head start to impose new regulations on clinics and medication This story was originally published by The 19th.Following Monday night’s leak of a supreme court draft opinion that would overrule Roe v Wade, the 1973 case that guaranteed the right to an abortion, Republican state lawmakers are working to make sure they are ready to limit access as soon as is legally permissible.The language of the court’s decision will probably change at least somewhat when it is ultimately issued by the end of June. But its central, top-line declaration – a 5-4 majority issuing a clear, unequivocal overturning of Roe – is widely expected to remain.Here is what Republican state lawmakers across the country are doing in the lead-up to the decision to assure that abortion restrictions will swiftly go into effect.Looking to courtsMost state legislatures have already ended their law-making sessions, or are past the point in the year where they can introduce new bills. So in many Republican-led states, lawmakers are getting ready to enforce laws that have already been passed and were then blocked by state and federal judges who had cited Roe v Wade’s federal protections. Without those protections, the rulings could be revisited.‘Unnecessary suffering and death’: doctors fear for patients’ lives in a post-Roe worldRead moreA law imposing new regulations on abortion clinics in Kentucky, medication abortion restrictions in Montana, and six-week abortion bans in states like Georgia, Ohio and South Carolina – these are some of the restrictions that have been blocked by courts.A decision overturning Roe could open up those laws to be newly enforced. But first, each state’s attorney general would have to formally ask courts to undo their decisions blocking them.Some officials are already doing just that. On Tuesday, the day after the supreme court’s draft decision leaked, Ohio’s Governor Mike DeWine, a Republican up for re-election this year, said he had directed the state’s attorney general to get their six-week abortion ban reinstated if Roe is overturned.A spokesperson for South Carolina’s governor did not respond to a request for comment. Andrew Isenhour, a spokesperson for Georgia’s Governor Brian Kemp, another Republican, would not directly answer whether Kemp will seek to reinstate that state’s six-week ban.But, he told The 19th, Kemp “has been been and remains focused on defending Georgia’s strong pro-life legislation against legal challenges”.“Trigger laws” would ban abortion once Roe is overturned but usually require some kind of state action – certification from the governor, the attorney general or an independent legislative council asserting that Roe has, in fact, been struck down – before they can take effect.The leak has given state officials a head start to prepare briefing materials and court documents that allow them to swiftly implement the bans. So far, 13 states have already passed trigger bans that could take effect after Roe is overturned.A push for new billsBecause most state legislatures are no longer in session – and since many have already passed so many kinds of abortion bans – only a few states are looking at passing new abortion restrictions.In Ohio, where the legislature meets year-round, lawmakers are weighing their own state trigger ban, which DeWine indicated he would sign.And on Wednesday, a legislative committee in Louisiana voted favorably on a bill that previews where the abortion fight could go next: House Bill 813 would reclassify abortion as homicide and, unlike most other abortion bans, extend criminal penalties to the pregnant person.The bill’s backers acknowledge it is probably unconstitutional under the current Roe v Wade guidance. But without Roe, things could look very different.Historically, anti-abortion lawmakers have been hesitant to pass laws punishing pregnant people, focusing instead on healthcare professionals who perform abortions. It’s unclear if other states will follow Louisiana’s lead, said Mary Ziegler, an abortion law researcher and professor.“On the one hand these are states that have reasons to not punish women and pregnant people, but I think the pressure is going to increase. And once somebody else is first it may be easier for other states to follow,” Ziegler said. “I imagine there’s going to be a real debate.”Special sessionsGovernors can also call in special legislative sessions this summer to pass new anti-abortion laws. So far, no governors have publicly committed to doing so.In Indiana, the state’s Republican lawmakers – who control both branches of the statehouse – have publicly urged the governor to call a special session if Roe is overturned.The state does not yet have a trigger law, and currently allows abortions up until 20 weeks of pregnancy. But Indiana’s lawmakers have a strong record of opposing abortion rights. Per the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks abortion policy, the state has passed 55 new restrictions on the procedure in the past decade, and is expected to heavily limit or ban access once Roe is overturned.Supreme court abortion law leak: what happened and why does it matter?Read moreLawmakers in Nebraska are also warning of a possible special session once Roe is overturned. Efforts to pass a trigger law failed this past year, though the governor – who has not yet committed to calling back state legislators – said he supports such an abortion ban.In Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis has already planned to call the legislature back into session, but with a mandate to focus on property insurance policy. Since Monday night, though, local abortion opponents have been calling on DeSantis to add an abortion ban to the legislature’s to-do list.Florida passed a 15-week abortion ban earlier this year, but efforts to enact a six-week ban never took off. DeSantis, who is widely believed to be planning a presidential run in 2024, has been noncommittal on whether he will pursue tighter abortion bans. And total abortion bans are less popular in Florida than in other Republican-led states, Ziegler noted.But even if not this summer, Glenn said, Florida could emerge as a priority state for abortion opponents in the coming years, along with states such as Montana, Iowa and Kansas, which have recently embraced more abortion restrictions but are not prepared to ban access once Roe is overturned. In both Iowa and Kansas, the state supreme courts have held that their constitutions protect abortion rights, but abortion opponents in both states are trying to pass amendments that would remove those protections.“There will be those states in the middle,” she said. “And like we saw here in Florida this year, there will be much more of an opportunity for the legislative process and people in the state to weigh in.”TopicsAbortionReproductive rightsRoe v WadeUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More

Groups perpetuating Trump’s 2020 election lie face scrutiny and lawsuitsColorado lawsuit charges group with questioning residents about voting status while Trump loyalists work to sustain falsehoods Conservative groups perpetuating Donald Trump’s false charges that the 2020 election was rigged have sparked a lawsuit against one in Colorado, and a congressional panel investigation of another in New Mexico, over aggressive tactics allegedly used to seek out possible voter fraud.The scrutiny and criticism facing these conservative groups underscore how Trump loyalists in several US states are working to sustain falsehoods about Trump’s loss, while launching new drives that voting rights advocates say smack of voter intimidation, often targeting communities of color.The Ohio primary shows that Trump still has a tight hold on the Republican party | Lloyd GreenRead moreA lawsuit was filed by the NAACP and two other groups in March charging that Colorado-based US Election Integrity Plan (USEIP), which has echoed Trump’s baseless claims about 2020 election fraud, has gone door to door in some counties aggressively questioning residents about their voting status and sometimes bearing arms.Moreover, the House Committee on Oversight and Reform has been investigating EchoMail, a firm that helped push false claims of election fraud in Arizona and has reportedly been paid $50,000 by a New Mexico county to oversee a local “audit force” doing intrusive door-to-door voter canvassing.Other states including Michigan and Utah boast conservative groups that, under the guise of protecting voting integrity by ferreting out fraud, have been criticized for the methods they employed in seeking out potential voter fraud.“As Americans, we expect and demand an open and participatory democracy that welcomes all voters equally,” said Danielle Lang, senior director of voting rights at the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center. “Those engaging in these pressure tactics should know that voter intimidation is a crime with serious consequences.”The lawsuit against USEIP filed by the NAACP in Colorado, the League of Women Voters in Colorado and Mi Familia Vota charges that USEIP has engaged in “door-to-door voter intimidation”, including taking pictures of some houses, in neighborhoods with a large number of minority residents.The lawsuit alleges, without providing specific cases, that USEIP representatives have at times worn badges or carried firearms when visiting voters’ residences, although they are not government officials.“We’re very concerned about reports that Colorado voters have received visits at their homes from people, sometimes openly armed, posing as government officials who imply, without evidence, that fraudulent voting activity occurred at their address,” Beth Hendrix, the League of Women voters executive director in Colorado told the Guardian.A Colorado judge last week rejected a motion by USEIP to dismiss the lawsuit. A separate motion by the plaintiffs’ two counsels, the nonprofit legal group Free Speech for People and the law firm Lathrop GPM, to obtain a preliminary injunction to halt USEIP’s efforts is pending.The lawsuit partly rests on a measure that passed after the Civil War, called the KKK Act, aimed at stopping white terrorists from using violence to interfere with Black voters.USEIP, which started after Joe Biden defeated Trump, is run by Shawn Smith, a retired air force colonel who also leads Cause of America, a nationwide group that boasts that its role is to “enable, facilitate and support citizen grassroots action to restore trust in local elections”.Mike Lindell, the multimillionaire Trump loyalist who is CEO of MyPillow and has been the chief financier of Cause of America, told the Guardian that the group serves as an “information hub” with a presence in all 50 states and on his website FrankSpeech.com.Lindell estimated he has spent between $100,000 and $200,000 monthly for salaries for the group’s employees – except for Smith, who is unpaid – and other expenses.Smith was reportedly tapped by Lindell to run Cause of America last fall, after Smith attended a Lindell-organized “cyber symposium” last summer in South Dakota which promoted conspiratorial and baseless claims of voting fraud in 2020.An organizing manual for USEIP thanks Lindell, but he told the Guardian that he had no ties with it.Smith can be seen in a 39-second video clip in a large crowd of Trump loyalists who were at the Capitol during the 6 January assault and another photo that was released by Colorado Newsline and relied on ProPublica research.Smith did not reply to emails sent to Cause of America seeking comment.Other outfits with track records for claiming the 2020 election was rigged have popped up in New Mexico, where ostensibly in the name of ferreting out voting fraud, they have sparked concerns about intimidating voters in areas with large minority populations.Top Democrats on the House Committee on Oversight and Reform in March announced an investigation into allegations from state officials that EchoMail was retained by tiny Otero county to examine potential voting fraud in part by overseeing a door-to-door voter canvass.The founder of EchoMail, VA Shiva Ayyadurai, has been a frequent promoter of unfounded conspiracies about the 2020 election results as well as a Senate primary in Massachusetts that he lost, and the firm was also a subcontractor for a widely debunked Arizona audit of its largest county.EchoMail’s contract, according to records obtained and published by the watchdog group American Oversight and first reported by NBC News, called for it to supervise a door-to-door voter canvass by a groupcalled the New Mexico Audit Force, to check the accuracy of voter rolls. The company’s contract also said it would inspect ballot images in the county, and assess voter signatures for accuracy.The House Oversight Committee chair, Carolyn Maloney, and the chair of its subcommittee on civil rights and civil liberties, Jamie Raskin, wrote Ayyadurai in March that it is “investigating whether your company’s audit and canvass in New Mexico interferes with Americans’ right to vote by spreading disinformation about elections and intimidating voters”.The House letter pointed out that 40% of the county’s residents are non-white Hispanic, and raised the concern that the company’s canvas could “have a particular impact on minority communities in Otero county”.Otero county, which has a population of 67,000 people, was won by Trump by more than 25% of the vote in 2020.In response, Ayyadurai denied EchoMail was playing any such role in Otero county and did not provide requested documents, prompting another letter to Ayyadurai with evidence and statements from a New Mexico couple involved in the “audit force”.A committee spokesperson told the Guardian that “Dr Ayyadurai has denied EchoMail’s participation in the sham audit and canvass, directly contradicting statements made by leaders of the New Mexico Audit Force and raising serious doubts about his credibility”.The panel is now weighing its next moves “to get to the bottom of this so-called audit and prevent other attacks on our elections”, the spokesperson added.The oversight committee also wrote in March to justice department assistant attorney general Kristen Clarke of the civil rights division to share its concerns about possible negative impacts of EchoMail’s Otero county efforts.On a related voting front, congresswoman Maloney told the Guardian in a statement that another investigation she launched last month with congresswoman Zoe Lofren, the chair of the House administration committee, is looking into “election disinformation in Arizona, Florida, Ohio and Texas. This is a fight for our democracy, and I am committed to finding solutions.”Lang of the Campaign Legal Center stressed that groups trying to find fraud while harassing voters or spreading disinformation won’t succeed and will be challenged. “The right to vote is the bedrock of our society and voters won’t be bullied out of exercising their rights,” Lang said.TopicsUS elections 2020Donald TrumpUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

Capitol attack panel moves closer to issuing subpoenas to Republicans Refusal to assist the investigation has caused the sentiment to turn towards taking near-unprecedented action, sources say Members on the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack on 6 January are moving closer to issuing subpoenas to Republican members of Congress to compel their cooperation in the inquiry – though it has started to dawn on them that they may be out of time.The panel is expected to make a final decision on the subpoena question over the next couple of weeks, according to sources directly familiar with internal deliberations, with House investigators needing to start wrapping up their work ahead of public hearings in June.While the members on the select committee remain undecided about whether to subpoena Republican members of Congress, their refusal to assist the investigation in any form has caused the sentiment to turn towards taking that near-unprecedented action, the sources said.The shifting view has come as a result of the dismay among the members in January, when House minority leader Kevin McCarthy and others turned down requests for voluntary cooperation, turning to anger after three more of Donald Trump’s allies last week refused to cooperate.What has changed in recent weeks in the select committee’s assessment is that they cannot ignore the deep involvement between some Republican members of Congress and the former president’s unlawful schemes to overturn the results of the 2020 election, the sources said.The recent letters to House Republicans Mo Brooks, Andy Biggs and Ronny Jackson – Trump’s former White House doctor – provided just a snapshot of the entanglement, the sources said, with the Trump White House, and potentially the militia groups that attacked the Capitol.House investigators are particularly interested in any potential connections between Republican members of Congress and the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys militia groups, the sources said, since those groups were actually involved in the riot element of January 6.The select committee wanted to interview Jackson, for instance, to establish how the Oath Keepers came to learn as they stormed the Capitol that he had “critical data to protect” and needed “protection”, according to text messages revealed in court filings.But the panel has been holding off compelling that information with subpoenas, anxious about the inevitable circus that would accompany such a move and, as the Guardian reported in January, embolden Republicans to subpoena Democrats if they take the House in 2022.The select committee told itself, the sources said, it might be able to avoid the issue altogether if it could get the information it needed from other places, like it did with Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows when his aides provided testimony.But that has not happened, and especially not with respect to the issue of potential connections between Republican members of Congress and the militia groups, whose members are now largely unable to talk to the panel having been placed under criminal investigation by the DoJ.The trouble for the select committee is that it may have run out of time to go down the subpoena route.Even if the panel were now to issue a bevy of subpoenas to House Republicans, if their colleagues decide to ignore the subpoenas, the only real option it has to enforce the orders would be to pursue action through the slow-grinding cogs of the judicial system.That enforcement mechanism would likely take months, according to former prosecutors – an exercise potentially of little use to a panel that is seeking to start wrapping up depositions before public hearings in June and expects to publish a final report in September.But some members believe Republicans may just cooperate if they are subpoenaed, the sources said, since Republican subpoenas to Democrats in a future investigation would only have teeth if Republicans don’t defang the very congressional subpoenas first – by defying them.TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsDonald TrumpJoe BidenUS elections 2020RepublicansnewsReuse this content More

Jill Biden makes unannounced visit to Ukraine and meets first ladySurprise trip on Mother’s Day as Biden meets with Ukraine’s first lady, Olena Zelenskiy US first lady Jill Biden made an unannounced visit to western Ukraine on Sunday, holding a surprise Mother’s Day meeting with the nation’s first lady, Olena Zelenskiy, as Russia presses its punishing war in the eastern regions.US president Joe Biden has not visited the country, though he expressed a desire to when he was in Poland this spring, following Russia’s invasion in February, but at that time Russian tanks were advancing on the capital, Kyiv, and he hinted that his security advisers held him back.Jill Biden traveled under the cloak of secrecy, becoming the latest high-profile American to enter Ukraine during its 10-week-old conflict with Russia.Russian forces drew back from Kyiv in the weeks after Biden’s trip to Poland, and the return of a greater level of security in the capital prompted visits by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, days after US secretary of state Antony Blinken and defense secretary Lloyd Austin, and other world leaders, including British prime minister Boris Johnson, had met there with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy.“I wanted to come on Mother’s Day,” Jill Biden told Olena Zelenskiy on Sunday.“I thought it was important to show the Ukrainian people that this war has to stop and this war has been brutal and that the people of the United States stand with the people of Ukraine.”The first lady traveled by vehicle to the town of Uzhhorod, about a 10-minute drive from a Slovakian village that borders Ukraine.The two came together in a small classroom, sitting across a table from one another and talking in front of reporters before they met in private. Zelenskiy and her children have been at an undisclosed location for their safety.Zelenskiy thanked Biden for her “courageous act” and said: “We understand what it takes for the US first lady to come here during a war when military actions are taking place every day, where the air sirens are happening every day – even today.”The school where they met has been turned into transitional housing for Ukrainian migrants from elsewhere in the country.The visit allowed Biden to conduct the kind of personal diplomacy that her husband would like to be doing himself.The White House said as recently as last week that the US president “would love to visit” but there were no plans for him to do so at this time.On Sunday, Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau also made a surprise visit to Ukraine and was expected to meet with Volodymyr Zelenskiy.Earlier, the meeting between the two first ladies came about after they exchanged correspondence in recent weeks, according to US officials. Jill Biden drove through Uzhhorod and the meeting between the women lasted about an hour.Her visit was limited to western Ukraine. Russia is concentrating its military power in eastern Ukraine, and she was not deemed to be in harm’s way.Earlier, in the Slovakian border village of Vysne Nemecke, she toured its border processing facility, surveying operations set up by the United Nations and other relief organizations to assist Ukrainians seeking refuge. Biden attended a religious service in a tent set up as a chapel, where a priest intoned: “We pray for the people of Ukraine.”Before that, in Kosice, Biden met and offered support to Ukrainian mothers in Slovakia who have been displaced by Russia’s war and assuring them that the “hearts of the American people” are behind them.At a bus station in the city that is now a 24-hour refugee processing center, Biden found herself in an extended conversation with a Ukrainian woman who said she struggles to explain the war to her three children because she cannot understand it herself.“I cannot explain because I don’t know myself and I’m a teacher,” Victorie Kutocha, who had her arms around her 7-year-old daughter, Yulie, told Biden.At one point, Kutocha asked, “Why?” seeming to seek an explanation for Russia’s decision to invade Ukraine on February 24.“It’s so hard to understand,” the first lady replied.Meanwhile, the top American diplomat in Ukraine, acting ambassador Kristina Kvien, temporarily returned to the US embassy in Kyiv, according to an unnamed US official, weeks after it was vacated.TopicsJill BidenUS politicsJoe BidenVolodymyr ZelenskiyUkraineRussiaEuropenewsReuse this content More