US Politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares92 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘A bigger victory for Putin than any military battle’: Russia gleeful after Trump-Zelenskyy clash

      by

      Russian officials and Moscow’s media outlets reacted with predictable glee to the dramatic clash between Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Donald Trump at the White House on Friday.Posting on social media, Dmitry Medvedev, Putin’s deputy on the security council and former president, called the exchange “a brutal dressing-down in the Oval Office”.He wrote: “Trump told the … clown [Zelenskyy] the truth to his face: the Kyiv regime is playing with the third world war … This is useful. But it’s not enough – we need to stop military support [to Ukraine].”In recent days, concern grew in Moscow as Trump seemed to lean toward a more Zelenskyy-friendly position following visits to Washington by the leaders of Poland, France and Britain, who urged support for Ukraine. Trump had indicated a willingness to back European peacekeepers in Ukraine – a move Kyiv and European governments saw as essential to preventing Moscow from reigniting the war, as it had after previous ceasefires.But any worries the Kremlin may have had faded when Zelenskyy found himself ambushed by Trump and his vice-president, JD Vance.“How Trump and Vance held back from hitting that scumbag is a miracle of restraint,” wrote Maria Zakharova, Russia’s foreign ministry spokesperson, on Telegram.There has been no comment so far from Putin, who has instead taken a backseat, likely watching the fallout unfold with satisfaction. “Putin doesn’t have to say much right now,” said a source familiar with the Kremlin’s thinking.“It’s clear that he enjoyed the show and now believes he can push for even greater demands in Ukraine. That meeting was a bigger victory for Putin than any of his military battles since the start of the war.”The source predicted that Putin is likely to call Trump in the coming days to argue that Zelenskyy is not someone who can be reasoned with and must be replaced – a sentiment already echoed by some in Moscow as well as Washington.“The White House will now start looking more closely at other candidates for Ukraine’s presidency,” wrote Alexey Pushkov, a member of the upper house of the Russian parliament, on Telegram.View image in fullscreenRegime change in Ukraine has long been a goal for Putin, who has never hidden his desire to install a new leadership in Kyiv which is friendly to Moscow. On Telegram – the primary platform for political discourse in Russia – many influential pro-war bloggers echoed the rhetoric of Trump’s inner circle that portrayed Zelenskyy as an ungrateful child.“Overall, the meeting in the Oval Office once again revealed the true face of Zelenskyy: ungrateful, arrogant, brazen, and boundless,” wrote Rybar, a popular account with links to the Russian defence ministry.For Kremlin insiders, the incident also signified a fundamental shift in the global order, with a White House no longer seen as an enemy but rather as a partner to Moscow – one with whom business and politics can be conducted.“Volodymyr Zelenskyy underestimated the scale of the shift that took place in American politics after Donald Trump’s arrival,” said Fyodor Lukyanov, a prominent Russian foreign-policy analyst who heads a council that advises the Kremlin.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionLukyanov highlighted Friday’s moment when Trump declared that he was not on Ukraine’s side but viewed himself as a mediator in the conflict. “This is a fundamental shift,” Lukyanov added.But there were also warnings in Moscow that, given Trump’s unpredictable nature, it was too early to declare victory.“In the short term, this tragicomic exchange will undoubtedly weaken Zelenskyy’s position within Ukraine and give Russian diplomacy additional leverage in its dealings with the US,” said Anton Grishanov, a researcher at a thinktank affiliated with Russia’s foreign ministry.“That said, Moscow and Washington still have divergent views on the settlement process, and Trump’s unpredictable temperament could bring plenty of surprises on the path to ending the conflict,” he added.As the dust settles, it’s clear that Friday’s meeting delivered a major blow to Trump’s efforts to negotiate a peace deal between Kyiv and Moscow, while Russia prepares to escalate its offensive against a Ukraine on the verge of losing its most vital military support.“The war continues,” Lukyanov concluded. More

    • 188 Shares132 Views

      in US Politics

      Medicaid recipients fear ‘buzzsaw cuts’ for Trump’s agenda: ‘We’re not going to be alive forever’

      by

      At the age of 62, Marya Parral knows that her, and her husband’s, years of being able to care for their two developmentally disabled sons are numbered, and so they have done everything they can to ensure their children can continue to live independently.For their oldest, Ian, that’s meant placing him in a program on an organic farm that caters to people diagnosed with autism. For Joey, their youngest, who has both autism and Down syndrome, Parral has found a caregiver who can help him deliver newspapers and run errands around their community of Ocean City, New Jersey.Parral said none of this would be affordable without help from Medicaid, the federal government’s insurance program for poor and disabled Americans. But this week, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives approved a budget framework that would make deep cuts to the program, and Parral worries her sons will lose what she has worked so hard to build.“We’re not going to be alive forever. We’re trying to set up a life for them, but that entire life that we’re working so hard to set up for them is dependent on Medicaid,” Parral said. “So it’s really devastating to think about cuts.”Producing a budget is the first step in the Republican-controlled Congress’s drive to enact legislation that will pay for Donald Trump’s priorities. House lawmakers will now spend weeks working to write and pass a bill that is expected to approve $4.5tn in extended tax cuts, as well as funding for Trump’s plan for mass deportations of undocumented immigrants.To pay for it, Republicans are considering a rollback of the federal social safety net, particularly Medicaid, which has nearly 80 million enrollees in all 50 states. The budget plan proposes an $880bn reduction in funding for the insurance over the next 10 years, an amount that experts warn would hollow out the program and have ripple effects across the entire American healthcare system.Megan Cole Brahim, a professor at Boston University School of Public Health and an expert on Medicaid, said the cut was the largest ever proposed, and if enacted would “have far-reaching impacts not just for those who rely on Medicaid, but for entire communities and economies”.“These changes mean millions of Americans – including the low-income, elderly, persons with disabilities, children – will lose health insurance coverage,” she said. “Others may see significant reductions in benefits or limited access to care. The impact on hospitals and health systems will be significant, particularly for safety-net and rural hospitals, which are already on the brink of closure. Patient revenues will fall, uncompensated care will rise. There will be staff layoffs and site closures.”John Driscoll, a healthcare executive and chair of the board of UConn Health in Connecticut, said: “The scale of the buzzsaw cuts to Medicaid would undermine every hospital’s ability to actually support its mission to care for the community, and would be a dangerous cut to the nursing-home infrastructure in the country.”Republican leaders backed the cuts to Medicaid, as well as to similar programs such as one that helps poor Americans afford food, as a way to mollify lawmakers in their party who want the US’s large budget deficit addressed. Still, not everyone is pleased. As the budget was being debated, eight Republican representatives, some of whom Democrats are keen to unseat in next year’s midterm elections, wrote to the House speaker, Mike Johnson, warning that their districts’ large Hispanic populations would be harmed.“Slashing Medicaid would have serious consequences, particularly in rural and predominantly Hispanic communities where hospitals and nursing homes are already struggling to keep their doors open,” they said.All eight ultimately voted for the resolution, but the dissent may be a warning sign for the budget’s prospects of enactment, particularly in the House, where the GOP has a mere three-seat majority. It also remains unclear whether Republicans will try to pass all of Trump’s priorities in one bill, or split them into two.The GOP has made clear they want to fully pay for the extension of Trump’s tax cuts, and Elyssa Schmier, vice-president of government relations for advocacy group MomsRising, said Medicaid and social safety programs are the party’s prime targets for cost savings.“If you’re not going to go after, say, the Pentagon budget, if they’re only going to go to some of these big mandatory spending programs, there’s only so many places that Republicans feel that they can go,” she said.In the days since the budget’s approval, Johnson and Trump have scrambled to downplay the possibility of slashing Medicaid, insisting they intend only to root out “fraud, waste and abuse.”“The president said over and over and over: ‘We’re not going to touch social security, Medicare or Medicaid.’ We’ve made the same commitment,” Johnson told CNN in an interview.Democrats have little leverage to stop the budget, which can be passed with simple majorities in both chambers. But the Democratic senator Ruben Gallego warned that gutting the social safety net to extend tax cuts that have mostly benefited the rich will alienate voters who sided with the GOP last November.“It will be on Donald Trump and Republicans, the fact that he’s going to side with the ultra-rich versus the working poor,” said Gallego, who won election to his seat in Arizona even as Trump captured the state’s electoral votes. “Families that are barely making a living, scratching a living, they’re now going to get kicked off healthcare to give tax cuts to the mega-rich.”The proposed cut to Medicaid would remove billions of dollars in funding from congressional districts nationwide that are represented by lawmakers from both parties, according to an analysis by the liberal Center for American Progress.In California’s San Joaquin valley, the Democratic representative Jim Costa’s district would lose the third-largest amount of funding, according to the data, and Medicaid coverage would be imperiled for more than 450,000 residents.“This reckless budget prioritizes the wealthy while devastating those who need help the most,” Costa said. “I voted no because this resolution is bad for our valley and a threat to the wellbeing of the people I represent.” More

    • 163 Shares106 Views

      in US Politics

      Even rightwingers are mocking the ‘Epstein files’ as a lot of redacted nothing

      by

      The Epstein files fiascoDrum roll, please: the “most transparent administration in American history” is declassifying shocking new information about Jeffrey Epstein and his associates. After years of speculation that powerful people have been concealing information related to the late financier and convicted sex offender, the Trump administration said earlier this week that it would release unseen details about the case.“Breaking news right now, you’re going to see some Epstein information being released by my office,” Pam Bondi, the attorney general, told Fox News on Wednesday night. “This will make you sick.”Apparently intent on treating this “new” Epstein information like an album drop rather than a horrific sex-trafficking case involving the abuse of young girls, the White House gave a bunch of influencers a first look at the information. On Thursday, Bondi’s team handed out big white binders labelled “The Epstein Files: Phase 1” and “The Most Transparent Administration in History” to a group of 15 rightwing activists and self-styled “citizen journalists” visiting the White House. Grinning gleefully, these influencers proceeded to pose for the press with the binders like they were trophies from a school sports day.So what was in those binders? A whole lot of heavily redacted nothing, basically. A bunch of people at Bondi’s office appear to have hastily printed out Epstein’s contact book, which was published by the (now shuttered) website Gawker a decade ago, along with other information that has been in the public domain for years. They then shoved 200 pages of printouts into binders and gave them to a handpicked collection of useful idiots. Being as they’re the most transparent administration in American history, the justice department also made the information available on its website later that day – along with a note acknowledging that there wasn’t actually much to see. “The first phase of declassified files largely contains documents that have been previously leaked but never released in a formal capacity by the U.S. Government,” the note said.“This isn’t a news story, it’s a publicity stunt,” the Palm Beach lawyer Spencer Kuvin, who has worked on the case since 2005, representing nine victims, told the Miami Herald. He added that he feared that the Trump administration was using Epstein’s victims for political purposes. But then what do you expect from Trump – a guy who, in 2002 said of Epstein: “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It’s even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do. And many of them are on the younger side.”In short, this whole big “reveal” was an embarrassing flop – so much so that it was mocked by people on the right. Even Laura Loomer, a white nationalist conspiracy theorist, thought the stunt was distasteful.“I hate to say it, but the American people can’t trust the validity of the Epstein files released today. It was released in an unprofessional manner with paid, partisan social media influencers to curate their binders for us,” Loomer tweeted on Thursday. She later added: “Sorry I won’t celebrate dancing like a school girl with a binder full of pedophile names.” When even Loomer thinks you’ve gone low, you’ve gone very low indeed.Ultimately, however, while nothing new may have been revealed in Bondi’s “Epstein files”, this grotesque stunt was very revealing. It was yet another reminder that there is nothing – not even the sex trafficking of minors – that Donald Trump and his associates won’t cynically turn into a self-serving photo opportunity. Or, I should add, an opportunity to “Rickroll” people: midday Thursday, while people were waiting for the documents to be published online, the House judiciary GOP account on X posted in all-caps: “#BREAKING: EPSTEIN FILES RELEASED.” This then redirected users to the YouTube music video for Rick Astley’s 1987 hit Never Gonna Give You Up. Classy.Also revealing was who the White House thought should get a first look at documents involving sex trafficking. Among the influencers assembled was Mike Cernovich. Who is he? Just a rightwing manosphere influencer who has said things like “rape via an alpha male is different from other forms of rape” and told men that women exist “for your sexual pleasure”.The reaction to the backlash over the Epstein files fiasco also shows how, when anything goes wrong, people in Trump’s orbit are quick to point fingers and turn on each other rather than take responsibility. Bondi, for example, responded to all the criticism by accusing the FBI of withholding information from her. Meanwhile, some of the conservative influencers who got the binders full of nothing accused the southern district of New York of hiding information.“These swamp creatures at SDNY deceived Bondi, Kash, and YOU,” the conservative media personality Liz Wheeler tweeted. “Be outraged that the binder is boring. You should be. Because the evil deep state LIED TO YOUR FACE.”Perhaps what is most revealing about this fiasco, however, is that it is a stark reminder of how justice still hasn’t been served when it comes to Epstein’s many victims. Apart from Ghislaine Maxwell, none of Epstein’s many enablers and associates have faced any real consequences. A lot of rich and powerful people have got away with disgraceful things. And that’s not a conspiracy theory; that’s just our legal system.Andrew Tate and brother land in US from Romania after travel ban liftedSpeaking of predators evading accountability, the Tate brothers, who are charged with human trafficking in Romania, landed in the US on Thursday. This comes after it was reported last week that the Trump administration had asked Romanian authorities to lift travel restrictions on the pair.View image in fullscreen‘Pro-lifers’ are demanding women face the death penaltySelf-described “abortion abolitionists” – who oppose all abortions without any exceptions and want to criminalize the procedure and ban IVF – used to be at the fringes of the anti-abortion movement. Now, people who believe that the death penalty should be considered for women who have abortions are slowly moving into the US mainstream. Mother Jones looks at how some of these abolitionist men have turned on women in the anti-abortion movement. “We need Christian men leading the fight against abortion, not feminist women,” one of those “TheoBros” recently wrote.At least six children die of hypothermia amid freezing conditions in GazaI haven’t heard any pro-lifers get upset about this.Jeff Bezos is sending Katy Perry to spaceLast year, Perry came out with Woman’s World, her first solo single in three years and, she said, “the first contribution I have given since becoming a mother and since feeling really connected to my feminine divine”. Unfortunately, her contribution was panned so mercilessly that Perry is now taking her feminine divine as far away from the world as possible: the singer will fly to space during Blue Origin’s next (all-female) crewed mission, the Jeff Bezos-owned space company has announced. Rumour has it that if you work at the Washington Post and have any opinions that have the temerity to clash with Bezos’s, then you’ll get shot into space, too.The pill hasn’t been improved in years – no wonder women are giving up on itMisinformation from wellness influencers along with a conservative backlash against birth control is causing more people to stop taking the pill. “But there’s another, underlying problem when it comes to contraception,” writes Martha Gill. “It needs to improve … It’s common for women to be using the same methods as their mothers – or even their grandmothers. Why aren’t contraceptives getting better?”The week in porktriarchyBig news for anyone with a small child: Peppa Pig’s mother (Mummy Pig) is having a new little piglet. Not sure how they can afford three children in this day and age but maybe Mummy Pig has been trading meme coins. While I’m sure Elon “have more babies” Musk is thrilled by the baby announcement, it is not clear how Cardi B feels. The rapper has been in a feud with Peppa since 2020, ever since her daughter started ruining her Uggs by jumping in muddy puddles. More

    • 175 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Erased generations of talent’: US public land stewards decry firings and loss of knowledge

      by

      It’s become known as the Valentine’s Day massacre.On 14 February, tens of thousands of civil servants were fired, as the Trump administration hacked away indiscriminately at the federal government.Among them, roughly 3,400 from the US Forest Service, 2,300 at the Department of Interior, including 1,000 from the National Parks Service, and thousands more who study the country’s soils, seas and skies.For those who steward more than 640m acres of US public lands, the sweeping firings left behind gaping holes in an already short-staffed workforce and deep uncertainty about their livelihoods.More than a dozen federal workers, some of whom are still employed and some of whom lost their jobs, spoke to the Guardian this week, sharing stories of proud sacrifice; careers dedicated to the public good and the public lands that were abruptly ended with emails decrying that their work wasn’t in “the public interest”.The rhetoric built into the president’s firing spree builds on a widening disconnect in the public’s understanding of the work being done on their behalf, they say, work that’s expected to be sharply felt when it stops being done.Toilets, trash and overgrown trails tend to spark notice when they are not maintained. The smoldering campsites that would have been extinguished could now create the next catastrophe. Trampled conservation areas will not regrow, strategies that kept endangered plants and animals from extinction may not be studied or implemented, and vital weather warnings may not make it into forecasts.“It seems like a lot of voters have been fed this idea that they are going to fire the fat cats, the bureaucrats who live on government cheese and never do any real work,” said Ben Vizzachero, who lost his position at California’s Los Padres national forest last week. “The people they are firing are hardworking everyday folk.”As a wildlife biologist for the United States Forest Service, Vizzachero’s role was focused on ensuring the federal government was following its own laws, put in place to protect the environment.Tasked with complex missions to open the lands for recreation or resource development while securing their preservation and conservation into the future, agencies rely on expertise like Vizzachero’s to achieve difficult to balance aims. “I think we live in an age where people take that for granted,” he said.A biologist at another forest who asked not to be named as they appeal to get their job back echoed Vizzachero’s concerns. They were just days away from the end of their probationary period with a promotion being processed when they were fired. Now, their projects have slowed or stopped.It’s affected not just the forest but also local businesses, tribes and other partners deeply involved in the complex and integrated work.“The targets agencies are asking us to hit for timber harvests, mineral extractions, restoration projects – they have all come to a halt,” they said.When done right this work isn’t often noted by the public, even those who have long enjoyed its outcomes.“We get to see pelicans flying along our coast and bald eagles nesting at our lakes and reservoirs,” said Vizzachero. “It’s easy to forget that when our parents were young those birds were on the brink of extinction.”‘People are really struggling’The firing spree has also taken an exacting toll on the workers themselves, many of whom have long borne the brunt of tight budgets and ever-expanding workloads. Some said they had just settled into housing after spending years living out of their cars to accommodate low pay and remote work. Others said they’d lose access to medical coverage, including one employee in the midst of a cancer diagnosis. Most have been grappling with an uncertain future, looking to the few private-sector options available for the specialized roles they once filled.“If you’re doing, say, vegetation sampling and prescribed fire as your main work, there aren’t many jobs,” said Eric Anderson, 48, of Chicago, who was fired 14 February from his job as a biological science technician at Indiana Dunes national park.All the years of work Anderson put in – the master’s degree, the urban forestry classes, the wildfire deployments – seemed to disappear in a single email dismissing him.“I have worked so hard for so many years to get to this point,” said a scientist at fish and wildlife service who asked to remain anonymous, noting how much work it takes just to land a position in the federal government as a scientist. “They erased whole generations of talent.”Many of the Trump administration’s cuts to the federal government are being challenged in court, and some have been brought temporarily to a halt.But the firings are just the beginning of a broader mission to dismantle civil service across the US, and federal workers are bracing for more.A memo from the office of management and budget issued this week outlines instructions for a widespread “reduction in force”. Department heads have been asked to draft plans for the severe drawdown, according to documents reviewed by the Guardian, including identifying high, medium and low priority layoffs for the next round. The administration has ordered that only one person can be hired for every four people let go.The holes will be further exacerbated by the thousands more who took resignation deals pushed by the administration and hiring freezes that left departments unable to fill old vacancies. Even if new hires are approved, onboarding them is going to be slow: the HR systems are already struggling to keep up with the firings and appeals.Experts say the cuts could leave some departments with staffing levels typically seen during government shutdowns just as public appreciation of public lands and the reliance on science has continued to grow.Visitation to parks and recreation in forests has surged in recent years, adding new strains on aging infrastructure and more opportunities for injuries and wildlife conflicts, and increasing dangers from extreme conditions fueled by the climate crisis.Joel Hathaway, a public affairs specialist who was among those fired from Beaverhead-Deerlodge national forest said that even before the firings, there was always more work to do than any one person could handle in each position. “These are complex tasks that are usually thankless – but always worthy.”The small town in Montana that he calls home is host to many federal employees, with forest headquarters and a Bureau of Land Management office nearby. With the wide scale cuts, there won’t be enough job options to go around, he said.“There isn’t enough private sector work,” he said. “People are already cutting back on their spending and will be forced to relocate. That has a trickle-down effect on every business in town from the brewery to the hardware store.”Hathaway is among those worried he will not be able to afford his mortgage. “My partner and I will likely have to sell our home and relocate – we will have to start over,” he said. But he’s distressed about more than having his life upended.“Right now people are really struggling not only because of the financial aspect of it but because of the cold, callous nature in which it was undertaken,” he said of Trump’s firing spree.“People are struggling with their mental health, frankly. It is a really difficult thing to be the target of people who are so powerful and also hold you in so little regard.”The Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 175 Shares86 Views

      in US Politics

      Pardoned January 6 rioter said ‘I’m shooting myself’ before Indiana deputy fatally shot him

      by

      The pardoned US Capitol attacker who was shot to death by an Indiana sheriff’s deputy during a traffic stop in January had first told the officer: “I’m shooting myself,” before attempting to retrieve a gun from his car, according to officials as well as newly released video of the encounter.Matthew Huttle’s killing by the deputy – whose body-worn and dashboard cameras captured video of the traffic stop – was “legally justified” and would not lead to any criminal charges, prosecutors said in a statement published on Thursday.Huttle, 42, had traveled to Washington DC with his uncle, Dale, when a mob of Donald Trump supporters stormed the Capitol on 6 January 2021 in a desperate attempt to prolong his presidency despite his losing the 2020 White House election to Joe Biden, according to federal prosecutors. Matthew Huttle entered the Capitol for about 15 minutes – recording it on video – and agreed to a plea deal that resulted in about six months of prison for him.Dale Huttle, meanwhile, received 30 months in prison after he pleaded guilty to using a long flagpole to jab a police officer protecting the Capitol.The Huttles were among more than 1,500 Capitol attackers who were pardoned by Trump on 20 January, his first day back in the Oval Office after retaking it by defeating Kamala Harris in November’s election.Six days after Trump’s mass clemency, a deputy stopped Matthew Huttle as he drove at 70mph (113km/h) in a 55mph zone near the line between the north-west Indiana counties of Jasper and Pulaski. The deputy told Huttle he would be arrested for being a habitual traffic offender, which prompted the motorist – who had been ordered out of his car – to say: “No, I can’t go to jail for this.”Huttle later sprinted for his car as the deputy shouted: “No, don’t you do it buddy! No, no, no, no, no!”The deputy and Huttle struggled in the latter man’s car. Video captured Huttle shouting: “I’m shooting myself”, and investigators said he “reached in a manner consistent with retrieving a weapon”.Prosecutors said the deputy fired multiple shots at Huttle – mortally wounding him – after seeing him raise a gun. Investigators subsequently found a loaded 9mm pistol as well as additional ammunition inside Huttle’s car, prosecutors also said.“Based on the evidence … the deputy’s actions were legally justified under Indiana law,” said the statement signed by prosecutor Chris Vawter, which called Huttle’s killing a case of self-defense. “This investigation is now closed, and no charges will be filed.”Attempts to contact an attorney for Huttle were not immediately successful. In court filings pertaining to the case against him in the January 6 attack, Huttle’s attorney, Andrew Hemmer, claimed that his client was “not a believer in any political cause” and only went to the Capitol that day “because he thought it would be a historic moment”.“He had nothing better to do after getting out of jail” in connection with a driving violation, Hemmer wrote of Huttle.Those who criticized the clemency that Trump granted the Capitol attackers included the US’s largest police union, which had endorsed him over Harris, a former prosecutor.The Fraternal Order of Police said in a joint statement with the International Association of Chiefs of Police: “Crimes against law enforcement are not just attacks on individuals or public safety – they are attacks on society and undermine the rule of law.”Huttle was one of multiple pardoned Capitol attackers who have since landed in news headlines over other legal issues.That group included a man left facing unresolved charges in Texas of having solicited a minor.Another pardoned January 6 participant was rearrested on federal gun charges. And yet another was handed a 10-year prison sentence for killing a woman in a 2022 drunk-driving crash, according to authorities. More

    • 163 Shares106 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s ‘bald power grab’ could set US on path to dictatorship, critics fear

      by

      Unusually for him, Donald Trump made no great fuss as he signed one drily worded executive order last Tuesday.Public attention was distracted that day – by the headline-grabbing drama of Elon Musk bludgeoning his way through the federal bureaucracy, by immigrants deported to Guantánamo Bay, and by the torrent of other directives Trump has issued since his inauguration last month.But Trump’s 69th executive order of his second presidency, under the deceptive title of “Ensuring accountability for all agencies”, has been denounced as a “bald power grab” that advances a political doctrine intended to make a dictator of the president.The order, wedged between the signing of a directive to end Covid vaccine mandates in schools and another expanding access to in vitro fertilisation, also contains a single paragraph that permits the president to decide the law and who should obey it.The paragraph has alarmed even some constitutional conservatives who otherwise agree with many of Trump’s actions. Other critics characterise it as another step toward an American brand of despotism.Frank Bowman, a law professor and former federal prosecutor who authored High Crimes and Misdemeanors: A History of Impeachment for the Age of Trump, described the executive order as “breathtaking”.“The essence of it is that Donald Trump is trying, quite consciously, to make himself an elected dictator,” he said.“It has big implications. The order basically says, ‘The law is determined by my will, period, and anyone who disagrees either has to fall in line or, by implication, we can fire you because you’re not permitted to express opinions about the law contrary to mine.’ So welcome to either monarchy or dictatorship.”The order ostensibly seeks to enhance transparency and accountability within those federal agencies that act with a degree of independence, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Trade Commission, by bringing them under more direct oversight by the White House.“Previous administrations have allowed so-called ‘independent regulatory agencies’ to operate with minimal presidential supervision. These regulatory agencies currently exercise substantial executive authority without sufficient accountability to the president, and through him, to the American people. Moreover, these regulatory agencies have been permitted to promulgate significant regulations without review by the president,” the order said.But the detail of the order gives the president powers far beyond mere oversight.Joe Morelle, the top congressional Democrat on the committee on house administration, wrote to Trump on Wednesday denouncing the order as “an unprecedented violation of American rule of law” that “opens the floodgates to political corruption and immeasurable money in politics”.View image in fullscreenIf the order stands, it potentially opens the way for Trump to serve his political and business interests by favouring funders and allies, such as Musk – for example, by ruling that they are not bound by financial regulations, or that immigration judge rulings are invalid.But critics have further warned that, taken with other measures, the directive poses a more fundamental threat to democracy as it advances the Republican right’s “unitary executive theory”, which casts aside the constitution’s checks and balances in favour of a claim that the president’s authority is paramount.The executive order seeks to exploit the complexities of modern government. In the 1930s, Congress delegated the setting of detailed regulations for agencies that require particular expertise – such as finance and technology – to officials with specialist knowledge. The legislature still set broad parameters, but officials were charged with deciding the detail of administrative law.Congress made these regulatory agencies a step removed from the presidency to protect their independence. It only permitted the president to dismiss those leading the agencies under specified circumstances.Although most modern governments have similar systems, Trump has characterised the process as a usurpation of presidential powers and therefore unconstitutional.Trump’s executive order stripped agencies of their independence by making them directly accountable to a part of the presidency: the office of management and budget (OMB). The OMB is led by Russell Vought, founder of the rightwing Center for Renewing America (CRA) thinktank and one of the primary authors of the Project 2025 plan for an authoritarian takeover of government.Vought is behind other measures to enhance Trump’s control on the basis of unitary executive theory, including a move to allow the president to override Congress’s spending decisions by blocking or reallocating funds, a dramatic shift in power if it is allowed to stand. Vought has also spoken about driving civil servants out of work by so traumatising them that they do “not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains”.Bowman said the true intent of the order was revealed by the president’s decision to exempt some actions of the Federal Reserve from OMB oversight.“The reason plainly is that he is afraid that if he were to simply declare that the Federal Reserve is no longer independent, that would drive the markets crazy and risk a financial panic,” he said.“But it puts the lie to the notion that this is some sort of constitutionally based declaration, because if independent agencies are in their nature unconstitutional then, if you’re the president, you don’t get to pick and choose which ones you’re going to leave independent. Either it’s constitutional to have independent agencies, or it’s not.”Even some conservatives who support some of Trump’s measures are alarmed by a provision in the executive order that declares that the president, or the attorney general under the president’s control, shall make the final interpretation of the law for the executive branch in everything from issuing regulations to positions on litigation.Gregg Nunziata, executive director of the conservative Society for the Rule of Law which has been strongly critical of some of Trump’s actions, said the president had a point about the constitutional legality of the independent agencies, even if he questioned his motives in wanting to take control of them.But Nunziata is disturbed by “the increasing suggestions from the White House that the law is what the president says it is”.“The law is what Congress passes and the supreme court interprets, and the president has an obligation to obey the law. He has an obligation to hire lawyers who make a good faith efforts to interpret what the law requires, not to hire lawyers who are going to be writing him permission slips to do whatever he might like,” he said.Bowman said the section amounted to a declaration that the president’s opinion on the law overrides everyone else in government.“That’s just crazy stuff because, in essence, what it’s saying is if the president wakes up one morning and says, ‘I think all these statutes that criminalise bribery really shouldn’t apply to me, my family, my friends or executive branch officials at all, and that’s my legal opinion,’ the justice department would have to adopt an interpretation of federal bribery laws that is completely at odds with their obvious meaning,” he said.Yet again, Trump’s actions raise the question of whether the executive order will stand. Bowman is not confident that the other pillars of the US’s system of checks and balances will do their job to protect democracy.He said conservatives on the supreme court have already demonstrated their sympathy for the unitary executive theory by ruling that the president has immunity for acts in his official capacity.“The principal check against executive overreach is the power of Congress, but right now he has utterly squelched Republicans in Congress. They have a plethora of tools they could use to stop this but, at present, they are utterly terrified of using them,” he said.“The normal checks against dictatorial actions have already been suppressed or are in the process of being so.” More

    • 150 Shares83 Views

      in US Politics

      How JD Vance emerged as the chief saboteur of the transatlantic alliance

      by

      JD Vance was supposed to be the inconsequential vice-president.But his starring role in Friday’s blowup between Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy – where he played a cross between Trump’s bulldog and tech bro Iago – may mark the moment that the postwar alliance between Europe and America finally collapsed.Trump and Vance teamed up to goad Zelenskyy into a feud in the Oval Office. But it was Vance that snaked his way in first, riling up the Ukrainian president by telling him that he was leading “propaganda tours” of the destruction wrought by Russia’s invasion.“I think it’s disrespectful to come into the Oval Office and try to litigate this in front of the American media,” Vance said, his voice rising. “You bring people on a propaganda tour, Mr President … Do you think that it’s respectful to come to the Oval Office of the United States of America and attack the administration that is trying to prevent the destruction of your country?”“During the war, everyone has problems,” Zelenskyy replied. “But you have nice ocean and don’t feel now. But you will feel it in the future.”“You don’t know that,” Trump interjected angrily. “You don’t know that. Don’t tell us what we’re going to feel.”The rest, as Trump would later call it, was “great television”. By design, it was disastrous for Ukraine.This was Vance’s second great intervention this month. His Eurosceptic worldview came into focus in Munich, where he accused shocked European leaders of stifling free speech telling them that “if you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you”.At the time, Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, said: “Listening to that speech … they try to pick a fight with us and we don’t want to a pick a fight with our friends”.But on Friday, Vance finally got his fight. The US vice-president is quietly assembling a foreign policy team with a deeply skeptical view of Kyiv’s value as a future ally. And European officials have lined up to back Zelenskyy, saying that the Trump team’s performance in the Oval Office indicated that the US was truly siding with Vladimir Putin in the war.“Now is the moment to stay calm, but not carry on,” wrote Camille Grand, a distinguished policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations and former assistant secretary general for defense investment at Nato. “The US ally has now officially decided to take a stance inconsistent with our traditionally shared interests and values. This might be temporary or lasting but this will have profound and enduring consequences.”There is a thing in Washington that many people understand but that few will say: that the Trump administration was looking for a pretext to ruin its relationship with Ukraine, and that the canned messaging that followed the Oval Office feels oddly coordinated and premeditated.“That was a train wreck by design,” said Sam Greene, a professor of Russian politics at King’s College London. “The quiet conversation since Munich has been about setting Ukraine up for a fall. If a real deal was going to be unattainable, right, that somebody would need to take the blame for it, and it would likely be the Ukrainians, right?”By Friday afternoon, the Trump administration was briefing reporters that it was so offended by Zelenskyy’s conduct that it would consider cutting all military aid to Ukraine, including ammunition, vehicles and missiles awaiting shipment. The official told the Washington Post that the conflict with Zelenskyy had not been premeditated.But the commentary from party allies was oddly formulaic and repetitive. Lindsey Graham, who had posed for a photo with Zelenskyy just hours earlier, tweeted: “America was disrespected and the deal is off. I have never been more proud of President @realDonaldTrump and Vice President @JDVance for standing up for America First.”Marco Rubio, the secretary of state, who has been one of Ukraine’s strongest backers up until his confirmation, tweeted: “Thank you @POTUS for standing up for America in a way that no President has ever had the courage to do before. Thank you for putting America First. America is with you!”Keith Kellogg, Trump’s envoy to Ukraine, tweeted: “Was honored to be with @POTUS, @VP, and [Rubio] in the Oval today during the bi-lateral with President Zelensky. As the President has ALWAYS done-he stood for America….America First.”It is difficult to know who is more contemptible: those who wanted this or those who merely went along with it. There is a picture in the Oval Office of Rubio and Vance sitting side by side as Trump rips into Zelenskyy. Rubio looks deeply uncomfortable, his hands clasped and his face downcast. Vance looks ecstatic. He finally got the fight he wanted to pick. More

    • 175 Shares97 Views

      in US Politics

      Ukraine war briefing: ‘Not good for both sides’ says Zelenskyy of stunning Trump exchange

      by

      After an extraordinary exchange with US president Donald Trump at the White House, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy made an appearance on Fox News in which he said the public row was “not good for both sides.” But Zelenskyy said Trump – who insists Putin is ready to end the three-year grinding war – needs to understand that Ukraine can’t change its attitudes toward Russia on a dime. Zelenskyy added that Ukraine won’t enter peace talks with Russia until it has security guarantees against another offensive. “It’s so sensitive for our people,” Zelenskyy said. “And they just want to hear that America (is) on our side, that America will stay with us. Not with Russia, with us. That’s it.”

      After the tense exchange and shortly before departing for his Mar-a-Lago resort in South Florida for the weekend, Trump told reporters that he wanted an “immediate ceasefire” between Russia and Ukraine, but expressed doubt that Zelenskyy was ready to make peace. Trump also posted on his social media site that he had “determined” that Zelenskyy “is not ready for Peace.” “He disrespected the United States of America in its cherished Oval Office. He can come back when he is ready for Peace,” Trump wrote. US military support for Ukraine now appears to be hanging in the balance, while talks over a minerals deal have collapsed.

      On CNN US Secretary of State Marco Rubio called for Zelenskyy to “apologize for wasting our time for a meeting that was going to end the way it did.”

      European leaders have rushed to defend Zelenskyy, after the clash with US president Donald Trump played out in front of the global media. German chancellor Olaf Scholz said that “No one wants peace more than the citizens of Ukraine! That is why we are jointly seeking the path to a lasting and just peace. Ukraine can rely on Germany – and on Europe.” French president, Emmanuel Macron, said: “Russia is the aggressor, and Ukraine is the aggressed people,” while Kaja Kallas, the EU foreign policy chief, declared that “the free world needs a new leader”.

      Ukrainians have also rallied around Zelenskyy as a defender of his country’s interests. The meeting is likely to have delighted officials in Moscow, the Associated Press reports, but many Ukrainians seemed unfazed, instead expressing a sense that the Ukrainian leader had stood up for their country’s dignity and interests. Nataliia Serhiienko, 67, a retiree in Kyiv, said she thinks Ukrainians approve of their president’s performance in Washington, “because Zelenskyy fought like a lion.”

      UK prime minister Keir Starmer has invited more than a dozen European and EU leaders to a Sunday summit to “drive forward” action on Ukraine and security, his office said. Ahead of the main summit, Starmer will chair a morning call with Baltic nations, before welcoming Zelenskyy to Downing Street to discuss the war with Russia, it said on Friday. Leaders from around continental Europe including France, Germany, Denmark and Italy as well as Turkey, Nato and the European Union have been invited to the summit.

      Two Russian drone strikes hit a medical facility and other targets in Ukraine’s second largest city, Kharkiv, injuring at least five people late on Friday, local officials said, according to Reuters. Regional governor Oleh Syniehubov, writing on the Telegram messaging app, said Russian drones had hit civilian areas in three central districts of the city, a frequent target of Russian attacks. Syniehubov said five people were hurt, while Mayor Ihor Terekhov put the injury toll at seven. In the Black Sea port of Odesa, another frequent Russian target in southern Ukraine, a drone attack triggered fires in a private home and a business, killing one person and injuring another.

      Moscow is using infantry to storm the Ukrainian border from the Russian region of Kursk, which is partially controlled by Ukrainian forces, Kyiv said on Friday. Ukraine launched a surprise offensive into the Kursk region in August last year hoping the territory it captured could eventually be swapped for Ukrainian territory under Russian control. The Kremlin has deployed a significant force including North Korean forces to try to dislodge Ukrainian troops holding on to stretches of the territory, including the town of Sudzha. More