US Politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Pennsylvania officer spotted Trump shooter 90 minutes before open fire – report

      by

      Donald Trump has agreed to participate in a victim interview with the FBI regarding his attempted assassination earlier this month, the bureau told reporters on Monday.This comes as authorities continue their investigations into the 13 July shooting in Butler, Pennsylvania, where 20-year-old Thomas Matthews Crooks fired eight shots from an assault rifle which hit and injured the former president, killed a rally attendee and injured several others. Crooks was killed by government snipers moments after the shooting began.On Sunday, new details around the shooting emerged from text messages between local security units, obtained by the Republican senator Chuck Grassley and published and verified by the New York Times, including that local law enforcement had spotted the shooter 30 minutes earlier than what officials had previously said.The published text messages show that a local countersniper first noticed a man, who was later identified as Crooks, loitering in the area where the countersnipers were set up more than 90 minutes before the shooting occurred.The Times reported that at 4.26pm, the countersniper alerted his colleagues of Crooks, and that he had parked near their vehicles and was sitting on a picnic table near the warehouse, where several countersnipers were, outside the fenced area of the grounds where Trump would be appearing later.The countersniper told his colleagues that Crooks knew they were there and saw him leaving with his rifle.One of the countersnipers took pictures of Crooks and the photos were shared in a group chat and another text went out among the local officers at 5.38pm, saying they should inform the Secret Service, per the New York Times.“Kid learning around building we are in. AGR I believe it is. I did see him with a range finder looking towards stage. FYI. If you wanna notify SS snipers to look out. I lost sight of him,” read one of the texts, accompanied by photos of Crooks.One of the two remaining countersnipers reportedly ran out of the building attempting to keep eyes on Crooks until other law enforcement arrived, per Butler County officials, but Crooks ran off, taking a backpack with him.At 6pm, one officer in the group texts guessed that Crooks was moving toward the back of the warehouse complex and away from the event, the Times reported. But instead, Crooks climbed on to a building in the complex closest to the stage.At 6.11pm, Crooks began firing, grazing Trump’s ear, killing a rally-goer and injuring several others. Moments later, Crooks was shot and killed on the roof of a warehouse that was connected to the one the countersnipers were stationed in.The newly released messages also suggest that the shooter was often one step ahead of security forces and law enforcement.The New York Times reported Crooks had scoped out the rally site a day before the Secret Service did on 8 July. The report also states the Secret Service excluded the entire warehouse complex from its inner security perimeter. This meant that on the day of the rally, Crooks was able to get to the building without passing through a security screening.After the Secret Service walk through on 8 July, the Times reported that the agency had asked local agencies to provide more help, and that text messages showed that Beaver county struggled to find enough volunteers to cover the 12-hour shift.Questions continue to be asked about the apparent failures in communication between different law enforcement agencies and how someone was able to get to close to assassinating Trump.Local police officers on a special tactical team, who were assigned to help protect Trump on 13 July, have also said they had no contact with Secret Service agents before the gunman opened fire.“We were supposed to get a face-to-face briefing with the Secret Service members whenever they arrived and that never happened,” Jason Woods, lead sharpshooter on the Swat team in Beaver county, Pennsylvania, told ABC News over the weekend.The Secret Service has not commented directly on the remarks by Woods. But an agency spokesperson, Anthony Guglielmi, has said the Secret Service “is committed to better understanding what happened before, during and after the assassination attempt of former president Trump to ensure that never happens again”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSeparately, members of Trump’s Secret Service detail and his top advisers have questioned why they were not told that local police assigned to guard the outer perimeter of the fairgrounds had spotted a suspicious person who turned out to be the would-be assassin.Last week, the FBI director, Christopher Wray, testified to the House judiciary committee that the shooter appeared to have used a drone at the rally location about two hours before the attack, to scope out an area about 200 yards (182m) from the stage where Trump was scheduled to speak.The drone was found in the gunman’s car, along with two explosive devices. According to the New York Times report, the Secret Service did not seek permission to use a drone for the rally.Wray also testified that the AR-style rifle used in the attack may have had a collapsible stock, making it easier to conceal, and that in the days leading up to the shooting, Crooks had searched online for information about the 1963 assassination of John F Kennedy.Despite the new information about the shooter’s focus on the Kennedy assassination, Wray said that the FBI had yet to find any clear indication of Crooks’ motivations or ideology.“It does appear he was interested in public figures more broadly,” he said.According to the New York Times, Crooks had started searching online for information on well-known figures, including Wray, US attorney general Merrick B Garland, Joe Biden and Trump, and he had also looked up “major depressive disorder”.In the immediate days after the shooting, Trump initially called for unity, writing on Truth Social that “in this moment, it is more important than ever that we stand United, and show our True Character as Americans, remaining Strong and Determined, and not allowing Evil to Win.”Delegates at the Republican National Convention also made much of how Trump’s campaign would pivot to a more message less divisiveness. But although Trump’s keynote speech at the convention began with him saying all Americans are ‘bound together by a single fate’, he soon reverted to attacking Democrats over the numerous criminal convictions he is facing and falsely accused the party of cheating in the 2020 election.More recently, on Saturday, Trump told supporters in a speech in Minnesota that the shooting may have made him “worse”.“I want to be nice,” Trump said. “They all say, ‘I think he’s changed. I think he’s changed since two weeks ago. Something affected him.’”“No, I haven’t changed”, he continued. “Maybe I’ve gotten worse, actually. Because I get angry at the incompetence that I witness every single day”. More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Your body is completely drained’: US workers toil in heatwaves with no protections

      by

      On 23 June, Shae Parker had to leave her shift early at a gas station in Columbia, South Carolina, to go to the emergency room due to heat exhaustion; she wasn’t paid for missing the rest of her shift. The air conditioning at her work has been on the fritz for weeks, she said, and her station heats up easily as the sun beams through its large windows.“I got nauseated, overheated, lightheaded,” she said. “We don’t have free water, we don’t have a water level on the soda machine, the ice machine is broken, so we have to buy water. The last few weeks it’s been extremely hot. It’s very hard to breathe when you’re lightheaded and experiencing dizziness. The fatigue is like 10 times worse because your body is completely drained. I had to get two bags of fluid from being dehydrated even though I was drinking water.”Millions of Americans faced dangerous temperatures earlier this month as a heat dome blanketed the midwest and eastern US. The National Weather Service issued a heat advisory for much of South Carolina as temperatures hit the 90sF (32C).Yet, workers across the country who toil in the heat both indoors and outdoors have to get through the summer without any heat protections in the workplace. Like Parker, many workers are left to try to treat their heat stress symptoms on their own.This past June was the hottest month of June on record worldwide, while July 2023 to June 2024 have been the hottest 12 months on record, with 2024 on pace to break 2023 as the hottest year on record.The Biden administration announced the proposal of an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Osha) rule to protect 36 million US workers from the heat on 2 July. But implementation won’t likely occur for several more years as the release of the rule proposal is just the third of seven steps in Osha’s rule-making process. It could face challenges in courts, causing further delays, or be derailed altogether if Donald Trump wins the 2024 election. The rule provides more robust rules and higher fines on employers to protect workers.View image in fullscreenDestiny Mervin, a restaurant worker in Atlanta, Georgia, and member of the Union of Southern Service Workers, said she has been constantly sweating during work and has had to change shirts during her shift because of how hot she has been.“Someone fainted two weeks ago and the week before that, someone had a seizure,” Mervin said in a press release. “A worker shouldn’t have to die for Popeyes for employers to take unbearable heat seriously.”In 2023, an estimated 2,300 people in the US died from heat-related illness, the highest record of heat-related deaths in 45 years.“The excessive heat the US has experienced in the last month is particularly dangerous to the people who have to work in it – hundreds of thousands of workers succumb to heat-related illness, injury and death each year,” said Rebecca Dixon, president and CEO of the National Employment Law Project.“The risk of workplace heat dangers is especially acute for workers of color, who are more likely to work in jobs that expose them to excessive heat as a result of occupational segregation,” Dixon said.” “As human-caused climate change produces more extreme temperatures, the need for strong federal heat protections is becoming more urgent every summer.”Priscilla Hoyle, an airplane cabin cleaner at Charlotte Douglas international airport, has gotten sick and had to go home twice in the past year due to heat exhaustion, with the most recent incident just a few weeks ago. Both times she wasn’t provided any medical treatment when she got sick on the job.“I got really sick, I could hardly breathe, I had to run off the plane and I was standing on the side throwing up,” Hoyle said. “It’s very draining, it’s very tiring. You have to walk from concourse to concourse in nothing but heat. You’re dripping in sweat and you can’t hydrate.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionDamarkus Hudson has also worked as an airplane cabin cleaner at Charlotte Douglas international airport in North Carolina for two years where he is constantly exposed to the heat without adequate protections or support, he claimed.Last year, Hudson passed out on the job due to heat exhaustion and was offered no medical treatment. He was instead only given time to drink water and cool down until his shift ended shortly after the incident.“The break room was full and I tried to go outside to get some fresh air, but there wasn’t any breeze and I just passed out, I couldn’t cool down,” Hudson said.View image in fullscreenHe noted a coworker poured water on him to cool him down, which sent him into shock, and that other workers have experienced similar symptoms on the job.He cleans four to five planes an hour in the sweltering heat, often walking long distances between concourses in the airport, and he said the air conditioning in the vehicles they travel in between planes doesn’t always work.“We’re always exposed to the heat. Working in the heat, you get nauseated, feel sick, and fatigued,” he added. “We don’t get enough water and when we do, it’s usually not cold water, and we don’t get extra breaks to cool down.”LaShonda Barber, a trash truck driver at Charlotte airport, said heat issues impact airport workers across the US. She claimed the trucks they use don’t have working air conditioning, that she and her workers are rarely provided water or rest breaks, which makes the heat impact even worse as the job is already physically demanding when its not hot outside.“There are a lot of people who have been hospitalized, passing out from this heat,” said Barber. “We’re sweating so much. We’re not getting time to get water into our bodies. We’re human – the same way you get hot, we get hot.” More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Why Kamala Harris should pick Tim Walz as running mate | Mehdi Hasan

      by

      Have you seen the touching images from March 2023, of the Minnesota governor, Tim Walz, being hugged by a group of elementary school kids after signing into law a bill that provided them with free school meals?Or the fun clip from September 2023, of Walz with his daughter Hope laughing and screaming on a ride at the Minnesota State Fair?How about the viral video of Walz on MSNBC last week, mocking Donald Trump, JD Vance and the Maga Republicans as “weird people”?That video has had more than 4.6m views on Twitter/X alone and, per Politico, is credited with the Democrats’ new shift “toward a more gut-level vernacular that may better capture how many voters react to far-right rhetoric” of the Trump/Vance variety.Kamala Harris herself has now borrowed Walz’s lingo and is also calling her opponents “weird”, while Walz is all over our television screens, bolstering the vice-president’s candidacy and playing “attack dog” against the Trump/Vance Republican ticket.I’ll be honest: last month, I would have struggled to pick Walz out of a lineup.This month? I’m Walz-pilled. I have watched dozens of his interviews and clips. And I’m far from alone. He has an army of new fans across the liberal-left: from former Bernie Sanders 2020 campaign co-chair Nina Turner, to one-time Democratic congressman Beto O’Rourke, to gun-control activist David Hogg. “In less than 6 days, I went from not knowing who Tim Walz is,” joked writer Travis Helwig on X, “to deep down believing that if he doesn’t get the VP nod I will storm the capitol.”According to Bloomberg, the Harris campaign has narrowed down its “top tier” of potential running mates to three “white guy” candidates: Walz (hurrah!), plus the Arizona senator Mark Kelly and Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro.Both Kelly and Shapiro have their strengths – and both represent must-win states for the Dems. Allow me, however, to make the clear case for Walz.First, there’s his personality. The 60-year-old governor would bring energy, humor and some much-needed bite to the Democratic presidential ticket. There’s a reason why his videos have been going viral in recent days. Tim Kaine he ain’t. Pick the charismatic and eloquent Walz and you have America’s Fun Uncle ready to go.Then, there’s his résumé. A popular midwest governor from a rural town. A 24-year veteran of the army national guard. A high school teacher who coached the football team to its first state championship. It’s almost too perfect!Finally, there’s his governing record. You will struggle to find a Democratic governor who has achieved more than Walz in the space of a single legislative session. Not Shapiro. Not JB Pritzker of Illinois. Not even Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan.In May 2023, Barack Obama, of all people, shared a piece from the MinnPost on X, which laid out Walz’s very successful – and very social-democratic – legislative record in the North Star state:“Democrats codified abortion rights, paid family and medical leave, sick leave, transgender rights protections, drivers licenses for undocumented residents, restoration of voting rights for people when they are released from prison or jail, wider voting access, one-time rebates, a tax credit aimed at low-income parents with kids, and a $1bn investment in affordable housing including for rental assistance.”Got that? Walz basically did Biden’s “Build Back Better” on steroids, despite only a single-seat majority in the state senate.But wait, there’s more!“Also adopted were background checks for private gun transfers and a red-flag warning system to take guns from people deemed by a judge to be a threat to themselves or others. DFL lawmakers banned conversion therapy for LGBTQ people, legalized recreational marijuana, expanded education funding, required a carbon-free electric grid by 2040, adopted a new reading curricula based on phonics, passed a massive $2.58bn capital construction package and, at the insistence of Republicans, a $300m emergency infusion of money to nursing homes.”Democrats at the national level can only dream of such progressive legislative victories.Policy wins aside, Walz also comes with less political baggage than his two main rivals and is, therefore, much less likely to divide the party.Think about it. Democrats can have Tim Walz on the ticket, who called the anti-war, pro-Palestinian ‘uncommitted’ movement “civically engaged” and praised them for “asking for a change in course” and “for more pressure to be put on” the White House, or they can have Josh Shapiro, who called for a crackdown on anti-war, pro-Palestinian college protesters and even compared them to the KKK.They can have Walz on the ticket, who has reportedly “emerged among labor unions as a popular pick” after signing “into law a series of measures viewed as pro-worker” including banning non-compete agreements and expanding protections for Amazon warehouse workers, or they can have Mark Kelly, who opposed the pro-labor Pro Act in the Senate.They can have Walz, who guaranteed students in Minnesota not just free breakfasts but free lunches, or Shapiro, who has courted controversy in Pennsylvania with his support for school vouchers.They can have Walz, who calls his Republican opponents “weird” and extreme, or Kelly, who calls his Republican opponents “good people” who are “working really hard”.This isn’t rocket science. Walz is the obvious choice. Not only is he the ideal “white guy” running mate for Harris, against both Trump and Vance, but he is already doing the job on television and online, lambasting Vance in particular over IVF treatment and insisting he mind his “own damn business”.And you know who is paying attention to all this? “Weird” Donald Trump, who was especially infuriated after Walz attacked him for cosying up to Vladimir Putin and Viktor Orbán on … Fox.“Why did Fox News put up Tim Walz, Governor of Minnesota, where I am leading?” the former president wrote in a post on Truth Social. “They make me fight battles that I shouldn’t have to fight!”Has there ever been a better endorsement for a Democratic vice-presidential nominee?

      Mehdi Hasan is the founder and editor-in-chief of the new media company Zeteo More

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      The Republican party’s obsession with families has taken a fanatical turn | Moira Donegan

      by

      “It’s possible,” writes Jessica Winter in the New Yorker, “that if JD Vance had his way, citizenship in the United States would be conferred not solely by birthright but by marriage and children.” This is no exaggeration. In a now viral 2021 clip, JD Vance said: “Let’s give votes to all children in this country, but let’s give control over those votes to the parents of those children. When you go to the polls in this country as a parent, you should have more power – you should have more of an ability to speak your voice in our democratic republic – than people who don’t have kids. Let’s face the consequences and the reality: If you don’t have as much of an investment in the future of this country, maybe you shouldn’t get nearly the same voice.”This position now represents large swaths of the Republican party, which has taken on an angry and aggressively prescriptive approach to family life.If you’re a woman in America, Republicans want you to be a mother whether you care to or not. They want you to risk your health to give them more babies. Then, when those babies get bigger, they want to make sure that those children’s fathers – or, excuse me, “parents” – have a near-total control over both them and you.They don’t want you to be able to get a divorce if your marriage turns unhappy or even abusive. They don’t want your daughter to be able to get birth control if her father doesn’t approve of it; they don’t want your other daughter to be able to get the hormone treatment she needs to thrive as her truest self. They want to inspect your kids’ genitals before they let them play on the high school softball team. They want to ban books, and decide what your kids can and can’t read.They want to bar the medical treatments that allow you to plan your family and have children on your own terms – things like egg freezing and IVF. They want to make you have your children young, and they want to stigmatize those of us women who pursue our own careers, interests and ambitions instead of popping out as many children as they deem appropriate.If you say no – if you resist their prescription for marriage, motherhood and perpetual feminine self-sacrifice – they want to let you know, in sneeringly condescending terms, that you’re “childless cat ladies”, that you’re not as good as them, that step-parents are not real parents, blended families are not real families, that women who don’t have children are disgusting, worthless and deserving of contempt. If you say no, they want to denigrate you in public, punish you financially, dilute your vote and lessen your citizenship.As the 2024 presidential election heats up following Trump’s selection of JD Vance as his running mate and Kamala Harris’s emergence as the new Democratic standard-bearer, it is becoming clear that much of the stakes of the November contest will revolve around questions of gender – and specifically, questions of family. And the view of the family that is emerging from the Republicans is a dark one indeed.Because the version of “family” that the Republicans are putting forward is one that can only look a very particular way. In their eyes, family is a compulsory relation of domination, an institution in which marriage and parenthood function to grant men near-total private control over women and children. Women, meanwhile, face a grim fate in the Republicans’ preferred vision of family: they are forced into motherhood, trapped into marriage, and punished for resistance.It’s not just that Vance, the VP pick and heir presumptive to the post-Trump Republican party, has made repeated, creepy remarks disparaging childless women and suggesting that adults without children should pay higher taxes and receive fewer votes. It’s that Vance’s obsessive, invasive and prurient investment in other people’s sexual and reproductive lives is the logical conclusion of the Republican party’s gender politics.Vance’s belief that women must be either compelled into childbirth or denied full citizenship is obviously of a piece with his party’s ambition to impose a national abortion ban. But it also flows from their opposition to no-fault divorce rights; their insistence that teens must not be able to access sexual, reproductive or transition-related healthcare without the approval of their parents; their rejection of IVF, diversity initiatives, and anti-discrimination protections; and their opposition to myriad other public policy initiatives that have helped advance women’s health, protect their safety, and allow them full access to work, education and the public sphere.The Republican plan, in short, is to sabotage or revoke any cultural or policy change that allows women to live as men’s equals. They instead aim to reshape policy, culture and the law to keep women in the home, dependent, without control over their own bodies and at the mercy of men.They aim, that is, to advance so-called “family values” in which birth is mandatory, marriage is inescapable, children are property rather than persons with rights of their own, and men are in charge. There’s a word for this dark vision of a world in which the private sphere is wholly controlled by husbands and fathers. That word is “patriarchy”.But the creepy and unsubtle patriarchal vision of gender and the family that is being advanced by the Trump-Vance Republican party may also present an opportunity for Harris and the Democrats to reclaim the mantle of “family”, and to redefine it for a better future. Rather than a compulsory, inescapable and unequal institution based on sexist domination, a “family” might instead be an alliance of equality, mutuality and care – one in which sovereign individuals can choose one another, and come together in an effort to love one another, respect one another, and help one another to thrive.These are, after all, the kinds of families that many Americans find themselves inhabiting: ones in which romantic partners might be gay or straight, married or not, but view themselves as equal partners; ones in which ties of blood, marriage, love, history and affinity all blend together in layers of connection and mutuality, ones in which children are wholly voluntary, chosen and loved, and in which women are sovereigns over their own bodies and lives, whose ambitions in the public world are neither impeded nor resented in the private one.These non-hierarchical, non-domineering, voluntary families can be encouraged through policy: through free, safe and legal abortion access, through free childcare, through paid family leave, affordable healthcare, high-quality care for seniors, insurance coverage for assisted reproductive technology, access to the full range of healthcare services for children and teens, and a thriving public school system. Such investments would help the sorts of families that most people want to build: ones that honor the dignity and worth of everyone in them.

      Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden calls for supreme court reforms including 18-year justice term limits

      by

      Joe Biden has called for a series of reforms to the US supreme court, including the introduction of term limits for justices and a constitutional amendment to remove immunity for crimes committed by a president while in office.In an op-ed published on Monday morning, the president said justices should be limited to a maximum of 18 years’ service on the court rather than the current lifetime appointment, and also said ethics rules should be strengthened to regulate justices’ behavior.The call for reform comes after the supreme court ruled in early July that former presidents have some degree of immunity from prosecution, a decision that served as a major victory for Donald Trump amid his legal travails.“This nation was founded on a simple yet profound principle: No one is above the law. Not the president of the United States. Not a justice on the Supreme Court of the United States,” Biden wrote.“I served as a US senator for 36 years, including as chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee. I have overseen more Supreme Court nominations as senator, vice president and president than anyone living today.“I have great respect for our institutions and separation of powers. What is happening now is not normal, and it undermines the public’s confidence in the court’s decisions, including those impacting personal freedoms. We now stand in a breach.”Biden called for a “no one is above the law” amendment to the constitution, which would make clear that no president is entitled to immunity from prosecution by virtue of having served in the White House. Biden also said justices’ terms should be limited to 18 years, under a system where a new justice would be appointed to the supreme court by the serving president every two years.The president also called for stricter, enforceable rules on conduct which would require justices to disclose gifts, refrain from political activity, and recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have financial interest.Last week Justice Elena Kagan called for the court to strengthen the ethics code it introduced in 2023 by adding a way to enforce it. That code was introduced after a spate of scandals involving rightwing justices on the court: Clarence Thomas was found to have accepted vacations and travel from a Republican mega-donor, while Samuel Alito flew on a private jet owned by an influential billionaire on the way to a fishing trip.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionLegislation would be required to impose term limits and an ethics code on the Supreme Court, but it is unlikely to pass the current divided Congress.The constitutional amendment on presidential immunity would be even more difficult to enact, requiring two-thirds support from both chambers of Congress or a convention called by two-thirds of the states, and then ratification by 38 of the 50 state legislatures.Reuters contributed to this report More

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Bitcoin price hits six-week high after Trump backs cryptocurrency

      by

      Bitcoin has hit its highest level in more than six weeks after Donald Trump said at the weekend he would end the “persecution” of the crypto industry if he wins the US presidential election.The cryptocurrency’s price rose by more than 3% on Monday to peak at about $69,745, the highest since 12 June when the currency changed hands at more than $69,800.The increase comes after supportive comments from Trump at the Bitcoin 2024 convention in Nashville, Tennessee, where he said on Saturday he would make the US the world’s cryptocurrency leader and embrace a more pro-bitcoin stance than his rival, Kamala Harris.The former president said: “I pledge to the bitcoin community that the day I take the oath of office, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris’s anti-crypto crusade will be over … If we don’t embrace crypto and bitcoin technology, China will, other countries will. They’ll dominate, and we cannot let China dominate. They are making too much progress as it is.”He also said he would sack the chair of the US financial watchdog the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), on the first day of his presidency if he won the election. “On day one, I will fire Gary Gensler,” Trump said, to cheers of approval from the audience.Gensler is a noted sceptic about cryptocurrencies, despite aiding them in January by approving exchange-traded funds (ETFs) – a basket of assets that can be bought and sold like shares on an exchange – that track the price of bitcoin.The SEC chair said in a statement approving the ETFs that bitcoin was a “speculative, volatile” asset used for illegal activities including ransomware and terrorist financing. Since 2023 the SEC has launched more than 40 crypto-related enforcement actions.Speaking at the bitcoin convention, Trump said he would establish a crypto presidential advisory council and create a national “stockpile” of bitcoin using cryptocurrency the US government held that was largely seized in law enforcement actions.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Never sell your bitcoin,” Trump said. “If I am elected, it will be the policy of my administration, the United States of America, to keep 100% of all the bitcoin the US government currently holds or acquires into the future.”The Financial Times also reported on Saturday that Harris’s advisers had approached top crypto companies to try to “reset” the relationship between the Democratic party and the sector. Approaches had been made to the Coinbase crypto exchange, the stablecoin company Circle and the blockchain payments group Ripple Labs, the FT said. More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Monday briefing: ‘Not going back’ – why Kamala Harris has reason to hope

      by

      Good morning. In the week since Kamala Harris became the de facto Democratic nominee, the contest for the presidency has been transformed. Money has poured in, the polls have tightened, and the campaign is about something fundamentally different. The same Democrats who were almost catatonic over Joe Biden’s chances of victory because so many voters saw him as too old to do the job now believe that Donald Trump can be defeated.But none of that means that Harris is sure of taking the Oval Office – or even that she is the favourite. Today’s newsletter explains how she has changed the race, and how much she still has left to do. Here are the headlines.Five big stories

      Social care | Teachers, NHS staff and other key workers who balance part-time work with caring for loved ones are quitting their jobs to avoid being hit with huge cash penalties for breaching carer’s allowance rules, according to a study by Carers UK. The report details carers being forced to take desperate measures to avoid breaching tight earnings limits, including quitting their jobs, cutting their hours, turning down pay rises, one-off cost of living payments and performance bonuses, and even working free hours each month.

      Israel-Gaza war | Global leaders were engaged in intensive diplomacy on Sunday to dissuade Israel from increasing attacks on Lebanon, in response to a rocket strike that killed 12 children in the occupied Golan Heights. Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said he would determine the “type” and “timing” of the response to Hezbollah’s attack.

      Immigration and asylum | A woman has died trying to cross the Channel in an overcrowded dinghy, as a number of small boats made the dangerous journey over the weekend.

      Home Office | Environmental groups are among 92 civil society organisations who have warned the home secretary Yvette Cooper against “the steady erosion of the right to protest” in the UK, and called on her to reverse the previous government’s crackdown on peaceful protest.

      Venezuela | Nicolás Maduro has been declared the winner of Venezuela’s presidential election by the government-controlled electoral authority – a result that appeared to dash opposition hopes of ending 25 years of socialist rule and looked certain to be bitterly contested.
      In depth: ‘The Republicans are road testing a lot of different messages’View image in fullscreenOn Friday, Barack and Michelle Obama formally endorsed Kamala Harris as the Democratic nominee for president, completing the set of high-profile party leaders who have publicly given her their support.Her ascent to the nomination appears to have gone much more smoothly, and with her party much more united behind her, than anyone imagined before Biden stepped aside.But the disastrous Biden campaign is a low bar for comparison – and Trump still holds plenty of cards. Here’s what you need to know as the Harris campaign moves from being a novelty act to the new normal.Her messages on the campaign trailEven though she’s been vice-president for more than three years, Harris is still relatively undefined for most voters, and so this is a crucial moment to set up the rest of the campaign.Her first campaign ad sought to draw a sharp contrast with Trump through the prism of freedom: to the tune of Beyoncé’s song of the same name, she talks about “the freedom not just to get by, but to get ahead. The freedom to be safe from gun violence. The freedom to make decisions about your own body.” Trump’s vision of America, she meanwhile said, was “a country of chaos, of fear, of hate”.She struck a similar note in an address to a teachers’ union in Houston, saying: “We are in a fight for our most fundamental freedoms” and warning that “we want to ban assault weapons, and they want to ban books”. And in a speech to more than 6,000 Black women in Indianapolis, she said: “Ours is a fight for the future and a fight for freedom.”In her first rally in the battleground state of Wisconsin a couple of days earlier – which saw a hasty venue change because it was so oversubscribed – she set up what is likely to be the consistent contrast drawn with Trump in the months ahead: she is a prosecutor, he is a convicted criminal. “I took on perpetrators of all kinds,” she said. “So hear me when I say, I know Donald Trump’s type.”Two slogans, meanwhile, have come to the fore – and they have a vigorous, defiant tone that sounds like it’s meant to enthuse the Democratic base. She led the fired-up crowd in Wisconsin in a chorus of “When we fight, we win.” And when she said: “America has tried these failed economic policies before, but we are not going back,” the crowd chanted: “Not going back! Not going back!”How the Trump campaign has respondedOne analysis of Harris’s impact on the campaign came from Trump pollster Tony Fabrizio, who sent a memo to staffers acknowledging a “honeymoon” with “wall-to-wall coverage … from the mainstream media” but added: “the fundamentals of the race stay the same”.But that seems obviously untrue: Harris is a very different candidate to Biden, and is invulnerable to the case that the Trump campaign has been set up to make – that their opponent is too old.Trump’s own approach was crystallised at the Bojangles Coliseum (real name) in Charlotte, North Carolina, where he held his first campaign rally since Biden’s exit. He called her the “ultraliberal driving force” behind Biden’s policies and said she was a “radical-left lunatic who will destroy our country”. He also branded her “lyin’ Kamala Harris” and repeatedly pronounced her name wrong. While immigration is meant to be a central line of attack, he did not mention it once in an interview with Fox News last Monday. Fox News contributors, meanwhile, seem to be obsessed with her view on plastic straws.All of that suggests that the Republicans are yet to settle on a message that is likely to appeal to swing voters, although that’s not to say they won’t: “They’re road testing a lot of different messages, have not really narrowed down what resonates, what people care about,” Republican strategist Jason Roe told Politico.How Democrats have reactedThe scale of the fundraising improvement – $200m in the week since she was endorsed by Joe Biden – is well documented, but also important is where it comes from: the Harris campaign said that 888,000 grassroots donors made donations of less than $200 in the first 24 hours. About 66% of the weekly total came from first-time donors, according to the campaign, opening up a potential new revenue stream in the months ahead. Late last week, Harris’s team hosted a zoom call with 160,000 attendees which appeared to break records in donations.Meanwhile, Future Forward, the biggest Democratic political action committee – which operates independently of the campaign – said it raised $150m in the first 24 hours.The campaign also said that 100,000 people had signed up to volunteer by Wednesday, and 2,000 had applied for campaign jobs. As supporters waited for new Harris for President signs – her design team came up with six options in three hours last Sunday and had to take them to campaign headquarters while they were still wet – some of them made DIY versions by lopping the incumbent president’s name off the top of existing BIDEN HARRIS signs. All of that, along with the memeification of Harris via Charli xcx’s “brat summer”, suggests an early rush of enthusiasm of an organic kind that is gold for political campaigns.How the polls have changedThe first concrete evidence that the race has changed came in a spate of polls released towards the end of last week, which showed a significant narrowing of the gap between Trump and Harris as compared to Biden’s performance.A national poll conducted by the New York Times and Siena College showed Harris behind 47 to 48 – closing the Biden-Trump gap by five points. An aggregate of 80 polls from the Hill and Decision Desk HQ had Harris 2.1 points behind, where Biden had been trailing by 3.3 points.Polls in the crucial battleground states, meanwhile, tend to show Trump with leads, but Harris improving on Biden’s position. And the Democrats say that they believe Harris at the top of the ticket can put them in contention in a swathe of states that appeared to be out of Biden’s reach: a memo from Harris campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon argues that her greater popularity with young and minority voters means that North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona and Nevada – all which were leaning towards Trump – are now in play.While all of that looks like very good news for Harris, there are strong caveats. Most polls say that Trump is still winning. And the improvement in national polls may overstate her chances because she is less popular with older, white working-class voters than Biden was – and they are the key constituency in the states most likely to decide the election.It’s also probably true that Harris is enjoying a honeymoon – and her momentum may slow. But the Democratic convention is two weeks away, and she will make more headlines when she announces her pick for vice-president before that. The hope for the Harris campaign is that by the time Trump has the chance to wrest back control of the agenda, she may be in an even better position than she is today.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWhat else we’ve been readingView image in fullscreen

      Ann Lee’s interview with Sean Wang (above) about his new debut film Dìdi is delightful. The pair discuss the significance of the semi-autobiographical film and why he felt compelled to make it. Nimo

      “You just don’t imagine these complications happening to a top athlete”: the Guardian’s Fascinating Olympians series ends with an interview with Allyson Felix, who tells Tobi Thomas about the highs and lows of elite competition, and why she has spent the last few years advocating for better maternal health outcomes for Black mothers. Hannah J Davies, deputy editor, newsletters

      Public inquiries can be an important way to uncover wrongdoing. In recent years though, they have become a routine response to institutional failures and rarely prompt significant change. “If justice delayed is justice denied, then inquiries that take years to report, after taking decades to get off the ground, look as though they are simply kicking difficult issues into the long grass,” Samira Shackle writes. Nimo

      From burpees to shoulder circles, Phil Daoust has got some exercise “snacks” to pepper throughout your day – even if you’re in the office. Hannah

      Michael Safi and William Christou’s dispatch from Lebanon finds that despite the high tensions with Israel and deadly strikes, the tourism industry is still booming. Dalya Farran, the owner of a beach club, said that while it’s bizarre, “you eat some good food, have some beers – or juice – and then go for a swim, and the sea washes away your worries and stress.” Nimo
      SportView image in fullscreenOlympics | Adam Peaty missed out on a third consecutive Olympic 100m breaststroke title by 0.02sec, sharing silver with Nic Fink of the US in a desperately close race won by the Italian Nicolò Martinenghi. Countless celebrities lined the stands as Simone Biles returned to compete in front of the world. Biles effortlessly worked her way through a smooth, ­efficient ­opening beam routine, qualifying for the all-around final in first place with a score of 59.566.F1 | George Russell won the Belgian Grand Prix, pulling off a surprise victory for Mercedes at Spa Francorchamps after a thrilling and impossibly tense battle with his teammate, Lewis Hamilton, who was second, completing a Mercedes one-two.Cricket | “In the end, resistance was futile,” writes Ali Martin about England’s decisive victory over West Indies, with the team securing a 10-wicket victory for England and a 3-0 series clean sweep.The front pagesView image in fullscreenThe Guardian leads with “Reeves paves way for cuts and tax rises to fix finances”. The Times characterises the Chancellor’s comments as “Squeeze on spending to lift UK from £20bn hole”.The i reports “GPs threaten to bring NHS to ‘standstill’ by capping daily patient numbers”. The Mail has “GPs: We will bring NHS to a standstill”. The Mirror covers the same story under the headline “Bitter pill”.The Telegraph leads with “Israel ‘to retaliate’ against Hezbollah”. The Financial Times reports “Harris raises $200mn in first week of ‘record shattering’ election campaign”.Today in FocusView image in fullscreenWhy Spain wants tourists to go homeFor decades, Spain has been the destination of choice for Brits desperate for sun, sea and sand. But now there is a growing backlash against tourism. What went wrong? Sam Jones reports.Cartoon of the day | Ella BaronView image in fullscreenThe UpsideA bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all badView image in fullscreenA new report by the development agency FSD Africa has found that greener economies could bring millions of jobs to some of the largest countries in Africa by 2030. About 10% of the jobs created, which will mostly be in renewable energy, will require university degrees, 30% will be “specialised” work that needs certification or vocational training, and 20% will be administrative. “Unskilled” labour will be more stable, with opportunities for upward mobility, the study predicts. The researchers behind the report are urging policymakers, funders and educational institutions to invest in training a workforce in green industries. They say it could “contribute to the formalisation of African economies”.Kevin Munjal, director of development impact at FSD Africa, says investing in greener economies provides ample opportunity to address the continent’s demographic crisis: “Africa has the youngest, fastest-growing workforce but … the youth need jobs.”Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every SundayBored at work?And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow.

      Quick crossword

      Cryptic crossword

      Wordiply More

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Australia fears being abandoned by America – but do the two countries need each other?

      by

      In any presidential year, the Australian media – including social media – will suddenly generate a vast army of instant experts on American politics, all with a take you just have to read or hear. They’ll cover everything from laws governing electoral delegates in Arizona to the impact of demographic change on voting patterns in western Pennsylvania. In the 2024 US presidential year, when so much is at stake, that ramps right up.

      Allan Behm’s The Odd Couple, a study of the Australia–America relationship that also serves as a meditation on both countries, could hardly be more timely. It belongs to a rather different tradition than that of instant analysis with newly acquired (and dubious) “expertise”.

      The Odd Couple: The Australia–America Relationship – Allan Behm (Upswell)

      Behm is a considered and reflective commentator. An experienced former diplomat, public servant and (Labor) political adviser who now works at the Australia Institute, he is qualified to offer both well-informed critique and constructive suggestions for the relationship.

      He has a way with words and is widely read, displaying a formidable cultural range that can take in the Argonauts, Davy Crockett and the Lone Ranger, the foundational documents of the United States, novels and poems from the 19th century, big thick books of political history and international relations, and much in between.

      The result is a valuable contribution to discussion of the Australia–America relationship. The quality of this debate here is poor. There are too many commentators with too much skin in the game, too many with warm recollections of their last trip to that conference in Aspen, or who are waiting in hope or expectation for their invitation to the Australian American Leadership Dialogue.

      The dissidents are there, but they struggle to exercise influence in a public culture dominated by a news empire controlled by (American) Citizen Murdoch.

      There are some who do a good job of questioning many of the pieties about the alliance. They include James Curran (a University of Sydney history professor and the Australian Financial Review’s foreign editor), Hugh White (former senior public servant and Australian National University academic) and Behm’s colleague at the Australian Institute, Emma Shortis. You will also find penetrating critics further to the left, in magazines such as Arena: Guy Rundle, Clinton Fernandez and David Lee. They tend to treat the US as an empire, Australia as a compliant sub-empire.

      Critics remind Australians that the alliance’s risks and costs are only magnified by the reflexive “follow the leader” approach to US policy pursued by Australian policy-makers. But compared with the chorus of pro-alliance commentators, the critics exercise limited influence with a political class whose timidity is one of Behm’s themes. Australia’s “international policies have been characteristically defensive and deferential to the interests of others,” he judges.

      ‘Half a dissident’

      Behm is only half a dissident: he does not reject the alliance. Each nation needs the other and their relationship is broadly complementary. Take out the US, and Behm can imagine only a bleak future for Australia: “Without America, Australia would be alone, adrift on its continent in a region that it does not understand and with which it has no affinity.”

      It is a rather pessimistic summation of Australian capacity – perhaps too much so – but “fear of abandonment” is a familiar theme in Australian foreign policy.

      Behm does not like visceral identity politics, but he does like a politics and diplomacy in which national actors have a strong and coherent sense of identity. He would like Australia to have a Bill of Rights, as the US does, but admires the shared commitment of the US and our country to the rule of law.

      Many of the alliance’s benefits – strategic, economic and cultural – are set out in The Odd Couple, but Behm worries Australians have done too little either to evaluate the dangers and losses, or to extract the full benefit they could gain from the relationship.

      Perhaps oddly for a book on this theme appearing at this moment, AUKUS, the security agreement between Australia, the UK, and the US, does not figure as a major topic. There is more on the economy: Behm draws attention to how the relationship helped Australia in the global financial crisis, but harmed it via the Howard-era free trade agreement.

      That agreement, Behm suggests, has undermined multilateralism, given the US sway over our Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and handed US companies new opportunities to constrain Australian policy-making. Behm believes the massive increase in two-way foreign direct investment between the two countries this century had very little to do with the free trade agreement.

      A 2003 protest against the free trade agreement with the US.
      Alan Porritt/AAP

      Behm is also a critic of US adventurism in war and Australia’s supine behaviour in following the leader, notably in Vietnam and Iraq. These failures, among others, were the result of Australia’s inability to articulate a strong sense of its own national identity or interests. It has too often, and too readily, subordinated itself to the much larger and more powerful country.

      He would like Australia to be more like Israel and Taiwan in the dogged pursuit of its interests with US policymakers, especially in working the Congress. Behm thinks we should invest more in diplomacy, recognising that power depends on culture, persuasion and a strong sense of national selfhood. It is not only about military firepower (including that of nuclear-powered submarines). He would like to see “a bit of jostling in the relationship”, less deference.

      Behm’s argument that the relationship with the US is multifaceted is hardly new, but it is worth reiterating and updating. He has chapters dealing with the law, economics, culture, war and peace. All contain valuable insights, although the chapter on culture was the least focused – and (though this Gen-X reviewer surprises himself in saying so) a little hard on the Baby Boomers.

      Deeper insecurities

      Two themes are either absent or lightly touched on. Behm says little about intelligence sharing. And he touches only lightly on religion, which is surely central to any understanding of the American experience in general, and of the twists and turns of its politics in recent decades.

      Behm is interested in the common histories of the US and Australia as settler societies founded on the dispossession of, and violence towards, Indigenous peoples. He detects a fundamental insecurity at the heart of each nation, based on this original sin.

      The apparently “boundless self-belief” of the Americans with their claims to exceptionalism, and Australia’s “brasher kind of larrikinism” each express a “much deeper insecurity born of a shared inability to ‘belong to’ – as distinct from ‘to own’ – the continents on which they live”.

      It is to Behm’s credit that he is not afraid of this kind of ambitious generalisation. That said, it carries the risk of inviting objection from the measurers and straighteners who review books. For example, I can’t help but suspect some complexity is being brushed over a little too lightly when I read: “The simple fact is that Australians no longer trust their governments. Nor do they trust one another.”

      The most serious of our recent crises, the pandemic, surely revealed that, when the chips are down, Australians do largely trust their governments – and one another, too.

      Behm gets the occasional historical detail wrong. The Myall Creek massacre was in 1838, not 1832, and Australia had no federal election in 1932. We are told at one point: “At the end of World War II, coal and iron ore declined as key exports.” In fact, neither had ever been key exports. But these are minor matters.

      Behm has an intelligent understanding of the past, which he applies to a wise, witty and subtle analysis. The Odd Couple is a welcome contribution to a domain of public debate in Australia where too many people think it’s best simply to keep a lid on their opinions. More