More stories

  • in

    Trump-appointed judges strike down fund for Black female entrepreneurs

    A US federal court of appeals panel has suspended Fearless Fund, an Atlanta-based, Black woman-owned venture capitalist firm, from continuing the firm’s Fearless Strivers Grant Contest, a grant program for Black female business owners.In the 2-1 ruling, the panel of three judges, two appointed by Donald Trump and one appointed by Barack Obama, ruled that the grant program “is substantially likely to violate” section 1981 of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1866, which prohibits the use of race in making contracts. The act aimed to fully integrate formerly enslaved Black Americans as citizens, give them the full rights of American citizenship and to make it illegal to deprive any Americans of rights “on the basis of race, color, or prior condition of slavery or involuntary servitude”.American Alliance for Equal Rights, founded by Edward Blum, the conservative activist who led the supreme court case that ended affirmative action in college admissions, brought the case against Fearless Fund last August. The fund is one of several firms, organizations and government institutions that have been targeted by conservative, rightwing groups working to make it illegal for public and private entities to pursue diversity initiatives.Less than than 1% of venture capital funding goes to Black and Hispanic women-owned businesses, according to Digitalundivided, a non-profit advocacy organization. The group found that firms started by Black women received only .0006% of VC funding raised by startups between 2009 and 2017. And in 2019, a report found that “Black entrepreneur’s loan requests are three times less likely to be approved than white entrepreneurs”.Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which was referenced in the ruling, guarantees citizens the right “to make and enforce contracts … and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens”.The panel of judges ruled that Fearless Fund is unlikely to enjoy first amendment protection and that its program “inflicts irreparable injury”.The Fearless Fund CEO and founder Arian Simone expressed disappointment at the ruling.“I am shattered for every girl of color who has a dream but will grow up in a nation determined not to give her a shot to live it,” she said in a statement. “On their behalf, we will turn the pain into purpose and fight with all our might.”The ruling is a victory for conservative groups that continue to target diversity initiatives, but it may not be a cut and dry harbinger of what’s to come. Last week, a federal judge in Ohio dismissed a lawsuit against the insurance company Progressive and the fintech platform Hello Alice, which jointly offer a grant program that helps Black-owned small businesses purchase commercial vehicles.In a statement, Simone vowed that the ruling against Fearless Fund was “the beginning of a renewed fight.“We are committed more than ever to advocating for equity, pushing forward with resilience, and ensuring that women of color receive the opportunities they rightfully deserve,” the statement reads. Fearless Fund and the organization’s legal representatives have indicated that they are evaluating all options to fight the lawsuit. More

  • in

    Wisconsin attorney general charges three former Trump associates in plot to overturn 2020 election

    Wisconsin’s attorney general, Josh Kaul, filed felony charges on Tuesday against three men who played a key role in the effort to appoint fake electors in the state as part of Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the election.Kenneth Chesebro, Jim Troupis and Michael Roman were each charged with one felony count of forgery, according to court documents. The crime is a class H felony punishable by a fine of up to $10,000 and up to six years in prison.Chesebro was the architect of the fake elector plan. Five days after the election, he emailed Troupis, a retired judge who was leading the Trump campaign’s legal efforts in Wisconsin, to muse about the possibility of throwing out Joe Biden’s win in Wisconsin and appointing a Trump slate of electors. The two developed the scheme over the next few months. Chesebro would later work with Roman to coordinate the efforts across states and to get the slates of fake electors to Washington.Chesebro pleaded guilty to conspiracy to filing false documents for his role in the scheme in a separate case in Georgia earlier this year. Roman faces charges in Georgia and is also a defendant in an Arizona case.This is the first time Troupis, who sits on a judicial ethics panel in Wisconsin, has been charged.Wisconsin governor Tony Evers, a Democrat, released a one-word statement praising the charges. “Good,” he said.The Wisconsin complaint lays out how Chesebro, Troupis and Roman – a Trump campaign aide – coordinated to draft false electoral certificates to be signed by swing state Republicans for Trump and the former vice-president, Mike Pence. The men debated the language to be used on the false elector certificates, considering adding language to qualify that the unofficial slate of electors were contingents in the event that somehow the election results in those key swing states changed before the election was certified.In Wisconsin, the complaint notes, the false elector documents contained “no qualifying language” and presented the Trump-Pence electors as duly elected.On 14 December, the day that the Wisconsin false electors convened, Chesebro celebrated in messages to Troupis and Roman: “WI meeting of the *real* electors is a go!!!”Even as Wisconsin’s slate of false Trump electors submitted their electoral certificates, their chances of reversing the results of the 2020 election appeared increasingly slim. By a narrow 4-3 ruling, the Wisconsin supreme court on 14 December tossed Trump’s lawsuit attempting to overturn the election, accusing the campaign of “challenging the rulebook adopted before the season began”.Chesebro and Troupis were not ready to give up.In the days after the Wisconsin Trump electors met to submit their unofficial certificates, the two men flew to Washington DC to meet with Trump.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOn 17 December, Chesebro acknowleged in a message to Roman that the scheme was looking “less plausible”. Still, he argued, the Electoral Count Act could be “weaponized” to deliver Trump the election.The charges in Wisconsin come after prosecutors in four other swing states – Arizona, Georgia, Nevada and Michigan – have filed criminal charges against those involved in the fake elector plot.Unlike his counterpart in the other states, Kaul did not file charges against the fake electors themselves. Earlier this year, Wisconsin’s 10 fake electors reached a settlement in a civil suit in which they agreed to never serve as presidential electors again in an election involving Trump. They also acknowledged Biden’s win.The indictments come as Trump has successfully maneuvered to delay the two criminal cases he faces for subverting the 2020 election until after November. More

  • in

    Biden calls Trump ‘reckless and dangerous’ over claims trial was rigged

    Joe Biden has called Donald Trump “reckless and dangerous” over the former president’s claim that the trial leading to last week’s felony conviction in a Manhattan court was rigged.In his sharpest criticism yet of his predecessor’s drive to undermine the legal integrity of the prosecution against him, the president also said a second Trump presidency would be a much greater threat to American democracy than his first. He likened Trump’s rejection of the court verdict against him to his refusal to accept that he lost the 2020 presidential election.“[Trump] wants you to believe it’s all rigged. Nothing could be further from the truth,” Biden told a fundraising audience in Greenwich, Connecticut.“It’s reckless and dangerous and downright irresponsible for anyone to say that it’s rigged just because you don’t like the verdict.”Biden’s comments followed a concerted onslaught from Trump following last Thursday’s conviction on 34 counts of document falsification charges relating to hush-money payments made to an adult film actor, Stormy Daniels, shortly before the 2016 presidential election, which Trump won.They came on the eve of testimony from the US attorney general, Merrick Garland, on Capitol Hill after being summoned by Republicans on the House of Representatives’ judiciary committee to answer their accusations that the justice department has been weaponised against Trump and his allies.Trump has accused Biden of directing the prosecution brought by the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, that led to last week’s conviction – which has made the first ever former president to become a convicted felon.But Biden pointed out that the trial was based on a New York state, rather than a federal case, and said the jury who convicted Trump was chosen in the same way juries are selected across the US. The guilty verdict followed five weeks of evidence.He also said an independent judicial system was an essential bedrock of US democracy, adding: “We should never allow anyone to tear it down.”Trump is due to be formally adopted as the Republican nominee at the party’s national convention which opens in Milwaukee on 15 July – four days after he is scheduled to be sentenced by Judge Juan Merchan, who presided over his trial and whom he has called “a devil”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSpeaking at a fundraiser hosted by Richard Plepler, the former chief executive of HBO, Biden appeared to question Trump’s mental state, suggesting he had been literally driven “crazy” by his 2020 election defeat.“Here’s what is becoming clearer and clearer every day: the threat Trump poses in his second term would be greater than it was in his first,” Biden said. “This isn’t the same Trump that got elected in 2016. He’s worse.”Echoing a theme touched on by the actor Robert De Niro in a recently released pro-Biden campaign, the president suggested that Trump had “snapped” mentally after his election defeat, which prompted an attack on the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, by a mob inspired by him trying to overturn the result.“Something snapped in this guy – for real – when he lost in 2020,” Biden said. “He can’t accept the fact that he lost, it’s literally driving him crazy.”He cited some of Trump’s extremist language, including a suggestion that he could “terminate the [US] constitution” and a message to his supporters that “if he loses there will be a bloodbath in America”.“What kind of man is this?” Biden said.He did not mention the trial of his son Hunter for the illegal possession of a firearm, which opened on Monday in a court in Delaware.Jason Miller, a senior adviser to the Trump campaign, dismissed Biden remarks, saying: “[Biden] will do anything to distract from Hunter’s trial.” More

  • in

    Elon Musk is cosying up to Donald Trump. Haven’t we suffered enough? | Arwa Mahdawi

    What happens when two of the most influential and insufferable people in the universe join forces? Looks like we’re about to find out. Rumour has it that Elon Musk is cosying up to convicted felon, adjudicated fraudster and presidential hopeful Donald Trump, in the hopes of securing a job in the White House.Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that the pair speak on the phone several times a month, and have discussed a possible advisory role for Musk if Trump is elected president again. It’s not clear what political pies Musk wants to stick his little fingers in: “The role hasn’t been fully hammered out,” the WSJ said. But, according to “people familiar with the talks”, Musk might get a position advising on border security and the economy.Is Musk really the right person to advise on these issues? Perhaps. As an immigrant from South Africa, he does have first-hand experience of border security. Indeed, his brother, Kimbal, publicly admitted that when the Musk bros first tried to set up business in the US they didn’t have the right work documents. “We were illegal immigrants,” Kimbal joked during a 2013 conference. Elon sheepishly protested that it was a “grey area”, while Kimbal, rather awkwardly, kept insisting it wasn’t: they didn’t have work authorisation. Meanwhile, the audience laughed uproariously. Working illegally makes for a fun little anecdote if you’re rich and white, it seems. But it’s grounds for immediate deportation and dehumanisation if you’re not. Elon himself is fond of demonising “illegal immigrants” and has said that migration has “invasion vibes”.Trump, of course, won’t have any issues with Musk’s border hypocrisy. Despite striking a hard line on immigration, he doesn’t seem to have been particularly bothered by an Associated Press investigation finding that his wife, Melania, modelled in the US before she had legal permission to work in the country. Melania also sponsored her Slovenian-born parents to become US citizens through a process that the Trump administration scornfully termed “chain migration” and aggressively tried to end. Musk and Trump seem firmly in agreement that there are rules for thee but not for me.As for Musk’s potential advice to Trump on the economy? One imagines it will somehow involve his companies getting even more government subsidies than the billions they’ve already received. Perhaps he’ll wangle a government contract to send migrants to Mars. Or – as he’s previously joked – send “space dragons with ‘lasers’” to Ukraine. Whatever he advises, you can expect it to be less policy and more publicity stunt.But I’m getting ahead of myself. Trump is not president yet and Musk has rebutted claims that he’s interested in Ivanka Trump’s old job. “There have not been any discussions of a role for me in a potential Trump presidency,” he tweeted on Thursday.Still, there is no denying that he’s been having a bit of a bromance with Trump. This is a significant shift: Trump and Musk are both afflicted with “main character syndrome” and their huge egos have rubbed each other the wrong way in the past. In 2022, for example, Trump declared Musk a “bullshit artist” for saying he hadn’t voted for a Republican before. Musk, in response, said it was time for Trump to “hang up his hat and sail into the sunset”. He added that Trump’s presidency was “too much drama. Do we really want a bull-in-a-china-shop situation every single day!?”It seems a bunch of billionaires have decided: yes we do. Musk isn’t the only mogul cosying up to Trump: depressingly, a number of wealthy donors have thrown their weight and money behind the ex-president in the past week. On Friday Musk also confirmed that X will host a livestream town hall-style event with Trump some time soon. Linda Yaccarino, who is somehow still CEO of X, chimed in with a fire emoji to tweet: “The People’s Town Hall!” More like Fracas With a Felon, surely? Arwa Mahdawi is a Guardian columnist
    Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More

  • in

    If the Washington Post is to fly again, its journalists must share the cockpit | Margaret Sullivan

    When Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post in 2013, he said he wanted to give the storied but struggling newspaper the “runway” it needed to take off in the digital age.A few years later, the plane seemed to be soaring. Readership was up, revenue – built on new digital subscriptions – was up, and the newsroom’s scrappy staff was trading scoops daily with the New York Times, and doing essential journalism, particularly during the campaign and administration of Donald Trump.Bezos, wisely, had left the renowned editor Marty Baron in place until he retired in 2022. The billionaire owner, who paid only $250m for the paper, even gave the Post its now-famous motto: “Democracy Dies in Darkness.” The Post had regained the swagger it had under its legendary publisher Katharine Graham when it broke the Watergate scandal that helped bring down a corrupt president in the 1970s.But these days, the Post is struggling once again. It lost an estimated $100m last year, readership has dropped dramatically, and a roughly 1,000-person newsroom staff has been shrunk through buyouts and layoffs.Enter Will Lewis, a hard-driving British journalist who had been publisher of the Wall Street Journal. In January, Bezos named him the Post’s publisher and CEO.So far, it’s been a rocky reign, with this past week especially chaotic.Lewis made several heavy-handed moves that have alienated and angered an extraordinarily talented journalistic staff. He abruptly forced out Sally Buzbee, who had succeeded Baron to become the paper’s first female editor, and immediately replaced her with two of his former colleagues, even as he revealed his plans for a radically restructured newsroom. (The former Wall Street Journal editor-in-chief Matt Murray and former Telegraph deputy editor Rob Winnett will lead two adjacent Post newsrooms, including a new one dedicated to “service and social media journalism”; and then they’ll switch roles after November’s election. Yes, it’s all very weird.)Taken by surprise and baffled, the staff reacted angrily and with skepticism. At a “town hall” meeting on Monday, the prominent politics reporter Ashley Parker challenged Lewis’s decision-making, earning applause from her colleagues. “Now we have four white men running the newsroom,” she said, according to the news non-profit Notus. (She was referring to Lewis himself, Murray, Winnett and David Shipley, the opinion section editor; it’s worth noting that, although the Post considers itself a global, not local, newsroom, more than 40% of Washington DC residents are Black.)And a top investigative reporter, Carol Leonnig, reportedly pushed back on leadership changes, noting “you’ve chosen people with a very different culture from the Washington Post,” apparently because they reflect Fleet Street’s tabloid culture and the Murdoch-controlled Wall Street Journal.Lewis grew testy and defensive, according to published reports and my own conversations with Post journalists.“We are going to turn this thing around but let’s not sugarcoat it,” Lewis said, according to the Post’s own reporting. “We are losing large amounts of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People are not reading your stuff.”He also claimed that he enjoyed working with Buzbee and wished that could have continued. That came off as disingenuous, as did his pledges of diversity in leadership.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“No one was buying what he was selling,” Notus quoted one attendee.I worked at the Post as media columnist from 2016 to 2022. I know my former colleagues to be top-flight and much of their journalism to be essential. They are also nimble and, in general, not resistant to change. They fully understand that we’re in a challenging new era. But they also are tough-minded journalists who demand to be treated with transparency and honesty and respect.Journalists don’t delude themselves that newsrooms are democracies; they know they don’t get a vote. But successful newsrooms aren’t dictatorships, either.If Lewis is going to be successful in his quest to make the Post soar again, he’ll need to have the journalists with him all the way. Right now, they’re not. And that means a course correction is in order.
    Margaret Sullivan is a Guardian US columnist writing on media, politics and culture More

  • in

    Trump, Covid, the climate crisis – we’ve had a hard few years. The wounds linger | Rebecca Solnit

    Everything is weird and everyone is wrecked. This is maybe the biggest and least acknowledged truth of life in the United States and a lot of places beyond right now. It’s the pandemic; the eight years of Trumpism; the distortions, disruptions and corruptions Silicon Valley has promulgated and other looming menaces, including climate chaos. We all know this, because we’re living it, but maybe we should talk more about the fact that our political catastrophes are inseparable from widespread psychic devastation, that the public and private, political and personal, are entangled – or rather that the former has wrought havoc on the latter.The wisest people I know are aware that the stresses, atrocities, divisions and divergences from norms of recent years have made them (and everyone else) exhausted and brittle. The less wise but no less brittle either lash out with the sense that what’s wrong is definitely someone else or take refuge in cults and oversimplified versions in which they are at least in control of what it all means.Public life has private impact; some of it breaks our brains, and some of it breaks our hearts. Not to leave our consciences out of this – to watch so much malice and willful destruction, to witness so much injustice, from genocides around the world to gross injustices at home, has an impact. That impact is probably best described as moral injury, which a veterans’ organization defines as “the psychological, social and spiritual impact of events involving betrayal or transgression of one’s own deeply held moral beliefs and values occurring in high stakes situations”.Most of us have a sense of what’s reasonable or possible based on what’s happened before; but we are now lost in a sea of unprecedenteds. We have not had authoritarian threats like this arise in all three branches of the federal government (if you count a former president aspiring to be a dictator as well as the supreme court and Congress). We have not previously had the wild corrosion of information and our ability to pay attention to it the way we do now, thanks to an internet dominated by corporations eager to offer us addictive social media and distorted search results and algorithms.For those paying attention, climate change is also an immense moral injury, a reminder that we are part of a system shredding the beautiful tapestry of life on earth and devastating beloved species. Although Covid was a scourge across the globe, far more people – about 8 million – die every year from breathing air polluted by burning fossil fuel, and that’s only one aspect of the devastation, and only to our species.Nevertheless the pandemic was devastating. I was surprised when the fourth anniversary of the global coronavirus pandemic was met largely with silence. Apparently almost no one wants to remember it, and of course it’s not exactly over, since people are still getting sick and dying of this new disease. Trauma, a term resorted to constantly these days, is an experience so devastating you cannot forget it; it dominates you. The opposite of trauma, in which you refuse to remember and process an experience, is also devastating, if not in the same way; you suppress an experience at the cost of operating with a reduced sense of self and reality.One of the positive aspects of many kinds of disaster is the sense of shared experience. But we had wildly different experiences of the pandemic: it killed some of us, bereaved some of us, bankrupted some of us, made some of us frontline workers facing danger and death, or unemployed, or suddenly isolated from the sociability of school or work and everyday life outside the home. The impact was profoundly different depending on your age, financial circumstances and domestic situation, among other factors. I hear a lot from teachers and professors about how their students have not recovered well from two years of isolation and online learning that often involved too little learning and too much being online.It is hard to imagine how different the Covid pandemic might have been had the country not been headed by someone who himself became a major source of divisive misinformation about Covid. In the US, a huge factor in the crisis in our psyches is four years of Trump in power, followed by nearly four more years of Trumpism. When the most powerful people in the country say and do whatever they want mostly without consequences, we are launched into incoherence and meaninglessness.A US flag flies upside-down in front of the supreme court justice Samuel Alito’s home for several days in early 2021, in seeming support of the January 6 insurrection, but he declines to recuse himself from matters concerning Trump. Justice Clarence Thomas, whose wife was an active part of that insurrection, also declines to recuse himself or account for the outrageous gifts he’s accepted from billionaires. The evangelical Christian who became the speaker of the House shows up to support Trump in his criminal election fraud trial due to hush money paid to a porn star and decries his guilty verdict and with it the justice system. The corruption is open and the loyalty to the ex-president rather than the rule of law is obvious.In any previous era, these outrages and dozens of others would have been treated as shocking scandals; now each outrage seems to crowd out the next so that, for example, Trump’s dinner with fossil fuel executives, in which he asked for a $1bn campaign contribution in return for slashing climate legislation, has been reported on almost with complacency. That a man who was found liable in civil court for rape is a leading candidate for the presidency has been likewise normalized.The examples are well-known – but perhaps more should be said about the impact. Trumpism has inspired Trump’s followers with the transgressive boldness he demonstrated first and best: that actually you can say anything you want, truth be damned, deny you said it, or contradict it. And with enough accrued power, you can break the law with impunity.Authoritarians want control not only over the economy, military, courts and media, but also fact, science, history – over meaning itself. To violate the independence of truth and fact, to insist they are whatever you want them to be, is to enter the realms of meaninglessness. Authoritarianism is nihilism. As Hannah Arendt said, “The result of a consistent and total substitution of lies for factual truth is not that the lie will now be accepted as truth and truth be defamed as a lie, but that the sense by which we take our bearings in the real world – and the category of truth vs falsehood is among the mental means to this end – is being destroyed.”Another crisis of our times is that the internet has isolated us, shattered our capacity to concentrate, undermined existing news media and created fertile ground for the spread of hate, misinformation and propaganda. The internet has isolated us from more face-to-face forms of contact and put us in spaces where combative shouting is normal and emotional honesty risky and rare, where in-group performativity is everywhere and dissent is dangerous. The loneliness epidemic Vivek Murthy, the US surgeon general, has talked about has everything to do with the internet and how it’s sucked us in in ways that have made other forms of contact wither away.That’s my diagnosis. My prescription might be simple: be kind to each other, remembering the distress we’ve all lived through; defend the facts with ardor; fight fascism and climate chaos in the ways you’re best equipped to (and if you’re lucky, that will connect you to other good people doing that crucial work). And if you’re lonely know that even in that you’re not alone; millions are, in large part because of how our world got rearranged. But diagnosis is the first step of treatment or cure, and just talking about how personal the impact is of this chaotic new era matters.
    Rebecca Solnit is a Guardian US columnist. She is the author of Orwell’s Roses and co-editor with Thelma Young Lutunatabua of the climate anthology Not Too Late: Changing the Climate Story from Despair to Possibility More

  • in

    Stormy Daniels has never been cowed. And now, she is vindicated | Zoe Williams

    In the opening scene of Stormy, the documentary about Stormy Daniels’ life, she says: “I have just been tormented for the last five years or so. And here I am, I’m still here.” Probably the worst of the torment has been from Donald Trump’s supporters, though they’ve never got together to explain what they’re angry about. Is it that Daniels claims she had sex with Trump, in 2006? That she accepted $130,000 to keep quiet about it? Surely, if he’s the richest and most virile man America ever produced, you’d think that was no big deal for him, and nice for her?Instead, as she described on the stand, giving evidence against Trump, the Maga lot have made her life a misery. Death threats layered with lurid threats of sexual violence, enough that she was constantly worried for the safety of her family, have poured in since 2018, when the Wall Street Journal first broke the story.Most likely, they are angered at Daniels’ failure to take Trump seriously. Was it the closely observed descriptions of his penis, in her memoir, or her Make America Horny Again strip club tour? Whatever you make of her, she has never seemed cowed; and in the peculiar cross-hatch of prurience and misogyny through which the hard right sees the world, a porn star is golden while she agrees with you, and contemptible once she doesn’t.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAll that virulent hatred alone would be enough to sink a regular person, but Daniels has also spent the past six years in court, on and off, asking Trump to stop lying about her. She lost her defamation case, then lost again on appeal, leaving her owing Trump hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees. She came out pretty gung-ho on this debt, vowing not to pay it, but that’s not really how courts work. It’s not a game of chicken.And now, finally, she is not just vindicated but at the white-hot centre of Donald Trump’s 34 felony convictions, which is 34 more than any former president in the country’s history. Other former members of his team who have been convicted in court include his campaign chairman (Paul Manafort Jr), his deputy campaign manager (Rick Gates), one of his lawyers (Michael Cohen), his chief strategist (Steve Bannon), several advisers (Peter Navarro, Roger Stone and George Papadopoulos) and his company CFO (Allen Weisselberg). I just couldn’t be more thrilled for Ms Daniels – that she’s one of very few people to cross paths with Trump and not end up with a criminal record. Zoe Williams is a Guardian columnist More

  • in

    Benjamin Netanyahu set to address joint session of US Congress for fourth time

    Benjamin Netanyahu is set to become the first foreign leader to address a joint session of the US Congress four times, despite deep differences with the Biden administration.The Israeli prime minister’s office said in a statement that a date for his address to Congress had yet to be set, but that it would not take place on 13 June as had been reported, due to a Jewish holiday.The formal invitation came from congressional leaders of both parties within hours of Joe Biden’s disclosure of the terms of a new peace proposal for Gaza endorsed by Israel. Over the weekend, however, Netanyahu played down the significance of any Israeli concessions in the new plan, and insisted that any proposal for a lasting ceasefire without the destruction of Hamas as a military and governing force would be a “non-starter”.He also has suggested that Israel was under obligation only to carry out the first of the peace plan’s three phases, which may increase Hamas’s reservations of a deal. The White House says it is waiting for an official response from Hamas on the proposal.Netanyahu had earlier defied Biden by adamantly opposing any steps towards the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel, and by pressing ahead with an offensive on the southernmost Gazan city of Rafah, despite repeated appeals not to from the Biden administration.Before this month’s scheduled appearance, Netanyahu was the only foreign leader apart from Winston Churchill to be accorded the honour of an address to a joint sitting of Congress three times. With his fourth address, he will outdo even Churchill in the record books.The invitation to Congress is a reminder than while Biden is seeking to influence Israeli politics to forge a peace agreement for Gaza and a broader long-term settlement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Netanyahu also has the means to sway US politics – and possibly hurt Biden’s re-election chances if he were to accuse the president of being insufficiently supportive.Netanyahu used an address to Congress in 2015 to speak out against the efforts of then President Barack Obama to reach an agreement with Tehran on Iran’s nuclear programme. The Israeli prime minister was highly critical of Biden last month when the president stopped a delivery of heavy bombs to Israel forces. More