Americas

Subterms

    Latest story

    238 Shares88 Views

    White House insists Trump’s prosecutor was legally appointed after federal judge throws out Comey and James indictments – live

    by

    The White House press secretary insisted that Lindsey Halligan, the interim US attorney for the eastern district of Virginia handpicked by Donald Trump, was legally appointed to her position.This comes after a federal judge threw out the charges against James Comey and Letitia James, saying that Halligan had no “legal authority” to charge two of the president’s most notable adversaries.“The Department of Justice will be appealing very soon, and it is our position that Lindsey Halligan is extremely qualified for this position, but more importantly, was legally appointed to it,” Leavitt told reporters.The press secretary said that Judge Cameron McGowan Currie, who issued today’s rulings, was “trying to shield” the former FBI director and New York attorney general “from receiving accountability”.The White House just posted the full text of a new executive order Donald Trump signed on Monday, “to begin the process of designating certain chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood as Foreign Terrorist Organizations”.Laura Loomer, a pro-Israel, anti-Muslim extremist with unusual influence over Trump, responded to the announcement by renewing her call for the administration to designate as terrorists Muslim American elected officials she claims, without evidence, are connected to the Muslim Brotherhood.Writing on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, which Loomer was barred from for anti-Muslim racism before it was purchased by Elon Musk, the extremist podcaster called on Monday for the White House to use the new designation to arrest and jail three prominent Muslim Democrats: Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Zohran Mamdani.Abbe Lowell, a lawyer for New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, has welcomed the decision by a federal judge to dismiss the criminal case against her on Monday, on the grounds that the prosecutor who brought the case, former White House aide Lindsey Halligan, was unlawfully appointed.“The court’s order acknowledges what’s been clear about this case from the beginning,” Lowell said in a statement. “The President went to extreme measures to substitute one of his allies to bring these baseless charges after career prosecutors refused. This case was not about justice or the law; it was about targeting Attorney General James for what she stood for and who she challenged. We will continue to challenge any further politically motivated charges through every lawful means available.”While gaggling with reporters, Karoline Leavitt said that she had spoken with secretary of state Marco Rubio “at length” following the US delegation’s meeting with Ukrainian officials in Geneva. She also mentioned that she’d spoken with the president.“Everybody inside feels optimistic about what happened in transpired yesterday,” she said. “The whole team really worked through the points of that 28-point peace plan that the United States authored, with input from both sides, the Russians and the Ukrainians.”Leavitt affirmed that “the vast majority” of these points had been agreed upon. “The Ukrainians have worked on language with us together,” she said. “So we feel as though we’re in a very good place.”The White House press secretary insisted that Lindsey Halligan, the interim US attorney for the eastern district of Virginia handpicked by Donald Trump, was legally appointed to her position.This comes after a federal judge threw out the charges against James Comey and Letitia James, saying that Halligan had no “legal authority” to charge two of the president’s most notable adversaries.“The Department of Justice will be appealing very soon, and it is our position that Lindsey Halligan is extremely qualified for this position, but more importantly, was legally appointed to it,” Leavitt told reporters.The press secretary said that Judge Cameron McGowan Currie, who issued today’s rulings, was “trying to shield” the former FBI director and New York attorney general “from receiving accountability”.Speaking to reporters outside the West Wing today, press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that the White House supports the Pentagon’s announcement that it is investigating veteran and Arizona senator Mark Kelly.Today, the Democratic lawmaker accused the Department of Defense of intimidation, Leavitt pushed back when asked about his Kelly’s statement.“I think what senator Mark Kelly was actually trying to do was intimidate the 1.3 million active-duty service members who are currently serving in our United States Armed Forces with that video that he and his Democrat colleagues put out,” the press secretary said, referencing the social media post where six Democratic members of Congress told members of the military that they should “refuse” illegal orders.“They knew what they were doing in this video, and Senator Mark Kelly and all of them should be held accountable for that,” Leavitt added today.My colleague, Jeremy Barr, has been combing through the tens of thousands of pages that were released on Sunday as part of voting technology company Smartmatic’s $2.7bn defamation lawsuit against Fox News over its coverage of the 2020 presidential election.He notes that Fox News has strenuously denied Smartmatic’s claims and said the company has vastly overstated its value. In a statement, Smartmatic said Fox’s “attempts to delay accountability won’t work, and its day of reckoning is coming”.You can read the top takeaways from the documents below.

    In a blow to Trump’s justice department, a federal judge has tossed out criminal charges against former FBI director James Comey and New York attorney general Letitia James. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie ruled that Lindsey Halligan, the Trump-installed prosecutor who secured the indictment against two of the president’s most noted adversaries, was illegally appointed to her position as US attorney for the eastern district of Virginia. Currie wrote that Halligan had “no lawful authority” to present the indictments to both Comey and James (in separate cases).

    The Pentagon has said it’s investigating Democratic senator Mark Kelly of Arizona for possible breaches of military law after Kelly joined a handful of other lawmakers in a video that called for US troops to refuse unlawful orders. The Pentagon’s statement, which was posted on social media this morning, cited a federal law that allows retired service members to be recalled to active duty on orders of the defense secretary for possible court martial or other measures. For his part, Kelly wrote in a statement that he’s “given too much to this country to be silenced by bullies who care more about their own power than protecting the Constitution”.

    Talks continued in Geneva between US and Ukrainian representatives today. Earlier, Donald Trump said that “something good just may be happening” in a post on Truth Social. Meanwhile, Ukraine has significantly amended the US “peace plan” for Ukraine, removing some of Russia’s maximalist demands, people familiar with the negotiations said, as European leaders warned on Monday that no deal could be reached quickly. For his part, Volodymyr Zelenskyy may meet Donald Trump in the White House later this week.

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has filed a notice in the federal register to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for the roughly 10,000 Myanmar nationals living in the US. This, despite the country being ruled by a military dictatorship that has a record of executing dissidents. The Trump administration has already withdrawn protected status for a number of other nationalities, including Afghanistan, Cameroon, Honduras, Nepal, Nicaragua, South Sudan and Venezuela, as part of sweeping changes to immigration policy.

    The outgoing Georgia congresswoman, Marjorie Taylor Greene, said today that “smears, lies, attacks, and name calling is childish behavior, divisive, and bad for our country”. This comes after she announced her decision to resign from Congress in January. In recent weeks, Greene has had a very public falling out with Donald Trump, which culminated in the president calling her a “traitor” after she supported a vote for the justice department to release the complete trove of Jeffrey Epstein files. Today, without naming the president or any Republican colleagues, the Georgia lawmaker pushed back on X. “Memes and red meat rants do nothing. Actions speak louder than words,” Greene wrote
    The president has said he will visit Beijing in April, after a “very good” call with China’s leader, Xi Jinping.Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social that he “discussed many topics including Ukraine/Russia, Fentanyl, Soybeans and other Farm Products”.He also teased a “good, and very important, deal for our Great Farmers”, and summarised the relationship with China as “extremely strong”. This despite a brewing trade war with the nation, following their decision to limit exports of rare earth minerals, and the US issuing retaliatory tariffs.“President Xi invited me to visit Beijing in April, which I accepted,” Trump added. “I reciprocated where he will be my guest for a State Visit in the U.S. later in the year. We agreed that it is important that we communicate often, which I look forward to doing.”Earlier, we brought you the news that the Department of Defense is investigating veteran and sitting Democratic senator Mark Kelly.This, after the Arizona lawmaker joined five other members of Congress in telling active duty military to “refuse illegal orders” in a social media video.For his part, Kelly has responded in a statement. “Secretary Hegseth’s tweet is the first I heard of this. I also saw the President’s posts saying I should be arrested, hanged, and put to death,” he wrote in a post on X. “If this is meant to intimidate me and other members of Congress from doing our jobs and holding this administration accountable, it won’t work. I’ve given too much to this country to be silenced by bullies who care more about their own power than protecting the Constitution.”Kelly also gave a brief summary of his military career:
    In combat, I had a missile blow up next to my jet and flew through anti-aircraft fire to drop bombs on enemy targets. At NASA, I launched on a rocket, commanded the space shuttle, and was part of the recovery mission that brought home the bodies of my astronaut classmates who died on Columbia. I did all of this in service to this country that I love and has given me so much.
    Halligan’s conduct in the Comey case came under sustained scrutiny from three different judges. A magistrate judge determined that Halligan may have committed other significant legal errors in instructing and presenting evidence to the same grand jury.The justice department denied to Reuters that Halligan engaged in any misconduct and argued that the magistrate judge’s ruling was based on misinterpretations and assumptions.A reminder that Comey was charged with making false statements and obstructing a congressional investigation. Prosecutors alleged he lied to the Senate judiciary committee during a 2020 hearing when he said he stood behind prior testimony that he had not authorized FBI leaks about investigations into Trump and his 2016 presidential election rival, Hillary Clinton.Comey has had an antagonistic relationship with Trump since his first term in 2017, when the president fired Comey while he was overseeing an investigation into alleged ties between Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia.Comey, who pleaded not guilty, mounted an array of legal challenges to the case, arguing that Halligan was unlawfully appointed as interim US attorney, that the case was an improper “vindictive” prosecution engineered by Trump, and that the substance of the false statement allegation was legally flawed.A federal judge has tossed out criminal charges against former FBI director James Comey and New York attorney general Letitia James.District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie ruled that Lindsey Halligan, the Trump-installed prosecutor who secured the indictment against two of the president’s most noted adversaries, was illegally appointed to her position as US attorney for the eastern district of Virginia.Currie wrote that Halligan had “no lawful authority” to present the indictments to both Comey and James (in separate cases). Lawyers for the former FBI director argued that when Halligan secured the indictment, the clock for a temporary US attorney had been run-out by her predecessor, Erik Siebert (who had already served for 120 days). They said it ultimately disqualified Halligan from holding the position at all. More

    More stories

    • 138 Shares60 Views

      in Elections

      Trump hints support for fringe theory that Venezuela rigged 2020 election

      by

      Donald Trump on Sunday appeared to endorse the discredited conspiracy theory that Venezuela’s leadership controls electronic voting software worldwide and caused his 2020 election defeat to Joe Biden.White House officials have previously said that Trump’s increasingly bellicose policy toward Venezuela is driven by concerns about migration and the drug trade. But the president’s new comment, made on Truth Social, hints that his hostility to Venezuela may also be based on an outlandish, implausible theory ruled to be false by a judge in 2023.Fox News paid $787m in 2023 to Dominion Voting to settle a lawsuit that was based in part on identical claims about Venezuela’s supposed role in the 2020 election.The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment about Trump’s remarks.Trump’s post came two days after the Guardian reported that Trump’s Department of Justice has been extensively interviewing conspiracists who are pushing the idea that Venezuela controls voting companies and flips votes to the candidates it favors.The US attorney in Puerto Rico, W Stephen Muldrow, has repeatedly interviewedthe former CIA officer Gary Berntsen and Venezuelan expatriate Martin Rodil, who claim to have proof of the scheme and the two have also briefed a taskforce out of Tampa. Berntsen, and author Ralph Pezzullo, were also guests on the podcast of far-right media personality Lara Logan on Friday.Trump on Sunday reposted the Logan podcast segment, and wrote:“We must focus all of our energy and might on ELECTION FRAUD!!”Trump did not specifically mention Venezuela, but the podcast was a rehash of the allegations and was built around a self published book called Stolen Elections, which recounts the theory.The post came as Trump has sent extensive military resources, including a navy aircraft carrier, to the region.On Monday the administration ramped up pressure, designating the Venezuelan-based so-called Cartel de los Soles as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. In July the treasury department had already named it a “specially designated global terrorist”.An indictment filed in 2020 alleged that the Venezuelan president, Nicolás Maduro, heads the reputed organization.“Who knows what the process is inside the White House,” said David M Rowe, a political science professor at Kenyon College who specializes in national security. “If it captures Trump’s attention, my understanding is it is part of the process. Trump needs to find justification in his own mind for war.”Rowe said that narcoterrorism claims about Venezuela have not resonated with Trump’s America First base, which has been reluctant to support overseas intervention. “As a kind of casus belli, a reason for war, narcoterrorism looks extremely weak. An attack on the American electoral system is stronger. If he can argue to the Maga movement that they did intervene in the US political system, it’s a stronger case for war,” he said.Berntsen, the ex-CIA officer promoting the theory, was asked by the Guardian on Monday about the president’s apparent affirmation of his theory, and replied: “The President knows this is NOT A CONSPIRACY THEORY, he knows the truth, evidence in possession of DOJ.”A Venezuelan opposition figure who supports strong action against Maduro but is dismissive of the election claims told the Guardian on condition of anonymity that proponents of the conspiracy theory are trying to take advantage of access to the administration. “I think there is someone inside the White House that these people have access to. They might be overselling this crap and there are people who refuse to let go of the 2020 election conspiracy bullshit.” More

    • 200 Shares88 Views

      in US Politics

      The ‘war on terror’ has killed millions. Trump is reviving it in Venezuela | Daniel Mendiola

      by

      For the last two months, US forces have amassed outside Venezuela and carried out a series of lethal strikes on civilian boats. The Trump White House has ordered these actions in the name of fighting “narco-terrorists” – a label apparently applicable to anyone suspected of participating in drug trafficking near Latin American coastlines. More than 80 people have already been killed in these pre-emptive strikes, and war hawks are calling for expanded military action to depose the Venezuelan president, Nicolás Maduro.Watching this play out, I am reminded of a passage from the geographer Stuart Elden’s award-winning 2009 book, Terror and Territory. In discussing how to study the “war on terror”, Elden observed that it did not make sense to study terrorism as something unique to non-state actors.“States clearly operate in ways that terrify,” Elden said. “The terrorism of non-state actors is a very small proportion of terrorism taken as a whole, with states having killed far more than those who oppose them.”A large body of research supports this claim.Researchers with Brown University’s Costs of War project, for example, have found that US-led interventions in the “war on terror” from 2001 to 2023 killed over 400,000 civilians in direct war violence. They also show evidence that when considering indirect deaths – for example, people in war zones dying from treatable medical conditions after clean water or medical infrastructure was destroyed – death toll estimates rise to at least 3.5m. Moreover, even beyond direct war zones, a recent study in the Lancet found that sanctions during the same period were also extremely deadly, causing as many as 500,000 excess deaths per year from 2010 to 2021.In short, we have already spent decades terrorizing civilian populations around the world in the name of fighting terror. This is well known, and yet the Trump White House is reinvigorating the “war on terror” anyway. Still more, it is trying to do it with even less oversight on the president’s license to kill than has been exercised in the past.While on the surface Trump’s second term has been characterized by a disorienting barrage of executive orders and culture war polemics, the administration has in fact been running a cohesive authoritarian playbook aimed at conferring near limitless powers to the presidency. These concerted efforts have played out in numerous policy arenas from immigration, to higher education, to economics, to even determining who is a citizen.Consistent with this pattern, Trump is asserting the same unchecked authority over the violent capacities of the US military.As I have written previously, a key tactic of the Trump White House has been eviscerating the oversight of the courts, making it impossible to impede the executive branch from continuing to break the law, even when it gets caught red-handed. However, another frequent strategy – perhaps less visible, though equally anathema to a system of limited government – has been to simply sidestep oversight by asserting that, even when law in theory places limits on presidential power, the exercise of this power is still “unquestioned”; according to this thinking, the executive branch apparently has the prerogative to interpret what those limits are.Of course, in a serious constitutional system, this would be preposterous. In practice, there would be no limits to presidential powers, rendering the constitution moot. Nonetheless, this is exactly the type of power that Trump is asserting over the military, both at home and abroad.The court case related to Trump’s efforts to suppress protests in Chicago using troops sheds critical light on how this strategy works. Federal law allows a president to deploy troops domestically if there is a “rebellion” that is making it impossible to “execute the laws of the United States”. Accordingly, some lower court judges have reasonably blocked the deployment of troops, finding that the administration has been unable to prove that these conditions were met. Just look at the facts: protests had on average only been about 50 people at a time, and they have clearly not made law enforcement impossible since ICE – the federal agency being protested – has vastly increased arrests during this time.True to form, however, Trump’s lawyers have argued that these details are irrelevant. In their view, there is actually no need to prove a rebellion is happening because the president has the authority to define rebellion anyway. In other words, the law might impose limits on how the president can use the military, but the president gets to decide what those limits are.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWhile lower courts have so far prevented this nakedly authoritarian legal theory from taking hold, the argument itself is still massively consequential: first, because an extremely Trump-friendly supreme court will hear the case soon and could very well endorse these claims; and second, because this is essentially the same logic that the Trump administration has used to justify killing civilians off the Latin American coast. Indeed, just as the Trump administration is asserting the exclusive right to define “rebellion” regardless of the facts on the ground – thus eliminating any real limits on the power to deploy troops domestically – the Trump White House is similarly asserting the unencumbered right to define “terrorist”, along with the corresponding right to take deadly action with virtually no outside oversight.In public statements, Trump has defended treating drug smugglers as terrorists by citing the harm done by drug overdoses, in effect suggesting that drug traffickers are directly killing US citizens. Ignoring the fact that Venezuela doesn’t produce fentanyl, the main driver of overdoses in the US, Trump has even gone so far as to float the mathematically impossible claim that each boat strike has saved 25,000 lives. Of course, officials have provided zero public evidence that the boats attacked were carrying drugs at all, much less tried to explain how blowing up boats would have any impact at all on drug abuse in the US.But again, why would they? The whole point of the argument is that such facts don’t matter because Trump simply has the unchecked authority to use lethal force. In fact, the justice department has suggested that officials do not even have to publicly list which foreign organizations are classified as killable terrorists, much less provide evidence to support this designation.Ultimately, Trump’s actions in and around Venezuela are best understood as a new phase in the “war on terror” – an ongoing tragedy that has already had deadly consequences for millions – though now with even fewer guardrails. The bottom line: Venezuela is not just some chess piece in an abstract game of geopolitics, and we are doing a disservice to humanity if we let war hawks in government and media spin it this way. We are talking about real people, and as very recent history shows, countless lives are at stake.

      Daniel Mendiola is a professor of Latin American history and migration studies at Vassar College More

    • 125 Shares76 Views

      in Elections

      Trump’s DoJ investigating unfounded claims Venezuela helped steal 2020 election

      by

      Federal investigators have been interviewing multiple people who are pushing unfounded claims that Venezuela helped steal the 2020 election from Donald Trump, the Guardian has learned.Two promoters of the conspiracy theory have repeatedly briefed the US attorney for the district of Puerto Rico, W Stephen Muldrow, and have shared witnesses and documents with officials, according to four sources. Muldrow declined to comment.In addition to the Puerto Rico talks, people pushing the conspiracy have been interviewed by federal investigators for a federal taskforce in Tampa which is looking at Venezuelan drug trafficking and money laundering, four sources told the Guardian. The US attorney’s office in Tampa declined to comment.An investigation of this sort underscores how Trump’s justice department is becoming a major weapon in the president’s efforts to rewrite the history of his 2020 loss – while potentially strengthening the administration’s case for military action against Venezuela.While there were a variety of conspiracy theories that helped fuel Donald Trump’s 2020 “Stop the Steal” movement – dead voters, stolen, fraudulent or forged ballots, and secret computer servers in Germany – the purported influence of Venezuela was always a central claim. It asserted that electronic voting in the US was secretly controlled by the impoverished regime, both by President Nicolás Maduro and his deceased predecessor Hugo Chávez.Not only was it bizarre on its face, but a judge in Delaware ruled it false in 2023, and Fox News, Newsmax and OAN later paid a total of hundreds of millions in total damages in defamation claims. At heart, the theory was that Smartmatic, which had the contract for electronic voting machines in Los Angeles, and Dominion, which ran voting in many other parts of the country, had been created or influenced by Venezuela to fix elections.The revival of the claim appears to bind together two themes: Trump’s consistent “rigged election” complaints, and his antagonism to Venezuela’s socialist regime.With a military buildup in the Caribbean and increased sabre-rattling from the Trump administration towards Maduro, the unfounded election-rigging theories could provide another rationale for military action against Maduro.‘Very receptive’How could a discredited conspiracy theory, be investigated as a plausible case by the US justice department five years after it first bubbled up?The story starts with two unique characters who claim to have been pursuing the election claims for years: Gary Berntsen and Martin Rodil. They have become sources for the Trump camp and ultimately for investigators and have promoted two major allegations about Venezuela, as the reporters Seth Hettena and Jonathan Larsen have written on Substack.The first theme links Tren de Aragua, the street gang Trump has designated as a terrorist organization, closer to Maduro. The other major theme Berntsen and Rodil promoted was the old voting conspiracy and the allegations that Venezuela helped rig elections worldwide.Berntsen is a former CIA case officer who came to the public eye even before writing a book in 2006 about his hunt for Osama bin Laden. “A formidable guy, a warrior, no question,” said one former official who knew him.Berntsen projects the plainspoken demeanor of an expert with field experience battling an intransigent bureaucracy. He is also a fierce champion of Trump and of an invasion of Venezuela.“I don’t dabble in conspiracy theories,” Berntsen wrote in a message to the Guardian. “I spent my life defending our country and constitution. I led many major operations and investigations and saved many lives.”He added: “The Department of Justice and FBI and key White House Staff are investigating and coordinating efforts to defend our system and charge those guilty of Stealing Elections and violating other laws accountable for their actions.”Rodil is a Venezuelan expatriate based in Washington, and says he has been a consultant to US law enforcement investigating Venezuelan crime for 20 years. A close associate of his said he specializes in recruiting Venezuelan informants and witnesses for US cases.The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists reported in 2022 that Rodil was under investigation in Spain for extorting three Venezuelans there, trying to get money in exchange for influencing US authorities on cases. It is unclear what happened to that case.Rodil told the Guardian it was false, and said those who accused him were charged in the US.Even before Trump’s return to office earlier this year, the sources say Berntsen and Rodil have been feeding information, documents and witnesses about the voting claims to Muldrow, the US attorney out of Puerto Rico and to an organized crime taskforce called Panama Express, or Panex, which is based out of Tampa.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSources familiar with the relationship between Muldrow, Berntsen and Rodil say there has been extensive cooperation on the matter. “They work together. Muldrow has been very receptive,” one of the sources said of the voting allegations. That source said there had been multiple briefings in Puerto Rico.Muldrow is one of the few US attorneys to have kept a job after Trump took over the White House. First appointed by Trump in 2019, he stayed in office during Biden’s term. He is a staunch Republican and Trump supporter, say two people who know him. Muldrow spent a good portion of his career in Tampa, and one source who knows him says he has a good working relationship with Pam Bondi, the current Trump US attorney general. She was the Florida state AG while Muldrow was based in the Tampa US attorney’s office.Several sources said Muldrow had turned over information to the Panex taskforce which used to focus primarily on the drug flow from Colombia but was now targeting Venezuela as well.This is now the taskforce working directly with Rodil and Berntsen, they say.In response to detailed questions, Muldrow emailed the Guardian: “In accordance with Department of Justice policies, I am not able to provide you with a comment.”Rodil told the Guardian that allegations involving so-called election integrity issues were incidental to conversations with Muldrow, rather than the central point of the briefings. He protested that while one witness talked about Smartmatic and election integrity, that was not the substance of Muldrow’s interest, and he said Muldrow only heard a portion of the evidence involving faked election results.Berntsen wrote in a message to the Guardian that “indictments are going to be released in the near future,” and said he and his colleagues believe that “your goal is to discredit the claims against Smartmatic and Dominion, the entities linked to a massive criminal cartel that stole US elections and elections worldwide.”‘Trump knows they need to be stopped’Ralph Pezzullo, the co-author of Berntsen’s 2006 book, is a true believer in the conspiracy theories Berntsen and Rodil are promoting now.In September, Pezzullo published an e-book called Stolen Elections: the Takedown of Democracies Worldwide, which described the Venezuela conspiracy theories, and is based on the accounts of Berntsen and Modil and witnesses they introduced to Pezzulo.Pezzullo wrote that the US voting was a “system created in Venezuela – and still electronically linked to Venezuela – that is designed to steal elections by remotely altering results”.Pezzullo said he too had spoken to Muldrow about the allegations. Pezzullo told the Guardian that his phone call with Muldrow was set up by Berntsen and claimed Muldrow assured him that the claims of election fraud were correct.“They’ve been attacking the US with the election machines and with the drugs,” Pezullo said, of Venezuela. “Trump knows they need to be stopped.” More

    • 163 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Texas’s Eagle Pass voters turned to Trump. A year later, some have doubts

      by

      Along southern Texas, the Rio Grande forms the US-Mexico border, an arrangement established after the end of the Mexican-American war. Eagle Pass, which had been known as El Paso del Águila, became the first US settlement on the Rio Grande.Swimming across the river has remained treacherous ever since. But migrants never stopped risking their lives to set foot on US soil – and in 2023, those numbers reach record highs as Eagle Pass, the seat of Maverick county, became the epicenter of growing backlash over the Biden administration’s immigration policies.In 2024, for the first time in a century, the Hispanic-majority border county voted for a Republican: Donald Trump. Trump won 14 out of 18 counties along the southern border, gaining the most support there of any Republican in three decades. But he made his biggest gains in Maverick, with 59% of the votes, increasing his support by 14% from 2020.While many supported Trump’s policies on border security, one year later some residents in Eagle Pass are increasingly uncomfortable with the tactics the administration has used across the country in keeping with its mass deportation agenda. Since Trump’s inauguration, federal agents have disrupted communities as they arrest parents who are with their children, show up at schools or daycare facilities, and accidentally sweep up US citizens.The intensity of the national crackdown is jarring for residents like Manuel Mello III who have been on the frontlines of border issues for decades. The chief of the Eagle Pass fire department, Mello explained that border crossings have always been part of the city’s history.Mello said his grandmother would pack food and water for those migrants that passed by. She would give them las bendiciones, or blessings in Spanish, and send them off. But what he saw at the Rio Grande in the last year of the Biden administration was unlike anything he had witnessed in his 33 years in the fire department.“We would get between 30 to 60 emergency calls a day about migrants crossing the river with a lot of injuries, some with broken femurs or this lady who had an emergency childbirth,” Mello said.In all 2024, the Eagle Pass fire department received more than 400 emergency calls and reported eight drownings. This year, the department has responded to fewer than 100 calls and reported only three drownings, according to numbers shared with the Guardian.“Now Eagle Pass has gone back to normal, but this is still a broken system. Because you’re deporting people doesn’t mean that you’re fixing it,” Mello said.A mile away, Ricardo Lopez and a group of friends gathered at a McDonald’s, as they do every week, to discuss some of the challenges facing Eagle Pass, a town in which 28,o00 people live.Not long after ordering coffee, Lopez and his friends, all bilingual men of Mexican descent, realized it has been almost a year since the last elections. They remembered the evolution of what was then an extraordinary series of events: from thousands of migrants swimming across the Rio Grande each day to foreign journalists wandering the town’s streets and Texas national guard troops grabbing lunch at local restaurants.“I think most people that live here can agree that it was the illegal immigration that was causing all the problems and that [Joe] Biden didn’t respond to the needs of the border,” said Lopez, 79, who recently ran for city council in Eagle Pass and lost. “After the last election I asked some of my friends, why did you vote for Trump? And they put it back to me: don’t you see what is happening? Though I don’t like the guy, he fixed the problem.”Just hours after taking office for a second time, Trump signed an order declaring a national emergency that allowed additional US troops to arrive at the southern border. But Trump didn’t only try to cut down on illegal immigration. The administration also terminated a mobile phone app created under Biden known as CBP One, which had allowed tens of thousands of people waiting in Mexico to cross into the US legally and apply for asylum.Since then, residents like Lopez have seen a dramatic change in Eagle Pass.At the height of the spike in migration in December of 2023, the border patrol recorded over 2,300 crossings a day in the Del Rio sector, home to Eagle Pass. In September of this year, it averaged just 30 crossings a day there, government data shows.Joshua Blank, research director of the Texas Politics project, a nonpartisan polling initiative by the University of Texas at Austin, said Maverick county was a reflection of broader political dynamics in the state, where Republicans were seeking to expand their appeal in blue-collar areas, including among Latinos.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Texas is a changing competitive landscape and more diverse than the country as a whole. If you try to appeal to Hispanics based on their Hispanicness, you might be missing the mark. And I think Democrats have probably failed in engaging with this group of people,” Blank said.Shortly after Biden entered the White House, Texas’s governor, Greg Abbott, had also launched Operation Lone Star in a bid to deter illegal immigration. The effort quickly raised concerns about its tactics, including the busing of thousands of migrants to Chicago, New York and Washington DC.As part of the initiative, an 80-acre base camp was built in Eagle Pass to house 1,800 Texas national guard soldiers. Troops deployed there by Texas and other Republican-led states have been seen standing on the US side of the border setting up coils of razor wire along the banks of the Rio Grande, ordering migrants to swim back to Mexico.Texas says Operation Lone Star had led to more than 500,000 apprehensions of undocumented people.On a recent afternoon, the Guardian observed armed Texas national guard troops walking and watching over the US-Mexico border atop shipping containers. No migrants were seen crossing the river from Mexico. In Piedras Negras, there wasn’t razor wire preventing access to the Rio Grande.While the migration dynamics have changed at the border, some longtime residents are not just concerned about the impact on people. They’re also worried about the degradation of the environment as a result of Trump and Abbott’s crackdown.Abbott used a natural disaster declaration to install floating buoys separated by saw-blades in the river as a part of Operation Lone Star. Shortly after, Jessie Fuentes, the owner of a kayaking company in Eagle Pass, filed a lawsuit, seeking to stop the installation of floating barriers.“The river was part of my grandfather’s upbringing, my father’s upbringing and mine, more than 200 years of experience as a family, and now it’s been mistreated with this militarization,” said Fuentes.“The river can’t defend itself so I sued the Texas government.” More

    • 200 Shares136 Views

      in US Politics

      US strikes another alleged drug boat bringing death toll from campaign in Latin America to 70

      by

      US forces struck another alleged drug trafficking boat in the Caribbean, killing three people, defense secretary Pete Hegseth has said, bringing the death toll from the Trump administration’s controversial campaign to at least 70.The US began carrying out such strikes – which some experts say amount to extrajudicial killings even if they target known traffickers – in early September, taking aim at vessels in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific.The US strikes have destroyed at least 18 vessels so far – 17 boats and a semi-submersible – but Washington has yet to make public any concrete evidence that its targets were smuggling narcotics or posed a threat to the United States.Hegseth released footage on X of the latest strike, which he said took place in international waters like the previous strikes and targeted “a vessel operated by a Designated Terrorist Organization.”No US forces were harmed in the operation, he said.“To all narco-terrorists who threaten our homeland: if you want to stay alive, stop trafficking drugs. If you keep trafficking deadly drugs – we will kill you,” he wrote.Like some previous videos released by the US government, a section of the boat is obfuscated for unspecified reasons.President Donald Trump’s administration has built up significant forces in Latin America, in what it says is its campaign to stamp out drug trafficking.So far it has deployed six Navy ships in the Caribbean, sent F-35 stealth warplanes to Puerto Rico, and ordered the USS Gerald R Ford carrier strike group to the region.On Thursday, the US Senate blocked a Democratic war powers resolution that would have forced Donald Trump to seek congressional approval to launch strikes in Venezuela, allowing the president to remain unchecked in his ability to expand his military campaign against the country.The administration has developed a range of options for military action in Venezuela, according to two people familiar with the matter, and Trump’s aides have asked the justice department for additional guidance that could provide a legal basis to strike targets other than boats.The governments and families of those killed in the US strikes on alleged drug boats have said many of the dead were civilians – primarily fishers.Venezuela’s president Nicolas Maduro has repeatedly accused Trump of seeking to oust him.US bombers have also conducted shows of force near Venezuela, flying over the Caribbean Sea off the country’s coast on at least four occasions since mid-October.Maduro – who has been indicted on drug charges in the United States – insists there is no drug cultivation in his country, which he says is used as a trafficking route for Colombian cocaine against its will.The Trump administration has said in a notice to Congress that the United States is engaged in “armed conflict” with Latin American drug cartels, describing them as terrorist groups as part of its justification for the strikes.With Agence France-Presse More

    • 188 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump says Maduro’s days are numbered but ‘doubts’ US will go to war with Venezuela

      by

      Donald Trump has sent mixed signals about potential US intervention in Venezuela, playing down concerns of imminent war against the South American nation but saying its leader Nicolás Maduro’s days were numbered.The president’s remarks, made during a CBS interview released on Sunday, come as the US amasses military units in the Caribbean and has conducted multiple strikes on alleged drug-trafficking vessels, killing dozens.Asked during the 60 Minutes program if the US was going to war against Venezuela, Trump said: “I doubt it. I don’t think so.” However, when asked if Maduro’s days as president were numbered, he replied: “I would say yeah. I think so, yeah.”Maduro, who faces indictment on drug charges in the US, has accused Washington of using drug trafficking as a pretext for “imposing regime change” in Caracas to seize Venezuelan oil.More than 15 US strikes on boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific have killed at least 65 people in recent weeks, with the latest taking place on Saturday, prompting criticism from governments in the region.Washington has yet to make public any evidence that its targets were smuggling narcotics or posed a threat to the US.In the same interview, Trump alleged countries including Russia and China had conducted underground nuclear tests unknown to the public, and that the US would test “like other countries do”.“Russia’s testing, and China’s testing, but they don’t talk about it,” he told 60 Minutes.“I don’t want to be the only country that doesn’t test,” he said, adding North Korea and Pakistan to the list of nations allegedly testing their arsenals.Confusion has surrounded Trump’s order that the US begin testing, particularly if he meant conducting the country’s first nuclear explosion since 1992.Trump first made his surprise announcement in a social media post on Thursday, minutes before entering a summit with the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, in South Korea, saying he had “instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis”.The announcement came after Russia said it had tested a new nuclear-powered cruise missile, the Burevestnik, and a nuclear-powered and nuclear-capable underwater drone.Asked directly if he planned for the US to detonate a nuclear weapon for the first time in more than three decades, Trump told CBS: “I’m saying that we’re going to test nuclear weapons like other countries do, yes.”No country other than North Korea is known to have conducted a nuclear detonation for decades. Russia and China have not carried out such tests since 1990 and 1996, respectively.Pressed on the topic, Trump said: “They test way underground where people don’t know exactly what’s happening with the test. You feel a little bit of a vibration.”However, Trump’s energy secretary, Chris Wright, on Sunday downplayed any possible tests by the US, telling Fox News on Sunday: “I think the tests we’re talking about right now are system tests. These are not nuclear explosions.”The US has been a signatory since 1996 to the comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty, which bans all atomic test explosions, whether for military or civilian purposes.Other topics addressed in the interview included:

      Trump said he “won’t be extorted” by Democrats to reopen the government, making clear that he has no plans to negotiate as the government shutdown will soon enter its sixth week.

      Asked to clarify whether he would try to run for a third term, which is barred by the constitution, Trump said: “I don’t even think about it,”

      Trump said immigration enforcement officials hadn’t gone far enough in deporting people who were in the country without legal authorisation.
      With Agence France-Presse More

    • 125 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s military pressure on Maduro evokes Latin America’s coup-ridden past

      by

      The ghosts of sometimes deadly Latin American coups of the past are being evoked by Donald Trump’s relentless military buildup targeting Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela’s autocratic socialist leader, whom Washington has branded a narco-terrorist.Salvador Allende, the democratically elected Marxist president of Chile toppled in a military coup in 1973, and Rafael Trujillo, the longstanding dictator of the Dominican Republic who was assassinated in 1961 in an ambush organized by political opponents, are just two regional leaders whose fates serve as a warning to Maduro.Allende is believed to have killed himself, although some doubt that explanation, as troops stormed the presidential palace in the Chilean capital, Santiago, in a coup – fomented by then president Richard Nixon’s administration – that ushered in the brutally repressive military regime of Gen Augusto Pinochet.The CIA is believed to have supplied the weapons used to kill Trujillo.Guatemala’s elected president, Jacobo Arbenz, escaped into exile after being overthrown in a 1954 coup also instigated by the CIA. But the event triggered a 30-year civil war that killed an estimated 150,000 people and resulted in 50,000 disappearances.The agency is also thought to have made at least eight unsuccessful attempts to assassinate Fidel Castro, the leader of Cuba’s communist regime, which is still in power and is closely allied to Maduro.The plot to depose Castro also included the failed Bay of Pigs invasion carried out by Cuban exiles and organized by the CIA in the early months of John F Kennedy’s presidency in 1961, but which was defeated by Cuba’s armed forces.Now, as the US stages its biggest naval buildup in the region since the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, some believe Maduro’s life is equally at risk.Washington is preparing to carry out military strikes imminently inside Venezuela on already pinpointed targets that have been identified as military facilities used to smuggle drugs, according to reports.US officials are leaving little doubt that this could lead to fatal consequences for Maduro.“Maduro is about to find himself trapped and might soon discover that he cannot flee the country even if he decided to,” the Miami Herald quoted a source with close knowledge of US military planning as saying. “What’s worse for him, there is now more than one general willing to capture and hand him over, fully aware that one thing is to talk about death, and another to see it coming.”The Trump administration has offered a $50m bounty for information leading to the arrest or conviction of the Venezuelan leader, after announcing in August that it was doubling the $25m reward initially offered during Trump’s first presidency.Explaining his decision this month to authorize covert CIA actions against Venezuela, Trump pointedly refused to say whether US forces were authorized to “take out” Maduro. However, Fulton Armstrong, a former CIA Latin America analyst, said the intense security surrounding the Venezuelan leader in effect rendered the reward a “dead or alive” proposition, meaning any attempt to snatch him is likely to result in his death.“Anybody who’s going to try to take him is going to be so heavily armed that any defense that he put up would lead to them pulling triggers,” said Armstrong.“Let’s say it’s locals and they want the bounty. Most of them will assume that they’ll get the bounty dead or alive. Our forces would be a little bit more disciplined, but then imagine the adrenaline that anybody trying to do a snatch would have coursing through their veins. They’re going to be trigger-happy.“Only a fool would think that they can go in there and say, ‘OK, let me put handcuffs on you and escort you to the car.’ That’s not how it’s going to work.”Maduro has survived at least one apparent attempt on his life, when two drones exploded as he was speaking at a military parade in Caracas in 2018. Television footage shows several members of his security team rushing to his side to shield him after the explosions.Maduro accused neighboring Colombia of being responsible, although some opponents suggested the episode was a false flag operation staged to win sympathy.In May 2020, Venezuelan security forces foiled an attempt by about 60 dissidents, accompanied by two former US Green Berets, to capture and oust him in a plot that involved infiltrating the country by sea. The episode was afterwards dubbed the “Bay of Piglets” in mocking reference to the botched plot against Castro.But a fresh sign of Washington’s determination to get its hands on Maduro emerged this week when the Associated Press reported that a US agent, working for the Department of Homeland Security, had unsuccessfully tried to bribe the Venezuelan president’s pilot into diverting his plane to enable American authorities to capture him.The Trump administration has deployed a daunting array of military hardware off the Venezuelan coast in what appears to be an intimidating statement of intent to bring about regime change in the country.Last week, the Pentagon announced that the USS Gerald Ford, the biggest aircraft carrier in the US navy, would sail from Europe to join a military force consisting of destroyers armed with Tomahawk cruise missiles, B-1 and B-52 bombers, and special forces helicopters.At least 57 people have been killed in more than a dozen US military strikes on alleged drug-trafficking boats in the Caribbean and Pacific. Washington has accused Maduro and other senior Venezuelan officials of being at the head of a cartel smuggling drugs into the US. Maduro denies the charge and experts dispute the significance of Venezuela’s role in the illegal drug trade.Trump has intensified the pressure further by authorizing the CIA to carry out covert activities inside Venezuela, although the contents of his instructions are classified and unknown.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionArmstrong argued that Trump was aware that his policy could prove fatal for Maduro.“What person wouldn’t be aware of that potential because you’re trying to take out a head of state, a tenacious head of state,” he said.“We do assassinations on a routine basis of people that we suspect of not even being senior members of groups that we consider to be terrorists. If we’re authorizing the assassination of regular combatants in the war on terror, how crazy is it to think that the administration would authorize the use of lethal means, if necessary, to snatch the head of a cartel.”Another former CIA officer, speaking on condition of anonymity because of their previous involvement in targeted assassinations in the Middle East, said decisions to authorize such killings were normally taken with great care and based on threat severity.“It is very specific and usually because there is a lethal threat to America and our allies. They are done super carefully,” the former agent said.“The president and the [national security council] come up with the plan, and then they decide who’s going to take the shot … Is it going to be the military [or some other agency], will it lead to war?”High-profile assassinations in recent times include Osama bin Laden by a Navy Seal team in 2011; Qassem Suleimani, the commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Qods force, killed by a drone strike ordered by Trump in 2020; and Ayman al-Zawahiri, Bin Laden’s former deputy in al-Qaida, who was killed by a drone in Afghanistan in 2022 during Joe Biden’s presidency.“Bin Laden was an easy decision – he killed thousands of Americans, and even before the 9/11 attacks he had done lesser stuff,” said the ex-officer. “Suleimani, too, was easy because he had killed so many Americans.”Maduro, however, presents a less clearcut target, even though Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, has described the Venezuelan regime as “the al-Qaida of the western hemisphere”.“The idea of going after a guy, Maduro, who is a sitting leader of a sovereign country, whether we like the country or not, just seems really strange and disproportionate,” the former agent continued. “Maduro is not Hitler. Bin Laden, Suleimani and al-Zawahiri were not heads of countries.“If you look at our history, even in the last 40 or 50, years, we’ve been staying away from going after world leaders.”Disclosures about the CIA’s role in backing coups and assassination attempts on foreign leaders during the 1950s and 1960s led to committees being established in Congress to oversee the agency’s activities.While there is no evidence that Trump has authorized Maduro’s assassination, John Ratcliffe, the CIA director, told senators during his confirmation hearings that he would make the agency less risk averse and more willing to conduct covert action when ordered by the president.Armstrong suggested the administration’s preferred course was to goad Maduro’s opponents in the Venezuelan military and other parts of society to topple him in a coup, setting the scene for a democratic transition while precluding the need for direct US action.But some analysts believe such a scenario would probably spawn a replacement loyal to the leftist movement spearheaded by Maduro’s late predecessor, Hugo Chávez – with a full-blown democratic transformation potentially taking years to bear fruit.Angelo Rivero Santos, a former Venezuelan diplomat in the country’s US embassy and now an academic at Georgetown University, said the chances of a coup were likely to be dashed by domestic realities and the fact that even Maduro’s critics have rallied around the flag in response to recent US pressure. .“The year 2025 is not 1973,” he said, referring to the coup that deposed Chile’s Allende. “Statements from the opposition show that this is not heavily supported inside the country.” More