Democrats

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      All 12 jurors seated for Trump’s historic criminal trial – as it happened

      by

      Here is a wrap-up of the day’s key events:
      12 jurors have been selected for Donald Trump’s historic criminal trial. One alternate juror has also been selected, with jury selection for five more alternates to resume tomorrow morning. The confirmations came after two jurors were removed from the jury earlier on Thursday.
      The first juror dismissed said she no longer believed she could be unbiased in the case. Since being selected on Tuesday, she had been targeted by Fox News host Jesse Watters, and said she had received a flurry of text messages from friends and family that led her to believe she had been identified.
      The second juror was excused after prosecutors expressed concerns that he may not have been truthful on his jury questionnaire. Prosecutors noted they found an article about a person with the same name who had been arrested in the 1990s for tearing down political posters.
      Prosecutors accused Trump of violating a gag order seven additional times. They have already filed a previous request to sanction him for breaking the order and a hearing on the issue is scheduled for next week.
      Judge Juan Merchan asked the media to stop reporting physical descriptions about potential jurors, concerned about their anonymity. Earlier this week he admonished Trump against intimidating jurors.
      That’s it as we wrap the blog up for today. Thank you for following along.Donald Trump was looking down at his hands on the table in front of him as judge Juan Merchan outlined next steps moving towards opening statements, which he hopes will be Monday. The confirmed jurors looked somber as they were sworn in, raising their right hands and swearing to hear the case in a “fair and impartial manner,” according to a trial pool report. Judge Juan Merchan said that jury selection for alternate jurors will continue on Friday and that he remains hopeful that the case will proceed to opening statements on Monday.All twelve juror confirmations came after a few setbacks, including the removal of two earlier jurors on Thursday.An alternate juror has been picked.According to a trial pool report, the details of the first chosen alternate juror are: B714, seat 18 (alternate 1).All 12 jurors have been seated. Here are the details for the last two jurors who were selected: B500, seat 16 (juror 11) and B440, seat 17 (juror 12).The jury selection has now moved on to choosing six alternate jurors.Three more jurors have been seated, bringing the total number of confirmed jurors to 10.According to a trial pool report, the juror details are: B639, seat 8 (juror 8), B423, seat 12 (juror 9) and B789, seat 14 (juror 10).Two jurors have been seated to backfill the empty spots that were left by two other jurors who were removed earlier.According to a trial pool report, the jurors are B565 (juror number 2) and B470 (juror number 4).Susan Necheles challenged the potential juror who stayed at her house overnight fifteen years ago, according to a trial pool report.Necheles also pointed to the potential juror’s husband who reviewed New York Times journalist Maggie Haberman’s book on Donald Trump’s crimes.Judge Juan Merchan asked the potential juror about her and her husband’s friendship with Necheles, to which the potential juror responded:
      “About 15 years ago, I met her through my husband, they were both lawyers at the time… We went and stayed at her house.”
      She went on to add that she has not spent time with Necheles since and would not have recalled the sleepover if her husband had not reminded her.The potential juror said that her husband was a general counsel at a company and also reviews books.Merchan also asked the potential juror if she discussed her husband’s opinion of Trump. In response, the potential juror said that they frequently talk about politics but did not discuss this particular case with him.The potential juror also said that she could be fair, adding, “I should say I work in publishing also, and I have published voices on both sides, so I do believe everyone deserves a voice.”After the potential juror left, Necheles renewed her objection, to which Merchan denied.“She doesn’t really know you,” Merchan said. In response, Necheles said that she did not remember her until her husband reminded her.“And she had to be reminded of that, yes?” Merchan said, adding, “Your challenge for cause is denied,” according to the trial pool report.Donald Trump’s lawyer Susan Necheles is moving to strike a potential juror for cause because the woman stayed at her house overnight 15 years ago.Following a quick departure from his bench, judge Juan Merchan returned, saying:
      “We started the day with seven, and unfortunately we’re down to five,” according to a trial pool report.
      Attorneys are also set to make “for cause” challenges on several of the 18 potential jurors who were questioned earlier.Judge Juan Merchan has sworn in another group of potential jurors and instructed them to appear at the courthouse at 11:30am on Friday.According to trial pool reports, Merchan apologized to group for having to wait around all day with nothing happening.Donald Trump’s attorney Susan Necheles questioned a potential juror on her thoughts towards the former president, according to a trial pool report. “I don’t have strong opinions, but I don’t like his persona. How he presents himself in public,” the prospective juror said, adding, “I don’t like some of my coworkers but I don’t try to sabotage their work.” The jury box laughed in response.The potential juror went on to add, “He seems very selfish and self serving… I don’t really appreciate that from any public servant.”“It sounds a bit like what you’re saying is you don’t like him, based on what you’re saying,” Necheles said, to which the potential juror responded, “Yes.” More

    • 100 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      House Republicans present Mayorkas impeachment articles to Senate

      by

      House Republicans on Tuesday formally presented articles of impeachment against Alejandro Mayorkas, the homeland security secretary, to the Senate, part of the party’s attempt to force an election-year showdown with the Biden administration over immigration and border security.In a ceremonial procession, 11 House Republican impeachment managers carried the two articles of impeachment across the rotunda of the US Capitol, where they informed the Senate they were prepared, for the first time in American history, to prosecute a sitting cabinet secretary for “willful and systemic refusal” to enforce border policies and a “breach of public trust”.Constitutional scholars, including conservative legal experts, have said the Republicans’ impeachment case is deeply flawed and fails to meet the high bar of “high crimes and misdemeanors” outlined in the constitution.Democrats, who control the Senate, have made clear their intention to quickly dispense with the articles, arguing that the politically charged proceedings amount to little more than a policy dispute with the administration. A two-thirds majority is needed to win an conviction in the Senate, an impossible threshold if all of the Democrats are united in favor of dismissing the charges against Mayorkas, who retains the support of Joe Biden.In February, House Republicans bypassed skepticism within their own ranks and unified Democratic opposition to approve by a one-vote margin two articles of impeachment against the secretary, who they have made the face of the Biden administration’s struggle to control record migration at the US-Mexico border.“Impeachment should never be used to settle a policy disagreement,” the Democratic majority leader, Chuck Schumer, said on Tuesday, adding: “Talk about awful precedents. This would set an awful precedent for Congress.”Schumer has said the Senate would convene on Wednesday as a “court of impeachment” and senators will be sworn in as jurors. Patty Murray, the Senate president pro tempore, a Democrat of Washington, presided over the chamber as the House homeland security chair, Mark Green of Tennessee, read the charges aloud.Schumer said he hoped to deal with the matter as “expeditiously as possible”. But Republicans are pressuring Democrats to hold a full trial.“We must hold those who engineered this crisis to full account,” the House speaker, Mike Johnson, said in a statement on Monday after signing the articles of impeachment. “Pursuant to the constitution, the House demands a trial.”Johnson initially delayed the delivery of the articles to focus on funding legislation to avert a government shutdown. Then the transmission was delayed again after Senate Republicans asked for more time to strategize ways to ensure a Senate trial.In remarks on Tuesday, Senator Mitch McConnell charged that it would be “beneath the Senate’s dignity to shrug off our clear responsibility” and not give thorough consideration to the charges against Mayorkas.“I will strenuously oppose any effort to table the articles of impeachment and avoid looking the Biden administration’s border crisis squarely in the face,” the Senate minority leader said.Mayorkas, the first Latino and first immigrant to lead the agency, has forcefully defended himself throughout the process, writing in a January letter to House Republicans: “Your false accusations do not rattle me.”Hours before the articles were delivered to the Senate, Mayorkas was on Capitol Hill, pressing Congress to provide his agency with more resources to enforce border policies and to pass legislation updating the nation’s outdated immigration laws.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Our immigration system, however, is fundamentally broken,” he told members of the House homeland security committee on Tuesday morning. “Only Congress can fix it. Congress has not updated our immigration enforcement laws since 1996 – 28 years ago. And, only Congress can deliver on our need for more border patrol agents, asylum officers and immigration judges, facilities and technology.”Republicans seized on the opportunity to assail Mayorkas, blaming him for the humanitarian crisis at the country’s southern border.“The open border is the number one issue across America in poll after poll and that is exactly why this committee impeached you,” said Marjorie Taylor Greene, the far-right Georgia congresswoman, one of 11 House Republicans tapped to serve as an impeachment manager.Several Republican senators have expressed deep skepticism about the House’s impeachment effort, former secretaries of homeland security as well as conservative legal scholars have denounced the Republicans’ case against Mayorkas as deeply flawed and warned that it threatens to undermine one of Congress’s most powerful tools for removing officials guilty of “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors”.A group of Republican senators are contemplating ways to slow-walk the process, suggesting they will deliver lengthy speeches and raise time-consuming procedural inquiries to keep the attention on immigration, one of Biden’s greatest political vulnerabilities.Americans broadly disapprove of the president’s handling of the border, now a top concern for many voters. Ahead of the 2024 election, Republicans have assailed Biden over the border while Donald Trump, the party’s likely presidential nominee, has again put immigration at the center of his campaign.An attempt to pass a bipartisan border bill – negotiated by Mayorkas and touted as the most conservative piece of immigration legislation in decades – was derailed by Republicans at the behest of Trump, who did not want Biden to notch a victory on an issue that plays to the former president’s political advantage.Biden has also asked Congress to approve requests for more border patrol agents and immigration court judges, but Republicans have refused, saying Biden should use his executive authority to stem the flow of migrants. Biden has said he is mulling a far-reaching executive action that would dramatically reduce the number of asylum seekers who can cross the southern border. More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      House sends impeachment articles against Alejandro Mayorkas to Senate – as it happened

      by

      House Republicans have sent two articles of impeachment against homeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to the Senate, a move that will bring about a Senate trial.According to House Republicans, Mayorkas “willfully and systematically” refused to enforce immigration laws, with House speaker Mike Johnson saying that Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer should “hold those who engineered this crisis to full account.”Johnson went on to add that Schumer is “the only impediment to delivering accountability for the American people.”“Pursuant to the constitution, the House demands a trial,” Johnson said.In response, Schumer said that he wants to “address this issue as expeditiously as possible,” adding, “Impeachment should never be used to settle a policy disagreement.”Following the latest move from the House, senators are expected to be sworn in as jurors on Wednesday. The chamber will then formally inform Mayorkas of the charges and request for a written response from him.Here is a wrap-up of the day’s key events:
      House Republicans have sent two articles of impeachment against the homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, to the Senate, a move that will bring about a Senate trial. According to House Republicans, Mayorkas “willfully and systematically” refused to enforce immigration laws, with House speaker Mike Johnson saying that Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer should “hold those who engineered this crisis to full account.”
      A second House Republican has joined the effort to oust the speaker, Mike Johnson, escalating the risk of another leadership election just six months after the Louisiana congressman assumed the top job. Congressman Thomas Massie, a Republican of Kentucky, announced on Tuesday that he would co-sponsor the motion to vacate resolution introduced last month by congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican of Georgia.
      At a press conference on Tuesday, House speaker Mike Johnson remained defiant that he would not resign and accused his critics of undermining Republicans’ legislative priorities. “I am not resigning, and it is, in my view, an absurd notion that someone would bring a vacate motion when we are simply here trying to do our jobs,” Johnson said.
      The criminal trial of Donald Trump entered its second day as judge Juan Merchan continued to vet over 500 prospective jurors. At one point during the jury selection process, Merchan sternly rebuked Trump after his team found a video on a possible juror’s social media account over Trump’s 2020 presidential loss. “Your client was audible… I will not have any jurors intimidated in this courtroom,” Merchan said.
      A potential juror caused Donald Trump to smile after he said that he read several of Trump’s books including the Art of the Deal. The juror, a resident of New York City’s Battery Park, said he is a member of the American Civil Liberties Union and is a board member of his synagogue.
      Prosecutors from the Manhattan district attorney’s office have filed a motion for contempt against Donald Trump. In the motion, prosecutors argue that Trump “wilfully violated this court’s [gag] order by publishing several social media posts attacking two known witnesses – Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels.”
      That’s it as we wrap up the blog for today. Thank you for following along.Alaska’s Republican senator Dan Sullivan has voiced his support for the House’s articles of impeachment against homeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.In a post on X, Sullivan wrote:
      “The articles of impeachment delivered by the House are thorough, compelling, and damning. The American people need to hear the evidence underlying these impeachment articles. Chuck Schumer has a constitutional duty to move forward with a Senate trial.”
      Georgia’s Republican representative Marjorie Taylor Greene announced that she delivered the impeachment articles against Alejandro Mayorkas to the Senate. In a post on X accompanying a video of her walking towards the Senate, Greene wrote:
      “Mayorkas is derelict of his duty and must be removed from office. Chuck Schumer: HOLD THE TRIAL.”
      House Republicans have sent two articles of impeachment against homeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to the Senate, a move that will bring about a Senate trial.According to House Republicans, Mayorkas “willfully and systematically” refused to enforce immigration laws, with House speaker Mike Johnson saying that Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer should “hold those who engineered this crisis to full account.”Johnson went on to add that Schumer is “the only impediment to delivering accountability for the American people.”“Pursuant to the constitution, the House demands a trial,” Johnson said.In response, Schumer said that he wants to “address this issue as expeditiously as possible,” adding, “Impeachment should never be used to settle a policy disagreement.”Following the latest move from the House, senators are expected to be sworn in as jurors on Wednesday. The chamber will then formally inform Mayorkas of the charges and request for a written response from him.Donald Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche and judge Juan Merchan discussed a misunderstanding over how potential jurors should be identified, including by number, according to a trial pool report.Attorneys also spoke with Merchan over social media posts, with Merchan saying that they can bring in prospective jurors and question them individually about concerning posts.Here are some images coming through the newswires:Donald Trump’s lawyers told the court before an early afternoon break that the former president no longer wished to exercise his right to be present for all one-on-one sidebar questioning of prospective jurors.Trump insisted on Monday that he wants to attend every conference, including side conferences during jury selection. No such questioning has taken place yet.Judge Merchan noted Trump had signed a form waiving his right to do so, saying:
      Mr. Trump, yesterday we discussed whether you wanted to be present at sidebars. You indicated you did. Your attorney indicated to me that you have changed your mind.
      At a press conference on Tuesday, House speaker Mike Johnson remained defiant that he would not resign and accused his critics of undermining Republicans’ legislative priorities.“I am not resigning, and it is, in my view, an absurd notion that someone would bring a vacate motion when we are simply here trying to do our jobs,” Johnson said.
      It is not helpful to the cause. It is not helpful to the country. It does not help the House Republicans advance our agenda.
      Congressman Thomas Massie’s announcement comes one day after Johnson unveiled a plan to advance a series of foreign aid bills through the House, following months of inaction on the issue. In February, the Senate passed a $95bn foreign aid package, which included funding for Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan and humanitarian efforts.Johnson proposed splitting up the package into four separate bills with some notable changes, such as cutting the humanitarian aid included in the Senate proposal and sending money to Ukraine as a loan. The speaker plans to hold separate votes on the bills and then combine them into one package to simplify the voting process for the Senate, which will need to reapprove the proposal.The plan won some tepid praise from many members of the House Republican conference, but the plan to bundle the bills into one larger funding package sparked frustration among hard-right Republicans. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who had already indicated she might force a vote on the motion to vacate over the issue of Ukraine funding, said she would not support Johnson’s plan and echoed Massie’s suggestion that the speaker should resign.A second House Republican has joined the effort to oust the speaker, Mike Johnson, escalating the risk of another leadership election just six months after the Louisiana congressman assumed the top job.Congressman Thomas Massie, a Republican of Kentucky, announced on Tuesday that he would co-sponsor the motion to vacate resolution introduced last month by congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican of Georgia.“[Johnson] should pre-announce his resignation (as Boehner did), so we can pick a new Speaker without ever being without a GOP Speaker,” Massie said on X, formerly known as Twitter.The former House speaker John Boehner resigned from Congress in 2015 after a fellow Republican, then congressman Mark Meadows of North Carolina, filed a motion to vacate the chair. In October, Kevin McCarthy became the first speaker in history to ever be formally removed from his job via a motion to vacate vote.Speaking to reporters after a Republican conference meeting this morning, Massie predicted that Johnson would lose the vote on the motion and would become the second speaker to lose the gavel. Massie said:
      The motion is going to get called, and then [Johnson] is going to lose more votes than Kevin McCarthy.
      Trump attorney Todd Blanche has been conducting his own questioning of jurors, which boils down to: What is your opinion of Donald Trump?Some jurors seemed reticent about voicing an opinion while others didn’t seem all that perturbed by the former commander-in-chief’s antics. One juror said:
      I find him fascinating. He walks into a room and he sets people off. One way or another, and I find that really interesting. Really, this one guy could do all this?
      Blanche pressed:
      Well certainly, he makes things interesting. So, I follow because so may people are set off one way or another, and that is interesting to me.
      Blanche said, “uhm, alright,” and then thanked the man. One potential juror repeatedly tried to avoid answering the question.
      If we were sitting at a bar, I’d be happy to tell you, but in this room what I feel about President Trump is not important or inherent to either the case you’re presenting or you’re defending.
      After repeated prodding, he conceded: “Look: I’ll say I’m a Democrat, so there you go, that’s where it goes with me,” but, he insisted:
      I walk in here and he’s a defendant.
      One woman appreciated Trump’s brashness. “He speaks his mind. Come on: What else can you say about that?” At this moment, Trump smiled.
      He says what he wants to say. I want to say some things but my mother said, ‘be nice.’
      The court has taken a recess for lunch and will resume at 2.15pm ET.Just before the break, Donald Trump and his lawyers went to a nearby courtroom to begin deciding which prospective jurors they’d want to remove using peremptory challenges.When they returned to the courtroom a short time later, Trump lawyer Todd Blanche said they needed more time.Judge Merchan said they would have until after the lunch break to decide.Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche has been asking potential jurors for their opinions of the former president. Here are some of their responses, per pool.One potential juror said he found Trump “fascinating and mysterious”, adding:
      He walks into a room and he sets people off one way or another … I find that really interesting. Really, this one guy can do all of this. Wow, that’s what I think.
      Another potential juror said he was “a big fan of the Apprentice when I was in middle school” and that there are “some things I agreed with, some things I disagreed with” with regards to Trump’s presidency.One potential juror told Blanche that she isn’t really into politics but that “obviously I know about president Trump. I’m a female.” When asked what she meant by that, she replied:
      I know that there have been opinions on how he doesn’t treat females correctly. Stuff like that.
      Another potential juror largely refused to share his views on the former president, insisting that his views don’t matter. He said:
      I’ll say I’m a Democrat so there you go. But I walk in there and he’s a defendant and that’s all he is.
      No cameras are allowed inside the Manhattan courtroom where Donald Trump’s hush money trial is under way, but sketch artists have been capturing scenes:Here are some of the questions potential jurors have been asked to answer as part of the trial’s jury selection process:
      Are you a native New Yorker? If not, where did you live previously?
      What do you do for a living?
      Do you participate in any organizations or advocacy groups?
      Which of the following print publications, cable and/ or network programs, or online media such as websites, blogs, or social media platforms do you visit, read, or watch? (Choices are: New York Times, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, New York Post, New York Daily News, Newsday, Huffington Post, Washington Post, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, Newsmax, MSN, Google, Yahoo, Facebook, Truth Social, X, Tik Tok, I do not follow the news, Other [name])
      Have you, a relative, or close friend had any experience or interaction with the criminal justice system, including a police officer or other type oflaw enforcement agent, which caused you to form an opinion, whether positive or negative, about the police or our criminal justice system?
      Have you, a relative, or a close friend ever worked or volunteered for a Trump presidential campaign, the Trump presidential administration, or any other political entity affiliated with Mr. Trump?
      Have you ever attended a rally or campaign event for Donald Trump?
      Have you ever considered yourself a supporter of or belonged to any of the following: the QAnon movement, Proud Boys, Oathkeepers, Three Percenters, Boogaloo Boys, Antifa?
      The defendant in this case has written a number of books. Have you read (or listened to audio) of any one or more of those books? If so, which ones?
      There are 18 jurors in the jury box, according to a trial pool report.Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked whether media reports surrounding the case have impacted the prospective jurors’ opinions.He also asked if they could set aside what has been reported in the media.Steinglass also said that it does not matter whether a juror has heard about the case, the pool report added.Prosecutor Josh Steinglass gestured to Donald Trump as he told prospective jurors that this criminal case is about “whether this man broke the law,” according to the trial reporter pool.Steinglass went on to acknowledge Trump as a former president and current presidential candidate.No jurors raised their hand when Steinglass asked whether anyone believed that prosecutors should have to prove more because of Trump’s position, the pool report added.In just five hours of jury selection, Donald Trump has seen dozens of New Yorkers say that they could not be fair and impartial.These prospective jurors have been excused from serving on the case, of course, but it still must smart a bit: This is Trump’s home town, after all, but he is so polarising that his compatriots want out.One juror did appear to make Trump’s morning, however. The prospect said “yes” to question 36 on the selection questionnaire, which was: “The defendant in this case has written a number of books. Have you read (or listened to audio) of any one or more of these books? If so, which ones?”The potential panelist revealed “I read the Art of the Deal, and I want to say How to be Rich, and Think Like a Champion – is that right?” The panelist hesitated, uncertain as to whether this was the title.Trump nodded his head and offered a smile.A potential juror caused Donald Trump to smile after he said that he read several of Trump’s books including the Art of the Deal, Politico reports.The juror, a resident of New York City’s Battery Park, said he is a member of the American Civil Liberties Union and is a board member of his synagogue.He added that he follows various news outlets including the New York Times, New York Post and NY1. More

    • 175 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      How did Kamala Harris go from being a rising star to a damp squib?

      by

      Remember Kamala Harris? Just a few years ago the first female vice-president of the US was surrounded by fanfare, splashed on the cover of Vogue and being feted as the future of the Democratic party. For a brief moment, it seemed plausible that Joe Biden, the oldest inaugurated president in history, might serve just a single term and then gracefully hand the reins over to his VP. “Ms Harris now finds herself the most clearly positioned heir to the White House,” the New York Times mused after the 2020 election.Four years on and Harris’s position is a lot less clear. Indeed, you could be forgiven for forgetting that the vice-president even exists. And, to be fair, that’s because part of her job is ensuring she doesn’t steal the spotlight from her boss. Very few vice-presidents shine in the role; there is a reason Teddy Roosevelt once opined that the position “is not a stepping stone to anything except oblivion”. Biden, of course, was an exception to that. Still, he jokingly complained that being number two was “a bitch” back in 2014, when he was VP.Even bearing in mind the inherent limitations of the position, however, Harris’s vice-presidency has been a damp squib. Not even Harris’s inner circle seem enthused by the 59-year-old: the early days of her vice-presidency were plagued with headlines about dysfunction and infighting in her office. Harris may have had a trailblazing career, but few people seem to take her seriously – not even allies dependent on US government aid. A recent report by the Washington Post, for example, suggests that the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was irritated when Harris recently asked him to stop attacking oil refineries in Russia, and proceeded to ignore her because he wasn’t sure she (the vice-president!) actually reflected the Biden administration’s views.The bad press has been accompanied by even worse polls. Indeed, an NBC News poll from last June found Harris had the lowest net-negative rating for any vice-president in the survey’s history – 49% had a negative view while 32% had a positive view. With the election drawing closer, the situation hasn’t much improved.And while Harris has insisted she is prepared to serve as president “if necessary”, she is not widely seen as a shoo-in in the unlikely case that the Democrats replace Biden as the 2024 nominee. Rather, the California governor, Gavin Newsom, and Michelle Obama have been floated as more electable replacements.So what went so terribly wrong? How did Harris go from being a rising star to something of an embarrassment?Racism and misogyny obviously play some part. Trump has referred to Harris as “this monster” and the right have always been desperate to paint Harris in the most dehumanising light. It hasn’t helped, of course, that Biden gave Harris the impossible task of dealing with migration and border security, which put her even more firmly in the right’s firing line.Still, it would be disingenuous to say that bigotry is at the heart of Harris’s image problem. Yes, the right automatically see the worst in her – but a hell of a lot of people on the left have been desperate to see the best in her. You did not have to be a Harris fangirl (and many progressives, alienated by her record as a prosecutor, were not) to want to see the first female vice-president, the first woman of colour vice-president, succeed.Now, however, as one of the faces of Biden’s heartless policy towards Gaza, she has alienated many of the people who thought she represented a more inclusive future. “Can we really celebrate Black women in power who can’t use said power to prevent death and starvation inflicted on a stateless people?” the Washington Post columnist Karen Attiah wrote last month. “I – like an increasing number of voters – don’t think so.”Ultimately, however, the problem with Harris isn’t so much her stance on Gaza so much as the fact that she doesn’t seem to have a genuine stance on anything. Throughout her career, Harris has been characterised by what the New York Times called a “lack of ideological rigidity”. Which is a polite way of saying she seems to believe in little except her own advancement. It’s been a successful strategy so far, but it may have finally come to an end. 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

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Mike Johnson unveils complex plan for Israel and Ukraine aid as pressure rises

      by

      Mike Johnson, the US House speaker, has unveiled a complicated proposal for passing wartime aid for Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan, rejecting pressure to approve a package sent over by the Senate and leaving its path to passage deeply uncertain.The Republican speaker huddled with fellow GOP lawmakers on Monday evening to lay out his strategy to gain House approval for the funding package. Facing an outright rebellion from conservatives who fiercely oppose aiding Ukraine, Johnson said he would push to get the package to the House floor under a single debate rule, then hold separate votes on aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan and several foreign policy proposals, according to Republican lawmakers.However, the package would deviate from the $95bn aid package passed by the Senate in February, clouding its prospects for final passage in Congress.Johnson has faced mounting pressure to act on Joe Biden’s long-delayed request for billions of dollars in security assistance. It’s been more than two months since the Senate passed the $95bn aid package, which includes $14bn for Israel and $60bn for Ukraine.The issue gained new urgency after Iran’s weekend missile and drone attack on Israel. Congress, however, remains deeply divided.Johnson has declined to allow the Republican-controlled House to vote on the measure. The senate passed it with 70% bipartisan support and backers insist it would receive similar support in the House, but Johnson has given a variety of reasons not to allow a vote, among them the need to focus taxpayer dollars on domestic issues and reluctance to take up a Senate measure without more information.As the House has struggled to act, conflicts around the globe have escalated. Israel’s military chief said on Monday that his country will respond to Iran’s missile strike. And Ukraine’s military head over the weekend warned that the battlefield situation in the country’s east has “significantly worsened in recent days”, as warming weather has allowed Russian forces to launch a fresh offensive.Meanwhile, Joe Biden, who is hosting Petr Fiala, the Czech prime minister, at the White House, called on the House to take up the Senate funding package immediately. “They have to do it now,” he said.Hakeem Jeffries, the top House Democrat, also put pressure on Johnson and pledged in a letter to lawmakers to do “everything in our legislative power to confront aggression” around the globe, and he cast the situation as similar to the lead-up to the second world war.“The gravely serious events of this past weekend in the Middle East and eastern Europe underscore the need for Congress to act immediately,” Jeffries said. “We must take up the bipartisan and comprehensive national security bill passed by the Senate forthwith. This is a Churchill or Chamberlain moment.”In the Capitol, Johnson’s approach could further incite the populist conservatives who are already angry at his direction as speaker.Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican Congresswoman from Georgia, is threatening to oust him as speaker. As she entered the closed-door Republican meeting on Monday, she said her message to the speaker was: “Don’t fund Ukraine.”The GOP meeting was filled with lawmakers at odds in their approach to Ukraine: Republican defense hawks, including the top lawmakers on national security committees, who want Johnson to finally take up the national security supplemental package as a bundle, are pitted against populist conservatives who are fiercely opposed to continued support for Kyiv’s fight.On the right, the House Freedom Caucus said Monday that it opposed “using the emergency situation in Israel as a bogus justification to ram through Ukraine aid with no offset and no security for our own wide-open borders”.The Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 275 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘The speaker has to move quickly’: White House urges Mike Johnson to pass aid for Ukraine and Israel – as it happened

      by

      The White House “will not accept” any bill put forward by Republicans in the US House that only provides additional funding to Israel, in the wake of Iran’s attack on Saturday, and does not include aid for Ukraine, the press secretary just said.The US House speaker, Mike Johnson, said on Sunday that he will aim to advance a bill for wartime aid to Israel this week but did not clarify whether Ukraine funding would be part of the package.The White House wants a bipartisan $95bn national security bill that is languishing in the House to be passed, which includes fresh funding for Israel, Ukraine, Taiwan and other allies.White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said at the media briefing in the west wing moments ago that “the Speaker has to move quickly” to “get this on the floor” of the chamber for a vote.If Republicans put forward a bill that only offers extra funding for Israel, the White House will not support it (although such a bill would be unlikely to pass the Democratic-controlled Senate anyway).“We would not accept a standalone,” Jean-Pierre said.Hello again, it’s been a lively day in US politics with news coming from the White House, the Supreme Court and Capitol Hill. We’re closing this blog now. We still have live coverage of the first day of the first ever criminal trial of a former US president as Donald Trump attends court in New York, where jury selection is underway in the hush money case involving Stormy Daniels. You can read that blog here.We’ll be back on Tuesday. All in the one blog this time we’ll plan to have action from Day 2 of the Trump trial, oral arguments at the Supreme Court over alleged insurrectionists accused of obstruction of an official proceeding when they tried to stop the congressional certification of Joe Biden’s presidential election victory, on January 6, 2021, and now-President Biden’s trip to his hometown of Scranton on the first visit of a three-day campaign swing through the crucial battleground state of Pennsylvania.Here’s what happened today:
      The White House “will not accept” any bill put forward by Republicans in the US House that only provides additional funding to Israel and not also Ukraine, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said. “The Speaker has to move quickly” to put the a bipartisan bill already passed by the Senate onto the floor of the House for a vote, she said.
      “We do not want a war with Iran,” national security spokesman John Kirby said at the White House press briefing. He said the US is not involved with any Israeli decision now about how to respond after Iran sent drones and missiles hurtling towards Israel on Saturday, with almost all of them shot down.
      Supreme court justice Clarence Thomas was absent from the court in Washington DC on Monday – with no explanation, as the court issued a ruling and heard oral arguments. This is highly unusual. Thomas, 75, also was not participating remotely in arguments, as justices sometimes do when they are ill or otherwise can’t be there in person.
      The US supreme court on Monday allowed a Black Lives Matter activist to be sued by a Louisiana police officer injured during a protest in 2016 in a case that could make it riskier to engage in public demonstrations, a hallmark of American democracy. In declining to hear DeRay Mckesson’s appeal, the justices left in place a lower court’s decision reviving a lawsuit by the Baton Rouge police officer, John Ford, who accused him of negligence after being struck by a rock during a protest sparked by the fatal police shooting of a Black man, Alton Sterling, by white officers.
      Joe Biden is preparing for a three-day election campaign swing through Pennsylvania from Tuesday, after Donald Trump campaigned there on Saturday, two days before his criminal trial was due to begin in New York.
      Czech prime minister Petr Fiala has now arrived in the Oval Office.Before his departure from Prague on Sunday, Fiala told reporters that during his visit to the US he will focus on security cooperation, the Middle East, and aid to Ukraine, the White House pool reports.Fiala said he would address the issue of further support for Ukraine in any talks he has with US officials. The White House today is urging the US House to bring a stalled bill to the floor for a vote that provides fresh aid to Ukraine and Israel.
      I will try to convince our American friends that this help and support is absolutely necessary,” Fiala said of more aid for Ukraine in its desperate fight back against Russia more than two years after the much larger neighbor invaded.
      Other topics will include economic relations and nuclear energy. Although the American firm Westinghouse has dropped out of the bid for the completion of a Czech power plant, the Czech Republic would still like to cooperate with the US on the supply of nuclear fuel for Czech power plants, and development of small modular reactors.Announcing Fiala’s travel to the US, the Czech Government Office pointed to a symbolic significance of his visit, as the Czech Republic commemorates the 25th anniversary of its accession to NATO.The arrival of the prime minister of the Czech Republic, Petr Fiala, at the White House has been delayed, as it was due to be happening by now.The White House pool report notes that Fiala began his visit to Washington today with an unannounced meeting with the director of the CIA, William Burns.“At the beginning of my working visit, I am heading for a meeting with the director of the CIA,” Fiala himself revealed on X. The heads of the Czech intelligence services, including the head of the Czech civilian counterintelligence service, the Security Information Service (BIS) Michal Koudelka and Military Intelligence Service commander Jan Beroun are accompanying Fiala in Washington.Last month Fiala announced that BIS discovered a Kremlin-financed network that spread Russian propaganda and wielded influence across Europe, including in the European Parliament.At the center of the network was a Voice of Europe news site based in Prague, which tried to discourage Europeans from sending more aid to Ukraine. Some European politicians cooperating with the news site were apparently paid by Russians. Fiala and Biden met in Warsaw in February 2023.Top House Democrat and New York Democratic congressman Hakeem Jeffries is also urging Speaker Johnson to bring the bipartisan aid bill that covers Ukraine and Israel to the floor for a vote.It was passed by the Senate in February and since then has been stalled as Johnson battles hard right Republican colleagues who oppose more aid to Ukraine.Jeffries’ wish posted yesterday has not been granted:But earlier on Monday Jeffries sent a letter to his caucus spelling out the need to support Ukraine as well as Israel, Reuters reports.
      The gravely serious events of this past weekend in the Middle East and Eastern Europe underscore the need for Congress to act immediately. We must take up the bipartisan and comprehensive national security bill passed by the Senate forthwith,” Jeffries wrote.
      Ukraine appealed again to allies on Monday for “extraordinary and bold steps” to supply air defenses to help defend against waves of Russian airstrikes that have targeted its energy system in recent weeks.But underscoring the deep party divide in Washington, a letter released on Monday urging an immediate vote on the Senate bill was signed by 90 House Democrats and just one Republican.House Speaker Mike Johnson is expected to decide this week on how he will handle Joe Biden’s long-delayed request for billions of dollars in security assistance for Ukraine, Israel and the Indo-Pacific, Reuters reports.More than two months after it passed the Senate, the push for the $95bn aid package, which includes $14 billion for Israel as well as $60 billion for Ukraine, gained new urgency after Iran’s weekend missile and drone attack on Israel despite fierce opposition in the deeply divided Congress.Johnson has declined to allow the Republican-controlled House to vote on the measure that the Senate passed with 70% bipartisan support in February.Backers insist it would receive similar support in the House, but Johnson has given a variety of reasons not to allow a vote, among them the need to focus taxpayer dollars on domestic issues and reluctance to take up a Senate measure without more information.Republican House aides said on Monday Johnson had not yet indicated his plans for security assistance, after discussing it with national security committee leaders late on Sunday and planning more talks with members on Monday.The White House “will not accept” any bill put forward by Republicans in the US House that only provides additional funding to Israel, in the wake of Iran’s attack on Saturday, and does not include aid for Ukraine, the press secretary just said.The US House speaker, Mike Johnson, said on Sunday that he will aim to advance a bill for wartime aid to Israel this week but did not clarify whether Ukraine funding would be part of the package.The White House wants a bipartisan $95bn national security bill that is languishing in the House to be passed, which includes fresh funding for Israel, Ukraine, Taiwan and other allies.White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said at the media briefing in the west wing moments ago that “the Speaker has to move quickly” to “get this on the floor” of the chamber for a vote.If Republicans put forward a bill that only offers extra funding for Israel, the White House will not support it (although such a bill would be unlikely to pass the Democratic-controlled Senate anyway).“We would not accept a standalone,” Jean-Pierre said.Joe Biden said a little earlier on Monday that he wants to prevent the conflict in the Middle East, where Israel is waging war in Gaza and fending off Iranian attacks, from spreading more widely, Agence France-Presse reports.
      Iran launched an unprecedented aerial attack against Israel, and we launched an unprecedented military effort to defend it. Together with our partners, we defended that attack.
      The United States is committed to Israel’s security. We’re committed to a ceasefire that will bring the hostages home and prevent the conflict from spreading beyond what it already has,” Biden said as he met Iraq’s visiting prime minister.
      Biden was referring to those kidnapped by Hamas militants in their deadly October 7 attack on Israel.Biden has promised “ironclad” support for Israel but also urged it to “think carefully and strategically” before launching a response against Iran that could trigger a wider war.The US president said he was “also committed to the security of our personnel and partners in the region, including Iraq.”Iraq’s prime minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani was visiting the White House for talks on the presence of US troops in Iraq as part of an anti-jihadist coalition.National security spokesman John Kirby, at the White House press briefing, is reluctant to expand on Joe Biden’s advice to Israel at the weekend to “be careful” in its approach to any response to Iran’s attack on Saturday night.But there is an air that the US believes Israel’s broadly successful defense against the unprecedented Iranian assault at the weekend, where hundreds of missiles and drones were intercepted by the Jewish state and allies, is a satisfactory outcome in itself.“We do not want a war with Iran,” Kirby said. He said the US is not involved with any Israeli decision now about how to respond.However he talked in graphic terms about the US activities in shooting down incoming Iranian missiles and drones on Saturday as they approached Israel, both with US fighter jets in the air and from US destroyer ships at sea.“We will do what we have to do to defend Israel,” he said, adding that the US “does not want a wider conflict.”Israel has said it will respond, but without any details yet. Western leaders are urging restraint. Iran’s attack was retaliation for an Israeli attack on Iranian targets in Syria earlier this month.A little earlier, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken also said Washington did not want any escalation, but would continue to defend key ally Israel.The White House press briefing is underway. Press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has just greeted the media in the west wing and now national security spokesman John Kirby is speaking on international affairs.Kirby is speaking now about Iran’s attack on Israel on Saturday night and he’s pushing back on any idea that Iran knew it wouldn’t hit home with any of the drone weapons or cruise missiles that it launched and that it designed the assault to fail.He said the attack “was defeated thanks to our preparations…and Israel’s remarkable defense system.”Kirby said the extent of the US’s intervention in Israel’s defense was unprecedented, and that Iran had fired so many weapons at Israel because it knew many would be repelled but hoped a maximum number would get through.He’s now talking up the wide defensive coalition and said “Iran failed.”Fifteen prominent historians filed an amicus brief with the US supreme court earlier this month, rejecting Donald Trump’s claim in his federal election subversion case that he is immune to criminal prosecution for acts committed as president.Authorities cited in the document include the founders Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Adams, in addition to the historians’ own work.Trump, the historians said, “asserts that a doctrine of permanent immunity from criminal liability for a president’s official acts, while not expressly provided by the constitution, must be inferred. To justify this radical assertion, he contends that the original meaning of the constitution demands it. But no plausible historical case supports his claim.”Trump faces four federal election subversion charges.The supreme court will hear arguments on Trump’s immunity claim, despite widespread legal and historical opinion that the claim is groundless. Fuller report from my colleague, Martin Pengelly here.Donald Trump’s federal criminal trial for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results had been due to take place in Washington, DC, in March and the government, prosecuting, had asked for it to begin in January of this year.But here we are in April, with the New York criminal trial going ahead (being blogged here) and no dates for any of the other three cases in which Trump is a defendant.This as the US Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments from the former president that he is immune from prosecution.Trump pleaded not guilty last August to charges filed in federal district court in Washington that he conspired to defraud the United States, conspired to obstruct an official proceeding, obstructed an official proceeding and engaged in a conspiracy against rights.My colleague Hugo Lowell writes that the supreme court’s eventual ruling in Fischer v United States, in which it’s hearing oral arguments tomorrow, will indicate whether the obstruction charge under section 1512 of title 18 of the US criminal code can be used against Trump, and could undercut the other general conspiracy charges brought against the former president by the special counsel, Jack Smith.The court could also end up by extension invalidating many convictions against rioters involved in the January 6 Capitol attack. The obstruction statute has been the justice department’s primary weapon to hold accountable those involved in the violence of that day.With Clarence Thomas absent from court today, observers will be watching keenly to see if he joins the bench on Tuesday for Fischer.Clarence Thomas is the oldest of the justices on the bench of the US supreme court, at age 75.The staunch conservative has had previous absences for health reasons, but no reasons have been given for his not being present today during the session in the marbled edifice in Washington DC.Oral arguments were being heard today and a ruling was made. Chief Justice John Roberts announced that Thomas wasn’t present.He has been embroiled in controversies in relation to accusations of unethical conduct and unfair partisan political links.NBC News reports:“Often when a justice is not present for oral arguments, the court will give a reason, including instances when there is a health issue.In February of last year, conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch was not present for an argument, and the court said he was feeling “under the weather.”When Thomas himself was hospitalized in 2022, the court disclosed that he had an infection and was being treated with antibiotics.”The US supreme court on April 25 will hear arguments in the unprecedented claim by Donald Trump that he has absolute immunity from prosecution in the federal criminal case over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.Progressive advocacy group MoveOn is petitioning for the conservative supreme court associate justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from that case.The group argues that: “It’s clear that the supreme court will play a central role in this year’s presidential election at a time when the public holds the historically lowest opinion of the court’s integrity. For the supreme court to consider these cases with any impartiality, it’s critical that justices with conflicts of interest recuse themselves. That applies first and foremost to Justice Clarence Thomas, whose own wife played a role in Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 elections.”The group goes on to argue that: “Thomas has a longstanding history of conflicts of interest. It’s crucial that we raise the pressure now and demand that Justice Thomas recuse himself from this case immediately!”With Trump on trial from today in Manhattan on the New York hush money case (being live blogged here), in the federal case on 2020 election interference we don’t yet have a date for trial. The case is basically on hold until the supreme court rules on the matter of immunity, putting in grave jeopardy the prospect of that trial starting before the next election in November.The US supreme court is due to hear arguments in an important case on Tuesday that involves defendants charged with crimes in relation to the 6 January 2021 insurrection at the US Capitol in Washington – and has implications for Donald Trump.Associate justice Clarence Thomas’s absence from court today now has people wondering what will happen tomorrow.Oral arguments will be presented in the case of Fischer v United States. Former police officer Joseph Fischer has been charged in connection with the January 6 invasion of congress by a mob of Trump supporters, accused of assaulting a serving police officer, disorderly conduct and, crucially, obstruction of a congressional proceeding.This allegedly happened when rioters, who had been egged on by Trump at a rally near the White House just before they breached the US Capitol, aimed to stop the official certification by a joint session of congress of Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential election victory over Trump. Amid the violence, the certification was delayed but took place in the early hours of the following day after the Capitol had been cleared.Fischer, as the learned Scotusblog explains, has asked the supreme court to throw out the charge that he obstructed an official proceeding, arguing that the law that he was charged with violating was only intended to apply to evidence tampering.More than 300 other January 6 defendants have been charged with violating the law and also features in federal criminal charges brought against Trump by special counsel Jack Smith for the former Republican president’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss to Biden, who is seeking re-election to a second term as the Democratic nominee this November. More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden’s renewed embrace of Israel threatens to deepen Democratic divide

      by

      “Ironclad,” said Joe Biden. “Ironclad,” said Lloyd Austin, the defense secretary. “Ironclad,” said the Senate leader Chuck Schumer, the House leader Hakeem Jeffries and the Michigan governor, Gretchen Whitmer.In the wake of Saturday’s attack by Iran, Democrats united around a single word in expressing their commitment to Israel’s security. It was a sentiment that papered over, at least for now, cracks in the party over Biden’s handling of the war in Gaza.But Biden’s renewed embrace of Israel could deepen further a row over US support for Israel’s war in Gaza that has engulfed the Democratic party and pitted the White House against its progressive wing – a split that could sap Biden’s support in November’s crucial presidential election.These have been trying weeks for the US president. As Gaza’s death toll climbs and famine looms, criticism of Israel’s conduct of the war has been growing from the left and even the centre, with some calling for an end to US arms supplies.Tens of thousands of people registered “uncommitted” protest votes against Biden in the Democratic primary election, including in swing states such as Michigan and Wisconsin, a grim portent ahead of the presidential election against Donald Trump in November.This pressure, and the recent deaths of World Central Kitchen aid workers in Gaza, seemed to finally prompt a shift in Biden’s tone. Last week he branded Israel’s handling of the war a “mistake”. Even then he remained passive-aggressive, declining to impose any tangible consequences.Then, on Saturday, Iran launched hundreds of drones and missiles at Israel on Saturday night in response to a suspected Israel attack on Iran’s Syria consulate on 1 April. Biden, cutting short a weekend stay at his Delaware beach house to meet with his national security team at the White House, was back in his instinctive comfort zone. His entire political career has been shaped by the view of Israel as a vulnerable ally in a hostile neighborhood that needs unequivocal US support.In an instant, the atmospherics in Washington changed. Schumer, who surprised many last month by calling for new elections in Israel, issued a statement that said “we stand shoulder to shoulder with the people of Israel” and made no mention of Gaza.The Democratic senator John Fetterman, no friend of pro-Palestinian protesters, told CNN’s State of the Union: “It really demonstrates how it’s astonishing that we are not standing firmly with Israel and there should never be any kinds of conditions on all of that. When a nation can launch hundreds of drones towards Israel, I’m not going to be talking about conditions, ever.”And on NBC’s flagship Meet the Press, John Kirby, the White House National Security Council spokesperson, gushed over “an incredible military achievement by Israel and quite frankly the United States and other partners that helped Israel defend itself against more than three hundred drones and missiles”.He added: “And I think Israel also demonstrated that it has friends, that it’s not standing alone, that it’s not isolated on the world stage.”Republicans seized on the attack to accuse Biden of weak leadership, claiming that only Trump could restore peace and stability to the world. Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee called for “aggressive retaliatory strikes on Iran”.If they succeed in shifting the terms of the debate, it will be even harder for the president to signal a break from Netanyahu. Amid the drumbeat for rallying against a common foe, Democrats who call for military aid to be conditioned will be accused of tone deaf appeasement.On Sunday, the Washington news agenda was dominated by speculation over Biden can dissuade Netanyahu from striking back – “Take the win,” he reportedly said – and prevent a wider regional war, and whether Congress might now pass military aid for both Israel and Ukraine.Gaza – where Israel’s offensive has killed at least 33,729 people, mostly women and children, according to the territory’s Hamas-run health ministry – was no longer uppermost in the thoughts of politicians or the journalists who interview them.Progressives and protesters had come a long way in forcing Biden to question his most deeply held convictions and warn Netanyahu that enough is enough. The events of Saturday night shook the kaleidoscope yet again and may give the US president a different political and electoral calculus, an excuse to return to his default position. Yet people in Gaza are still dying, and many would-be Biden supporters are still angry about it. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden closes gap on Trump but third-party candidates pose danger, polls show

      by

      Multiple new polls show Joe Biden strengthening slightly in the US presidential election, but suggest third-party candidates could present a risk to his chance of carrying the White House in November.According to a New York Times/Siena College poll released on Saturday, Biden has whittled down the four-point lead Donald Trump held in February, with Trump leading Biden 46% to 45% among registered voters.The narrowing of support for the candidates seven months before election day comes as Trump is likely to be largely off the campaign and fundraising trail for the next six weeks while he attends a criminal trial in New York over pre-2016 election hush money payments.Despite the narrowing of Trump’s lead that the New York Times poll found, the survey located a worrying issue for Democrats: some voters recalled Trump’s 2016-20 presidency, despite his capacity to sow divisiveness and chaos, as a time of economic prosperity and strong national security.Before 2020 election, only 39% of voters said that the country was better off after Trump took office – a figure that has risen in the intervening years with a Democrat in the White House.According to the New York Times, 42% now view Trump’s term as better for the country than the Biden administration, compared with 25% who say the opposite and an additional 25% saying Biden has been “mostly bad” for the country.Approval of Trump’s handling of the economy was also up 10% over the past four years.A separate study of 1,265 registered voters released on Sunday by I&I/Tipp showed Biden at 43% and Trump at 40% if no other choices are in the mix.Poll respondents were asked who they preferred in a two-candidate contest, with the option to chose “other” and “not sure” – options that both returned 9% of those polled. That 18% figure of the total vote, editor Terry Jones of Issues & Insights wrote, showed that Biden and Trump “are not opposing against one another in a vacuum”.Asked a follow-up question that added the independent candidates Robert F Kennedy Jr, an environmental lawyer and vaccine sceptic, the Harvard professor Cornel West, and the Green party figure Jill Stein, Biden took the greater hit to his support, leveling with Trump at 38%.With Kennedy at 11%, West at 2%, and Stein at 1%, Jones calculated that Kennedy’s presence siphoned off five points of Biden’s support to Trump’s two.“This is not surprising, given that RFK Jr is on most issues a traditional progressive leftist, which makes him indistinguishable from the current leadership of the Democratic party,” Jones wrote.According to the Kennedy campaign, the candidate and vice-presidential pick Nicole Shanahan currently have enough signatures to get on the ballots of just six states: Hawaii, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, North Carolina and New Hampshire.Earlier this month, third-party group No Labels announced it would not field a “unity ticket” candidate after reaching out to 30 potential people and raising $60m despite assessing that “Americans remain more open to an independent presidential run and hungrier for unifying national leadership than ever before”.The group said it would only offer a candidate if it could identify a candidate with a “credible path” to the White House.“No such candidates emerged, so the responsible course of action is for us to stand down,” it said.Kennedy, who has consistently denied his candidacy is in effect a “spoiler” to Democratic hopes of retaining the White House, is not the only worry for the party currently holding executive power.Polls are wildly conflicting. A recent Rasmussen survey found that Biden trails Trump regardless of third-party candidates.In a two-way contest between Biden and Trump, 49% of likely US voters said they would choose Trump, and 41% would vote for Biden. That was a marginal increase for Trump since February, when he led by six points.That same poll found 8% would vote for some other candidate, virtually matching the I&I/Tipp findings. More