Democrats

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Voters may at last be coming round to Biden’s sunny view of the economy

      by

      Joe Biden has spent most of his presidency insisting to Americans that the economy is on the right track. Poll after poll has shown that most voters do not believe him. That may be changing.After months of resilient hiring, better-than-expected economic growth and a declining rate of inflation, new data shows that Americans are becoming upbeat about the US economy, potentially reversing the deep pessimism Biden has struggled to counter for much of the past three years.That trend could reshape campaigning ahead of November’s presidential election, in which Biden is expected to face off against Donald Trump, the frontrunner for the Republican nomination. Experts believe the president’s case for a second term will benefit from more optimistic views of the economy – but the hangover from the inflation wave that peaked a year and a half ago presents Republicans with a potent counterattack.“Over the last couple of years, people have been feeling the most pain on day-to-day spending, on things like groceries and gas prices and prescription drugs. And, fortunately, those prices are beginning to come down, which gives Democrats a stronger hand than we had just a few months ago,” said Adam Green, co-founder of advocacy group the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.“For a campaign that says that they want to finish the unfinished business of the Biden presidency, our polling shows that it’s perfectly OK to acknowledge that there has been pain, and there’s more business to do,” said Green.He added that the Biden campaign should “really focus the voters’ attention on the forward-looking agenda of one party wanting to help billionaires and corporations, and the Democratic party wanting to challenge corporate greed and bring down prices for consumers”.Biden has been unpopular with voters, according to poll aggregator FiveThirtyEight, even as employment grew strongly and the economy avoided the recession that many economists predicted was around the corner. While it’s not the only factor, pollsters have linked voters’ disapproval with Biden to the wave of price increases that peaked in June 2022 at levels not seen in more than four decades, and which have since been on the decline. An NBC News poll released this month showed Biden trailing Trump by about 20 points on the question of which candidate would better handle the economy, a finding echoed by other surveys.But new data appears to show Americans believe the economy has turned a corner. Late last month, the Conference Board reported its index of consumer confidence had hit its highest point since December 2021, while the University of Michigan’s survey of consumer sentiment has climbed to its highest level since July of that year.View image in fullscreen“The people who give positive views of the economy, they tend to point to, the unemployment rate is low, and they also point to that inflation is down from where it was,” said Jocelyn Kiley, an associate director at Pew Research Center, whose own data has found an uptick in positive economic views, particularly among Democrats.Trump and his Republican allies have capitalized on inflation to argue that Biden should be voted out, though economists say Biden’s policies are merely one ingredient in a trend exacerbated by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and global supply chain snarls that occurred as a result of Covid-19. Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor who is the last major challenger to the former president still in the race has said the economy is “crushing middle-class Americans”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBut voters’ improving views of the economy could blunt those attacks ahead of the November election, where the GOP is also hoping to seize control of the Senate from Biden’s Democratic allies and maintain their majority in the House of Representatives. Lynn Vavreck, an American politics professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, said Trump might have to fall back to tried-and-true tactics from his 2016 victory over Hillary Clinton, such as promising to institute hardline immigration policies.“The economy is growing. People don’t really say that they feel good about it, but if you’re gonna load up your campaign on those people’s feelings, I feel like that’s a little risky,” said Vavreck, who has studied how economic conditions can affect presidential campaigns.“You could do that, and that would be a bit of a gamble, or you could find an issue on which you believe you are closer to most voters than Joe Biden, that is not about the economy, and you could try to reorient the conversation around that issue.”There is already evidence that harnessing outrage over the flow of undocumented immigrants into the United States is key to Trump’s campaign strategy. The former president’s meddling was a factor in the death of a rare bipartisan agreement in Congress to tighten immigration policy in exchange for Republican votes to approve assistance for Ukraine and Israel’s militaries.With the economy humming along, Trump is apparently nervous that the US economy could enter a recession at an inconvenient moment. “When there’s a crash, I hope it’s going to be during this next 12 months because I don’t want to be Herbert Hoover,” he said in an interview last month, referring to the US president who is often blamed for the Great Depression that began 95 years ago.Even though the rate of inflation has eased, albeit haltingly, prices for many consumer goods remain higher than they were compared with when Biden took office, which his opponents can still capitalize on, said the Republican strategist Doug Heye.“Consumers go to the grocery store, and they spend money, and they’re upset with what things cost, and that should always be what they’re talking about,” Heye said.While Biden has been quick to take credit for the strong hiring figures during his administration, polls show that hasn’t landed with voters. In recent months, the White House has shifted strategy, announcing efforts to get rid of junk fees and accusing corporations of “price gouging”.Evan Roth Smith, head pollster for the Democratic research firm Blueprint, said that lines up with his findings that voters care less about job growth and more about the fact that everything costs more.“Voters just felt a prioritization mismatch between what they were experiencing, the kind of pressures they were under, which isn’t that they didn’t have jobs, it’s that they couldn’t pay their bills,” Smith said.“Makes all the sense in the world that if the White House and president and the Biden campaign are touting this stuff, that they are going to make headway, and are making headway with voters in getting them to feel like Joe Biden in the Democratic party do understand.” More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Wisconsin adopts new legislative maps, giving Democrats chance to win state

      by

      The Wisconsin governor, Tony Evers, has signed into law a pair of new state legislative maps, undoing a Republican gerrymander that has shaped Wisconsin politics for more than a decade and giving Democrats a chance at winning control of the state in future elections.“It’s a new day for Wisconsin,” said Evers at a press conference on Monday to cheers from a room of anti-gerrymandering activists.His signature likely marks the end of a protracted fight over Wisconsin’s legislative lines and greatly reduces the Republican bias baked into the current maps. Republicans have enjoyed unchallenged control over the state assembly and senate for more than a decade because of legislative maps they drew to ensure that they would have large majorities in both chambers even in years Democrats won the majority of votes statewide.The new maps are the result of a December ruling from the Wisconsin supreme court that the current state assembly and senate maps are unconstitutional. The court ordered the state to adopt new legislative maps before the 2024 election. Evers, lawmakers in both parties and multiple outside groups submitted revised maps to the court for consideration. After consultants hired by the court to review them said that the maps drawn by the Republican lawmakers maintained their partisan gerrymander and “do not deserve further consideration,” Republicans lawmakers decided to adopt the maps Evers had proposed – which give them a slight edge at maintaining their majorities – rather than roll the dice on court-drawn maps that could benefit Democrats even more.“We kind of have a gun to our head,” said Republican state senator Duey Stroebel during the senate debate over the bill on 13 February.Republican lawmakers had done everything they could to avoid this outcome, even threatening to impeach supreme court justice Janet Protasiewicz, whose election in April 2023 created a liberal majority on the court. They dropped the threats only after a panel of former Wisconsin supreme court judges recommended against pursuing impeachment.View image in fullscreenEvers signed the bill despite pressure from powerful Democrats in the state to veto it. When the bill made its way through the legislature, Democratic lawmakers opposed it nearly uniformly, citing concerns about a line in the bill that leaves the current maps in place for recalls and special elections ahead of the November general election. And they have expressed concerns about possible future legal challenges to the legislative maps and general distrust of the Republican legislators who agreed to the law’s passage.“If you believe that WI Republicans are planning to run on Gov. Evers’ maps in November, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you,” wrote Democratic state senator LaTonya Johnson on the social media site X.But it’s not clear exactly what those legal challenges would look like.“I am extremely skeptical of this idea that there is a good basis for challenging the law, really on any grounds,” said Quinn Yeargain, a legal scholar who focuses on state constitutional law. “I’m as much of a partisan Democrat and progressive as anybody else is, but being intellectually honest about what’s going on here is also important.”Evers had previously said he would sign these maps into law, and stood by his word.“I did spend a lot of time talking to the folks who had differences of opinion,” said Evers, of legislative Democrats who opposed the bill. “But I felt at the end of the day this is the right thing to do for the people of the state of Wisconsin.”The maps were heralded by anti-gerrymandering activists in Wisconsin as a win.“We’re in the business of fair maps,” said Nick Ramos, the executive director of Wisconsin Democracy Campaign and an organizer with the group Wisconsin Fair Maps Coalition. “And Governor Evers’ maps are good – like, really good. They’re going to do a lot for the state.” More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib tells fellow Democrats: reject Biden in primary

      by

      The progressive US congresswoman Rashida Tlaib has called on her fellow Michigan Democrats to vote “uncommitted” in the state’s presidential primary election – at the expense of the party’s incumbent, Joe Biden – in late February.Appearing in a video posted to X on Saturday by Listen to Michigan, a political campaign to encourage the state’s voters to vote “uncommitted” in the 27 February primary, Tlaib justified her stark display of displeasure with Biden by alluding to Israel’s military strikes on Gaza, which local authorities say have killed nearly 29,000 Palestinians since last October.Tlaib – Congress’s only Palestinian American lawmaker – also criticized the Biden White House’s support for Israel, which launched its military campaign in Gaza in response to the 7 October Hamas attacks that killed about 1,200 Israelis.Speaking in front of the Ford Community & Performing Arts Center in Dearborn, which has one of the US’s largest populations of Arab Americans, Tlaib said: “It is important … to not only march against the genocide, not only make sure that we’re calling our members of Congress and local elected [officials], and passing city resolutions all throughout our country. It is also important to create a voting bloc, something that is a bullhorn to say, ‘Enough is enough.’”Tlaib added: “We don’t want a country that supports war and bombs and destruction. We want to support life. We want to stand up for every single life killed in Gaza … This is the way you can raise our voices. Don’t make us even more invisible. Right now, we feel completely neglected and just unseen by our government.“If you want us to be louder, then come here and vote uncommitted” rather than in support of Biden, the Democratic party’s presumptive nominee for November’s presidential election.The congresswoman’s message echoed the calls of Listen to Michigan, whose campaign manager is Tlaib’s sister Layla Elabed.Speaking to Business Insider, Elabed said: “Voting uncommitted is our way of demanding change, and this is going to be our vehicle to return political power back to us.”More than 30 elected officials across south-east Michigan have already pledged to vote “uncommitted” in the state’s 27 February primary elections. Those officials include the Dearborn mayor, Abdullah Hammoud, along with city council members and state representatives.A statement released by Listen to Michigan earlier in February said, “Let us be clear: we unequivocally demand that the Biden administration immediately call for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza. We must hold our president unaccountable and ensure that we, the American taxpayers, are no longer forced to be accomplices in a genocide that is backed and funded by the United States government.”It also said: “Therefore, we pledge to check the box for ‘uncommitted’ on our ballots in the upcoming presidential primary election. These are not empty words; they signify our steadfast commitment to justice, dignity, and the sanctity of human life, which is greater than loyalty to any candidate or party.”With the 81-year-old president facing increasing pressure over his handling of Israel’s military strikes in Gaza, as well as scrutiny over his age, Arab and Muslim Americans across multiple swing states – including Michigan – have organized campaigns under the slogan #AbandonBiden.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTlaib’s latest video announcement has received mixed responses.The former Ohio Democratic state senator Nina Turner tweeted, “Arab Americans do not want their tax dollars going to kill their family members. It’s unnerving to see the liberal response to that demand. Rashida Tlaib is absolutely justified to endorse this.”Meanwhile, in response to Tlaib’s endorsement of Listen Michigan, the conservative group Republicans Against asked on X who among Democrats would run against the congresswoman ahead of her running for re-election in November.Tlaib last year was censured by the Republican-led US House over her criticisms of Israel. She responded to the censure measure by saying that she would “not be silenced” and that “Palestinian people are not disposable”. More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Donald Trump banned from running businesses in New York for three years – live

      by

      The New York fraud case ruling is a massive blow to Trump and his business empire and a big win for New York attorney general Leticia James, who is expected to speak on the ruling at a press conference this afternoon.In addition to the big fine and ban on doing business, Trump also is barred from obtaining loans from New York banks for three years.Trump’s conduct in the case entered into the judge’s opinion.“Overall, Donald Trump rarely responded to the questions asked, and he frequently interjected long, irrelevant speeches on issues far beyond the scope of the trial,” Judge Engoron wrote. “His refusal to answer the questions directly, or in some cases, at all, severely compromised his credibility.”Buried in the middle of judge Arthur Engoron’s almost-100 page judgement in the Trump family business fraud case is a smoothly-delivered but absolutely stinging rebuke of Ivanka Trump’s truthiness.Ivanka was a witness not a defendant in the Trump Org civil case in New York and she took the stand last November, testifying in a calm and orderly manner most memorable for the infamous little phrase “I don’t recall”.Well it didn’t fool Engoron. On Page 45 of his ruling today he excoriates the former president’s older daughter thus: “Ivanka Trump was a thoughtful, articulate, and poised witness, but the Court found her inconsistent recall, depending on whether she was questioned by OAG [Office of the Attorney General] or the defense, suspect.”Ivanka Trump, 42, left her fashion business, which is now discontinued, while she was working as an unpaid senior adviser in the White House for the Trump administration. She’s also been an executive vice president in the Trump Organization and a judge on her dad’s television show The Apprentice.Judge Engoron completed his trump hand today thus: “In any event, what Ms Trump cannot recall is memorialized in contemporaneous emails and documents; in the absence of her memory, the documents speak for themselves.”But the judge canceled his prior ruling from September ordering the “dissolution” of companies that control pillars of Trump’s real estate empire, Reuters reports.Engoron said on Friday that this was no longer necessary because he is appointing an independent monitor and compliance director to oversee Trump’s businesses.Trump’s legal team has responded to the massive fine and three-year ban. Via Reuters:Trump’s lawyer Alina Habba said in a statement that the ruling was a “manifest injustice” and “culmination of a multi-year, politically fueled witch-hunt” against him.“This is not just about Donald Trump – if this decision stands, it will serve as a signal to every single American that New York is no longer open for business,” Habba said, adding that she plans to appeal.The New York fraud case ruling is a massive blow to Trump and his business empire and a big win for New York attorney general Leticia James, who is expected to speak on the ruling at a press conference this afternoon.In addition to the big fine and ban on doing business, Trump also is barred from obtaining loans from New York banks for three years.Trump’s conduct in the case entered into the judge’s opinion.“Overall, Donald Trump rarely responded to the questions asked, and he frequently interjected long, irrelevant speeches on issues far beyond the scope of the trial,” Judge Engoron wrote. “His refusal to answer the questions directly, or in some cases, at all, severely compromised his credibility.”The New York attorney general Leticia James secured a fine of more than $350m against Trump, his eldest sons and their associates after a judge found them guilty of intentionally committing fraud by falsifying government disclosures.Judge Arthur Engoron also banned the former president from serving as an officer or director or any New York corporation or entity for three years. Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr were issued two-year bans.The full ruling can be found here. We’re reading through it now.The ruling in the New York fraud case against former president Donald Trump has been released, banning Trump from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation or other legal entity in New York for three years.The New York attorney general’s office sued Trump for inflating the value of his assets on government financial statements in the case, which also includes Trump’s adult sons, Donald Trump Jr and Eric Trump, and two former Trump Organization executives, Allen Weisselberg and Jeff McConney, as defendants.The stakes in the case relate to Trump’s businesses, but his political career could be affected by the case as well. It’s factored into his 2024 campaign, where he talks about the “witch hunt” he’s facing across multiple court cases.Lawyers who’ve been watching the hearings in the Fulton County case against Trump where defense attorneys are trying to get DA Fani Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade removed from the case have said there’s been little evidence offered of any potential conflict – though the salacious nature of the allegations have done damage to Willis and potentially the case in the court of public opinion.Friday’s hearings have not been as heated or sordid as yesterday’s, instead probing the people surrounding the relationship who may have some information on it. It’s been, at times, tedious and wonky, and the defense hasn’t gotten any kind of smoking gun to prove its claims of a conflict.Terrance Bradley, Wade’s former law partner and onetime divorce attorney, is on the stand now and not offering much to help the defense’s case that the relationship is a conflict of interest or that the timeline of the relationship Willis and Wade have put forward isn’t accurate.Robin Yeartie, a former employee in the DA’s office, had testified that Willis started her relationship Wade before he was hired on the Trump case, but she also affirmed she had been ousted over performance. Other witnesses have not shown evidence of a different timeline, nor did Yeartie.On the southern border of the US and Mexico, the Republican governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, said he’s going to build a military “base camp” in Eagle Pass, the city where there’s an ongoing standoff between US Border Patrol and the Texas National Guard.Here’s more from Reuters:The facility – dubbed Forward Operating Base Eagle – will be an 80-acre complex along the banks of the Rio Grande and house up to 1,800 troops, with the ability to expand to 2,300, Abbott and state officials said at a press conference.The move is part of a broader effort by Abbott to try to stop migrants from crossing the border illegally into Texas, including a makeshift barrier of shipping containers and concertina wire in a city-owned park in Eagle Pass. The state intends to install more barriers north and south of the park, officials said on Friday.U.S. immigration enforcement historically has been the responsibility of the federal government and Abbott’s moves to secure the border have triggered legal standoffs with U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration.Back to the Fulton County hearing…Special prosecutor Nathan Wade’s former law partner who at one point represented him in his divorce proceeding is on the stand now. Terrance Bradley is testifying on some things, but is limited in what he can talk about because of attorney-client privilege, making for a stilted line of questioning for someone once called the defense’s “star witness.”Bradley may have some texts that would suggest Wade and Fulton County DA Fani Willis were in a relationship earlier than they’ve claimed, but Willis’ attorneys have disputed this and said he can’t talk about the texts anyway because of attorney-client privilege.For now, those texts are off the table in the testimony.During remarks at the White House this afternoon, President Joe Biden touched on the Russian satellite issue that’s caused some alarm over security this week.Biden said there was no sign Russia has decided to deploy an emerging anti-satellite weapon, the Associated Press reports. The White House has confirmed that U.S. intelligence officials have information indicating Russia has obtained such a capability, although such a weapon is not yet operational. Biden said Friday that “there’s no evidence that they have made a decision to go forward with doing anything in space.”“There is no nuclear threat to the people of America or anywhere else in the world with what Russia’s doing at the moment,” Biden said.The president confirmed that the capability obtained by Russia “related to satellites and space and damaging those satellites potentially,” and that those capabilities could “theoretically do something that was damaging.”But Russia hasn’t moved forward with plans yet, and, Biden added: “My hope is, it will not.”Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito on Friday temporarily halted the Boy Scouts of America’s $2.46 billion settlement of decades of sex abuse claims, which is being appealed by a group of 144 abuse claimants, Reuters reports.Alito’s brief order freezing the settlement gives the court more time to decide a February 9 request by the abuse claimants to block the settlement from moving forward.They contend that the deal unlawfully stops them from pursuing lawsuits against organizations that are not bankrupt, such as churches that ran scouting programs, local Boy Scouts councils and insurers that provided coverage to the Boy Scouts organization.NPR reported last April that the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) announced, as it was emerging from Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization, that it would establish a $2.4bn fund for those in the organization who were victims of sexual abuse. as it emerges out of Chapter 11 bankruptcy, covering more than 82,000 men who said they were victims.The BSA had urged the supreme court on Thursday not to stop the settlement from moving forward, saying that a delay could “throw the Scouting program into chaos” and “potentially destroy BSA’s ability to carry out its 114-year-old charitable mission”, Reuters further reported.Joe Biden commented briefly at the White House a little earlier about the development yesterday where a man at the center of congressional Republicans’ push to impeach the US president was arrested for lying about Joe and Hunter Biden.“He is lying and it [impeachment] should be dropped – and it’s been an outrageous effort from the beginning,” Biden said. He made the brief remark in response to the last question he took from reporters, returning to the lecturn to do so, after appearing to talk chiefly about the deal of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny.The news emerged yesterday evening that an FBI informant has been charged with lying to his handler about ties between Biden, his son Hunter and a Ukrainian energy company.Alexander Smirnov, 43, falsely told FBI agents in June 2020 that executives associated with the Ukrainian energy company Burisma paid Hunter and Joe Biden $5m each in 2015 and 2016, prosecutors said on Thursday.Smirnov told the FBI that a Burisma executive had claimed to have hired Hunter Biden to “protect us, through his dad, from all kinds of problems”, prosecutors said in a statement.The allegations became a flashpoint in Congress over the summer as Republicans demanded the FBI release the unredacted form documenting the allegations as they pursued investigations of Biden and his family. They acknowledged at the time that it was unclear if the allegations were true.The new development sharply undermines the thrust of congressional Republicans’ corruption accusations that the US president was making money from his son Hunter’s business dealings in Ukraine. Full story here.Incidentally, the misconduct hearing in Georgia for the leading prosecutors in the election interference case against Donald Trump and more than a dozen co-defendants has resumed after lunch. It’s in the weeds at the moment, but we’ll bring you highlights.Joe Biden, speaking at the White House moments ago about temporary ceasefire talks with Israel in its war on Hamas, reminded the public that Americans are among the hostages still held inside Gaza.“And my hope and expectation is that we will get this hostage deal, we will get these Americans home, and the deal is being negotiated now,” the US president said.At least 120 hostages are believed still to be held in Gaza by Hamas, the Islamist militant group that controls the Palestinian territory and took more than 240 hostages from southern Israel after launching a massive attack on the area on 7 October last year. Most of the hostages are Israelis.The White House said earlier this week that it was not known how many of the remaining hostages are still alive.Joe Biden has just spoken at the White House about the death of Russian activist Alexei Navalny but also discussing Nato, Israel and Burisma.The US president expressed outrage at Navalny’s death in a Russian arctic prison camp. Biden’s remarks on that are in our live blog dedicated to Navalny news, here, and his comments responding to Donald Trump’s position on Nato earlier this week will also be in the blog.But Biden also took some questions and one was about the latest on negotiations with Israel and the US demands that Israel have a credible plan for the 1.7 million people trapped in Rafah in the far south of Gaza before attacking the city in continued efforts to destroy Hamas. He said he has had “extensive talks” with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu this week “over an hour each” during phone calls.“I have made the case and I feel very strongly about it – there has to be a temporary ceasefire to get the hostages out. I’m still hopeful that that can be done,” he said.Biden added: “In the meantime, I do not anticipate … I’m hoping that the Israelis will not make a massive land invasion [of Rafah]. It’s my understanding that that will not happen.”Eight members of the House of Representatives have unveiled a bipartisan proposal to provide $66.3bn in military aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan as they attempt to make progress in the lower chamber amid the logjam, Politico reports today.The total is lower than the $95bn bill for similar purpose passed by the Senate earlier this week but which has shaky prospects in the Republican-controlled House.Politico writes:
      Spearheaded by Ukraine caucus co-chair Brian Fitzpatrick, Republican of Pennsylvania, the House counterproposal also includes provisions aimed at tightening border security and winning over Republicans who won’t approve Ukraine aid without addressing the border.
      The bill is sponsored by an equal number of Republicans and Democrats. In addition to Fitzpatrick, the bill is co-sponsored by GOP Reps. Don Bacon of Nebraska, Mike Lawler of New York and Lori Chavez-DeRemer of Oregon.
      Four centrist Democrats also signed on: Reps. Jared Golden of Maine, Ed Case of Hawaii, Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez of Washington and Jim Costa of California.
      House Speaker Mike Johnson opposes the Senate version, and it’s unclear how he will respond to the new bill. But the new proposal creates yet another bipartisan pressure point as Ukraine advocates look to force a vote on the House floor after months of inaction.
      Full report here.Joe Biden is due to make public remarks shortly about the death in custody of Alexei Navalny, the Russian opposition leader and courageous critic if Russia’s president Vladimir Putin.Our Guardian colleague in Moscow, Andrew Roth, writes in this report that the death of Navalny, once Putin’s most significant political challenger, is a watershed moment for Russia’s shattered pro-democracy movement, which has largely been jailed or driven into exile since the Ukraine invasion of 2022.Navalny, 47, was being held in a jail about 40 miles north of the Arctic Circle, where he had been sentenced to 19 years under a “special regime”.We are covering developments and reaction to this tragedy in a dedicated Guardian live blog, which you can follow here.That blog will feature Joe Biden’s remarks as they happen.After Fulton County district attorney Fani Willis was not called back to the stand, the county’s hearing has continued with other witnesses, albeit much less explosive than yesterday’s testimony.
      Former Georgia governor Roy Barnes testified that he was asked to be special prosecutor, but turned it down because it didn’t pay enough and would risk his safety.
      John Floyd, Willis’ father, testified that he hadn’t met special prosecutor Nathan Wade until 2023 and didn’t know they were in a relationship until it became public. He also said he taught his daughter to keep cash on hand, something Willis said she used to pay back Wade for anything he paid for while they dated.
      More witnesses should take the stand this afternoon. You can livestream the courtroom here.
      Beyond the hearing, the big news of the day: US Sen. Joe Manchin, the Democrat from West Virginia, will not run for president, ending speculation that he could spoil the election as a third-party option. That’s a sigh of relief for President Joe Biden.We’re still keeping an eye out for the expected ruling out of New York on the Trump fraud case, which should come sometime today. Stay tuned!Joe Manchin, the Democratic senator from West Virginia, announced in a speech today that he officially will not be running for president, ending speculation that he could run as a third-party candidate and throw President Joe Biden’s reelection prospects for a loop.“I will not be a deal breaker or a spoiler,” Manchin said, according to the New York Times.Manchin had considered running under the No Labels banner, a group that’s gotten on the ballot as a party in multiple states and is trying to recruit someone to run as an alternative to Trump and Biden this year. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Joe Manchin announces he won’t be running for president

      by

      Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia has announced that he will not be launching a presidential campaign, ending speculation about a run for the White House that would have thrown more chaos and confusion into an already tumultuous 2024 election season.Manchin, a centrist Democrat from a deep red state, has long been a thorn in the side of his party and especially its left wing. Since announcing his decision not seek re-election to the Senate, Manchin, 76, has toyed with the idea that he might launch an independent or third-party bid for the White House.“I will not be seeking a third-party run. I will not be involved in a presidential run,” Manchin said during remarks in Morgantown, West Virginia, on Friday. He insisted that his focus was on bridging divides at a moment of deep political polarization, and said he would not want to play the role of “spoiler” in an all-but-certain rematch between Joe Biden and Donald Trump.“I just don’t think it’s the right time,” Manchin said. “Democracy is at stake right now.”His announcement comes against a backdrop of widespread voter dissatisfaction with both the incumbent, who at 81 years old is seen by many as being too old for a second term, and his predecessor, 77, whose legal travails and extremist rhetoric have spurred fears of a political crisis in the US should he win.“I will be involved in making sure that we secure a president that has the knowledge and has the passion and has the ability to bring this country together,” Manchin said. “And right now we’re challenged.”Following his decision in November to forgo a re-election campaign, Manchin had embarked on a nationwide listening tour as he stoked speculation of a presidential run. He aligned himself with No Labels, a centrist organization that has been exploring ways to field a bipartisan, third-party presidential ticket for voters who say they are disenchanted by the prospect of a Biden-Trump repeat in 2024. In July, the senator joined an event hosted by the organization in the early primary state of New Hampshire.As recently as Thursday, a day before his announcement, Manchin told an audience in Cleveland, Ohio, that his top choice of running mate would be Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee and retiring Utah senator.“Hypothetically, if I was picking my running mate, really who I would ask right now is Mitt Romney,” Manchin said during a Q&A at a City Club of Cleveland breakfast on Thursday. He also named former Ohio senator Bob Portman, a moderate Republican known for crossing the aisle.Manchin, whose once reliably Democratic state is now overwhelmingly pro-Trump, has been a fierce critic of Biden and sought to portray him as a leftist. But he also has said repeatedly that he did not want his actions to help return Trump to office.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWhile his decision not to seek re-election was a setback for Democrats’ hopes of holding their slim Senate majority, the news that he would not run for president was a welcome one for his party.Democrats are already confronting third-party challenges from Robert F Kennedy Jr, who is considering running on the Libertarian ticket, as well as from Jill Stein, the Green party nominee, and and Cornel West, who is running as an independent.Republicans are favored to claim Manchin’s Senate seat in November, with the governor, Jim Justice, and Congressman Alex Mooney battling for the GOP nomination. More

    • 88 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Georgia voters shrug off Biden-Trump age question

      by

      Next week, Frank Stovall turns 103. The retired Lockheed engineer has until recently been a lifelong Atlantan, is a veteran of two wars, and is old enough to remember when Republicans were rare in Georgia.“Well, yes, I think they’re both healthy,” Stovall said, when asked at the Church at Wieuca in Buckhead about the mental fitness for office of President Joe Biden and former president Donald Trump. “I’m a Republican, but I’m not going to vote for Trump, if I can help it. I hate to say this, but I think he was a traitor to the country on January 6.“Biden? I’ve been really impressed with him on everything except the border thing. But yeah, I think Biden is a good man. If he got mental lapses … goodness, most of us do when you get a few years on you.”Buckhead, an affluent neighborhood of Atlanta, is split between Republicans and Democrats. Georgia is often described as a politically purple state, with strong Democrats and strong Republicans competing to be seen in nearly equal numbers – though spaces where they cohabitate are scarce.So when a special prosecutor at the Department of Justice released a report last week alleging striking gaps in Biden’s memory and mental acuity, political pundits jumped to assess how the issue of age will affect the American presidential election in places like this. But in the US, broad opinions matter much less than those of the relatively small number of persuadable voters.“Basically, you’re catering to a million voters, in a few states,” said Clarence Blalock, a political consultant in Georgia who is competing in the Democratic primary to challenge Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene. The average age of voters tends to be older than the general public, he said, and any strategy questioning the competence of the president – or Donald Trump – due to age may backfire. “They may feel insulted by it. I don’t think it’s a good strategy.”Certainly, many on the right saw in the report’s accusations a confirmation of what they already believe about Biden – that he is largely a figurehead, with decisions being made by others. “I feel sorry for him,” said Chris Swindell, 68, a self-described libertarian from Marietta. “He comes out, and he’s not running the country. The people in the background are running the country.”But few will flip their votes over the age issue, Blalock said. He noted that most partisans had already decided to overlook the flaws of their own candidates.One of those is Jimmy Bennett, 67, a staunch Republican and Trump voter.“Listen, we know a lot of older people that are on the money with their mindset,” said Bennett over a slice of pie at Matthew’s Cafeteria in politically ecumenical Tucker, Georgia.“But if they start making these crazy decisions, and start doing things way off, and then you can see the degrade, then that’s the time to step in.”Only about 10% of voters in Georgia consider changing their votes for any reason at all, and no matter who is running. In 2022, despite the threats of defection by stalwart Trump supporters, the Republican governor, Brian Kemp, defeated Democrat Stacey Abrams by about 300,000 votes out of roughly 4m ballots, but on the same day, the Democratic senator Raphael Warnock beat his Republican challenger, Herschel Walker, by about 40,000 votes (and later won a runoff by about 100,000).“We’re never going to have a 60-40 election,” said Brian Robinson, a Republican strategist and political commentator here. “We wouldn’t have a 60-40 election if Biden died and people were voting for a dead person.”Nonetheless, the age issue is top of mind for Americans of both parties, he said, consistently ranking along with immigration and the economy as the main concerns voters express. In that regard, the special prosecutor’s report was a blow to the Biden campaign. “Democrats are hoping that independent voters are coming to Biden because they don’t like Trump. The [age] issue nullifies some of that Democratic advantage,” Robinson said.“The Biden campaign has, in some way, to provide optics that he’s healthy mentally and physically – and that’s a risk.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBut Trump has to be careful too, Robinson said. “The Democrats are trying to create an equivalency there. [Trump] has to avoid providing Democrats with ammo showing equivalent incapacity.”That may prove difficult, given Trump’s own propensity for mental lapses – for every time Biden confuses a Macron with a Mitterrand, Trump takes a Haley for a Pelosi – and equally advanced age: currently 81 and 77, both Biden and Trump would, if elected, be the oldest presidents ever.“I think Donald Trump is a fool and an idiot, and I think he has no mental acuity – period – because he doesn’t live in a world of reality. He lives in a fantasy world where facts are not facts,” said Jackie Goodman, 74, a fourth-generation Atlantan.For Goodman, her choice is about policy – she identifies as a pro-choice voter – and less about either man running.“I wish we could have a younger candidate who has a lot more vitality,” she admits. “But I definitely would not vote Republican – and I definitely would not vote for Trump.”Indeed, the question may be less about whether the age issue makes anyone switch their vote, but rather if it makes voters simply check out, said Blalock. Given the importance of turnout in US elections, how many Americans decide not to vote at all could prove crucial.“The idea that Biden doesn’t have it together, so I’m going to vote for Trump … I mean, do people think Trump has it together [either]?” he asked.“Or [do they] just stay home?” More

    • 300 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump prosecutor Fani Willis tells misconduct hearing: ‘I’m not on trial. These people are on trial for stealing an election’ – as it happened

      by

      In one furious outburst, Fani Willis is angrily pushing back at what she says are personal attacks on her and Nathan Wade, and says opposing attorneys should focus their attention elsewhere.Asked if she objected to records of flights she took with Wade being demanded, she said:
      I object to you getting records. You’ve been intrusive into people’s personal lives. You’re confused. You think I’m on trial. These people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020. I’m not on trial, no matter how hard you try to put me on trial.
      Willis is also defending Wade’s character, saying they are “good friends”.The judge has ordered another short break.We’re closing the US politics blog now after what was an extraordinary day, on two fronts, in the various legal cases against Donald Trump.
      In Georgia, the Fulton county district attorney Fani Willis gave testimony in a fiery first day of a misconduct hearing that could see her removed from the election interference case against the former president. “I’m not on trial here,” she insisted in one of many angry exchanges over her affair with special prosecutor Nathan Wade.
      Willis tussled with Trump lawyer Steve Sadow over the “tough conversation” she had with Nathan Wade ending their relationship and, crucially, when it occurred. Telling Sadow “you don’t have to yell at me,” Willis said their relationship was over before she indicted Trump last August.
      Willis insisted she paid Wade back for money he spent on two cruises and other trips he took with her in 2022 and early 2023.
      Willis accused Ashleigh Merchant, a lawyer for another Trump co-defendant, of telling lies about her in another heated exchange.
      Wade also took the stand, confirming their relationship ended last summer.
      Robin Yeartie, a former friend of Willis who worked in her office, testified the relationship began before Wade was hired.
      In New York, a judge set a 25 March start date for Trump’s trial on charges he made illegal hush-money payments to adult movie star Stormy Daniels, and Playboy model Karen McDougal.
      The two stories dominated the day.Also today:Join us again tomorrow, when we’ll have more from the second day of the Fani Willis misconduct hearing.A fiery first day of the misconduct case against Fani Willis, in which a judge will decide if the Fulton county district attorney will be disqualified from prosecuting the Georgia election interference case against Donald Trump, has just wrapped up for the day.The final exchange was Harry MacDougald, lawyer for Trump co-defendant Jeffrey Clark, asking Willis about any financial gifts above $100 she received from Nathan Wade, the special prosecutor she hired for the case, and with whom she had a romantic relationship.Willis says she never received any, other than him paying for dinner. She says she reimbursed him for everything, and pushed back when McDougald said there was nothing to prove she had withdrawn any cash to do so.“That’s not accurate,” Willis replied.It was a tamer exchange than those that preceded it. In one particularly hostile moment, Willis accused an attorney of repeatedly lying about her, and in another furiously exclaimed: “I’m not on trial, no matter how hard you try to put me on trial.”Judge McAfee has told all parties to reconvene at 9am ET on Friday. It’s been quite a day.Steve Sadow’s questioning of Fani Willis has now concluded, and the judge overseeing the misconduct hearing, Scott McAfee, says there’s time for a few more questions before he wraps the hearing up for the day.Next up is Allyn Stockton, lawyer for Trump’s co-defendant and former attorney Rudy Giuliani, who opened with questions about travel Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade might have made together, including trips to Washington DC that Willis has already denied took place.Next, he’s wondering about Willis’s hiring practices and contract-issuing procedures as Fulton county district attorney.It’s not yet clear where he’s going with it, but he seems to be suggesting there might be something improper about the status of employment of two of Wade’s colleagues who reportedly did work for her Willis’s office.Steve Sadow and Fani Willis are now tussling over the “tough conversation” she had with Nathan Wade ending their relationship and, crucially, when it occurred.“The physical relationship was over pre-indictment,” Willis aid, referring to the criminal election interference charges she brought, aided by special prosecutor Wade, against Donald Trump in Georgia in August 2023.But she said women and men “think differently” about what might constitute the end of a relationship. She also said there was a good deal of tension in her relationship with Wade towards the end:
      He told me one time only thing a woman can do for him is make him a sandwich. We would have brutal arguments about the fact that I am your equal.
      I don’t need anything from a man. A man is not a plan. A man is a companion. And so there was tension always in our relationship, which is why I always gave him his money back.
      I don’t need anybody to foot my bills. The only man who’s ever footed my bills completely is my daddy.
      Sadow tried again. “The romantic relationship ended before the indictment was returned. Yes or no?” he said.“To a man, yes,” Willis replied.Steve Sadow, an attorney for Donald Trump, is next to question Fani Willis, and their exchanges are even more hostile than those that preceded them.“You don’t have to yell at me. I’m able to understand. So I would ask you to not yell at me,” Willis replied when Sadow asked a question about her living arrangements during the period she was having a relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade.Willis is also repeatedly claiming the phrasing of Sadow’s questions is “inaccurate”, as is definition of “romantic” to describe her relationship with Wade.“A romantic relationship doesn’t necessarily have to be just sex. It can be dating, it can be holding hands. It can be any of those things that one might call romantic. I’m asking you whether or not prior to November 1st 2021 there was a romantic relationship with Mr Wade,” Sadow said.Willis replied: “I do not consider our relationship to have become romantic until early 2022 … sometime between February and April.”Almost inevitably, Donald Trump has now weighed in with an emailed attack on Fani Willis, and almost as inevitably it’s a fundraising appeal from his campaign, which is clearly watching today’s courtroom drama closely:
      Fani Willis was responsible for taking my mugshot! First she coordinated with the Biden White House to take me down! Then she hired her lover to go after me and paid him with taxpayer dollars,” an email to supporters says, repeating numerous unverified allegations.
      But now, right now, her corruption is being broadcast live to the whole world. I told you she’s corrupt as hell.”
      The email concludes with the oft-heard claim of a “witch-hunt” and a request to “patriots” to chip in to defeat Willis.Ashleigh Merchant, the attorney questioning Fani Willis, is asking why she chose to run for district attorney, citing a claim that Willis said she didn’t want to be “finally effed-up again”.It appears relevant because Donald Trump has claimed Willis ran for the office because she was out to get him.Willis says she felt that with her experience she was “the appropriate person” for what was a tough job:
      It was a huge sacrifice to be district attorney in Fulton County. I was doing just fine. I had a municipal court judgeship that was paying me 100 something thousand a year, and we got to show up twice a week … [the] easiest thing I’ve ever done in life.
      I also had private clients that were paying me to represent them, so I was able to have a law practice and raise two daughters by myself. They were times in life where things were hard.
      So I was telling people I don’t really want to for DA. I’m in a good position right now, I got this easy job that I enjoy being the chief judge of the city of South Fulton, making money at the law firm, and I’m not sure that I want to make the sacrifice.
      Eventually, I prayed. I think that I was the appropriate person.
      Merchant’s questioning of Willis has now concluded.Judge Scott McAfee says the heated atmosphere in the courtroom needs to cool down, and ordered a short break.When the session resumed, with Fani Willis still on the stand, he admonished all parties to respect the decorum of the court.Here’s my colleague Sam Levine’s latest take on this afternoon’s fiery proceedings:In her time on the stand, Fani Willis has twice sought to remind the audience about the stakes of the case. At issue isn’t her relationship with Wade, but democracy. “Ms Merchant’s interests are contrary to democracy your honor, not to mine,” she said at one point.In a heated exchange later she said “You’re confused… I’m not on trial. These people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020.”Willis’s testimony so far has sought to explain some of the biggest questions from Wade’s testimony this morning.Explaining why she repaid Wade in cash for travel, Willis explained that she has always kept significant amounts of cash wherever she lays her head. She took from that stash to repay Wade. She has also been blunter about calling out “lies” in motions seeking to disqualify her.By way of explanation, Ashleigh Merchant, mentioned above, is the attorney currently involved in the back-and-forth with Willis on the stand. She represents Michael Roman, one of Donald Trump’s co-defendants in the election interference case that Willis is prosecuting.In one furious outburst, Fani Willis is angrily pushing back at what she says are personal attacks on her and Nathan Wade, and says opposing attorneys should focus their attention elsewhere.Asked if she objected to records of flights she took with Wade being demanded, she said:
      I object to you getting records. You’ve been intrusive into people’s personal lives. You’re confused. You think I’m on trial. These people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020. I’m not on trial, no matter how hard you try to put me on trial.
      Willis is also defending Wade’s character, saying they are “good friends”.The judge has ordered another short break.There were only a handful of trips together with Nathan Wade, Fani Willis is now telling the court:
      We went to Aruba, I consider that one trip. On New Year’s Eve, we went on a cruise to the Bahamas. That’s the second trip.
      We went to Belize. That was my trip, that was, you know, his 50th [birthday] and then Napa Valley. We went around May. I don’t know the dates, but it seems to me like it was close to Mother’s Day.
      And those are the only trips.
      Fani Willis is talking about two cruises out of Miami that she took with Nathan Wade, one in October 2022.She says Wade booked and paid for the first one, but she reimbursed him “whatever it was”:
      He is the one that would book the travel. But we need to be clear when we’re talking about just because he’s booked it doesn’t mean I consider him ever having taken me any place.
      He paid for the cruise and the fights… whatever he told me it was, I gave him the money back.
      She was asked where the cash came from:
      I am sure that the source of the money is always the work sweat and tears of me.
      For many, many years, I have kept money in my house… on my worst day probably only $500 or $1,000. And my best days, I probably had $15,000 in my house, cash.
      There’s always going to be cash in my house or wherever I’m laying my head.
      But Willis said she never paid Wade more than $2,500 in any one payment.The Guardian’s Sam Levine is tweeting from the courtroom about Fani Willis’s testimony.The Fulton county district attorney is angry about “lies” told her earlier in the case, including by her former friend Robin Yeartie, who testified today that a relationship between Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade began before she hired him to work on Donald Trump’s election interference case.She’s being asked about her dealings with Yeartie, and vacations she allegedly took with Wade.Fani Willis said she was “very anxious” to testify today, and ran from her office to get to the courtroom when she heard special prosecutor Nathan Wade’s testimony had concluded.She said she had some “choice words” about the motion to disqualify her from Donald Trump’s election interference case but denies she had any substantive conversation with Wade, or anybody else about it:
      I would not have. I don’t believe I’ve had any conversation with him that is substantive related to this.
      Willis has adopted a defensive, verging on aggressive stance, and says she takes exception to allegations she slept with Wade the first day she met him, at a conference:
      Your motion tried to implicate I slept with him at that conference, which I find to be extremely offensive. Mr Wade was my teacher.
      It’s highly offensive when they replicate that you slept with somebody the first day you met with them, and I take exception to this.
      Fulton county district attorney Fani Willis has just taken the stand in the election interference case in Georgia.Almost as soon as she sat down, the judge called a five-minute break for certain documents to be copied and distributed.She’ll be testifying soon about the nature of her relationship with, and cash payments to special prosecutor Nathan Wade, who wrapped up his lengthy period of testimony just now.Stick with us…Rumours that Russia is planning to deploy nuclear weapons in space have been dampened down by experts who say that while such technology is possible, there is no need to push the panic button.The furore kicked off on Wednesday when the head of the US House of Representatives’ intelligence committee, Mike Turner, called for the Biden administration to declassify information on what he called a “serious national security threat”.While Turner gave no further details, it was later reported by news outlets, citing unnamed sources, to involve Russia’s potential deployment of a nuclear anti-satellite weapon in space. The Kremlin dismissed the claim as a “malicious fabrication”.Dr Bleddyn Bowen, an associate professor at the University of Leicester who specialises in outer space international relations and warfare, said the the lack of detail was no reason to panic. “It’s so vague and cryptic, it could be a number of different things. [But] no matter what they are, none of them are a big deal, to be honest. Everyone needs to calm down about this.”Russia is bound by several legal restrictions regarding the use or presence of nuclear weapons in space. Article 4 of the Outer Space treaty (1967) bans nuclear weapons from being put into orbit, installed on celestial bodies or otherwise stationed in outer space, while the New Start treaty aims to reduce the number of deployable nuclear arms. The Partial Nuclear Test Ban treaty (1963) bans nuclear explosions in space.You can read more here.The White House just announced that the US will engage with Russia and allies on the Outer Space treaty and has no intention of violating it.The White House national security spokesman John Kirby is telling reporters gathered in the west wing a little more detail about the “serious national security threat” that emerged into the public eye yesterday.“It’s not an active capability,” Kirby said, after confirming that the threat was related to “an anti-satellite capability that Russia is developing, while adding that “there is no immediate threat to anyone’s safety.”Kirby did not elaborate on reports that the new capability is about Russian plans to deploy nuclear weapons in space.Kirby said Joe Biden has directed a series of actions by the administration, including briefings to congressional leaders and direct diplomatic engagement with Russia about the program.The administration has not permitted more information to be made public yet, the spokesman said.It was a surprise yesterday when the head of the House intelligence committee, Mike Turner, called for the Biden administration to declassify information on what he called a “serious national security threat”.The emerging Russian system can’t directly cause “physical destruction” on Earth, Kirby just said.The White House media briefing is underway. Press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre opens by lamenting the mass shooting in Kansas City, Missouri, yesterday.Gunfire erupted towards the end of the victory parade for the Kansas City Chiefs football team, after they won the Super Bowl last weekend.She repeated the White House’s call for the US Congress to ban assault weapons for the general public.Joe Biden has frequently called for such a ban during his presidency, so far to no avail. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Mayorkas impeachment: petty, doomed … but still potentially damaging

      by

      In 1876, the last US cabinet official to be impeached, William Belknap, resigned before the House could vote on the matter. Ulysses S Grant’s secretary of war was tried in the Senate anyway, on charges of corruption, but escaped conviction.Nearly 150 years later, in the House on Tuesday and at the second time of asking, Republicans corralled just enough votes to ensure Joe Biden’s secretary of homeland security, Alejandro Mayorkas, suffered Belknap’s fate. But Mayorkas has not resigned – and nor is he likely to be convicted and removed.Democrats control the Senate, which means Mayorkas is all but certain to be acquitted at any trial, regardless of reported doubts among Republican senators about their party’s case.After the 214-213 vote to impeach, Chuck Schumer, the Democratic Senate majority leader, set out what will happen next. House managers will present the articles of impeachment after Monday’s President’s Day holiday. Senators will be sworn in as jurors. And Patty Murray of Washington state, the Democratic Senate president pro tempore, will preside thereafter.Schumer also issued a stinging statement.“This sham impeachment effort is another embarrassment for House Republicans,” the New Yorker said. “The one and only reason for this impeachment is for Speaker [Mike] Johnson to further appease Donald Trump.”The Mayorkas impeachment is of a kind with Senate Republicans’ decision last week to detonate their own hard-won border and immigration bill because Trump, their likely nominee for president, wants to campaign on the issue.Schumer continued: “House Republicans failed to produce any evidence that Secretary Mayorkas has committed any crime. House Republicans failed to show he has violated the constitution. House Republicans failed to present any evidence of anything resembling an impeachable offense. This is a new low for House Republicans.”Most observers agree that the charges against Mayorkas – basically, that he performed incompetently and violated immigration law regarding the southern border – do not remotely rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanours”, as constitutionally required for impeachment and removal.Perhaps with a nod to the unfortunate Belknap, the Biden White House weighed in, saying: “History will not look kindly on House Republicans for their blatant act of unconstitutional partisanship that has targeted an honorable public servant in order to play petty political games.”But history also records that all impeachments (and impeachment efforts, such as that mounted by Republicans against Biden himself) are inherently political, so this one could prove as politically potent as did those of Trump. Both Trump impeachments concerned behaviour – blackmailing Ukraine for political dirt and inciting the January 6 attack on Congress – much closer by any standard to the status of high crimes and misdemeanours. Regardless, Republicans ensured Trump was acquitted in both and have since fed Trump’s fierce desire for revenge.The Mayorkas impeachment was driven by Trump-aligned extremists prominently including Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia.Speaking to reporters on the Capitol steps on Tuesday, the same day the Senate passed a $95bn national security package including funding for Ukraine in its war with Russia, Greene said she was “very thankful to our Republican Congress. We’re finally working together with the American people to send a message to the Biden administration that it’s our border that matters, not other countries’ borders. Our border matters.”Claiming Mayorkas was guilty of “willful betrayal of the American people and breaking federal immigration laws”, Greene also said the impeachment “sends a message to America that Republicans can get our job done when we work together and do what’s important and what the American people want us to do.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIf there were any remaining doubt that Mayorkas was impeached in service of pure politics, Greene said senators set to sit as jurors should “look at the polling. They know that our border security is the No 1 issue in every single campaign in every single state, every single city, in every single community … They better pay attention to the American people.”It is not certain, however, that a trial will happen.Joshua Matz, a lawyer who has written extensively on impeachment and worked on both impeachments of Trump, recently told Politico: “Impeachment trials are meant to be deadly serious business for matters of state – not free publicity for the House majority to air policy attacks on the current administration.”The Mayorkas impeachment articles, Matz said, are “so manifestly about policy disagreement rather than anything that could arguably qualify as high crimes and misdemeanours, that it would be unwarranted to waste the Senate’s time with the trial on the matter.“The articles are formally deficient in so many ways that any trial would be flagrantly unfair and create such grave due process issues that it would be outrageous to even proceed.”Senate Democrats could bring up a simple motion to dismiss the Mayorkas charges, a gambit which would be likely to succeed, given indicated support from the West Virginia centrist Joe Manchin, a key swing vote in the narrowly divided chamber. Less starkly, Democrats could seek to tie proceedings up in procedure, options including sending the charges to a committee, there to sit in limbo throughout an election year.All choices carry political peril, however. On Wednesday, the news site Semafor quoted an unnamed Republican aide as saying: “If Democrats give Republicans the opportunity to say that they are sweeping this under the rug, we will gladly take it.“If this is the sham Democrats claim it is, why would they be afraid of holding a trial?” More