Democrats

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      US courts hear efforts to remove Trump from 2024 ballot – will they work?

      by

      When Scott Gessler stepped up to the lectern in a Denver courtroom on Monday, he opened with a full-throated defense of American democracy.“When it comes to decide who should lead our nation, it’s the people of the United States of America who should make those decisions,” he said. “This court should not interfere with that fundamental value – that rule of democracy.”It wasn’t so much the argument that was significant as much as who Gessler was representing: Donald Trump. The same Donald Trump who fought doggedly to have courts, state legislators, his vice-president and members of Congress throw out valid electoral slates from several states and declare him the winner of the 2020 presidential election.Gessler is defending the former president in a novel case in Colorado seeking to block him from appearing on the state’s ballot – a case that centers around whether Trump is disqualified from running for president under section 3 of the 14th amendment. The Reconstruction-era provision disqualifies anyone from holding office if they have taken an oath to the United States and subsequently “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same” unless Congress votes to remove that disqualification by two-thirds vote.It is not the only one of its kind: the Minnesota supreme court heard a similar case this week and there is also a similar case already pending in Michigan, a key battleground state. States are tasked with ensuring that candidates for office meet the qualifications so the challenges to Trump’s candidacy are bubbling up through state court.The 14th amendment cases are part of a mosaic of legal efforts that seek to hold Trump and his allies accountable for overturning the 2020 election, but they are among the most important. While the cases are dry – steeped in legalese and historical understanding of constitutional text – they get at Trump in a way that none of the other suits can: blocking his return to political life.While the other cases could require Trump and his allies to face jail time, lose their law licenses, and pay damages for defamatory lies, none of them would block Trump from returning to the White House in 2024 (a criminal conviction does not disqualify someone from running or serving as president). If he wins the election, he could theoretically pardon himself in the federal cases against him or dismiss the prosecutions. And while no pardon would be available in the Georgia criminal case, it’s untested whether the constitution would allow a state to incarcerate a serving, elected president.Simply put, winning the election is widely seen as Trump’s best chance at escaping the criminal charges against him. Losing the 14th amendment cases would cut off that possibility.“Let me be clear. The purpose of our actions is to obtain rulings that Trump is disqualified from the ballot, not merely to have a political debate. Not at all to have a political debate. Not merely to air issues,” said Ron Fein, the legal director for Free Speech for People, a left-leaning group that filed the challenge in Minnesota.“The dangers of Trump ever being allowed back into public office are exactly those foreseen by the framers of section 3. Which is that they knew that if an oath-taking insurrectionist were allowed back into power they would do the same if not worse.”The 14th amendment measure was passed after the civil war and has never been used to block a presidential candidate from the ballot. It picked up steam this summer after a pair of conservative scholars authored a law review article saying that it applied to Trump.Trump’s lawyers have defended him by arguing that his conduct on January 6 did not amount to an insurrection, that Congress needs to pass a law to enforce the 14th amendment, and that its language does not apply to the president.But expert witnesses for the challengers in the Colorado case offered a wealth of historical and other evidence this week suggesting that what Trump did on January 6 was an insurrection as the framers of the 14th amendment would have understood it.Legal observers almost universally agree that the US supreme court, where Trump appointed three of the six members of the court’s conservative super-majority, will ultimately decide the issue and whether Trump is eligible to run for re-election. There is not a clear legal consensus and since the law is so untested, it’s not clear what the court will do.Outside of the courtroom, the biggest challenge may be getting a wide swath of Americans to accept the idea that someone they support may not be eligible to run for president. In a democracy, there is something viscerally distasteful about not being able to vote for the person we support, Ned Foley, a law professor at the Ohio State University, noted earlier this year.It’s a question the supreme court justices in Minnesota seemed to be wrestling with as well, acknowledging the case was coming up on a line between politics and the law.“Let’s say we agree with you that section 3 is self-executing, and that we do have the authority under the relevant statute to keep Mr Trump’s name off the ballot. Should we – is the question that concerns me the most,” Natalie Hudson, the chief justice of Minnesota’s supreme court said on Thursday during oral argument.But the challengers in the cases, which are supported by left-leaning groups, argue that disqualifying Trump based on the 14th amendment is no different than disqualifying someone because they are under the age of 35, a naturalized citizen, or because they have served two terms as president.“In many ways, section 3 sets forth a qualification for president that is far more important than the other constitutional criteria,” Fein said. “Most Americans are not too worried about whatever dangers might have once been posed by somebody who was not a natural born US citizen.“But someone who broke an oath to the constitution and then engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the constitution poses a real danger if they’re ever allowed back into power.”Rachel Leingang contributed reporting from Minneapolis More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      What’s Left Unsaid review: Andrew Cuomo and the case for his defense

      by

      Andrew Cuomo resigned as governor of New York in August 2021, amid a blizzard of sexual harassment allegations. None were prosecuted. Against this backdrop, he smolders. Once a giant figure in the Democratic ranks, he is out of a job. He “died as he lived”, Lis Smith, a former adviser, wrote in Any Given Tuesday, her memoir published last year. Cuomo had “zero regard for the people around him and the impact his actions would have on them”.Enter Melissa DeRosa with What’s Left Unsaid, a full-throated defense of her own former boss. On the page and while promoting her book, Cuomo’s chief adviser and most senior aide generally wields a sledgehammer. Except when she doesn’t.“I don’t want to comment on Lis’s book,” De Rosa said, when asked by Vanity Fair. “We all lived through this in our own ways. We all had to cope with the fallout of it.”Subtitled My Life at the Center of Power, Politics and Crisis, DeRosa’s memoir is pocked with scenes of a marriage gone south, of trying to cope with Covid-19 and of general governmental strife. She punches hard. Her anger is white hot. Her book is deliberate and focused.She slams Cuomo’s accusers. Letitia James, the New York attorney general, and Kathy Hochul, Cuomo’s successor as governor, get it in the neck. Aides to James had sexual harassment-related problems of their own, DeRosa charges. She also calls out CNN and the New York Times for their own alleged deficits on that score.DeRosa has connections. She interned in Hillary Clinton’s office, when Clinton was a New York senator. She thanks Clinton for helping put steel in her spine. She gives a shoutout to Huma Abedin, Clinton’s close aide. DeRosa led New York operations for Barack Obama’s political action committee. She rose through the ranks of state government and Cuomo’s office. She charges Hochul with administrative and political ineptitude, echoing criticism, leveled by Nancy Pelosi, that Hochul cost the Democrats control of the US House by screwing up the New York redistricting process, handing Republicans seats.“The governor didn’t realize soon enough where the trouble was,” Pelosi told Maureen Dowd of the New York Times. But here, DeRosa can be myopic. According to Bill de Blasio, the former New York mayor, Cuomo was also at fault in the process that most observers say facilitated Republican gains. If a mere 89 more New Yorkers had been counted, the size of the state’s congressional delegation would have suffered no loss in size.“For God’s sake, if the state had invested in the census, could you have found 89 more people to count? Sure, easily,” De Blasio has said. “This was a lost opportunity by the state government to get the count right.”DeRosa acknowledges tensions between mayor and governor but takes De Blasio to task for his embrace of leftwing politics.“That meant staking out a position that actively opposed police presence,” she writes, blaming De Blasio for problems related to crime. She also calls him out for sidling up to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the progressive star in Congress, and mocks his presidential run to nowhere.DeRosa also deals with the fractious relationship between Cuomo and the White House of Donald Trump, for so long a New York fixture and a former client of the Cuomo family law firm, Blutrich, Falcone & Miller.In 2020, under Covid, New York lockdown policy put it at odds with the administration.“We’ve done polling, and you guys are in the wrong place on this,” a “smug” Jared Kushner is quoted as telling DeRosa, saying New York was out of sync with Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Florida.“We were in the middle of a pandemic, one that had already killed tens of thousands of people, and I was talking with President Trump’s top adviser … about polling in swing states,” DeRosa writes.In fall 2021, Ron DeSantis actively discouraged vaccination. The grim reaper had a field day on the governor’s front lawn. Florida came to surpass New York in fatalities, in absolute and relative numbers. According to the Lancet, Florida’s unadjusted death rate (per 100,000) was 416, for New York 384.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionDeRosa also attacks Trump for reneging on federal assistance to infrastructure projects. Why? Cuomo publicly criticized Trump. To quote DeRosa, “the president of the United States had lost his mind over four sentences in a convention speech.”Yet Cuomo has more in common with Trump than DeRosa acknowledges. It went beyond being “two tough guys from Queens, raised by larger-than-life fathers”, as the author puts it. Confronted with pushback over his decision in 2014 to disband an anti-corruption commission which he himself appointed, Cuomo bellowed: “It’s my commission. I can appoint it, I can disband it. I appoint you, I can un-appoint.”L’état, c’est moi.DeRosa pays tribute to family. In summer 2021, as Cuomo was brought crashing down, she repaired to her sister’s in-law’s place on Cape Cod, away from prying eyes.She also deals with friends – some of them now former. Elise Stefanik, the New York Republican congresswoman who become a top Trump toady, was a buddy and classmate. DeRosa “knew her as ‘Little Elise’”. Stefanik landed at Harvard, DeRosa at Cornell. DeRosa reports a heated discussion over same-sex marriage that left Stefanik shaken. DeRosa compared her to a segregationist.The fact that Stefanik called for Cuomo and his senior staff to resign probably triggered this trip down memory lane. Left unmentioned: Stefanik was one of 39 Republicans, and the sole member of House GOP leadership, to vote in favor of federal protection for same-sex and interracial marriage.Promoting her book, DeRosa was asked by Vanity Fair about Cuomo, karma and payback. She said: “I don’t like to think that we live in a world where the answer is, ‘Well, you got it because you deserved it.’”Vanity Fair’s headline? “Melissa DeRosa Isn’t Done Defending Andrew Cuomo”. She and her boss are not about to disappear.
      What’s Left Unsaid is published in the US by Sterling Publishing More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Leftist Democrats invoke human rights law in scrutiny of Israel military aid

      by

      Leftwing Democrats in Congress have invoked a landmark law barring assistance to security forces of governments deemed guilty of human rights abuses to challenge the Biden administration’s emergency military aid program for Israel.Members of the Democratic party’s progressive wing say the $14.3bn package pledged by the White House after the 7 October attack by Hamas that killed more than 1,400 Israelis breaches the Leahy Act because Israel’s retaliatory assault on Gaza has overwhelmingly harmed civilians. An estimated 9,000 people have been killed in Gaza so far, among them 3,700 children, according to the Gaza health ministry, run by Hamas.The act, sponsored by the former Democratic senator Patrick Leahy and passed in 1997, prohibits the US defence and state departments from rendering security assistance to foreign governments facing credible accusations of rights abuses. The law was originally designed only to refer to narcotics assistance, but was later expanded, with amendments covering assistance from both state department and Pentagon budgetsSeveral governments, some of them key US allies, are believed to have been denied assistance under the law, including Turkey, Colombia and Mexico.Proponents of applying the act to Israel point to the rising death toll in Gaza from military strikes on the territory, the displacement of more than 1 million people from their homes and a surging humanitarian crisis after Israeli authorities cut water, food, fuel and electricity supplies.“I am very concerned that our taxpayer dollars may be used for violations of human rights,” said the congressman Andre Carson of Indiana in an email to the Guardian, in which he accused Israel of “war crimes”, citing this week’s deadly bombing of the Jabalia refugee camp and the Israeli Defense Forces’ (IDF) alleged use of white phosphorus.“Last year, I voted to provide $3 billion dollars of strategic and security assistance to Israel. But we must absolutely make sure that none of those funds are used inappropriately, in violation of US law like the Leahy Act, or in violation of international law.”But earlier this week, the Biden administration said it was not placing any limits on how Israel uses the weapons provided to it by the US. “That is really up to the Israel Defense Force to use in how they are going to conduct their operations,” a Pentagon spokesperson, Sabrina Singh, said on Monday. “But we’re not putting any constraints on that.”The Israeli government and its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, have so far not responded to calls for a humanitarian pause and have rejected calls for a ceasefire, as demanded by some progressive Democrats.Joe Biden promised a lavish military aid package to Israel in an Oval Office speech after visiting the country following the Hamas attack. US commandos are currently in Israel helping to locate an estimated 240 hostages, the number given by IDF, including American citizens, seized in the assault, the Pentagon has confirmed.Carson, one of three Muslims in Congress, said he previously raised concerns about possible Leahy Act violations last year after the shooting death of the US-Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh in the West Bank. An Israeli investigation subsequently admitted there was a “high probability” that she had been killed by Israeli gunfire, after initially blaming Palestinians.Usamah Andrabi, the communications director for Justice Democrats – a political action committee that helped elect leftwing House members nicknamed “the Squad”, which include some of Congress’s most vocal advocates for Palestinian rights – also invoked the Leahy legislation.“I think the Leahy Act should absolutely be looked into right now, when we are seeing gross violations of human rights,” he said. “[The Israelis] are targeting refugee camps, hospitals, mosques all under the guise of self-defense or that one or other member of Hamas is hiding there. It doesn’t matter whether Hamas is there or not, because you are targeting civilians. No amount of tax dollars should be justified for that.”Like Carson, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, one of the most high-profile members of “the Squad”, specifically identified the supposed use of white phosphorus – as claimed by Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International – as a transgression that should disqualify Israel from receiving US assistance. The IDF had said it does not use white phosphorus against civilians, but didn’t clarify whether it was used at the time.“Deployment of white phosphorus near populated civilian areas is a war crime,” she said. “The United States must adhere to our own laws and policies, which prohibit US aid from assisting forces engaged in gross violations of human rights and international humanitarian law.”Congressional calls for scrutiny over US funding for Israel predate the current war in Gaza.Last May, Betty McCollum, a Democrat from Minnesota, introduced the Defending the Human Rights of Palestinian Children and Families Living Under Israeli Military Occupation bill, designed to prohibit US funds from being used to enforce Israeli occupation policies in the West Bank.“Not $1 of US aid should be used to commit human rights violations, demolish families’ homes, or permanently annex Palestinian lands,” McCollum said at the time. “The United States provides billions in assistance for Israel’s government each year – and those dollars should go toward Israel’s security, not toward actions that violate international law and cause harm.”The bill, which has not passed, was co-sponsored by 16 other House Democrats – including some who have not supported the current calls for a ceasefire – and endorsed by 75 civil society groups, including Amnesty, HRW and J Street.McCollum’s office did not respond to questions over whether she now supported extending her bill to Gaza or using the Leahy Act to block Biden’s emergency fund package.In a speech on the Senate floor this week, the senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont called Israel’s Gaza campaign “morally unacceptable and a violation of international law” but stopped short of opposing Biden’s assistance program.Instead, he demanded a “clear promise” from Israel that displaced Palestinians will be allowed to return to their homes after fighting stops and for the abandonment of efforts to annex the West Bank, a territory claimed by Palestinians as part of a future state.“The United States must make it clear that these are the conditions for our solidarity,” he said.In a letter to the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, and the minority leader, Mitch McConnell, Sanders and five other Democratic senators – Elizabeth Warren, Jeff Merkley, Ed Markey, Peter Welch and Mazie Hirono – said they supported approving Biden’s proposed overall $106bn aid package to Israel, Ukraine and other foreign crisis areas “without delay”.But they demanded that an equal sum be allocated to “domestic emergencies”, including childcare, primary health care and the opioid epidemic.A separate letter the six sent to Biden asks a series of searching questions about Israel’s invasion of Gaza.“We have serious concerns about what this invasion and potential occupation of Gaza will mean, both in terms of the long-term security of Israel and the well-being of the Palestinian residents of Gaza,” it says. “Congress needs more information about Israel’s long-term plans and goals, as well as the United States Government’s assessments of those prospects.” More

    • 275 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats grow nervous over Israel’s conduct in Gaza as Senate leader vows not to consider House security bill – as it happened

      by

      Yesterday evening, the Republican-led House of Representatives passed a bill to provide Israel with security assistance as it presses on with its invasion of Gaza and conflict with Hamas. But the measure is not expected to be considered by the Senate, and has attracted a veto threat from Joe Biden over provisions rescinding money from the IRS tax authority and driving up the US budget deficit.Democrats are instead holding out for a larger package that would, as Biden has requested, pay for more military aid to Ukraine and improved border security in addition to aiding Israel, while also avoiding cuts to White House priorities like improving the IRS’s ability to crack down on tax cheats. Such a measure is expected to attract some support from Senate Republicans, most notably Mitch McConnell, who has remained a champion of Ukraine even as polls show many other Republicans are growing wary of paying for the country’s defense against Russia.Back to the House vote, it was 226 to 196 in favor of passage, with all but two Republicans present voting yes and all but 12 Democrats in attendance voting against it. Several of the Democrats who voted for the bill had previously attacked it as inappropriately partisan, including Florida’s Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who said she nonetheless decided to support it due to her connection to Israel:There appears to be a shift in sentiment towards Israel’s invasion of Gaza in Washington DC, particularly among Senate Democrats. A group of 13 lawmakers has signed on to a joint statement calling for a humanitarian pause in Israel’s campaign to root out Hamas, and in a visit to Tel Aviv, secretary of state Antony Blinken made a similar request. The Senate now seems to be on a collision course with the House, which last night passed a bill to send Israel military assistance while also slashing funding to the IRS tax authority. That’s a nonstarter for Democrats, and their Senate leader, Chuck Schumer, says the measure won’t be considered in the chamber, while minority leader Mitch McConnell also seems uncomfortable with it.Here’s what else happened today:
      Next Tuesday is election day for off-year contests, including in Ohio, where voters will be asked to protect abortion access in the state constitution, and Virginia, where Democrats hope to defang Republican governor Glenn Youngkin.
      House Democrats are also expressing concerns publicly over the number of civilians killed in Israel’s invasion of Gaza, including California progressive Ro Khanna.
      George Santos will run for re-election next year, even if he is expelled from the House, he told CNN.
      Pete Buttigieg, the transportation secretary and first openly gay person to serve in a president’s cabinet, condemned Republican House speaker Mike Johnson’s history of anti-LGBTQ+ statements.
      Got questions about Israel and Palestine? The Guardian has answers.
      It’s not just Senate Democrats who are questioning Israel’s handling of its invasion of Gaza.House Democrats are also publicly worrying over the mounting civilian death toll. Here’s California progressive Ro Khanna telling CNN that while he supports Israel’s right to defend itself, he believes too many civilians are dying in its invasion:Joe Biden has arrived in Lewiston, Maine, site of a mass shooting last week that left 18 people dead.He is currently visiting Schemengees Bar and Grille, one of two locations where army reservist Robert Card opened fire:Biden is expected to meet with first responders in Lewiston, as well as survivors of the attack and family members of the victims, before heading to Rehoboth Beach, Delaware for the weekend.In the weeks since the killings, reports have emerged that people who knew Card tried to sound the alarm about his behavior. Here’s more on that:Transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg, the first openly gay man to serve in a US president’s cabinet, condemned Republican House speaker Mike Johnson for his history of making anti-LGBTQ+ statements.In an interview with CNN, Buttigieg said, “I will admit it’s a little bit difficult driving the family minivan to drop our kids off at daycare, passing the dome of the Capitol knowing the speaker of the House, sitting under that dome, doesn’t even think our family ought to exist.”Here’s more from Buttigieg:Johnson has a long history of disparaging same-sex couples, including in 2004, when he wrote a newspaper op-ed saying homosexuality was “inherently unnatural”. Since being elected speaker last month, he has avoided making similar statements, telling Fox News commentator Sean Hannity in an interview that he “genuinely love[d] all people regardless of their lifestyle choices.”“Go pick up a Bible off your shelf and read it – that’s my worldview”, he added. Here’s some further reading on that:With Chuck Schumer saying he will ignore a House Republican bill to give Israel military assistance while cutting funding to the IRS, it seems likely Senate Democrats will soon propose a measure that lines up with Joe Biden’s demands.The president last month asked lawmakers to approve aid to both Israel and Ukraine, and money for border security. At a press conference earlier today, the Democratic House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries said that proposal would be welcomed by his lawmakers:The bigger question is what Republican House speaker Mike Johnson will do with it, and whether it would have the votes to pass Congress’s lower chamber, where a growing faction of GOP members are opposed to aiding Ukraine.There appears to be a shift in sentiment towards Israel’s invasion of Gaza in Washington DC, particularly among Senate Democrats. A group of 13 lawmakers has signed on to a joint statement calling for a humanitarian pause in Israel’s ongoing invasion to root out Hamas, and in a visit to Tel Aviv, secretary of state Antony Blinken made a similar request. The Senate now seems to be on a collision course with the House, which last night passed a bill to send Israel military assistance while also slashing funding to the IRS tax authority. That’s a nonstarter for Democrats, and their Senate leader Chuck Schumer says the measure won’t be considered in the chamber, while minority leader Mitch McConnell also seems uncomfortable with it.Here’s what else has happened today so far:
      Next Tuesday is election day for off-year contests, including in Ohio, where voters will be asked to protect abortion access in the state constitution, and Virginia, where Democrats hope to defang Republican governor Glenn Youngkin.
      George Santos will run for re-election next year, even if he is expelled from the House, he told CNN.
      Got questions about Israel and Palestine? The Guardian has answers.
      Proceedings are done for the day in the Trump Organization civil fraud trial in New York, where Eric Trump testified again.Here’s a taste of Lauren Aratani’s report:
      Eric Trump, one of the two sons trusted to run Donald Trump’s real estate empire, testified on Friday that he was not involved with the financial documents a judge has ruled to be fraudulent, in a trial that threatens to hobble his family’s business.
      In a second day on the witness stand, the former US president’s second son said he relied on outside accountants and lawyers to check financial documents. His older brother Donald Trump Jr made the same argument in his testimony earlier this week.
      Prosecutors presented evidence that showed Eric Trump had signed off on documents that estimated the value of trophy properties such as the Trump Seven Springs estate north of New York City and the Trump National Doral golf club in Florida.
      That undercut his testimony on Thursday that he knew nothing about those estimates, which Judge Arthur Engoron found were fraudulently inflated to win favorable terms from lenders and insurers.
      And here’s Lauren’s report in full.And here’s some further reading, by me, about the Trump boys’ tactics in court:Thirty-one Democrats voted not to expel the Republican lawmaker George Santos from the US House of Representatives because he has not been convicted of any crime and to eject him would set a dangerous precedent for Republicans to expel their ideological opponents, a leading congressman said.“For me this was an easy call,” said Jamie Raskin of Maryland, a law professor and influential progressive who sat on the January 6 committee and was lead manager in Donald Trump’s impeachment for inciting the attack on Congress.Santos “hasn’t been convicted of anything yet, and he has not been convicted of anything in our ethics process”, Raskin told Mother Jones.“The history is very telling. We’ve expelled five people in the history of the US House of Representatives. Three of them were Confederate traitors and the other two had other federal criminal convictions.”James A Traficant, an Ohio Democrat, was the last House member to be expelled, in 2002 and after being convicted of crimes including conspiracy to commit bribery, obstruction of justice and racketeering. After seven years in jail, he attempted to run for re-election.Raskin continued: “For us to take the step of expelling someone who had not been convicted of anything would be a really dangerous manoeuvre, especially with the Republicans in control of the House.”Read on:And also, as a footnote, some recommended reading, in the form of the great David Grann on the curious case of James A Traficant, for the New Yorker. This is just a taste – you really owe it to yourself to buy Grann’s book of New Yorker pieces, The Devil and Sherlock Holmes: Tales of Murder, Madness and Obsession, before today is through…George Santos, the New York fabulist, part-time drag enthusiast, accused fraudster and congressman, told CNN earlier he would “absolutely” run for re-election next year even if he is expelled from Congress over his criminal charges.Santos survived an expulsion vote, over 23 federal criminal charges to which he pleaded not guilty, on a motion brought by members of his own party this week. He could face another such vote after a House ethics committee investigation concludes later this month.Here’s his conversation with the great corridor-haunter himself, Manu Raju, CNN chief congressional correspondent:Raju: “So, if they expel you, and then they put someone else in the seat, you’re going to run in 2024?Santos: “Absolutely.”Raju: “Uh-huh. Can you win a primary, given of all these things that are lined up against you…”Santos: “Yes. Yes.”Raju: “… and the general election?”Santos: “Well…”Raju: This is a Biden-leaning district. And you have all these issues against you.Santos: “Could I have won the general election last time? Nobody said I could. But I survived.”Raju: “It was a different situation.”Santos: “No, I understand. But elections are tricky. There’s no predetermined outcome.Raju: “Your voters thought they were electing one person.”Santos: “Manu, nobody elected me…”Raju: “And that wasn’t true.”Santos: “Nobody elected me because I played volleyball or not. Nobody elected me because I graduated college or not.“People elected me because I said I’d come here to fight the swamp, I’d come here to lower inflation, create more jobs, make life more affordable, and the commitment to America. That’s why people voted for anybody. To say that they voted based on anybody’s biography, I can beg you this. Nobody knew my biography. Nobody opened my biography who voted for me in the campaign.”Unfortunately for Santos, once he got to Congress, lots of reporters did open his biography. And, explaining the volleyball reference, a lot of it turned out not to be true.And that was before the criminal charges.Shifting back to Israel’s ongoing invasion of Gaza, here’s Connecticut’s Democratic senator Chris Murphy on why he is now calling for a temporary pause in the fighting.Murphy and 12 other Democratic senators signed onto a statement advocating for a “short-term cessation of hostilities” to get hostages out of Gaza and humanitarian aid in. He elaborates on the call, in an interview with MSNBC:Also happening next Tuesday are legislative elections in Virginia, where Republicans hope to take full control of Senate and empower GOP governor Glenn Youngkin to enact his agenda unimpeded. The Guardian’s Joan E Greve reports on how a Democratic congresswoman who conquered new territory for the party five years ago is working to help state-level candidates do the same:As two dozen volunteers prepared to knock doors on an unseasonably warm afternoon in late October, Congresswoman Abigail Spanberger reminded them that their work helped flip her battleground House seat in 2018. She predicted it would pay off again for Virginia Democrats this year.“It is how we have won in hard races across Virginia and across the country, and it is certainly why I feel confident that we are on the right path headed towards November 7,” Spanberger said, speaking to campaign volunteers in a sunny parking lot in Manassas.Spanberger has played an active role in boosting Virginia Democrats’ hopes for election day, as the party looks to flip control of the house of delegates and maintain their majority in the state senate. The stakes are high: Republicans would achieve a legislative trifecta in Richmond if they take control of the state senate, allowing them to enact controversial policies like banning abortion after 15 weeks and limiting access to the ballot box.With her carefully crafted political persona as a centrist Democrat, Spanberger may be the right person to deliver her party’s closing message in the final stretch of the campaign. In Manassas, Spanberger laid out her vision for how Virginia Democrats would succeed on 7 November, saying: “There is nothing more important than helping people believe that the policies and the government – whether it be in Richmond or on Capitol Hill – that they want is possible.”The results on Tuesday could affect Spanberger’s own future as well; the congresswoman has reportedly told multiple people that she intends to run for governor in the battleground state. If she is successful, her victory would allow Democrats to take back the Virginia governorship, which is now held by Republican Glenn Youngkin, in 2025.It’s not 2024 yet, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t any important elections happening this year. Indeed, next Tuesday is election day in several states nationwide for off-year contests over ballot initiatives, governor’s mansions and other key questions. Here’s the Guardian’s Alice Herman with some troubling news out of Ohio, where voters will decide on whether to protect abortion access in the state constitution:Ohio’s Republican secretary of state quietly canceled the voter registrations of more than 26,000 voters in late September, less than two weeks before the deadline to register to vote in next week’s hotly contested abortion referendum in the state.Voting rights advocates say the process lacked transparency and departed from Frank LaRose’s usual practice of alerting groups before removing registrations from the rolls. And it comes as LaRose campaigns hard against the 7 November constitutional amendment vote – when Ohio voters will decide whether to enshrine the right to abortion in the state constitution – as well as a vote on a separate measure to legalize marijuana.“We are disappointed in the secretary of state’s office’s authorization of the voter purge while voting for the November election was already (and still is) under way,” Kayla Griffin, of the voting rights group All Voting is Local, said.Voter list maintenance is a standard, legally required part of the election process, and many if not most of these registrations are for people who have moved away, died or long since stopped voting. The state issues alerts by mail to voters whose registration is flagged for removal, leaving the chance to update or confirm their registration before being kicked off the rolls.But it’s unusual to remove voter registrations this close to an election given the risk of disenfranchising people who intend to vote but simply missed the memo that they had been flagged for removal. In fact, if this was a national election rather than a state-level contest, what LaRose’s office has done would have been illegal. The National Voter Registration Act prohibits elections offices from systematically removing voters from the rolls within 90 days of a federal election. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      View on Israel-Gaza emerges as rare divide for California’s Senate hopefuls

      by

      As three leading California Democrats vie for a rare opening in the Senate, the Israeli offensive in Gaza has exposed rare fault lines in the candidates’ otherwise aligned platforms.Following Hamas’s attack on Israel last month, all three leading candidates in the race to fill Dianne Feinstein’s seat – representatives Barbara Lee, Adam Schiff and Katie Porter – condemned the group’s actions. But as Israel ramped up its attacks on Gaza in retaliation, their divergent approaches to foreign policy became clear.The fissures between the candidates are a reflection of debates within the broader Democratic party. But in California’s open primary, where voters will choose between leading Democratic candidates with nearly identical platforms, the issue could be a deciding factor for some voters.“These candidates have regularly identified themselves as progressive candidates on a host of domestic policy issues – you can hardly tell the difference between them,” said Sara Sadhwani, a professor of American politics at Pomona College. But when it comes to Israel and Gaza, “from the get-go, we began to see some of these real distinctions”.Lee, who was the sole member of Congress to vote against the authorization for the use of military force after 9/11 that gave the president broad power to wage war, has maintained her position as an unwavering anti-war progressive. She is the only leading candidate to have called for a ceasefire.“I absolutely condemn all violence against civilians – including the horrific terrorist attacks by Hamas. Nothing is more valuable than human life,” she told the Guardian in an emailed statement. “And the surest way to mitigate the suffering in both Israel and Palestine is through a ceasefire.”Lee said the US “must lead the way forward” by supporting humanitarian and reconstruction aid, including food, medicine and water, to the region.On X, she posted: “There is one peace and diplomacy candidate in this race. I am proud to carry that mantle – even if I carry it alone.”Schiff has emphasized that “there are no both sides to the attack” by Hamas. “Israel has a right to defend itself, and the US must do all it can to assist Israel as it protects its citizens and takes all necessary steps to recover the hostages taken,” he said after the group staged its offensive last month. “Hamas is a terrorist group mass-murdering hundreds of innocent Israelis and taking women and children hostage.”Schiff has rejected calling for a ceasefire, a position in line with that of the Biden White House.In a statement on Thursday addressing his vote on a Republican-led House bill providing aid to Israel, he advocated for humanitarian pauses in the fighting, while noting the US should ensure that “Israel has the material support it needs to replenish its defenses, not only against Hamas, but against Islamic jihad, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and their Iranian sponsors, all of whom are endangering the lives of Israelis and threatening to widen the war”.Among several reasons for opposing the bill was its exclusion of humanitarian aid for Palestinian civilians who need food and medical aid, said his communications director Marisol Samayoa.Schiff, who is Jewish, said at a candidate debate in Los Angeles last month that he was proud to have the support of both the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac), an influential pro-Israel lobbying group that has backed election deniers and far-right Republicans, and J Street, a “pro-Israel, pro-peace” group.“I stand shoulder to shoulder with the Israeli people,” he said.At the candidate forum, Katie Porter offered a hawkish take that at times appeared to clash with her progressive domestic policy: “There are lost lives in Gaza and Israel and it is because the United States has allowed terrorism to flourish and has refused to take a strong enough stance against Iran who is backing Hamas and Hezbollah,” she said.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe Orange county Democrat has pushed for stronger action against Iran in the past. Her district has one of the largest concentrations of Iranian Americans and one of her key policy tenets is “fighting for the accountability and change that the Iranian people deserve”.At the same forum – in line with mainstream Democrats – she also said that Israel, in taking action against Hamas, should be mindful not to violate human rights laws. “There is no exception for human rights,” she said.Porter did not respond to a request for further comment.Sadhwani, the Pomona College professor, said younger voters especially, who tend to more strongly empathise with Palestinians under occupation and oppose US military aid to Israel, could be swayed to Lee, for instance, and away from Schiff or Porter. Lee’s vocal support for a ceasefire and aid to Palestine could also sway Arab American voters, who might feel let down by Joe Biden and the broader Democratic party’s support for Israel amid its strikes on Gaza.Schiff’s stance cost him the endorsement of the Burbank mayor, Konstantine Anthony. “Until my congressman joins this peace movement, I can no longer, in good conscience, maintain my endorsement of his candidacy for the United States Senate,” said the progressive mayor, whose city is encompassed in Schiff’s southern California district.But Schiff’s relatively moderate views and hawkish foreign policy – including advocating for Congress to authorise the use of force against the Islamic State, has long drawn criticism from California progressives.In a statewide race where a Senate candidate will also need to pick up moderate and conservative voters, Schiff’s record could be a strength, said Sadhwani.“Who knows where we’ll be, by the time the primary rolls around next year,” she said. “But to the extent that this issue remains at the top of voters’ minds, it could certainly play an important role in their choice of senator.” More

    • 200 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Abigail Spanberger flexes her political power in a battleground state: ‘I could see her as president’

      by

      As two dozen volunteers prepared to knock doors on an unseasonably warm afternoon in late October, Congresswoman Abigail Spanberger reminded them that their work helped flip her battleground House seat in 2018. She predicted it would pay off again for Virginia Democrats this year.“It is how we have won in hard races across Virginia and across the country, and it is certainly why I feel confident that we are on the right path headed towards November 7,” Spanberger said, speaking to campaign volunteers in a sunny parking lot in Manassas.Spanberger has played an active role in boosting Virginia Democrats’ hopes for election day, as the party looks to flip control of the house of delegates and maintain their majority in the state senate. The stakes are high: Republicans would achieve a legislative trifecta in Richmond if they take control of the state senate, allowing them to enact controversial policies like banning abortion after 15 weeks and limiting access to the ballot box.With her carefully crafted political persona as a centrist Democrat, Spanberger may be the right person to deliver her party’s closing message in the final stretch of the campaign. In Manassas, Spanberger laid out her vision for how Virginia Democrats would succeed on 7 November, saying: “There is nothing more important than helping people believe that the policies and the government – whether it be in Richmond or on Capitol Hill – that they want is possible.”The results on Tuesday could affect Spanberger’s own future as well; the congresswoman has reportedly told multiple people that she intends to run for governor in the battleground state. If she is successful, her victory would allow Democrats to take back the Virginia governorship, which is now held by Republican Glenn Youngkin, in 2025.For now, Spanberger has declined to confirm those plans, insisting she remains laser-focused on this year’s crucial elections.“I have enjoyed spending time with people who are in the voting mindset,” Spanberger said in August. “As for anything that I might do in the future, I’m not going to make any announcements until after November.”Spanberger first won election to the US House of Representatives in 2018, capitalizing on her experience as a former CIA officer turned organizer for the gun safety group Moms Demand Action to sway voters concerned about Donald Trump’s leadership. Winning her 2018 race by just two points, Spanberger unseated a Republican incumbent, Dave Brat, who had defeated his last Democratic opponent by 15 points two years earlier.Spanberger joined a freshman House class dominated by Democrats, part of the “blue wave” that helped the party take control of the chamber for the first time in eight years.“She was one of these what I call the ‘national security Democrats’ that were elected in 2018,” said Jessica Taylor, the Senate and governors editor for the Cook Political Report. “I think she still retains that sort of more moderate pragmatic profile, with especially a focus on national security.”Despite Republicans’ repeated efforts to oust Spanberger, the congresswoman has held on to her seat through two hard-fought re-election campaigns. Running in a newly redrawn district in 2022, Spanberger won her race by roughly five points, her largest victory to date. She has also proved herself to be an impressive fundraiser, bringing in nearly $9m in 2022.Over her three terms in Congress, she has developed a reputation as a centrist able to collaborate with Democrats and Republicans alike, as she has advocated for bipartisan initiatives like a ban on House members trading individual stocks and increased funding for police departments. Spanberger enjoys reminding voters that she was named the most bipartisan elected official in Virginia by the non-profit Common Ground Committee.But even as she cultivates a reputation as a pragmatic centrist, Spanberger has been careful to avoid alienating her more progressive constituents through her consistent support of the social issues that remain important to the Democratic base. The Planned Parenthood Action Fund has given Spanberger a score of 100% on its congressional scorecard, as has the LGBTQ+ rights group Human Rights Campaign. Spanberger, who highlighted her work with Moms Demand Action during her first campaign, has also received endorsements from anti-gun violence groups like Everytown for Gun Safety and Giffords.This delicate political balance frustrates her Republican rivals, who argue the congresswoman’s voting record proves she is not the centrist she makes herself out to be.“She does campaign as a moderate. Her language is moderate in tone,” said Rich Anderson, chairman of the Republican party of Virginia. “But she votes as a pretty progressive liberal out on the left edge of the spectrum.”The moments when Spanberger has publicly clashed with her party have been rare and notable. She opposed the election of Nancy Pelosi as House speaker in 2019 and 2021, a significant but ultimately inconsequential vote as Pelosi still won the gavel. Spanberger also made headlines in 2020, when the Washington Post reported that she lashed out against progressive colleagues in a phone call focused on Democrats’ losses in key House races. Lamenting the defeat of several centrist Democrats in battleground states, Spanberger reportedly said: “We need to not ever use the word ‘socialist’ or ‘socialism’ ever again … We lost good members because of that.”“She’s been very careful to pick and choose where she goes against her party,” said Mark Rozell, dean of the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University. “It’s worked for her. That’s the bottom line. It has worked and given her a lot of encouragement that she could run an effective statewide campaign, and that remains to be seen.”As speculation has intensified over her statewide ambitions, Spanberger has made a point to keep her attention on the elections happening this year, crisscrossing the state to promote Democratic candidates.“We want legislators who are focused on the issues that matter,” Spanberger told a crowd of roughly 120 people in rural Orange, Virginia, in August. “We want people in elected and representative offices who are going out and talking to the people that they represent, who are advocating for the issues that matter.”Candidates and voters at the Orange event applauded Spanberger’s seemingly ubiquitous presence in her district. Jason Ford, a former campaign staffer for Spanberger who is now running for a seat on the state senate, recalled a running joke that no one knew where the congresswoman lived in the district because she always seemed to be out on the campaign trail speaking to voters.“She’s willing to show up in every part of the district,” Ford said. “She has consistently shown that hard work, commitment to the people and genuinely caring about the issues that they care about is what it takes to be a good representative.”That approach has won her many fans among Democrats in her district. “She just cares about Virginia. She cares about the things that Virginians care about and not what Youngkin and his crowd think Virginians care about,” said Kate Handley, a 57-year-old from Gordonsville.Bill Maiden, a 58-year-old voter and former Republican from Culpepper, added: “She actually goes out, meets people and does what she says – reaches across the aisle, gets things done … That’s exactly what we need out of a politician.”Spanberger’s constituents voiced optimism about her potential gubernatorial campaign, even as they expressed dismay about the possibility of her leaving the House.“I’d hate to lose her in Congress, but I think she would be a fantastic governor,” said Lynn Meyers, a 78-year-old voter from Locust Grove. “She’s on point. She’s realistic. She’s fair. She’s not like a loose cannon like so many of our folks in politics are today.”But any statewide campaign will have to wait until after the legislative elections next week, which could be instructive for Spanberger and other Virginia politicians weighing their future plans. If Republicans are successful on Tuesday, it may encourage candidates in the Youngkin mold to jump into the gubernatorial race, although experts emphasize that it is too early to get a clear sense of the 2025 field.“It’s essentially impossible to handicap the field before we even know how these elections turn out next week and who is running,” Taylor said.On the Republican side, Virginia’s lieutenant governor, Winsome Earle-Sears, and the state’s attorney general, Jason Miyares, have been named as potential candidates, given that Youngkin is term-limited. Spanberger may also face a rocky road to the Democratic nomination, as Richmond’s mayor, Levar Stoney, has been widely expected to jump into the primary.“My guess is that much of the commentary will focus on her as the centrist candidate and the mayor as the more progressive one,” Rozell said. “That could be a danger point for her, given the low turnout in primaries and the propensity of the more liberal wing of the party to dominate turnout in low-turnout primaries.”Spanberger could forgo a gubernatorial campaign and instead focus on holding her battleground district in 2024, which may bolster her party’s prospects of regaining control of the US House next year. But given Spanberger’s packed campaign schedule over the past few months, Anderson believes there is little question of her future plans.“She is spending a lot of time if not on the road at least making public statements in support of legislative candidates who have been nominated by the Democratic party all around the state, so that tells me that’s exactly where she’s going,” Anderson said. “I think probably within a reasonable period of time after November 7, we’ll have the answer to the question.”Although 2025 is more than a year away, at least one of Spanberger’s admirers is already looking beyond the governor’s mansion.“I could see her as president someday. I really could,” said Willow Drinkwater, an 82-year-old voter from Gordonsville. “Because she brings people together. She’s a consensus-maker.” More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      US House passes $14.3bn aid package for Israel despite Democratic opposition

      by

      The US House of Representatives on Thursday passed a Republican plan to provide $14.3bn in aid to Israel as it fights Hamas, despite Democrats’ insistence it has no future in the Senate and the White House’s promise of a veto.The measure passed 226-196, largely along party lines, with most Republicans supporting the bill and most Democrats objecting.The bill’s introduction was the first major legislative action under the new Republican House speaker, Mike Johnson. President Joe Biden has threatened a veto, and Chuck Schumer, the majority leader of the Democrat-controlled Senate, said he would not bring it up for a vote.Biden has asked Congress to approve a broader $106bn emergency spending package including funding for Israel, Taiwan and Ukraine, as well as humanitarian aid. Schumer said the Senate would consider a bipartisan bill addressing the broader priorities.The House bill would provide billions for Israel’s military, including $4bn for Israel’s Iron Dome and David’s Sling defense systems to be able to counter short-range rocket threats, as well as some transfers of equipment from US stocks.“This is the first step in the process and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the bill so we can get funds to Israel as soon as possible,” said the representative Kay Granger, who chairs the House appropriations committee, during debate on the legislation.Republicans have a 221-212 majority in the House, but Biden’s fellow Democrats control the Senate 51-49. To become law, the bill would have to pass both the House and Senate and be signed by Biden.House Republican leaders said they would cover the cost of the aid to Israel by cutting some funding for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that Democrats included in Biden’s signature 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.Republicans objected to the increased IRS funding from the beginning, and said cutting the agency’s budget was essential to offset the cost of military aid to Israel, whose tanks and troops took on Hamas on the outskirts of Gaza City on Thursday.Democrats objected to cutting money for the IRS, calling it a politically motivated “poison pill” that would increase the country’s budget deficit by cutting back on tax collection. They also said it was essential to continue to support Ukraine as it fights against a Russian invasion that began in February 2022.The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office on Wednesday said the IRS cuts and Israel aid in the standalone bill would add nearly $30bn to the US budget deficit, currently estimated at $1.7tn.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe representative Rosa DeLauro, the ranking Democratic on the appropriations committee, accused Republicans of delaying aid by backing a partisan bill that does not include Ukraine or humanitarian aid for civilians. “This bill abandons Ukraine. We will not abandon Israel and we will not abandon Ukraine. But their fortunes are linked,” she said.While Democrats and many Republicans still strongly support Ukraine, a small but vocal group of Republicans question sending more money to the government in Kyiv at a time of steep budget deficits.Johnson, who voted against Ukraine aid repeatedly before he became speaker last month, plans to introduce a bill combining assistance for Ukraine with money to increase security at the US border with Mexico.“Ukraine will come in short order. It will come next,” Johnson said at a news conference on Thursday. “We want to pair border security with Ukraine, because I think we can get bipartisan agreement on both of those matters.”Congress has approved $113bn for Ukraine since the invasion began. More

    • 250 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Johnson ‘not surprised’ his proposal to cut IRS budget to fund Israel would cost taxpayer money – as it happened

      by

      NBC News caught up with Mike Johnson, who chalked up the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office’s determination that his Israel aid proposal would actually cost taxpayers money to the machinations of Washington:Punchbowl News separately caught two rightwing senators heading into Johnson’s office, and report they are expected to support his bill:But it is the Senate’s Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer, who will decide whether the measure comes to the floor, and he has said he will not do that.Five House Republican lawmakers from New York are pressing on with their effort to expel George Santos, the congressman who admitted to lying about large parts of his résumé and who is also facing federal charges. A vote on their expulsion resolution is expected this evening, though it’s unclear if it will reach the two-thirds majority necessary for passage. The chamber’s ethics committee has meanwhile announced it will provide an update regarding its investigation into Santos by 17 November, while some worry that kicking him out of his seat before he is convicted will set a bad example.Here’s what else happened:
      The House will also consider resolutions to censure far-right Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene and progressive Democrat Rashida Tlaib.
      Mike Johnson, the Republican House speaker, proposed aiding Israel by cutting the IRS’s budget, but that will just make the effort even more expensive for taxpayers, Congress’s nonpartisan budget analyst found.
      Chuck Schumer, the Senate’s Democratic leader, endorsed using an unusual procedure to get around Republican Tommy Tuberville’s blockade of military promotions.
      A new analysis shows Democrats appear to have the edge in winning back control of the House next year.
      The Florida judge handling Donald Trump’s trial over the classified documents charges signaled she may delay the case.
      We’ve talked plenty about the resolution to expel George Santos on this blog today, so let’s dive in to the dueling efforts to censure progressive Democrat Rashida Tlaib and far-right Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene.Greene introduced the resolution targeting Tlaib, one of two Muslims in the House and the only Palestinian American, accusing her of antisemitism and participating in an insurrection:Greene is an enthusiastic supporter of Donald Trump’s lie that he won the 2020 election, and has taken part in efforts to downplay the severity of the January 6 attack on the Capitol. The insurrection she accuses Tlaib of participating in was a protest in a House office building where hundreds of people were arrested in what organizers described as planned acts of civil disobedience. Tlaib spoke to the protesters before they entered the building, which, unlike the Capitol building that rioters stormed on January 6, is open to the public.Tlaib, who is a vocal opponent of Israel’s government and its treatment of the Palestinians, rejected the charge of antisemitism in a statement:The same day Greene introduced her resolution to censure Tlaib, Vermont Democrat Becca Balint introduced a separate resolution to censure the Georgia congresswoman, accusing her of spreading racist conspiracy theories, Islamophobia and also being antisemitic:Ever since assuming the majority in the House at the start of the year, Republicans have moved to retaliate against Democrats who attracted their ire. The party censured Adam Schiff, a prominent Donald Trump antagonist, and booted Ilhan Omar, the second Muslim in the chamber and a prominent progressive, off the foreign affairs committee.The House is expected to vote on whether to expel Republican congressman and admitted fabulist George Santos sometime after 6.30pm this evening, Democratic whip Katherine Clark’s office has announced.Lawmakers will also consider resolutions to censure far-right Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene and progressive Democrat Rashida Tlaib.Congress’s lower chamber is currently in session, with lawmakers debating several pieces of legislation proposed in response to Hamas’s attack on Israel last month. Speaking of which, we have a separate live blog covering the latest events in the spiraling conflict, and you can follow it here:At a hearing in Florida today, federal judge Aileen Cannon seemed open to extending legal deadlines in Donald Trump’s classified documents case, potentially delaying his trial.Opening arguments in the case are set to start in May 2024, but Cannon noted that timetable could conflict with the former president’s trial on separate charges related to trying to overturn the 2020 election, which is scheduled to begin in March.In addition to those federal cases, Trump has also been indicted in Georgia for trying to overturn the 2020 election there, and for falsifying business documents in Manhattan.For more details, here’s our rundown of Trump’s legal problems:Meanwhile in New York City, the civil fraud trial of Donald Trump and his family members is continuing. Donald Trump Jr may at some point today take the witness stand in the proceedings, in which a judge is determining what penalties to impose after finding the Trump family committed fraud in their organization’s business practices.We have a live blog covering the latest in the case, which could potentially lead to the dismantling of the former president’s business empire. Follow along here:Another House Republican has decided against standing for re-election next year.Ken Buck told MSNBC he won’t stand again to represent his eastern Colorado district:A member of the rightwing Freedom Caucus, Buck made waves in September when he penned a Washington Post column saying he did not believe impeaching Joe Biden was a good idea.His district is seen as strongly Republican, and Democrats will have an uphill battle to claim the vacant seat in 2024.In cricket – and stick with me here – the “corridor of uncertainty” is a channel just outside off stump, which bowlers try to ply and in which batsmen must decide whether to play a shot or leave the ball alone, weighing up risk in the blink of an eye.In Congress, the corridors of uncertainty might be said to be any corridors in which Manu Raju, chief congressional correspondent for CNN, might decide to linger, thereby to catch congressmen and women and senators for a quick question about the issue of the day.Today, Raju, a master of the form, has been asking Republican senators about the proposal from the House GOP, newly under speaker Mike Johnson, to split Israel aid from Ukraine aid and to target the Internal Revenue Service for linked cuts. Here are some results:Rick Scott, Florida: “We have a Republican majority in the House. And so we have to listen to what they want to do.”Josh Hawley, Missouri: “I think it’s notable that [Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell] is standing with [Democratic majority leader Chuck] Schumer against the Republicans. [It’s] a mistake.”Lindsey Graham, South Carolina: “I like paying for things but in emergencies, we normally don’t. Democrats could put a ‘pay-for’ that I would disagree with. So when it gets over here, we’ll hopefully put a package together that includes Israel, Ukraine and border security.”Raju, to camera: “So that last comment from Lindsey Graham is a significant one, saying he’s concerned about including those measures to suddenly pay for that Israel package, saying that typically is not done on Capitol Hill and considering the number of concerns about the precedent it would set if that were to happen time and time again. On the other side of the equation, concerns about the sky-high national debt.“So that is the tension that is now playing out within the Republican party, but in the middle of all this is: what is the future of Israel aid? What’s the future of Ukraine [aid]? No one knows for certain how this will play out amid major concerns … both of those issues could get stalled or potentially fall by the wayside.”In a Guardian exclusive, Dharna Noor reveals plans for climate groups to tour the US, pushing for a Green New Deal …One year after the passage of the much-lauded Inflation Reduction Act, a coalition of organizers and representatives are relaunching the push for a Green New Deal with a national tour.“The Inflation Reduction Act was the largest climate investment in US history,” said John Paul Mejia, a national spokesperson for the youth-led climate justice organization the Sunrise Movement, one of the groups hosting the tour. “But for the next 10 years, we should work to make [it] the smallest by winning stuff that’s much larger.”The tour, which kicks off with an event in Michigan this month, will aim to showcase widespread support for even bolder federal climate action, and will feature Green New Deal champions including Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts and the representatives Ilhan Omar, Jamaal Bowman, Cori Bush and Summer Lee alongside local advocates. It will be led by the Green New Deal Network, a coalition of progressive environmental groups that includes the Sunrise Movement, Greenpeace and Climate Justice Alliance, social justice organizations such as People’s Action and the Movement for Black Lives, and the liberal-left Working Families political party.Supporters are calling for stronger executive action as well as the passage of a suite of proposals in Congress.“With our Green New Deals for public schools, housing, cities and more, we can make historic investments that transform our communities by repairing damage done by the fossil fuel-driven climate crisis and giving every person the resources they need to thrive,” said Bowman.The Green New Deal – a plan to rapidly and fairly decarbonize the US economy and create millions of jobs in the process – swept the US progressive political scene during Donald Trump’s presidency. The Sunrise Movement in 2018 held sit-ins on Capitol Hill calling for its implementation, and months later, Markey and the New York representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez unveiled an official resolution fleshing out the proposal.The ambitious, sweeping vision hinged on the idea that tackling the climate crisis could entail the remaking of US society to be more just, prioritizing communities most affected by inequality, climate disasters and pollution. It sharply contrasted with previous national decarbonization plans, such as the failed 2009 attempt to create a cap-and-trade system for planet-heating pollution known as Waxman-Markey.“During that Inconvenient Truth era, climate advocacy was very technocratic in some ways,” said Kaniela Ing, the national director of the Green New Deal Network and a former Hawaii state legislator, referring to the 2006 documentary on the climate crisis by the former US vice-president Al Gore. “But the Green New Deal was about how all these things are connected, how climate is connected to schools, better infrastructure … things that people actually want.”Read on…The new Republican speaker of the US House, Mike Johnson, is “dangerous”, the former Wyoming congresswoman and January 6 committee vice-chair Liz Cheney said, considering Johnson’s role in Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election.“He was acting in ways that he knew to be wrong,” Cheney told Politics Is Everything, a podcast from the University of Virginia Center for Politics. “And I think that the country unfortunately will come to see the measure of his character.“… One of the reasons why somebody like Mike Johnson is dangerous is because … you have elected Republicans who know better, elected Republicans who know the truth but yet will go along with the efforts to undermine our republic: the efforts, frankly, that Donald Trump undertook to overturn the election.”Johnson voiced conspiracy theories about Joe Biden’s victory in 2020; authored a supreme court amicus brief as Texas sought to have results in key states thrown out, attracting 125 Republican signatures; and was one of 147 Republicans who voted to object to results in key states, even after Trump supporters attacked the Capitol on 6 January 2021, a riot linked to nine deaths and which has produced thousands of arrests and hundreds of convictions, some for seditious conspiracy.Cheney was one of two anti-Trump Republicans on the House January 6 committee, which staged prime-time hearings and produced a report last year. She lost her seat to a pro-Trump challenger. The other January 6 committee Republican, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, chose to quit his seat.Like Kinzinger, Cheney has written a book. She has also declined to close down speculation that she might run for president, as a representative of the Republican establishment – her father is Dick Cheney, the former defense secretary and vice-president – determined to stop Trump from seizing the White House again.Johnson ascended to the House speakership last month, elected unanimously after three candidates failed to gain sufficient support to succeed Kevin McCarthy, who was ejected by the far-right, pro-Trump wing of his party.Johnson’s hard-right, Christianity-inflected views and past positions have been subjected to widespread scrutiny.Cheney told Larry Sabato, her podcast host and fellow UVA professor, that Johnson “was willing to set aside what he knew to be the rulings of the courts, the requirements of the constitution, in order to placate Donald Trump, in order to gain praise from Donald Trump, for political expedience.“So it’s a concerning moment to have him be elected speaker of the House.”Five House Republican lawmakers from New York are pressing on with their effort to expel George Santos, the congressman who admitted to lying about large parts of his résumé and is also facing federal charges. A vote on their expulsion resolution could come as soon as today, though it’s unclear if it will reach the two-thirds majority necessary for passage. The chamber’s ethics committee has meanwhile announced it will provide an update regarding its investigation into Santos by 17 November, while some worry that kicking him out of his seat before he is convicted will set a bad example.Here’s what else is going on today:
      Mike Johnson, the Republican House speaker, proposed aiding Israel by cutting the IRS’s budget, but that will just make the effort even more expensive for taxpayers, Congress’s non-partisan budget analyst found.
      Chuck Schumer, the Senate’s Democratic leader, endorsed a push to use an unusual procedure to get around Republican Tommy Tuberville’s block of military promotions.
      A new analysis shows Democrats appear to have the edge in winning back control of the House next year.
      NBC News caught up with Mike Johnson, who chalked up the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office’s determination that his Israel aid proposal would actually cost taxpayers money to the machinations of Washington:Punchbowl News separately caught two rightwing senators heading into Johnson’s office, and report they are expected to support his bill:But it is the Senate’s Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer, who will decide whether the measure comes to the floor, and he has said he will not do that.The Senate’s Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer, announced he will support deploying an unusual procedure to circumvent Republican senator Tommy Tuberville’s months-long blockade of more than 300 military promotions.The Alabama lawmaker has since February been holding up promotions of hundreds of top officers in the armed forces in protest of a new Pentagon policy intended to help service members access abortions. Democrats and some Republican have expressed outrage at the move, saying it harms national security.According to the Hill, Rhode Island Democrat Jack Reed is proposing a standing order resolution that will allow Congress’s upper chamber to approve military promotions as a group through the end of next year. However, it needs 60 votes to pass, and Democrats only control 51 seats in the chamber, meaning at least nine Republicans must sign on.It’s unclear if that support exists yet, but in a speech on the chamber’s floor, Schumer said he will put the resolution up for a vote.“Yesterday, my colleague Senator Reed, chairman of the armed services committee, introduced a resolution that will allow the Senate to quickly confirm the nominations that are currently being blocked by the Senator from Alabama,” said Schumer, adding he had moved for the Senate to hold time-consuming floor votes on three military promotions that Tuberville had been blocking.“The resolution will be referred to the rules committee, and when the time comes, I will bring it to the floor of the Senate for consideration.”Here’s video of his remarks: More