More stories

  • in

    Biden destroyed Harris bid by staying in race too long, top adviser says in book

    Joe Biden “totally fucked us” by leaving it too late to drop out of the 2024 US presidential election, a former top campaign aide to Kamala Harris has told the authors of a new book.David Plouffe, who was manager of Barack Obama’s winning 2008 campaign and a senior adviser in his White House, was drafted in to help Harris’s bid for president after the declining Biden withdrew from the race last summer.Harris’s 107-day sprint against Donald Trump was “a fucking nightmare”, Plouffe is quoted as saying by authors Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson in Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again. A copy was obtained by the Guardian.“And it’s all Biden,” Plouffe adds, reflecting on the former US president’s decisions to run for re-election and then to cling on for more than three weeks after a catastrophic debate performance against Trump raised questions about his mental acuity and age. “He totally fucked us.”Plouffe, along with some other former Obama staffers, has previously been critical of Biden and his role in the Democratic defeat. In the wake of Harris’s loss he posted a message on X – formerly known as Twitter – that the Harris campaign had begun in a “deep hole”. He later deleted his account.The book describes how Plouffe had received calls from donors worried about Biden’s diminishing energy, cognitive skills and ability to deliver a speech. He in turn pressed the White House and Democratic party if they felt sure that the then president could win another election and was repeatedly told he could.But Tapper, chief Washington correspondent for CNN, and Thompson, a national political correspondent for Axios, spoke to around 200 people for the book, including members of Congress and White House and campaign insiders. Some had been sounding the alarm about Biden’s mental acuity and about desperate efforts by his close staff and allies to hide the extent of his deterioration.One senior aide, who quit the White House because they did not think Biden should run, admits to the authors that “we attempted to shield him from his own staff so many people didn’t realize the extent of the decline beginning in 2023”.“I love Joe Biden. When it comes to decency, there are few in politics like him. Still, it was a disservice to the country and to the party for his family and advisers to allow him to run again.”A prominent Democratic strategist says of Biden’s determination to seek re-election: “It was an abomination. He stole an election from the Democratic party; he stole it from the American people.”Original Sin is one of several eagerly awaited books about the 2024 election and an alleged White House conspiracy.Biden, 82, seemingly tried to preempt its revelations last week with media appearances on BBC Radio 4’s Today program and ABC’s talkshow The View. Biden has signed with Creative Artists Agency for representation and hired communications strategist Chris Meagher to help burnish his public reputation.But the 27 June 2024 debate in Atlanta was no anomaly, the book argues. Since at least 2022 Biden has been increasingly prone to lose his train of thought and struggle to remember the names of top aides. His speeches can be incoherent and difficult to hear. When he proved incapable of delivering a two-minute video address without stumbling, aides filmed him with two cameras so the edit would be less obvious.Original Sin tells how prominent figures tried to intervene in various ways. Obama visited the White House in 2023 and warned Biden: “Just make sure you can win the race.”Ari Emanuel, a Hollywood powerbroker and significant Democratic donor, yelled at longtime Biden ally Ron Klain: “Joe Biden cannot run for re-election! He needs to drop out! He can’t win! What’s the plan B?” Klain admitted there was no plan B.And Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader in the Senate, confronted the president after the debate last July at his home in Rehoboth, Delaware, and appealed to his desire to preserve his legacy. He warned Biden that, he if stayed in the race and lost to Trump then 50 years of “amazing, beautiful work goes out the window. But it’s worse than that – you will go down in American history as one of the darkest figures.”On their way out, the book reports, Biden put his hands on Schumer’s shoulders and told him: “You have bigger balls than anyone I’ve ever met.”Biden stepped aside on 21 July and quickly endorsed Harris, but it was too late, the authors contend. He had already helped usher in the fate that he most wanted to avoid: the return of Trump to the White House. More

  • in

    Illinois governor is first in US to block federal access to personal data on autism

    Illinois governor, JB Pritzker, has signed a first-in-the-nation executive order to block the federal government from collecting personal health data related to autism, a direct rebuke to the Trump administration.Pritzker, a Democrat who has been one of the more vocal critics of Donald Trump’s second administration, signed the order last week, saying he wanted to protect “dignity, privacy, and the freedom to live without fear of surveillance or discrimination”.It came two days after the US Health and Human Services secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, announced a plan to use data maintained by the National Institutes of Health, and claims submitted for Medicare and Medicaid coverage, to determine the causes of autism. While the agency did not release details of the plan, Kennedy promised it would follow “applicable privacy laws to protect Americans’ sensitive health information”.Prior to his rise to health secretary, Kennedy joined anti-vaccine advocates in claiming childhood vaccines are responsible for autism, but studies by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and others have ruled that out.Pritzker’s executive order bans state agencies from disclosing “personally identifiable autism-related data” outside of state government unless the person or their guardian gives consent, it’s required by legal action, it’s necessary to provide services such as employment or housing or is otherwise required by law. State contractors, vendors and grant recipients are also covered.“We are taking steps to ensure that our state remains a leader in protecting the rights of individuals with autism and all people with disabilities,” Pritzker said.Andy Shih, chief science officer for Autism Speaks, a national advocacy group funding research and services, said he’s unaware of a similar declaration elsewhere. And while Kennedy promises to abide by privacy guidelines, Shih said with advances in computational power and algorithmic thinking, what’s private data today might not be tomorrow.Government investigators could use some techniques to get more information than what is previously disclosed. In the wrong hands, it could be used against patients to deny them constitutionally protected rights.“There’s always that concern,” Shih said. “Being proactive to protect privacy, which is something we value as a society, this should be applauded.”Kennedy has previously said he wants to be able to announce by September some of the causes of autism, a complex brain disorder better known as autism spectrum disorder because it affects people differently. For some people, profound autism means being nonverbal or having intellectual disabilities, while milder cases might mean difficulty with social and emotional skills.Experts say Kennedy’s planned database isn’t appropriate to uncover autism’s causes in part because there’s no information about genetics. However, Shih noted that the Department of Health and Human Services’s announcement was about creating a platform to help understand a range of chronic illnesses, which he said could be useful.Shih added that linking data sets is a proven way of studying issues of health. He pointed to a study published earlier this year in the Journal of the American Medical Association that found dementia in significantly higher numbers among autistic adults over age 65 than the general population. It was achieved by linking numerical identifiers from two different data sets. More

  • in

    ‘Just wildly illegal’: top Democrats push to censure Trump’s plan to accept Qatar jet

    Top Democrats in the US Senate are pushing for a vote on the floor of the chamber censuring Donald Trump’s reported plan to accept a $400m luxury jet from the royal family of Qatar for use as Air Force One and later as a fixture in the Trump’s personal presidential library.Four Democratic members of the Senate foreign relations committee said on Monday that they would press for a vote later this week. They said that elected officials, including the president, were not allowed to accept large gifts from foreign governments unless authorized to do so by Congress.Cory Booker from New Jersey, Brian Schatz from Hawaii, Chris Coons from Delaware and Chris Murphy from Connecticut cast the reported gift of the Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet as a clear conflict of interest and a serious threat to national security.“Air Force Once is more than just a plane – it’s a symbol of the presidency and of the United States itself,” the senators said in a joint statement. “No one should use public service for personal gain through foreign gifts.”News of a possible gift of the luxury jet prompted immediate scathing criticism from senior Democrats. Though the Qatari government has stressed that no final decision has yet been made, Trump appeared to confirm it on Sunday when he commented on social media that the transfer was being made “in a very public and transparent transaction”.The plan appears to be for the 13-year-old plane to be fitted out by the US military for use as Air Force One and then, when Trump leaves the White House, for it to be put on display in his presidential library – in effect being handed to Trump for his own personal use.The reported arrangement comes as Trump sets off for a tour of the Middle East, including Qatar. Another of the countries on the tour, the United Arab Emirates, has also become embroiled in controversy over potential conflicts of interest involving Trump.Last week it was revealed that an investment firm based in Abu Dhabi had injected $2bn into a stablecoin venture launched by Trump’s World Liberty Financial crypto company as an investment into the crypto exchange Binance.Senate Democrats are also gearing up to challenge Trump’s conflicts of interest under congressional rules governing the sale of military weapons to foreign countries.Murphy, the senator from Connecticut who has been at the forefront of sounding the alarm over conflicts of interest in the second Trump administration, has said he will use his powers to challenge arms sales as a way of forcing a full debate and Senate vote on both the Qatar plane and UAE stablecoin issues.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHe said on social media that he would object to “any military deal with a nation that is paying off Trump personally – we can’t act like this is normal foreign policy”.He added: “UAE’s investment in Trump crypto and Qatar’s gifting of a plane is nuclear grade graft.”In an earlier post on Bluesky, Murphy described the idea of Qatar handing over the jet as being “just wildly illegal”.Trump has so far brushed aside the Democratic fury. He praised Qatar’s offer on Monday as a “great gesture” and said he would “never be one to turn down that kind of offer”. More

  • in

    This Mother’s Day, lets talk about why birth rates are really declining | Katrina vanden Heuvel

    Mother’s Day is here, and while Donald Trump may seem an unlikely celebrant of the occasion, his administration has recently floated several proposals to incentivize motherhood – or, more accurately, giving birth. There’s the $5,000 “baby bonus” for every American mother, free classes educating women on their menstrual cycles and a National Medal of Motherhood for moms who have at least six children. (Want to guess which regime also awarded such a medal?)As usual, the president has offered ridiculous solutions to a very real problem. He’s certainly right that every American should be able to afford to raise children, and that programs like social security depend on stable demographics. But of course, every other action he has taken to undermine gender equality would suggest that this sudden interest in the wellbeing of mothers is less than sincere. That’s exactly why progressives have an opening to break up what the Republican party believes to be its ideological monopoly on pro-family policies.The roots of the fertility crisis engage the bread-and-butter issues that have long been the domain of Democrats. US birthrates have hit a record low not because the nation has become “almost pathologically anti-child”, as JD Vance asserted to the New York Times. Instead, surveys have shown that would-be parents want to own a home, repay student debt and have money for childcare before starting a family. Yet the average age of a homebuyer has climbed to 56, almost double what it was 40 years ago. And 43% of young people currently carry student debt, compared with 28% in 1993. The problem isn’t lack of interest – it’s too much interest being paid on record high loans.But most of the Trump administration’s floated fixes are unoriginal swipes from the undemocratic leaders they admire. In 2017, Vladimir Putin declared a “Decade of Childhood in Russia”, an innocent name for a program that calls for everything from defending so-called family values to encouraging conjugal trysts during workplace coffee breaks to censoring “childfree propaganda”. Meanwhile, Viktor Orbán has dedicated 5% of Hungary’s GDP to pronatalist policies, which include nationalized IVF services and lifetime tax exemptions for mothers with three children. These men are carrying on an authoritarian tradition begun by the original strongman, Benito Mussolini, whose “Battle for Births” portended literal battles that decreased Europe’s population by 20 million people.That’s why those who really care about real solutions would be wise to start offering their own plans, and, in fact, some already have. What the Trump administration didn’t plagiarize from autocrats, they took from progressives, which is why “baby bonuses” sounds an awful lot like the “baby bonds” proposed in 2021 by Senators Tammy Baldwin and Cory Booker and Representative Ayanna Pressley. The legislation would put $1,000 in a savings account at birth for every American child. The Biden-era American Rescue Plan also almost doubled the child tax credit, which nearly halved the child poverty rate. Though making that expansion permanent received bipartisan support, it was ultimately killed by the centrist triangulating of Joe Manchin.Four years later, Democrats have the chance to embrace a genuinely progressive agenda that doubles as a pro-family platform. Bernie Sanders has long called for cancelling all student debt, Elizabeth Warren has campaigned for universal childcare, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was among the first politicians on Capitol Hill to offer three months of paid parental leave to her entire staff. The Congressional Progressive caucus has also called for a whole raft of policies that would lower the cost of living, from expanding Medicaid to investing $250bn in affordable housing. They understand that real relief will come not from handing out medals but from having the mettle to fight for working families.Still, even if Democrats manage a progressive populist revival not seen since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, it probably wouldn’t be enough to lift birthrates. In social democracies like Finland and Sweden – which offer 13 months of paid parental leave and cover 90% of preschool costs, respectively – fertility remains below replacement levels.Does that indicate the problem may be more fundamental? One sociologist, Dr Karen Benjamin Guzzo, has attributed this dilemma to apprehension: “People really need to feel confident about the future.” But whether it’s 60% of young people feeling very worried about the climate crisis, or 80% of new mothers feeling lonely, or 90% of voters feeling that American politics is broken, the state of the world doesn’t seem too conducive to domestic bliss. The right’s response to this anxiety is embodied by Elon Musk, who keeps siring children with women he meets on X to create a “legion-level” brood “before the apocalypse”.To help avert said apocalypse, what should be on offer are authentically family-friendly policies that benefit parents and non-parents alike. In doing so, there’s a chance to persuade Americans that the next generation still might have a brighter future than the last. Or, at the very least, that progressives have a more compelling vision for American families than the one whose budget is about to take billions from children’s education, food and healthcare.It’s one thing to incentivize giving birth. Americans deserve leaders who will fight for those kids after they’re born.

    Katrina vanden Heuvel is editorial director and publisher of the Nation. She is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and has contributed to the Washington Post, the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times More

  • in

    Mayor of Newark arrested for trespassing at Ice detention center

    The mayor of Newark, Ras Baraka, was arrested for trespass at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) detention center in New Jersey on Friday as Democratic members of Congress also attempted to conduct what they say was a visit to the controversial facility to conduct “federal oversight”.News of Baraka’s arrest at Delaney Hall was reported on X by Alina Habba, the acting US attorney for the district of New Jersey, and a former personal attorney and adviser to Donald Trump.“The Mayor of Newark, Ras Baraka, committed trespass and ignored multiple warnings from Homeland Security Investigations to remove himself from the ICE detention center in Newark, New Jersey this afternoon,” Habba wrote.“He has willingly chosen to disregard the law. That will not stand in this state. He has been taken into custody. No one is above the law.”Kabir Moss, spokesperson for the Baraka for Governor campaign, said in a statement that he was taken to a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) office a few miles from the facility and remained in detention. Baraka is currently running for the Democratic nomination as New Jersey’s governor in a competitive race. The primary is scheduled for next month.“We are actively monitoring and will provide more details as they become available,” Moss said.The New Jersey Globe published a photograph of him being led away in handcuffs by officers in jackets marked “Police Ice”. The newspaper does not have a reporter at the scene, but said observers at Delaney Hall said there had been “a scuffle”.Baraka, who spoke out against Trump’s immigration policies in January after an immigration raid in Newark he said Ice agents conducted without a warrant, was at Delaney Hall with Democratic New Jersey Congress members Bonnie Watson Coleman, LaMonica McIver and Rob Menendez.The politicians have accused the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of reopening the detention facility, in contravention of local ordinances and without the necessary permits.It is the largest such facility in the north-eastern US, and was the first to open after Trump’s second term of office began in January, according to the Ice website.Coleman, in a tweet, said the visit was an attempt to establish conditions inside. “We’ve heard stories of what it’s like in other Ice prisons. We’re exercising our oversight authority to see for ourselves,” she wrote.Coleman also told reporters at a press conference outside the facility that the lawmakers had traveled to the facility to see the conditions, according to the Independent.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Ice is out of control,” she said. “Ice thinks it can intimidate all of us. And it cannot intimidate any of us. And we the people will make sure that this administration adheres to the rules that separate us from dictatorships and other third world countries.”Menendez accused Ice agents of having “put their hands on” representatives Coleman and McIver, reported the New York Times. “They feel no restraint on what they should be doing, and that was shown in broad daylight today,” Menendez said at the news conference.Axios reports that Coleman’s office said that they “arrived at Delaney Hall today at about 1pm to exercise their oversight authority as prescribed by law. After a period of explaining the law to the officials at the site they were escorted in.”Video attached to the tweet shows the Congress members inside the grounds of the center talking to employees. Other clips show them being threatened with arrest for trespass by uniformed officials. More

  • in

    Bernie Sanders urges Paramount not to ‘capitulate’ to Trump by settling 60 Minutes suit

    The senator Bernie Sanders and his Democratic colleagues are urging Paramount Global not to settle Donald Trump’s $20bn lawsuit against 60 Minutes, saying such a decision would “capitulate to this dangerous move to authoritarianism”.In a letter co-signed by eight senators, Sanders urged controlling shareholder Shari Redstone and Paramount Global’s board to reconsider settling with Trump for as much as $75m to end his lawsuit against CBS News over its editing of last year’s 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris.Trump sued CBS News last November, alleging that the network’s interview with Harris during the 2024 presidential campaign was edited to frame her in a positive light and thus amounted to “election interference”.During the finalized interview, Harris was asked whether Benjamin Netanyahu listened to US advice. She replied of the Israeli prime minister: “We are not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States – to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end.”An alternative edit shown in pre-broadcast promotions showed Harris delivering a longer response.In Trump’s court filing, his lawyers alleged that “CBS and other legacy media organizations have gone into overdrive to get Kamala elected”.In Tuesday’s letter, Sanders, alongside the Democratic senators including Dick Durbin, Sheldon Whitehouse, Richard Blumenthal, Peter Welch, Chris Murphy, Jeffrey Merkley, Elizabeth Warren and Edward Markey called Trump’s lawsuit “an attack on the United States Constitution and the First Amendment”.“It has absolutely no merit and it cannot stand,” they said, condemning Trump’s lawsuit as “a blatant attempt to intimidate the media and those who speak out against him”.The senators praised Paramount Global’s initial decision to file two motions to dismiss Trump’s case, which the company said “is without basis in law or fact”. However, the senators said that the company’s reported decision to settle with Trump is “unfortunately … a grave mistake”.“Rewarding Trump with tens of millions of dollars for filing this bogus lawsuit will not cause him to back down on his war against the media and a free press. It will only embolden him to shake down, extort and silence CBS and other media outlets that have the courage to report about issues that Trump may not like,” the senators wrote.“Stand up for freedom of the press and our democracy,” they added.Speaking to the Washington Post, a source familiar with the situation said that Redstone had recused herself from discussions about a potential settlement though she previously “shared her desire for some sort of resolution” with Paramount Global’s board.The senators’ letter comes as the Trump administration has escalated its attacks against US media, with the president denouncing CNN and MSNBC as “illegal” while ordering the US Agency for Global Media – the parent company of Voice of America – to be eliminated.Last week, Trump also signed an executive order seeking to cut public funding for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service. In response to Trump’s accusations of the outlets’ having leftwing bias, NPR and PBS have both said they are looking at legal options. More

  • in

    We can’t just be against Trump. It’s time for a bold, progressive populism | Robert Reich

    Demonstrations against Donald Trump Trump are getting larger and louder. Good. This is absolutely essential.But at some point we’ll need to demonstrate not just against the president but also for the United States we want.Trump’s regressive populism – cruel, bigoted, tyrannical – must be met by a bold progressive populism that strengthens democracy and shares the wealth.We can’t simply return to the path we were on before Trump. Even then, big money was taking over our democracy and siphoning off most of the economy’s gains.Two of the country’s most respected political scientists – professors Martin Gilens of Princeton and Benjamin Page of Northwestern University – analyzed 1,799 policy issues decided between 1981 and 2002. They found that “the preferences of the average American appear to have only a miniscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.”Instead, lawmakers responded to the demands of wealthy individuals (typically corporate executives and Wall Street moguls) and big corporations – those with the most lobbying prowess and deepest pockets to bankroll campaigns. And “when a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or with organized interests, they generally lose.”Notably, Gilens and Page’s research data was gathered before the supreme court opened the floodgates to big money in Citizens United. After that, the voices of typical Americans were entirely drowned.In the election cycle of 2016, which first delivered the White House to Trump, the richest 100th of 1% of Americans accounted for a record-breaking 40% of all campaign donations. (By contrast, in 1980, the top 0.01% accounted for only 15% of all contributions.)The direction we were heading was unsustainable. Even before Trump’s first regime, trust in every major institution of society was plummeting – including Congress, the courts, corporations, Wall Street, universities, the legal establishment and the media.The entire system seemed rigged for the benefit of the establishment – and in many ways it was.The typical family’s inflation-adjusted income had barely risen for decades. Most of the economy’s gains had gone to the top.Wall Street got bailed out when its gambling addiction caused it humongous losses but homeowners who were underwater did not. Nor did people who lost their jobs and savings. And not a single top Wall Street executive went to jail.A populist – anti-establishment – revolution was inevitable. But it didn’t have to be a tyrannical one. It didn’t have to be regressive populism.Instead of putting the blame where it belonged – on big corporations, Wall Street and the billionaire class – Trump has blamed immigrants, the “deep state”, socialists, “coastal elites”, transgender people, “DEI” and “woke”.How has Trump gotten away with this while giving the super-rich large tax benefits and regulatory relief and surrounding himself (especially in his second term) with a record number of billionaires, including the richest person in the world?Largely because Democratic leaders – with the notable exceptions of Bernie Sanders (who is actually an independent), AOC and a handful of others – could not, and still cannot, bring themselves to enunciate a progressive version of populism that puts the blame squarely where it belongs.Too many have been eating from the same campaign buffet as the Republicans and dare not criticize the hands that feed them.This has left Trump’s regressive populism as the only version of anti-establishment politics available to Americans. It’s a tragedy. Anti-establishment fury remains at the heart of our politics, and for good reason.What would progressive populism entail?Strengthening democracy by busting up big corporations. Stopping Wall Street’s gambling (eg replicating the Glass-Steagall Act). Getting big money out of politics, even if this requires amending the constitution. Requiring big corporations to share their profits with their average workers. Strengthening unions. And raising taxes on the super-wealthy to finance a universal basic income, Medicare for all, and paid family leave.Hopefully, demonstrations against Trump’s regressive, tyrannical populism will continue to grow.But we must also be demonstrating for a better future beyond Trump – one that strengthens democracy and works on behalf of all Americans rather than a privileged few.

    Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is a professor of public policy emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com More

  • in

    Why are the Democrats greenlighting Trump’s crypto plans? | Corey Frayer

    When Elon Musk’s “department of government efficiency” (Doge) gained access to treasury payment systems in February, Democratic party leadership pledged to protect government payments from Donald Trump’s influence. Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries held a press conference announcing the Stop the Steal act that would prevent the takeover of critical government payment infrastructure. On that very same day, high-profile Democrats joined with Republicans to introduce legislation allowing for payments to be made in cryptocurrencies called stablecoins. The bill paves the way for the US president to require that all payments to and from the government are made with cryptocurrencies, which could include the one he has a business interest in.After making millions off a “memecoin”, the crypto-opportunist-in-chief recently entered the burgeoning crypto-payments market by launching a stablecoin. For the uninitiated, stablecoins are crypto products that allege to hold the value of a currency like the US dollar and are intended to be used as digital payments. In fact, stablecoins constantly fail to hold their value, aren’t subject to federal consumer protections, and aren’t backed by the full faith and credit of the government. If a consumer’s stablecoins are hacked, fraudulently or accidentally spent, or lost due to a misplaced password, stablecoin companies will not reverse or reimburse those payments like a credit card company would. If a stablecoin company fails, consumers are not protected by anything like federal deposit insurance. Stablecoins have also become the preferred cryptocurrency for illicit finance.In an awkwardly playful nod to Trump’s crypto interests, bipartisan stablecoin bills have been introduced in the House and Senate entitled “Stable” and “Genius”, respectively, following Trump’s 2018 assertion that he is a “stable genius”. Sponsors of legislation claim their bills protect consumers, guarantee stability and curb their use in illicit finance. Many academics and experts disagree with those assertions. As they point out, the bills give crypto businesses such as the president’s access to the same payment system that banks and credit card providers use while subjecting them to far weaker standards than their traditional counterparts.Almost unbelievably, gutting consumer protections and privatizing the dollar may be the least concerning outcomes of stablecoin legislation. On 25 March, Trump issued an executive order mandating adoption of digital payments to and from the US government. That may sound innocuous, but the government already makes 95% of its disbursements electronically. The order doesn’t intend to modernize an already-modernized system. Musk exposed the order’s true intent when his Doge team took over the payment system, to the aforementioned alarm of congressional Democrats. He endorsed putting those payments “on the blockchain” – and in so doing, make public payments with private stablecoins.It’s not a hypothetical. The administration has already floated issuing $3.3bn in the housing department’s community development block grants via stablecoins. USAID has been instructed to make disbursements in stablecoins. And the treasury payments Musk was referring to? That’s $5.45tn in government payments from social security to veterans’ pay and pensions, federal employee salaries and income tax refunds. Americans might be forced to adopt cryptocurrencies whether they like it or not.The president has demonstrated his willingness to use the power of his office to enrich his family and friends and to provide favors to crypto business partners. Under Trump, SEC lawsuits against his crypto business partners Justin Sun and Binance have been halted. Just last week, Trump’s World Liberty Financial announced an opaque $2bn deal with a firm in the United Arab Emirates that is chaired by the UAE’s national security adviser, who is the brother of the country’s president. It’s naive to think Trump would shy away from using his power to shovel profits to the politically influential crypto industry, and his own crypto venture in particular.Crypto’s ascendant political influence may explain Democrats’ confusing pledge to stop Trump profiting from the presidency with one hand while pushing stablecoin legislation with the other. Conflicts of interest or not, the Democrats’ campaign arm continues courting crypto, though it doesn’t accept donations in cryptocurrencies. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee chair, Kirsten Gillibrand, is a lead sponsor of the Genius bill. During the Senate banking committee consideration of Genius, news broke that Trump’s company was speaking with Binance about the launch of a stablecoin. It was as if the committee had called a recess for a word from its sponsor. Five Democrats still voted in support. House Democrats have sought amendments that would bar government officials from having a financial interest in such assets, but they’ve gotten little traction. This weekend, nine former Democratic supporters of the bill threatened to block further consideration unless concerns over issues ranging from money laundering to national security were addressed. But they said they remained “eager to continue working with our colleagues to address these issues”.The Democratic party has rightly pointed out that a sitting president’s conflicts of interest undermine the firmament of our democracy. Anyone, especially the president, who would use an office of public trust for personal benefit must be held accountable. Astoundingly, Democrats are poised to bless Trump’s crypto grift with the Genius act. If they do, it will be clear that, at least when it comes to crypto, they would rather endorse the president’s abuses than fight them.

    Corey Frayer is the director of investor protection at the Consumer Federation of America and a senior adviser on crypto markets to the former SEC chair Gary Gensler More