Democrats

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden warns Russia will ‘pay a heavy price’ if Putin launches Ukraine invasion – live

      by

      Key events

      Show

      3.59pm EST

      15:59

      Ivanka Trump asked to cooperate with Capitol attack committee

      3.11pm EST

      15:11

      US accuses Russia of conspiring to take over Ukraine government

      1.29pm EST

      13:29

      Congressman Jamaal Bowman arrested outside Capitol amid voting rights protests – report

      12.49pm EST

      12:49

      Georgia DA requests grand jury to investigate Trump efforts

      12.30pm EST

      12:30

      Today so far

      11.52am EST

      11:52

      Biden clarifies Ukraine comments: ‘Russia will pay a heavy price’ for invasion

      11.16am EST

      11:16

      ‘There are no minor incursions,’ Ukrainian president says after Biden’s flub

      Live feed

      Show

      Show key events only

      From

      11.52am EST

      11:52

      Biden clarifies Ukraine comments: ‘Russia will pay a heavy price’ for invasion

      Joe Biden sought to clarify his comments from yesterday about a potential Russian invasion of Ukraine, after the US president appeared to downplay the threat of a “minor incursion” into Ukraine.
      Speaking at the start of a meeting on infrastructure, Biden told reporters moments ago, “I’ve been absolutely clear with President Putin. He has no misunderstanding. If any — any — assembled Russian units move across the Ukrainian border, that is an invasion.”
      Biden said such an invasion would be met with a “severe and coordinated economic response,” which he has “discussed in detail with our allies as well as laid out very clearly for President Putin”.
      He added, “But there is no doubt — let there be no doubt at all that, if Putin makes this choice, Russia will pay a heavy price.”

      ABC News
      (@ABC)
      “I’ve been absolutely clear with President Putin…If any, any assembled Russian units move across the Ukrainian border, that is an invasion,” Pres. Biden says. “It will be met with severe and coordinated economic response.” https://t.co/aWy2ej1jCo pic.twitter.com/Z5d2pDVEnw

      January 20, 2022

      Biden’s comments come one day after he seemed to imply that Nato was at odds over how to respond to Russian aggression depending upon the type of attack that was launched against Ukraine.
      “I think what you’re going to see is that Russia will be held accountable if it invades,” Biden said at his press conference yesterday.
      “And it depends on what it does. It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do, et cetera.”
      That comment required a coordinated clean-up effort from Biden administration officials, with Kamala Harris and Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, seeking to clarify that the US and its allies are united in responding to Russian aggression.

      4.42pm EST

      16:42

      A spokesperson for Ivanka Trump seemed to suggest that she did not have any relevant information to share with the House select committee investigating the Capitol insurrection.
      “As the Committee already knows, Ivanka did not speak at the January 6 rally,” the spokesperson said in a statement provided to CBS News.
      “As she publicly stated that day at 3:15 pm, ‘any security breach or disrespect to our law enforcement is unacceptable. The violence must stop immediately. Please be peaceful.’”

      Fin Gómez
      (@finnygo)
      New- Statement from @IvankaTrump Spokesperson to @CBSNews on January 6th committee request to cooperate w/its inquiry. pic.twitter.com/rSGG2EpgMn

      January 20, 2022

      However, in his letter to Ivanka Trump, committee chairman Bennie Thompson specifically said the panel is interested in any conversations she had with Donald Trump about efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
      So even though Ivanka Trump did not speak at the January 6 rally that preceded the insurrection, it is still quite likely that she has relevant information for the investigation.
      The statement makes it seem even less likely that Ivanka Trump will voluntarily agree to cooperate with the select committee.

      4.23pm EST

      16:23

      Democratic congressman Jamie Raskin, a member of the House select committee investigating the Capitol insurrection, said Ivanka Trump could be a “material fact witness” for the panel’s inquiry.
      “If the former president has no executive privilege to hide evidence of an attempted coup or insurrection, neither do his family or friends,” the Maryland congressman said on Twitter.
      “If Ivanka Trump was with Donald Trump as the attack unfolded, she is a material fact witness. I look forward to her testimony.”

      Rep. Jamie Raskin
      (@RepRaskin)
      If the former president has no executive privilege to hide evidence of an attempted coup or insurrection, neither do his family or friends. If Ivanka Trump was with Donald Trump as the attack unfolded, she is a material fact witness. I look forward to her testimony.

      January 20, 2022

      According to the letter that committee chairman Bennie Thompson sent to Ivanka Trump, the panel is seeking information she may have about Trump’s efforts to pressure Mike Pence to attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
      “As January 6th approached, President Trump attempted on multiple occasions to persuade Vice President Pence to participate in his plan,” Thompson said in the letter.
      “One of the President’s discussions with the Vice President occurred by phone on the morning of January 6th. You were present in the Oval Office and observed at least one side of that telephone conversation.”
      Thompson also requested information from Ivanka Trump on “any other conversations you may have witnessed or participated in regarding the President’s plan to obstruct or impede the counting of electoral votes”.

      3.59pm EST

      15:59

      Ivanka Trump asked to cooperate with Capitol attack committee

      Hugo Lowell

      The House select committee investigating the Capitol attack is asking Ivanka Trump, the daughter of the former president, to appear for a voluntary deposition to answer questions about Donald Trump’s efforts to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s election victory.
      The move by the panel marks an aggressive new phase in its inquiry into the 6 January insurrection, as House investigators seek for the first time testimony from a member of the Trump family about potential criminality on the part of the former president.

      January 6th Committee
      (@January6thCmte)
      The Select Committee is requesting that Ivanka Trump provide information for the committee’s investigation.In a letter to Ms. Trump seeking a voluntary interview, Chair @BennieGThompson underscored evidence that Trump was in direct contact with the former President on Jan 6th.

      January 20, 2022

      Congressman Bennie Thompson, the chair of the select committee, said in an 11-page letter to Ivanka Trump that the panel wanted to ask about Trump’s plan to stop the certification, and his response to the Capitol attack, including delays to deploying the national guard.
      The questions to Ivanka appear directed at a key issue: whether her father oversaw a criminal conspiracy on 6 January that also involved obstructing a congressional proceeding – a crime.
      The letter said that the panel first wanted to question Ivanka Trump about what she recalled of a heated Oval Office meeting on the morning of the 6 January insurrection when the former president was trying to co-opt Mike Pence into rejecting Biden’s win.
      Read the Guardian’s full report:

      3.31pm EST

      15:31

      Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, pointed to the Treasury Department’s newly announced sanctions against four Ukrainian officials as an example of how the US is proactively responding to Russian aggression.
      “We are not waiting to take action to counter Russia. We see what they’re doing. We’re disrupting it,” Psaki said at her daily briefing this afternoon.
      “And these actions are also of course separate and distinct from the broad range of high-impact, severe measures we and our allies are prepared to impose in order to inflict significant costs should they invade.”

      Bloomberg Quicktake
      (@Quicktake)
      Psaki says the U.S. is not waiting to take action against Russia over troop buildup on the Ukraine border after the Treasury Department announced sanctions against supposed Russian spies https://t.co/676DFgKgHT pic.twitter.com/X0J53QwFM9

      January 20, 2022

      3.11pm EST

      15:11

      US accuses Russia of conspiring to take over Ukraine government

      The Guardian’s Julian Borger, Luke Harding and Andrew Roth report:
      The US has alleged that Russian intelligence is recruiting current and former Ukrainian government officials to take over the government in Kyiv and cooperate with a Russian occupying force.
      The US Treasury on Thursday imposed sanctions on two Ukrainian members of parliament and two former officials it said were involved in the alleged conspiracy, which involved discrediting the current government of the president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy.
      “Russia has directed its intelligence services to recruit current and former Ukrainian government officials to prepare to take over the government of Ukraine and to control Ukraine’s critical infrastructure with an occupying Russian force,” the Treasury statement accompanying the sanctions said.
      The claims suggest US intelligence fears Russia is preparing a full-scale invasion and not the “minor incursion” that Joe Biden referred to as a possibility in remarks on Wednesday that triggered alarm in Kyiv.
      Online researchers have identified Russian troops and military vehicles within just ten miles of Ukraine’s borders, increasing the risk that Vladimir Putin could launch a military offensive on short notice.

      2.54pm EST

      14:54

      As she wrapped up her daily briefing, White House press secretary Jen Psaki was asked whether Joe Biden plans to do more press conferences in the future.
      “Stay tuned,” Psaki replied. “Buckle up, bring snacks next time.”
      Biden’s press conference yesterday lasted nearly two hours, after the president decided to extend the event by calling on reporters who were not on the original list provided to him by his staff.
      After taking questions for about an hour and a half, Biden looked at his watch and decided to keep talking for another 20 minutes — likely to the chagrin of his press staff.

      2.41pm EST

      14:41

      A reporter asked Jen Psaki for further clarification on Joe Biden’s comments about the possibility of Russia executing a “minor incursion” into Ukraine.
      The president has since sought to clear up those comments, saying this morning, “I’ve been absolutely clear with President Putin. He has no misunderstanding. If any — any — assembled Russian units move across the Ukrainian border, that is an invasion.”
      Psaki said Biden was making the point yesterday that the US and its allies have “a range of tools” to respond to Russian aggression, which may take the form of paramilitary tactics like cyberattacks.
      The press secretary also addressed Biden’s comment that there are “differences in Nato as to what countries are willing to do, depending on what happens”.
      “We have been focused on ensuring that we remain united with Nato,” Psaki said. “Now united doesn’t mean that everything will be identical, right? It means we’re united in taking actions should they decide to invade. And we are united.”

      2.23pm EST

      14:23

      A reporter pressed Jen Psaki again on Joe Biden’s comments yesterday about the legitimacy of the upcoming 2022 elections in the face of new voting restrictions in many states.
      The reporter, Peter Alexander of NBC News, noted that Biden said yesterday, “I’m not going to say it’s going to be legit. The increase and the prospect of being illegitimate is in direct proportion to us not being able to get these reforms passed.”

      ABC News Politics
      (@ABCPolitics)
      Asked if Pres. Biden is confident that the midterm elections will be legitimate even if federal voting rights legislation doesn’t pass Congress, White House press sec. Jen Psaki says “yes.” https://t.co/Y5SVieyPLg pic.twitter.com/zsZXFgD41T

      January 20, 2022

      Alexander asked Psaki, “Yes or no: does the president believe, if all remains as it is right now, that the elections this fall will be legitimate?”
      Psaki replied, “Yes, but the point that he was making was that, as recently as 2020 as we know, the former president was trying to work with local officials to overturn the vote count and not have ballots counted. And we have to be very eyes wide open about that and clear-eyed that that is the intention potentially of him and certainly of members of his party.”
      Alexander then asked for clarification that Biden is confident in the legitimacy of the upcoming elections if no changes are made in voting rights legislation moving forward.
      “Yes,” Psaki responded.

      2.08pm EST

      14:08

      The White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, is now holding her daily briefing, and she is continuing her efforts to clean up some of Joe Biden’s comments from his press conference yesterday.
      A reporter asked Psaki whether Biden has confidence in the legitimacy of the 2022 elections, as Democrats struggle to pass their voting rights bill.
      During his press conference, Biden was asked whether he had faith in the legitimacy of the upcoming midterm elections if Democrats are unable to pass their bill.
      Biden responded, “It all depends on whether or not we’re able to make the case to the American people that some of this is being set up to try to alter the outcome of the election.”
      Psaki reiterated that Biden was not intending to cast doubt upon the legitimacy of the 2022 election but was instead making a point about how the 2020 election would have been illegitimate if election officials had cooperated with Donald Trump’s demands to overturn the results in battleground states.
      The press secretary made the same point over Twitter this morning:

      Jen Psaki
      (@PressSec)
      Lets be clear: @potus was not casting doubt on the legitimacy of the 2022 election. He was making the opposite point: In 2020, a record number of voters turned out in the face of a pandemic, and election officials made sure they could vote and have those votes counted.

      January 20, 2022

      1.56pm EST

      13:56

      Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell is attracting intense criticism for his comments about Black voters, which he made last night after Republican senators blocked Democrats’ voting rights bill (again).
      Speaking to reporters after the bill failed and the Senate rejected a change to the filibuster, McConnell was asked for his message to minority voters who are concerned that they will not be able to vote unless the Democratic bill is enacted.
      “The concern is misplaced, because if you look at the statistics, African-American voters are voting in just as high a percentage as Americans,” McConnell said.

      BG
      (@TheBGates)
      .@LeaderMcConnell: “The concern is misplaced, because if you look at the statistics, African-American voters are voting in just as high a percentage as American.”Yikes. pic.twitter.com/WXR1WCZh5T

      January 20, 2022

      That comment sparked a lot of confusion among those who pointed out that African American voters are, in fact, Americans.
      Democratic congressman Bobby Rush called out McConnell’s comment, saying in a tweet, “African Americans ARE Americans. #MitchPlease”
      It’s also worth noting that studies indicate the voting restrictions enacted by 19 states in the past year will disproportionately impact voters of color.

      Bobby L. Rush
      (@RepBobbyRush)
      African Americans ARE Americans. #MitchPlease https://t.co/N3dSsQ9Jqn pic.twitter.com/SRnTTVJdJ4

      January 20, 2022

      Updated
      at 1.57pm EST

      1.29pm EST

      13:29

      Congressman Jamaal Bowman arrested outside Capitol amid voting rights protests – report

      Joanna Walters

      Demonstrators are right now outside the US Capitol demanding action to protect voting rights and election integrity in the US, following the Senate’s resounding refusal, once again, to pass legislation on this issue last night. More

    • 200 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      The three lessons for the voting rights struggle from the latest Senate setback | Steve Phillips

      by

      Three lessons for the voting rights struggle from the latest Senate setbackSteve PhillipsThis latest defeat is not a fatal blow. The struggle for democracy is ongoing – and our fate has not been decided yet At the conclusion of the 1984 Democratic national convention, Jesse Jackson gathered his supporters and offered important perspective to those of us who had labored long and hard on his presidential campaign, telling us, “We’ve never gotten freedom at a convention. The convention is a comma, where you pause and go on. We’re going to keep fighting for freedom – at the polls, in the courts, in the streets.” And then he concluded by invoking the phrase made famous by Malcolm X – “Freedom, by any means necessary.”Seven ways Republicans are already undermining the 2024 election | David DaleyRead moreThis week’s fight in the US Senate over the voting rights bill is a comma in a much, much longer story. It is a story that started in 1619 when Africans were brought in chains to America’s shores to do the work that created the wealth that made many white people rich. It is a story encapsulated in the country’s 1790 Naturalization Act, one of the nation’s very first pieces of legislation, which stated that citizenship is reserved to “free white person[s]” (a law that defined US immigration policy until 1965). It is a story that saw hundreds of thousands of Americans who wanted to be able to continue to buy and sell Black bodies go to war and kill hundreds of thousands of other Americans who sought to end slavery.At its core, it is the story of the centuries-long struggle over whether the United States of America should be a multiracial democracy, or whether it should be a white nationalist country.Reflecting on the defeat in the Senate, three dominant realities can help us make sense of what just happened and determine where we go from here.First, the cold, hard truth is that the majority of white politicians have always been reluctant to make America a multiracial democracy (between the House and Senate votes, 60% of the white members of Congress voted against the John Lewis Voting Rights Act).Passage of the 15th amendment itself, guaranteeing the right to vote, was a ferocious battle that raged over months and multiple votes in 1869. Nearly 100 years later, in 1965, it was only after Jimmie Lee Jackson, Viola Liuzzo and James Reeb lost their lives in the struggle for voting rights that Congress was finally moved to pass the current Voting Rights Act. None of this unwillingness to protect the right to vote is new, and we should be disappointed – but not surprised – at the conduct of the country’s elected officials during this week in which we supposedly honored Martin Luther King Jr.The second reality is that many top Democratic strategists and leaders are behind the times and bad at math. The fact that Democrats put their political capital behind an infrastructure bill before taking on the task of protecting democracy was a race-based political calculation. The infrastructure bill was an attempt by Democrats to woo the support of white swing voters by emphasizing bipartisanship and brick and mortar, race-neutral, projects. The scary policies associated with people of color – things like reimagining public safety, providing a pathway to citizenship for immigrants and combating aggressive voter suppression – were downplayed.The mathematical calculation in determining that sequence of priorities was off from the start. Beyond the morality of the matter, from a crass realpolitik point of view, voting rights protections and ending whites-first immigration practices bring more people of color into the electorate. And people of color vote Democratic.The third, and most hopeful, reality is that progressives can still win, and we need look no further than Georgia for inspiration and instruction about what is possible even in the face of opposition from the right and lack of conviction on the left. Stacey Abrams is very good at math, and she has been working for a decade to engage the 1.1 million people of color who were not voting in a state where elections were routinely decided by 230,000 votes. On the right, Republican Brian Kemp, who was secretary of state during his gubernatorial run against Abrams, improperly purged 340,000 people from the rolls in the 2018 election Abrams lost by 54,723 votes.Abrams did not treat her defeat as a fatal blow; she saw it as a comma, and she went on to continue organizing and building a statewide network of groups and activists who could turn out large numbers of voters of color. For a long time, the leaders in Georgia soldiered on without support from top Democrats who couldn’t calculate the advantage of focusing resources in a state where the strategy centered on expanding the number of people of color voting. By late summer 2020, for example, Senate Majority Pac had invested zero dollars in Georgia while spending $7m in 85% white Iowa. Biden himself expressed amazement at his victory there, saying on election night, “We’re still in the game in Georgia. That’s not one we expected.”The Georgia model elected Senators Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff and delivered the current Senate control to the Democrats. In 2022, it can expand that majority, dramatically decreasing the dependence on Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. Massive investments in civic engagement organizations and voter mobilization efforts in Florida, North Carolina and Wisconsin can propel Val Demings, Cheri Beasley and Mandela Barnes to victories in their races against Republican incumbent senators.This week’s defeat of the Voting Rights Act is one chapter in a long story. While a sad chapter, it need not be the last chapter, and by applying the lessons from Georgia’s journey, we can actually write a happy ending over the next several years.
      Steve Phillips is host of Democracy in Color with Steve Phillips. His forthcoming book, How We End the Civil War, is due out this year. He is a Guardian US columnist
      TopicsUS politicsOpinionUS voting rightsDemocratscommentReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘What are the Republicans for?': Joe Biden says Trump 'intimidating' entire party – video

      by

      US president Joe Biden has accused the Republicans of blocking his legislative agenda for purely political purposes, saying the party is more interested in defeating his presidency than doing things for the American people. Without mentioning his name, Biden suggested that former president Donald Trump was still in control of the Republican party, with members of Congress fearful they will be defeated in their primaries if they vote contrary to his wishes. Biden questioned what the purpose of the Republican party was during his a press briefing marking the one-year anniversary of his presidency

      Winter of peril and impossibility: Biden faces hard truth at anniversary press conference
      Joe Biden says his administration has ‘outperformed’ in bruising first year More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats fail to advance voting rights law as Senate holdouts defend filibuster

      by

      Democrats fail to advance voting rights law as Senate holdouts defend filibusterSweeping protections for voters, already passed by House and backed by Biden, fail to clear 60-vote procedural hurdle Senate Democrats failed again to pass sweeping new voting protections on Wednesday, in what may be the most brutal blow yet to efforts to strengthen protections for voters at a perilous moment for US democracy.Just as they have done four other times in recent months, all 50 Republicans united in their opposition to the measure. They relied on the filibuster, a Senate rule that requires 60 votes to advance legislation to a final vote.Bernie Sanders suggests he may support primary challengers against Manchin and SinemaRead moreDespite heavy pressure from Joe Biden and fellow Democrats, two senators, Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, have dug in defending the measure, preventing Democrats from getting rid of it.In a rebuke to Biden, Sinema gave a speech on the Senate floor last week making it clear she would not support changes to the filibuster. Manchin has also consistently made his support clear. “I will not vote to eliminate or weaken the filibuster. The filibuster plays an important role in protecting our democracy from the transitory passions of the majority and respecting the input of the minority in the Senate,” he said in a speech on Wednesday.Their opposition set up a showdown as the ultimately doomed bill was taken up for discussion on Wednesday. Late in the evening, Republicans used the filibuster to vote to end debate on the bill, effectively blocking it from advancing. Immediately afterwards, Democrats moved to hold a vote to try and change the filibuster rules anyway. The effort failed 52-48, with Manchin and Sinema voting with all 50 Republicans to preserve the filibuster. Sinema loudly said “aye” when it was her turn to vote in favor of preserving the filibuster changes.“I am profoundly disappointed that the United States Senate has failed to stand up for our democracy. I am disappointed — but I am not deterred,” Biden said in a statement.“Our Administration will continue to fight to pass federal legislation to secure the right to vote. We will not stop fighting against the anti-voter legislation that Republican legislatures continue to push at the state level—and to champion and support state and local elected officials who work to enact pro-voter legislation,” Kamala Harris said in a separate statement.“Isn’t protecting voting rights, the most fundamental wellspring of this democracy, more important than a rule?” Chuck Schumer, the Senate majority leader, said just before the vote on the filibuster change.Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia said Democrats were seeking to restore a “talking filibuster”, where senators have to hold the floor of the US senate to prevent a vote on legislation.“We’re going to take up a rules reform proposal that will not blow up the senate,” he said on the Senate floor Wednesday evening. “It switches the secret filibuster into a public filibuster. It makes both parties work on the floor to get the kind of extended public debate we joined together to seek.”Senator Angus King of Maine, who once defended the filibuster, said the process that was in place was a “second cousin once removed of the filibuster”.“I’d venture to say if we had the rules we have today, we wouldn’t have the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act,” he said.Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, described Wednesday as “in all likelihood, the most important day in the history of the Senate.” He said the Democratic proposal was just “smoke and mirrors”, and accused Democrats of undertaking a plot to “to break the Senate”.The voting rights measure has failed before, but Wednesday marks the first time they have taken a formal vote on changing the filibuster. Its likely failure marks a profound setback for Biden’s presidential agenda. The president spent an enormous amount of political capital in recent weeks pressuring Manchin and Sinema to support rule changes to the filibuster, giving a speech in Atlanta and traveling to Capitol Hill to try to get support. In stirring remarks just before the vote on the voting rights bill, Raphael Warnock, a Democrat from Georgia, said senators could not praise the legacy of Dr Martin Luther King, Jr while voting against voting rights. “You cannot remember MLK and dismember his legacy at the same time,” Warnock said. “I will not sit quietly while some make Dr King a victim of identity theft.”“Those of us who are students of Dr King, I know I have, often wonder ‘what would I have done if I was alive during the civil rights movement?’ I know that we all would like to think we had a fraction, just a small fraction of the courage it took for John Lewis to cross that Edmund Pettus Bridge,” he said. “Well, for those of us who serve in the United States Senate in this moment, in this moral moment, we do not have to wonder … we don’t have to wonder what we would have done. I submit that what we would have done back then we are doing right now. History is watching us.”The bill that failed on Wednesday, Freedom to Vote: John R Lewis Act, combined two major voting rights bills into a single mega bill.It would have set a national baseline for election access, guaranteeing 15 days of early voting as well as online voter registration. It protected local election officials from harassment and partisan interference in their jobs and curbed gerrymandering, the severe distortion of partisan district lines. It also restored a key piece of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that required places with a history of voting discrimination to get their changes approved by either the justice department or a federal court in Washington before they go into effect.The bill’s failure comes as states across the US have waged an aggressive effort to restrict voting access after the 2020 election, which saw record turnout. In total, 19 states have passed 34 bills that restrict voting access, making it harder to request and return a mail-in ballot, among other measures, even though there was no evidence of fraud, either in mail-in voting or otherwise, in 2020.Many of those efforts are obviously aimed at Black and other minority voters who helped Democrats win in 2020, activists say. As state legislatures reconvene, Republican lawmakers are proposing even more new restrictions.At the same time, Republicans in state legislatures are redrawing electoral districts at the state legislative and congressional level to virtually guarantee their re-election for the next decade. Seeing Democratic gains in traditionally Republican districts, Republicans have redrawn the lines to simply make many districts uncompetitive for the next decade, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.It’s a strategy that has blunted the growing power of Black, Hispanic and Asian voters in places like the suburbs, which are rapidly diversifying. In North Carolina, for example, Republicans lowered the Black voting age population of a district long represented by GK Butterfield, a former judge who is Black. It will be harder for Black voters in that district to elect their candidate of choice and Butterfield has since announced he is retiring from Congress.There is also growing concern about what experts call election subversion – efforts to inject more partisanship into election administration and counting votes.Republicans are passing laws that give them more partisan control over key administrative roles and Trump allies who have embraced the myth of a stolen election are running for secretary of state in places such as Georgia, Michigan, Arizona and Nevada – a perch from which they could exert enormous unilateral control over election rules.Civil rights groups have waged an aggressive campaign, privately and publicly, trying to get Manchin and Sinema to support a filibuster change. “Let’s be honest, every voter suppression bill passed in the 19 states across the country has been passed by Republicans alone. If one party can dismantle our democracy on its own, the other party should muster the courage to safeguard it,” Derrick Johnson, the president and CEO of the NAACP, wrote in a letter to senators.TopicsUS voting rightsThe fight to voteUS SenateUS politicsDemocratsJoe ManchinnewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden marks a year as president and says he has ‘probably outperformed’ – live

      by

      Key events

      Show

      4.29pm EST

      16:29

      Biden expresses confidence in passing ‘big chunks’ of Build Back Better

      4.21pm EST

      16:21

      Biden: ‘I didn’t overpromise. I have probably outperformed’

      4.05pm EST

      16:05

      Biden holds press conference to mark one year in office

      3.48pm EST

      15:48

      Manchin’s filibuster speech set to clash with Biden’s press conference

      1.00pm EST

      13:00

      Today so far

      11.30am EST

      11:30

      Biden to hold press conference amid struggles to pass voting rights bill

      10.25am EST

      10:25

      Manchin to deliver floor speech on voting rights and filibuster reform

      Live feed

      Show

      Show key events only

      4.47pm EST

      16:47

      Joe Biden confirmed the Build Back Better Act will likely have to be separated into multiple bills in order to get some of its components passed.
      “It’s clear to me that we’re going to have to probably break it up,” the president said.
      Biden noted that Joe Manchin, who announced his opposition to the spending package last month, supports some of the bill’s key provisions, such as establishing universal access to free prekindergarten.
      “I think we can break the package up, get as much as we can now and come back and fight for the rest later,” Biden said.

      4.37pm EST

      16:37

      Joe Biden was asked whether he believes the threatened sanctions against Russia will be enough to prevent Vladimir Putin from approving an invasion of Ukraine, when such economic measures have not proven effective with the Russian president in the past.
      “He’s never seen sanctions like the ones I’ve promised will be imposed if he moves,” the president replied.
      Biden noted he has had “frank discussions” with Putin in recent weeks, as fears have intensified over a potential invasion of Ukraine.
      The US president said that, if Putin moves forward with a full-scale invasion, it will be a “disaster” for the Russian economy.
      “Russia will be held accountable if it invades,” Biden said.

      4.29pm EST

      16:29

      Biden expresses confidence in passing ‘big chunks’ of Build Back Better

      A reporter asked Joe Biden whether he needed to be more realistic in his legislative goals and and scale down his priorities in order to get something passed.
      The president said he did not believe he needed to scale down his goals, arguing his agenda is largely popular with the American people.
      “We just have to make the case of what we’re for and what the other team’s not for,” Biden said, underscoring the need for Democrats to contrast their priorities with those of Republicans.
      However, in response to a follow-up question, Biden seemed to acknowledge that the Build Back Better Act may need to be broken up into several pieces to get passed.
      “I’m confident we can get pieces, big chunks of the Build Back Better law signed into law,” Biden said.
      Joe Manchin announced last month that he would not support the $1.75tn spending package, which represents the centerpiece of Biden’s economic agenda.
      But the president and Democratic congressional leaders have indicated they are not giving up on the proposal.

      4.21pm EST

      16:21

      Biden: ‘I didn’t overpromise. I have probably outperformed’

      Joe Biden is now taking questions from reporters, after delivering some prepared remarks about the coronavirus pandemic and the US economy.
      A journalist asked the president whether he believes he promised too much to voters, considering Democrats’ failure to pass a voting rights bill or the Build Back Better Act since he took office.
      “I didn’t overpromise. I have probably outperformed what anybody thought would happen,” Biden replied.
      The president insisted his administration had made “enormous progress” over the past year, but he acknowledged that the year had not seen much bipartisanship.
      Condemning the obstructionist tactics of the opposing party, Biden said he had not succeeded in convincing “my Republican friends to get in the game”.

      Updated
      at 4.50pm EST

      4.16pm EST

      16:16

      Joe Biden said coronavirus will not disappear anytime soon, but he expressed confidence that the situation in the US will continue to improve in the months ahead.

      CBS News
      (@CBSNews)
      President Biden: “COVID-19 is not going to give up and it’s not gonna go away immediately. But I’m not going to give up and accept things as they are now. Some people may call what’s happening now the ‘new normal.’ I call it a job not yet finished. It will get better.” pic.twitter.com/4MqDerL3H4

      January 19, 2022

      “I’m not going to give up and accept things as they are now. Some people may call what’s happening now the ‘new normal.’ I call it a job not yet finished,” Biden said.
      “It will get better. We’re moving toward a time when Covid-19 won’t disrupt our daily lives, where Covid-19 won’t be a crisis but something to protect against and a threat. Look, we’re not there yet, but we will get there.”
      Biden’s remarks come as the Omicron variant causes a surge in cases of coronavirus in the US, putting more pressure on hospitals and resulting in high demand for tests.

      4.10pm EST

      16:10

      While touting the successes of his first year in office, Joe Biden acknowledged that many Americans remain unhappy with the state of the nation.
      “For all this progress, I know there’s a lot of frustration and fatigue in this country. And we know why: Covid-19,” Biden said.
      The president said he understood Americans are tired nearly two years into the pandemic, but he emphasized the US now has the tools to save lives and keep the economy open — vaccines, tests and masks.
      Nodding to criticism that the White House should have made coronavirus tests more widely available sooner, Biden said, “Should we have done more testing earlier? Yes. But we’re doing more now.”

      4.05pm EST

      16:05

      Biden holds press conference to mark one year in office

      Joe Biden has now appeared at the podium to kick off his press conference, which comes on the eve of the one-year anniversary of his inauguration.
      “It’s been a year of challenges, but it’s also been a year of enormous progress,” the president said.
      Biden touted his administration’s success in boosting coronavirus vaccination rates and lowering the US unemployment rate, despite widespread criticism of Democrats’ failure to pass a voting rights bill or their Build Back Better Act.
      Biden is expected to deliver prepared remarks for about 10 minutes before taking questions from reporters. Stay tuned.

      3.48pm EST

      15:48

      Manchin’s filibuster speech set to clash with Biden’s press conference

      Joe Manchin will deliver his Senate floor speech on voting rights and filibuster reform at 4.30pm ET, his office just confirmed in a statement.
      Given that timing, it is quite likely that Manchin will be speaking as Joe Biden holds his press conference, which is scheduled to begin at 4pm ET.
      So while Biden is trying to tout the successes of his first year in office, Manchin will simultaneously be taking the podium on the Senate floor and likely eliminating any hope of passing voting rights legislation in the near future.
      It should be an eventful afternoon, to say the least. Stay tuned.

      3.36pm EST

      15:36

      Tim Scott, a Republican of South Carolina, criticized Joe Biden for comparing the voting restrictions enacted in the past year to the racist policies of the Jim Crow era.
      Scott, the only Black Republican member of the Senate, said the issue of voting rights is “really important to all Americans but specifically important to Americans from the Deep South who happen to look like me”.
      “As I listened to the president talk about the importance of stopping what he characterized as ‘Jim Crow 2.0’, I felt frustration and irritation rising in my soul,” Scott said. “I am so thankful, thankful that we are not living in those days.”

      CSPAN
      (@cspan)
      Sen. @CoryBooker: “Don’t lecture me about Jim Crow. I know this is not 1965. That’s what makes me so outraged. It’s 2022. And they’re blatantly removing polling places from the counties where Blacks and Latinos are overrepresented. I’m not making that up. That is a fact.” pic.twitter.com/JtwxQMZtpE

      January 19, 2022

      After Scott spoke, Cory Booker, another one of the three Black members of the Senate, stepped up to the podium to denounce the voting restrictions and their disproportionate impact on minority voters.
      “Don’t lecture me about Jim Crow. I know this is not 1965. That’s what makes me so outraged. It’s 2022,” said Booker, a Democrat of New Jersey.
      “And they’re blatantly removing more polling places from the counties where Blacks and Latinos are overrepresented. I’m not making that up. That is a fact.”

      3.09pm EST

      15:09

      The Senate debate over voting rights and filibuster reform has been going on for hours now, and the chamber may not wrap up its work today until 9pm or 10pm ET, per PBS NewsHour.

      Lisa Desjardins
      (@LisaDNews)
      For Senate watchers, consensus in talking with Dem senators and Dem leadership sources is that tonight is heading toward a 9p/10p end time. (As always it’s fluid, who knows, etc.)

      January 19, 2022

      2.46pm EST

      14:46

      The Senate debate over Democrats’ voting rights bill and their suggested changes to the filibuster continues, with Republicans denouncing their colleagues’ proposals.
      Thom Tillis, a Republican of North Carolina, pledged that he would leave the Senate if his party ever amended the filibuster — or rather the legislative filibuster, as Republicans already eliminated the filibuster for supreme court nominees.

      CSPAN
      (@cspan)
      .@SenThomTillis: “The day that Republicans change the rules for the filibuster is the day I resign from the Senate.” pic.twitter.com/f38byD2vqE

      January 19, 2022

      “The day that Republicans change the rues for the filibuster is the day I resign from the Senate,” Tillis said.
      “And I believe that I have a number of members on my side of the aisle that would never do it. So you don’t have to worry about the argument, ‘If you don’t change it now, they’ll just change it when they hit the trifecta.’ It’s not going to happen.”
      It will be interesting to see if those comments ever come back to haunt Tillis.

      2.22pm EST

      14:22

      Joe Biden held a virtual meeting today with some of the senators who traveled to Ukraine over the weekend to meet with the country’s president and discuss concerns over a potential Russian invasion.
      “President Biden and the senators exchanged views on the best ways the United States can continue to work closely with our allies and partners in support of Ukraine, including both ongoing diplomacy to try to resolve the current crisis and deterrence measures,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement.
      “President Biden commended the strong history of support for Ukraine from both sides of the aisle, and agreed to keep working closely with Congress as the Administration prepares to impose significant consequences in response to further Russian aggression against Ukraine.”
      Secretary of state Antony Blinken is also in Ukraine today, meeting with President Volodymyr Zelenskiy before traveling to Geneva for talks with Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, on Friday.
      Blinken has warned that Russia could take “further aggressive action” against Ukraine “at any moment,” the Guardian’s Luke Harding and Andrew Roth report:

      2.04pm EST

      14:04

      Joanna Walters

      The US Supreme Court has issued a very unusual statement. Not about any of the high-stakes cases the bench is considering, however, but about coronavirus, masks – the wearing of – and a report of a disagreement between liberal-leaning Sonia Sotomayor and conservative-leaning Neil Gorsuch over what can be a life-or-death issue. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Bernie Sanders suggests he may support primary challengers against Manchin and Sinema

      by

      Bernie Sanders suggests he may support primary challengers against Manchin and SinemaProgressive Vermont senator believes ‘there’s a very good chance’ Democrats will face challenges over their filibuster stance Bernie Sanders has said he may consider supporting primary challengers against colleagues Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, the two Democrat holdouts in debate over whether to amend the filibuster to pass voting rights legislation.The progressive Vermont senator told reporters on Tuesday that he believes “there is a very good chance” that Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat, and Sinema, a Democrat from Arizona, will face primary challenges because of their stance on the filibuster.He said home-state voters would be disappointed that the pair have refused to support changing Senate rules to overcome a Republican filibuster against major voting legislation while also balking at the massive, Biden-backed spending and social plan known as Build Back Better.When asked if he would consider backing such primary challengers, Sanders replied, “Well, yeah.”Sanders, an independent who caucuses with Senate Democrats, didn’t elaborate on his comment, but it is unusual for senators to suggest they would be willing to campaign against colleagues from their own party.Sanders’s sentiments also lay bare progressives’ growing frustrations with the more conservative senators, Manchin and Sinema, whom the left has blamed for stalling many of Biden’s top legislative priorities.Manchin and Sinema say they support the legislation but are unwilling to change Senate rules to muscle the legislation through the chamber over Republican objections. With a 50-50 split, Democrats lack the 60 votes needed to overcome the Republican filibuster.Manchin is expected to deliver a floor speech on Wednesday afternoon outlining his position on changing chamber rules to allow voting rights legislation to move forward. Yesterday he countered Sanders’s comments, saying he would not be bothered by a primary challenger.“I’ve been primaried my entire life. That would not be anything new for me,” he said Tuesday, when asked about fellow Democrats urging voters not to back him in a primary. “I’ve never run an election I wasn’t primaried. This is West Virginia, it’s rough and tumble. We’re used to that. So bring it on.”Sanders remains one of the nation’s leading progressive voices after strong Democratic presidential primary bids in 2016 and 2020 – and is still popular enough nationally to potentially affect Senate primaries around the country.Manchin and Sinema are not up for re-election until 2024, but both could face serious primary challengers then. Democratic representative Ruben Gallego of Arizona, who has sharply criticized Sinema for not supporting the voting rights legislation, has not ruled out launching a challenge against her.Manchin and Sinema are also experiencing some external pressure as they resist efforts to change the filibuster to pass voting rights legislation. Emily’s List, the progressive group that backs female candidates who support abortion rights and has deep ties to Democrats, said it would withhold its endorsement from Sinema because of her stance on filibuster reform.“Our mission can only be realized when everyone has the freedom to have their voice heard safely and freely at the ballot box,” Emily’s List’s president, Laphonza Butler, said in a statement released on Tuesday.Naral Pro-Choice America, which supports abortion rights and is also influential in top Democratic circles, released its own statement suggesting it would no longer support or endorse Manchin or Sinema because of their stances on the legislation.The voting rights legislation in question is the Freedom to Vote: John R Lewis Act, which civil rights activists say is vital to safeguarding American democracy as Republican-led states pass new restrictive voting laws. It would make election day a national holiday while ensuring access to early voting and mail-in ballots – both of which have become especially popular during the Covid-19 pandemic. The package also seeks to let the justice department intervene in states with a history of voter interference, among other changes.
      Associated Press contributed to this report
      TopicsBernie SandersDemocratsUS voting rightsUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 188 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Schumer insists Senate will vote on voting rights bill ‘win, lose or draw’ – live

      by

      Key events

      Show

      4.39pm EST

      16:39

      White House launches ‘beta’ version of website to order Covid tests

      4.15pm EST

      16:15

      Trump’s attorney general Barr to publish book

      2.08pm EST

      14:08

      Psaki: Russia attack on Ukraine could come ‘at any time’

      1.45pm EST

      13:45

      Two more Democrats will retire

      1.30pm EST

      13:30

      Today so far

      12.46pm EST

      12:46

      Senate will vote on voting rights ‘win, lose or draw,’ Schumer says

      12.28pm EST

      12:28

      Schumer files cloture on Democrats’ voting rights bill

      Live feed

      Show

      Show key events only

      From

      1.08pm EST

      13:08

      Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer argued Democrats have an obligation to do everything possible to pass voting rights legislation, despite the high likelihood of failure because of Republican filibustering.
      “If Republicans choose to continue their filibuster of voting rights legislation, we must consider and vote on the rule changes that are appropriate and necessary to restore the Senate and make voting rights legislation possible,” Schumer said in his floor speech.

      CSPAN
      (@cspan)
      .@SenSchumer: “If Republicans choose…their filibuster of voting rights legislation we must consider and vote on the rule changes that are appropriate and necessary to restore the Senate and make voting rights legislation possible.” pic.twitter.com/gbmNQZKMS9

      January 18, 2022

      But as of now, Schumer does not have the votes necessary to change the filibuster, as Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema remain opposed to doing so.
      Because of the 50-50 split between Democrats and Republicans in the Senate, Schumer needs the support of every member of his caucus to reform the filibuster.

      4.39pm EST

      16:39

      White House launches ‘beta’ version of website to order Covid tests

      The Biden administration has launched the “beta” version of its website to order free, at-home coronavirus tests.
      The site, CovidTests.gov, includes a link to a US Postal Service form that allows Americans to request four tests to be shipped to their homes.
      White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, said the site will officially launch tomorrow morning and noted there may be some glitches until then.
      “CovidTests.gov is in the beta phase right now, which is a standard part of the process typically as it’s being kind of tested,” Psaki said at her daily briefing.
      “Every website launch, in our view, comes with risk. We can’t guarantee there won’t be a bug or two, but the best tech teams across the administration and the postal service are working hard to make this a success.”
      The Biden administration has already ordered 1bn free at-home coronavirus tests to be distributed to Americans as the country confronts the highly transmissible Omicron variant.

      Updated
      at 4.48pm EST

      4.15pm EST

      16:15

      Trump’s attorney general Barr to publish book

      Martin Pengelly

      William Barr, Donald Trump’s second attorney general and perceived hatchet man until he split from the former president over his lies about election fraud, has a book deal. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Capitol attack panel grapples with moving inquiry forward: to subpoena or not?

      by

      Capitol attack panel grapples with moving inquiry forward: to subpoena or not?The committee is undecided on making the near-unprecedented step as the threat of Republican retaliation looms The House select committee investigating the Capitol attack is weighing whether to subpoena some of Donald Trump’s top allies on Capitol Hill as it considers its options on how aggressively it should pursue testimony to move forward its inquiry into the January 6 insurrection.The Republican House minority leader Kevin McCarthy and Republican members of Congress Jim Jordan and Scott Perry may have inside knowledge about Trump’s plan to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s election and whether it was coordinated with the Capitol attack.But the outright refusal of McCarthy and the other Republican lawmakers to testify voluntarily with the investigation has intensified discussions among the panel’s members and investigators about whether to force their cooperation.Mike Pence equates voting rights protections with Capitol attackRead moreThe select committee is undecided on whether to take that near-unprecedented step, in part because of one major concern that has emerged in recent days, according to two sources familiar with the matter: Republican retaliation against Biden and Democrats in future inquiries.In private conversations, some members and investigators on the select committee have expressed how appalled they are at the refusal of McCarthy and the Republican lawmakers to help the investigation, and feel prepared to subpoena for their testimony, the sources said.But the one major recurring worry raised in discussions, the sources said, is that subpoenas might create moral hazard for Republicans plotting an onslaught of partisan investigations into the Biden administration should they retake the House after the 2022 midterms – as many observers think likely.Republicans in Congress have openly floated the prospect in recent days of launching political probes into the Biden administration’s coronavirus response, the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the personal life of Biden’s son Hunter, as well as an impeachment inquiry.In response, some members and investigators on the select committee have quietly raised the possibility that if the panel declines to subpoena Republicans now, then a Republican majority might not subpoena Democrats in the future, the sources said.The issue has proved a difficult conundrum for the select committee, which started serious discussions about subpoenas to Republicans after Jordan and Perry refused to cooperate, and escalated the urgency of talks after McCarthy also declined to help the inquiry.The panel was particularly outraged by McCarthy’s refusal and his statement attacking their request for an interview as “abuse of power” and intensified its research into parliamentary rules governing their ability to authorize subpoenas, the sources said.Even in the absence of any formal decision, the possibility of subpoenas has already become a touch point as the select committee grapples with the so-called speech and debate clause in the constitution that shields lawmakers while they perform their official duties.The clause says lawmakers “shall not be questioned in any other place” about speech or debate, and is generally interpreted to cover all legislative actions – which Republicans argue precludes them from having to answer the select committee’s investigation.But the members on the panel believe the law does not extend to protect lawmakers from Congress’s own investigations, rejecting the idea that McCarthy, Jordan and Perry have any claim to immunity as the panel investigates whether Trump oversaw a criminal conspiracy.There is also precedent for the House to subpoena its own members. The House ethics committee, which investigates allegations of wrongdoing by members of Congress, for instance has the authority under House rules to subpoena lawmakers – orders they cannot refuse.A spokesperson for the select committee declined to comment on internal discussions about how aggressively the panel might act to secure cooperation from McCarthy, or whether counsel for the panel has reached a determination on the matter.Congressman Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the select committee, previously said in his request for cooperation to McCarthy that the panel was interested in details about McCarthy’s conversations with Trump before, during and after the Capitol attack.But it is also not immediately clear whether McCarthy would have substantially new information to share with House investigators beyond what is already public – meaning the marginal benefit to getting his testimony may not outweigh the potential political consequences.There remains a possibility that McCarthy, Perry and Jordan might cooperate with the select committee in the event of a subpoena, using the potential legal threat to justify their reversals to Trump, who the Guardian reported last month is agitated by the investigation.If the select committee decides it has the authority and resolve to issue subpoenas, the sources said, then the primary remaining question would likely be a matter of timing, and when best in the investigation the panel should force their cooperation.But the worry about Republican retaliation reflects the select committee’s recognition that the stakes of issuing subpoenas to Republican lawmakers and McCarthy, the man poised to become speaker in 2022 should his party retake the House majority, could not be higher.Additional concerns have centered on the ability to enforce subpoenas to Republican lawmakers if the select committee did take that step, and whether a federal judge would countenance becoming mired in what is essentially becoming a partisan fight in Congress.Congressman Adam Schiff, a member of the select committee, suggested on MSNBC the panel, for that reason, would likely not pursue criminal contempt of Congress proceedings with recalcitrant lawmakers as it did with Trump’s former aides Mark Meadows and Steve Bannon.Moving ahead with criminal contempt of Congress against the Republican lawmakers would mark an escalation that tests the limits of congressional subpoenas, threatening to touch off a legal fight the panel might not have time to conclude as it races to finish its report.The former Republican chairman of the House oversight committee, Trey Gowdy – who also oversaw the inquiry into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails – demurred on subpoenaing Democrats over concerns about enforceability, a source close to Gowdy said.Gowdy faced internal pressure from the House Republican conference for his reluctance to subpoena Democrats, the source said, but that was in part to make sure lawmakers would not defang the power of congressional subpoenas if they simply refused to comply.That leaves the select committee with only a handful of options, which appear to rest on a gamble over whether it can shame Republicans into cooperating, including a formal resolution on the House floor censuring or admonishing the lawmakers.TopicsUS Capitol attackRepublicansDemocratsJoe BidenDonald TrumpUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesanalysisReuse this content More