More stories

  • in

    A huge Democratic victory in Omaha offers a lesson for the party | Katrina vanden Heuvel

    For the last several months, the Trump administration’s reckless use of executive power, trade policy, gutting federal agencies and defying court orders has gone largely unchecked. National Democrats have limited means of opposition – so the best hope for accountability will be electoral accountability.This may help explain why last Tuesday’s election results in America’s 41st biggest city generated such outsized excitement from progressives. John Ewing Jr, a longtime county treasurer, was elected the first Black mayor of Omaha, defeating the incumbent Jean Stothert, who was seeking a fourth term after holding that office since 2013. More than that, Ewing won big, by nearly 13 points, marking a huge shift after Stothert won her last race by 30.Ewing ran a substantive, highly localized campaign that built upon decades of credibility he earned as a public servant – supplemented by the longstanding work of the Nebraska Democratic party to build coalitions in a traditionally deep-red state. In swinging this race by 43 points, they have both inspired hope that the political winds may be shifting, and provided a model for Democrats to succeed in 2026 and beyond.The results in Omaha are meaningful not for the scale of the city, but for how it may reflect the country as a whole. Omaha’s congressional seat – Nebraska’s second – is a true swing district, one of only three in the country that voted for Kamala Harris in 2024 while also electing a Republican to Congress. It’s a diverse, medium-sized, midwestern city – and if that isn’t enough to convey its heartland status, it’s nearly in the geographic center of the contiguous United States.For all of these reasons, it’s instructive for Democrats to understand the strategy of the chair of the Nebraska Democratic party, who now serves as president of the Association of State Democratic Committees (ASDC) and a DNC vice-chair: Jane Kleeb. In a moment when so much media attention has been focused on internal procedural drama surrounding certain other vice-chairs, Kleeb and the Nebraska Democratic party have continued their longstanding focus on the day-to-day work.In the waning days of the Omaha mayoral election, Stothert attempted to negatively polarize voters against Ewing by nationalizing the race – and, in particular, hammering the GOP’s favorite wedge issue target of late: trans people. As my colleague John Nichols wrote about last week for the Nation, this did not work. Instead, Ewing refused to take the bait and kept his focus on tangible municipal issues – such as housing, street paving and even a struggling streetcar project. In a simple graphic released three days before the election, the Nebraska Democratic party proudly declared: “Jean is focused on potties. John is focused on fixing potholes.”As thousands of Democrats across the country seek election up and down the ballot in 2026, they too could decline to debate on Republican terms and instead run campaigns relentlessly focused on improving their constituents’ lives.Successful as this campaign was, it also builds upon statewide efforts from the Nebraska Democratic party to compete in unfavorable territory. Kleeb has long advocated for Democrats to perform direct outreach to rural voters – and it’s not the same thing as pandering. Instead, it means recognizing real problems that, say, farmers are experiencing and offering practical solutions.In her words: “In rural and small towns we may not use the word ‘climate change’ in the first five sentences, but everything we’re doing is talking about protecting the land and water.”And progressives in Nebraska know a thing or two about the value of avoiding toxic political labels. When the navy veteran, mechanic and union leader Dan Osborn ran a populist, independent campaign for Senate last year, the Nebraska Democratic party stepped aside and chose not to run a candidate. While Osborn and the state party had their differences – and he ultimately lost – this unorthodox strategy showed serious upside. Osborn came closer to defeating the incumbent Republican than any other challenger in the 2024 cycle; now he’s looking at a 2026 run in much more favorable circumstances.With lessons to learn from the success in Nebraska, it is encouraging that Kleeb now holds a prominent leadership position in the national Democratic party – the same role that Ken Martin held before he became chair. As head of the ASDC, Kleeb is well positioned to work with all 50 state chairs to get them the resources they need – and it will be all 50, as she and the DNC recently announced that the national organization will be contributing more to state parties as part of a re-emerging 50 state strategy.But even if Kleeb’s ascendance only meant that the Democratic party got better at competing in Nebraska, it could prove decisive. Given that the House is currently held by Republicans by a handful of seats (give or take whatever disgraced resignations happen between now and next November), the race in Nebraska’s second district could very well be the tipping point for control of the lower chamber. Representative Don Bacon, who held on to his seat by less than 2 points last cycle, may well retire before he has a chance to lose.Whether the race for Congress in 2026 comes down to Omaha itself or someplace like it, Democratic victories will depend on a nationwide effort to invest as deeply in local concerns as Kleeb and Ewing have. That strategy can be summed up with a mantra that Kleeb has repeated time and time again – what you may call Jane’s refrain: “When we organize everywhere, we can win anywhere!”

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

  • in

    Newark mayor says prosecutors tried to ‘humilate’ him by forcing redo of fingerprints and mugshot

    Ras Baraka, the Democratic mayor of Newark, said federal prosecutors were seeking to “humiliate and degrade” him by making him give fingerprints and have a mugshot taken for a second time on Thursday.The move came after a court appearance on a trespassing charge stemming from his arrest at an immigration detention center where he was protesting with several members of Congress.The charges against Baraka have unfolded amid fears that the Trump administration is seeking to prosecute Democratic politicians, judges or others who have opposed its policies.Baraka appeared in court for a roughly 15-minute procedural hearing before magistrate judge André Espinosa. The hearing covered mostly scheduling for discovery in the case, which stemmed from an encounter on Friday outside the Delaney Hall immigration detention center.Assistant prosecutor Stephen Demanovich said the government disputed Baraka’s claims that he committed no crime and was invited on to the facility’s property. Confusion over whether Baraka had been fingerprinted and processed after his arrest unfolded after the judge brought the proceedings to a close.As the parties began to walk away, the judge added that the mayor would need to be processed by the US Marshals Service and that it would take 10 minutes. Baraka, looking confused, said he had already been processed after his arrest. The judge said “agents” had processed him but not the marshals.“Let’s go,” Baraka said, before indicating he would go with the marshals.Speaking to a crowd of supporters outside court, Baraka addressed why it took him a while to emerge from the building.“They’re trying their best to humiliate and degrade me as much as they possibly can,” he said. “I feel like what we did was completely correct. We did not violate any laws. We stood up for the constitution of this country, the constitution of the state of New Jersey.”The trespassing charge against Baraka carries a maximum sentence of 30 days in prison.One of Baraka’s attorney’s, Rahul Agarwal, said the defense expected to seek to dismiss the charges because the mayor was arrested by federal agents on private property. He added that it was a “selective prosecution” and that only the mayor had been arrested.Demanovich said the government disputed that but did not go into detail.Baraka has been an outspoken opponent of Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown and a vocal opponent of the facility’s opening.In video of the Friday altercation shared with the Associated Press, a federal official in a jacket with the homeland security investigations logo can be heard telling Baraka he could not enter because “you are not a Congress member”.Baraka then left the secure area, rejoining protesters on the public side of the gate. Video showed him speaking through the gate to a man in a suit, who said: “They’re talking about coming back to arrest you.”“I’m not on their property. They can’t come out on the street and arrest me,” Baraka replied.Minutes later, several Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agents, some wearing face coverings, surrounded him and others on the public side. Baraka was dragged back through the gate in handcuffs.Delaney Hall is a two-storey building next to a county prison and formerly operated as a halfway house. In February, Immigration and Customs Enforcement awarded a 15-year contract to the Geo Group Inc to run the detention center.Politicians and activists have said facility has been reopened in contravention of local ordinances and without the necessary permits. It is the largest such facility in the north-eastern US, and the first to open during Trump’s second term, according to Ice.A trial date for Baraka has not yet been set.The Associated Press contributed reporting More

  • in

    Democrats are failing against Trump. We need a new generation in 2026 | Alexandra Rojas

    After more than 100 days of the Trump administration, it’s clear how unprepared Democratic leadership has been for this moment.Words can hardly describe just how far Donald Trump, Elon Musk and the administration have gone to serve the interests of their fellow billionaires, undermine our economy and kill hundreds of thousands of jobs while dragging our basic civil liberties and constitution through the buzzsaw to illegally disappear countless immigrants and send them to privately funded domestic prisons and torture camps abroad.It’s why the absence of true oppositional leadership has been deafening. After spending an entire campaign cycle naming Trump as an existential threat to our democracy and rule of law – which he is – the party’s leadership has folded at the first chance to wield the power they have, revealing hypocrisy and cowardice.Chuck Schumer surrendered the entire federal budget and Marco Rubio, who is now championing the administration’s campaign of disappearing immigrants, was confirmed unanimously to Trump’s cabinet by the US Senate.Every choice Democratic leadership has made to sacrifice its base and become more like the bad guys we were supposed to be fighting has led us here. And now, people are losing faith in Democrats’ ability to solve our country’s biggest problems – the party is polling at a historic low.Americans have long been ready for the political revolution Bernie Sanders has talked about, but the party and the DC elite haven’t been. Aside from the many polls that highlight the national popularity of Sanders and the policies he supports over the last eight years, voters have made it abundantly clear that it’s time to usher in a new generation of leaders who won’t act like doormats for Trump and Elon Musk. They see this party – just like our government and our economy – as captured by the wealthy few.Waiting for 2028 is not the answer – no president alone can provide the change we need. Massive transformation in this country has never happened without a Congress willing to act – from FDR’s New Deal to the Civil Rights Movement. As the 2026 midterm elections approach, we have an opportunity to take action.When I first started at Justice Democrats in 2017 under Trump’s first presidency, we had a vision as big as a presidential-sized campaign. What if we ran a 50-state campaign to run people in Democratic primaries and take back Congress? Though we haven’t been successful in every race, over the last four cycles, Justice Democrats has been a part of unseating five 15+ year incumbents who collectively served 108 years in office, we have beaten the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) and corporate Democrats in open seats, and we have gone up against hundreds of millions of dollars of opposition spending.Our mission since the beginning has been simple and focused: to build a mission-driven team of working-class leaders in Congress who champion solutions as big as the problems we face. We have recruited and elected leaders like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Jamaal Bowman, Cori Bush, Summer Lee and more over the years.Our work towards this mission has not been perfect, and there has been so much we have learned along the way from the thousands of volunteers, organizers, staff, leaders, donors and allies we have met along the way. But together we have built a powerful bench of progressives in Congress who are the most politically courageous and working-class people to ever walk the halls of one of the most powerful bodies in the world.We know it’s not 2017 any more and the forces we are up against – in the White House and the billions spent to influence our media, our elections, our politicians – are even greater than they once were. It still probably sounds far-fetched to clean up the House and Senate – replace every bought-and-paid-for Democrat and Republican we have in Congress. But we believe it is our collective duty to try.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionLast month, we announced our first new Democratic congressional primary candidate since the 2022 cycle: Donavan McKinney, a working-class Detroiter and state representative, against the incumbent US representative Shri Thanedar, AKA Detroit’s Elon Musk. Thanedar is a self-funded multimillionaire businessman who since 2021 alone spent over $17m of his own wealth to bankroll his congressional campaigns while spending more taxpayer money than any other member of Congress on ads to promote himself last year.This race embodies the fight for the future of the Democratic party. Are we going to elect more multimillionaires backed by corporate lobbies to play possum in the face of fascism, or are we going to elect people who will fight to fix America’s crises with the urgency of someone who has lived through them?A new world needs new leaders. The 2026 cycle presents a historic opportunity for generational and working-class transformation in the Democratic party and in our politics.

    Alexandra Rojas is executive director of Justice Democrats More

  • in

    Michelle Obama 2.0 – the reinvention of the former first lady

    Hello and welcome to The Long Wave. This week, I review Michelle Obama’s new podcast, IMO, which is surprising in the ways it breaks with the Michelle of the past.I came to sneer – and stayed to cheerView image in fullscreenFirst, a disclaimer: I had never fully bought into the Michelle Obama hype. I felt her now legendary line “When they go low, we go high” encapsulated a troubling and complacent form of respectability politics, in which Black people have to maintain coolness and grace under fire to be taken seriously. As the first lady, Michelle often seemed like a sanitising presence, wheeled out so that her national treasure status could serve as a smokescreen to obscure more honest and damning assessments of Barack Obama’s political record.Also, I am not a huge fan of the celebrity podcast genre, which is a vehicle for high-profile figures to chat to their friends in return for huge pay packets. So I was sceptical when Michelle’s podcast was launched in March. Yet when I listened to it, I was immediately charmed and hooked. In truth, I came to sneer and stayed to cheer. She is honest, reflective and vulnerable in ways that are profoundly resonant of a universal Black female experience, something that her icon status had rarely spoken to previously. The irony is that just as Michelle is finding her voice, her popularity appears to be falling – the podcast received poor ratings on launch, though it’s arguably the best thing she’s ever done.A great orator has the conversation of her lifeView image in fullscreenThe most arresting thing about IMO, despite the genuinely interesting high-profile Black guests such as Keke Palmer and the Wayans brothers, is Obama herself. She has always been one of the great orators in US politics – one of the superpowers that made her and Barack, another impressive public speaker, such a compelling couple on the world stage. In her podcast, Michelle uses this talent to reflect on her life and the challenges of ageing, losing her parents and the constant demands placed upon her.The fact that she co-hosts the show with her brother, Craig Robinson – a genial and down-to-earth foil for her confessions – gives the podcast such an intimate air that you feel like you’re in the presence of everyday people, not celebrities. I found myself listening not to hear any snippets of political gossip or insight into the Obamas’ lifestyle, but to receive some exceptionally articulated wisdom from an older Black woman who has seen a lot and gone through milestones we will all experience.She is also funny. Her account of how differently men and women socialise is familiar and hilarious. Michelle describes catching up with her female friends as a “multiday event”, something that leaves Barack perplexed as to why it takes two days for a basic meetup.There is pathos and uncertainty, too. In a recent episode, Michelle talks about the death of her mother, who lived in the White House during the Obamas’ tenure. Michelle says that, at 61, only now does she feel that she has finally become an adult, having had to reckon with her own mortality after the loss of her parents. The former first lady has revealed that she is in therapy, and that she is still trying to navigate this phase of her life.And, in a striking segment, she speaks with barely restrained annoyance about her reasons for not attending Trump’s inauguration, an absence that triggered divorce rumours that have been swirling for months. She says “it took everything in [her] power” to choose what was right for her in that moment. Yet that decision was met with “ridicule” because people couldn’t believe she was saying no to the inauguration for any other reason than she just did not want to be there – they had to “assume my marriage was falling apart”. Oof. It caught my breath.Beyond Black Girl Magicskip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionView image in fullscreenThis Michelle is worlds away from the Michelle of the 2010s. The publishing juggernaut and icon of Black social mobility, who rose to first lady from a bungalow in the south side of Chicago, was the product of a particular moment in feminist and racial discourse.The start of that decade brought the rise of Black Girl Magic, a cultural movement that focused on the exceptional achievements and power of Black women. It intersected with Black Joy, which moved away from defining the Black experience primarily through racism and struggle. Both unfolded against the backdrop of “lean in” feminism, which glorified hard graft, corporate success and having it all. The result was the marketing of women such as Michelle to promote popular narratives of inspiration and empowerment.That energy has since dissipated, losing steam culturally and overtaken by more urgent battles. The gains of the Black Lives Matter movement triggered a rightwing backlash against diversity and inclusion that is spearheaded by Trump. Now the Obamas seem like relics of a naively optimistic and complacent time.‘We got out of the White House alive – but what happened to me?’View image in fullscreenBut all that change and disappointment seems to have freed Michelle from the expectation that she should project graceful power and guru-like wisdom at all times. The podcast may not be the runaway hit it might have been 10 years ago, but that speaks to its authenticity and refreshing lack of a cynical big marketing campaign. Michelle is not trying to catch a moment – she even looks different. Gone is the silk-pressed hair, the minimalist jewellery and the pencil dresses. She now embraces boho braids, long colourful nails and bold gold jewellery. In an episode of IMO, she asks herself: “What happened that eight years that we were in the White House? We got out alive; I hope we made the country proud. But what happened to me?” There is so much urgency in her voice. And though her high-octane political experience may not be relatable to the average person, that question is one that I and many women of a certain age are asking as we emerge, blinking into the light, from the tunnel of navigating racism, establishing careers against the odds and having families. What happened to me?To receive the complete version of The Long Wave in your inbox every Wednesday, please subscribe here. More

  • in

    Ice has become Trump’s private militia. It must be abolished | Mehdi Hasan

    On Friday, the Democratic mayor of Newark was arrested and detained in his own city by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agents. His crime? Trying to gain access and inspection rights to a privately operated detention center that he says is in violation of multiple city lawsuits.Three Democratic members of Congress accompanied Ras Baraka to the Delaney Hall facility in Newark, as they exercised their own congressionally mandated right to enter Ice detention facilities for oversight purposes, without prior notice.While Baraka was taken away in handcuffs, two of the House Democrats – Bonnie Coleman Watson and LaMonica McIver – were shoved and manhandled by Ice agents outside the facility. The third, Rob Menendez, angrily accused Ice of feeling “no weight of the law and no restraint on what they should be doing. And that was shown in broad daylight today when they not just arrested the mayor of Newark but when they put their hands on two members of Congress standing behind me. How is this acceptable?”It’s a good question. Elected Democrats are now under both legal and physical assault from a rogue agency, which behaves less like federal law enforcement and more like Donald Trump’s private militia. And yet, elected Democrats refuse to call for its abolition. They seem to have decided that the continued existence of Ice is “acceptable”.Despite the feverish claims from Republican politicians and Fox anchors about the Democratic party being “soft” on immigration enforcement, we’re a long way from 2018, when “abolish Ice” was an actual slogan on the left and deployed by both prominent progressive activists and rising Democratic party stars, such as then newly elected Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Even Kirsten Gillibrand, a moderate New York senator, said she wanted to “get rid of [Ice], start over, reimagine it and build something that actually works”. Kamala Harris, then a California senator, said she believed in “starting from scratch” with Ice.These days, however, elected Democrats, even of the progressive variety, have run a mile from the one-time campaign to dismantle Ice. The new Congressional Progressive Caucus chair, Greg Casar, for example, told Semafor last month he had “changed” his mind on “Abolish Ice”. Ocasio-Cortez did not utter the words “abolish Ice” on her recent “Fighting Oligarchy” tour with Bernie Sanders. And nor, for that matter, did the independent senator from Vermont, who once said he wanted to “break up” Ice.What on Earth are elected Democrats, especially progressives, waiting for? How many more abuses of power and violations of the law does Ice have to commit? How unpopular does Trump have to get on the issue of immigration – especially on the issue of Ice deportations – before the so-called opposition take a much bolder stance on the future of Ice?Consider some of the Ice horror shows from the past 30 days alone:

    On 8 May, Ice agents “held a young girl’s face to the ground” while they detained her mother in Worcester, Massachusetts. A video of the incident from Telemundo Nueva Inglaterra shows the teenage girl screaming as multiple agents and officers chase her and grab her legs.

    On 7 May, Ice agents detained Jensy Machado, a US citizen, in northern Virginia with “guns drawn”, to quote the Virginia Democratic congressman Don Beyer. Despite his attempt to show his Real ID and prove his legal status, they put him in cuffs.

    On 5 May, Ice agents detained Daniel Orellana, a 25-year-old Guatemalan, at a gas station in Framingham, Massachusetts. When they were told they had apprehended the wrong man, according to Orellana’s girlfriend, one of the agents said: “OK, but we’re going to take you anyway.”

    On 4 May, a group of Ice agents detained a man filling up gas in his truck at a gas station in Oxnard, California – and left his children behind on their own. “They arrested someone,” said an eyewitness. “They left the children inside the truck.”

    On 26 April, court papers filed by the Department of Homeland Security admitted that Ice agents did not have a warrant when they arrested the Palestinian activist and green-card holder Mahmoud Khalil in March.

    On 24 April, in the middle of the night, Ice agents burst into the home of a family of US citizens in Oklahoma City, while executing a search warrant issued for someone else. The agents ordered the family outside into the rain in their underwear, the mother said, and confiscated their phones, laptops and all their cash savings as “evidence”.

    On 22 April, Ice agents detained a mother and her two-year-old daughter, a US citizen, during a routine check-in with the agency in New Orleans and then deported the mother back to Honduras with her American child. A Trump-appointed federal judge said he had a “strong suspicion that the government just deported a US citizen with no meaningful process”.

    Also on 22 April, Ice agents in plain clothes, without badges or warrants, detained two men during a raid on a courthouse in Charlottesville, Virginia. Two bystanders who dared to ask those agents to show them a warrant were ordered not to “impede” the arrest and have since been threatened with prosecution by Ice.

    On 14 April, Ice agents stopped an undocumented Guatemalan couple in their car in New Bedford, Massachusetts, while looking for another man. When Juan Francisco and Marilu Méndez’s lawyer told them over the phone to stay in the car until she got there, the Ice agents used a large hammer to smash the rear window of the car and drag them out.

    Also on 14 April, we learned that Ice agents detained a 19-year old Venezuelan asylum seeker and deported him to the Cecot prison in El Salvador – despite his lack of criminal convictions or even tattoos. During the arrest, according to his father, one Ice agent said: “No, he’s not the one,” as if they were looking for someone else, but another agent said: “Take him anyway.”
    All of these incidents are just from the past month. Go back further, and I could go on and on and on.So where are the Dems on this? Why aren’t they calling for an end to a lawless, violent, deadly, institutionally racist, sexually abusive agency, whose employees’ union endorsed Trump for president in both 2016 and 2020, and whose former acting director, Tom Homan, has become this administration’s gung-ho “border czar” and “the face of Trump’s cruelty”, to quote my Zeteo colleague John Harwood?Forget about talk of “reform”. At this point, there is no way to improve or “fix” Ice. It has to be abolished. Shut down. Scrapped. To quote Gillibrand in 2018, the entirety of immigration enforcement in the United States must be “reimagined”.Meanwhile, as some Democrats obsess over opinion polls and worry about looking “soft” on the border, the actual experts on authoritarianism are sounding the alarm. The political scientist Lee Morgenbesser has compared Ice to a “secret police” and says the agency “is fast becoming a key piece in the repressive apparatus of American authoritarianism”. Historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat calls Ice the “foot soldiers” of the “fascists”. Even the “anti-woke” libertarians over at Reason magazine say Ice is on a “militaristic mission that effectively turns nonviolent immigrants into fugitives”.Why would a future Democratic president or Democratic-controlled Congress want to keep such a Gestapo-like outfit? And, sorry, but when did it become a political taboo to call for the abolition of a government agency? Republicans have spent decades trying to shut down a plethora of federal government departments. The current Trump administration has gutted USAID, established under John F Kennedy in 1961. Trump has signed an executive order to try to force the “closure” of the Department of Education, which was first conceived of by Andrew Johnson in 1867. Republicans in Congress have introduced a bill to abolish the IRS, which goes back to 1862 and Abraham Lincoln.So why can’t timid Democrats call for the abolition of Ice, which was created only in 2003 by George W Bush, making it even younger than Leonardo DiCaprio’s current girlfriend?Both Ice and its Republican supporters in Congress see an opportunity right now. “The agency,” reports the New York Times, “is hoping to receive a large windfall from Republicans in Congress so it can spend as much as $45bn over the next two years on new detention facilities, a more than sixfold increase from what Ice typically spends to detain migrants.”If Democrats are serious about stopping fascism, then they have to do everything in their power to prevent the ongoing expansion and further empowerment of Homan and his army of masked Ice thugs.And if Democrats are ever able to win back office, there is only one right move here, politically, financially, and, above all else, morally: abolishing Bush and Trump’s Ice, once and for all.

    Mehdi Hasan is a broadcaster and author, and a former host on MSNBC. He is also a Guardian US columnist and the editor-in-chief of Zeteo More

  • 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