Donald Trump

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden speaks at Nato summit amid concerns over his 2024 campaign – live

      by

      “It’s a pleasure to host you in this milestone year,” Biden said.He highlighted the strength of the alliance and progress since he took office.“Today, Nato is better resourced than it ever has been. I want to pause on this because it’s significant,” he said. More Nato allies now are now paying dues – 2% of their GDP – than ever before.Joe Biden is now taking the stage for his address.“History was watching,” when leaders first came together to sign the Nato treaty in 1949, Biden began.Nato leaders have been emphasising that a record number of members, 23 out of 32, now meet a commitment first agreed 10 years ago to spend 2% of GDP on defence. Trump has repeatedly complained that smaller Nato countries do not “pay their dues” and this year threatened not to defend any country that was “delinquent”.More recently, allies of Trump have argued that if elected again the Republican would demand a reorientation of Nato where European countries would be asked to increased defence spending further, while the US focuses more on China.But such is the size of the US defence budget – $860bn, two-thirds of the total of all Nato members – that it would be difficult for European countries to replace a significant reallocation of resources from a Trump White House and to continue supporting Ukraine at the existing level of about €40bn a year.On Monday Mike Johnson, the speaker of the House of Representatives and a leading Trump ally, said that while Republicans valued the military alliance and would stand by member countries in preventing conflict, “we also believe that Nato needs to be doing more”.Jens Stoltenberg, the Nato secretary general, started by highlighting the history of Nato.“Our alliance was created by people who have lived through two devastating world wars,” he said. The alliance is “one for all and all for one”, he added.He also noted that Nato’s alliance was “never a given”.The event tonight is taking place at the Mellon Auditorium, where the Nato treaty was first signed in 1949.A highlight reel showing clips from the end of the second world war and the cold war, featuring clips from John F Kennedy, Ronald Regan and finally Joe Biden is playing before Biden takes the stage.Joe Biden walked on stage, along with Nato allied leaders and Jens Stoltenberg, the Nato secretary general.All eyes will be on the president tonight as he fights to redeem his political prospects and convince skeptics that he can win the election.The president has said that his performance at the summit, which is commemorating 75 years of the transatlantic alliance and his work at the summit, will be a good way to judge his capabilities.Today’s speech is especially high stakes. Biden is reeling from a disastrous performance at the presidential debates, and this speech will be his first major public address since then. The public will be watching closely for any flubs.Biden is likely to highlight his foreign policy record – and his administration’s commitment to strengthening Nato. Donald Trump, meanwhile, has emphasized an “America First” approach and said that he would not defend Nato members if the came under attack. He has also questioned the amount of aid the US has provided to Ukraine in its defense against Russia’s invasion.Mikie Sherrill, a representative of New Jersey is the seventh congressional Democrat to ask Biden to step down.“I realize this is hard, but we have done hard things in pursuit of democracy since the founding of this nation. It is time to do so again,” she wrote in a statement.The White House clarified on Monday that Joe Biden has not seen a neurologist outside of his annual physicals, following a heated exchange between the president’s press secretary and journalists seeking an explanation for why a Parkinson’s disease specialist visited the White House eight times in as many months.In an evening letter the White House physician, Kevin O’Connor, said the specialist, Kevin Cannard, has been a neurology consultant to the White House medical unit since 2012. He said Cannard had visited multiple times a year since then, and that the neurologist was chosen for his breadth of experience and expertise.“Seeing patients at the White House is something that Dr Cannard has been doing for a dozen years,” O’Connor wrote. “Dr Cannard was chosen for this responsibility not because he is a movement disorder specialist, but because he is a highly trained and highly regarded neurologist here at Walter Reed and across the Military Health System, with a very wide expertise which makes him flexible to see a variety of patients and problems.”He added that Cannard was the neurologist who had examined Biden for his three annual physicals since becoming president.Biden’s last medical examination in February had not shown “any cerebellar or other central neurological disorder, such as stroke, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s or ascending lateral sclerosis, nor are there any signs of cervical myelopathy”, O’Connor wrote.The letter, which O’Connor said he was releasing with the permission of both Biden and Cannard, followed intense speculation about the president’s cognitive powers following last month’s stumbling performance in a debate with Donald Trump in Atlanta, in which he repeatedly appeared confused and lost his train of thought.Later today, Joe Biden will be speaking at the Nato summit in Washington, DC. Dan Sabbagh and Andrew Roth report:World leaders flew into Washington DC on Tuesday for a two-day Nato summit where they are expected to agree to enhanced military support for Ukraine against a backdrop of questions about Joe Biden’s mental sharpness.Britain’s new prime minister, Keir Starmer, and Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, were among those arriving at the US capital amid a warning that Russia could step up missile strikes on Ukraine this week, repeating a barrage that killed at least 38 on Monday.The summit is expected to agree to a fresh package of military aid for Ukraine, including at least four additional Patriot air defence systems and progress on supplying F-16 fighters, to help Kyiv better fend off devastating Russian attacks.Concerns about Biden and his ability to defeat Trump hang over the summit, given Trump’s past scepticism about Nato and uncertainty about whether he would be willing to continue to supply large volumes of military aid.Nato leaders have been emphasising that a record number of members, 23 out of 32, now meet a commitment first agreed 10 years ago to spend 2% of GDP on defence. Trump has repeatedly complained that smaller Nato countries do not “pay their dues” and this year threatened not to defend any country that was “delinquent”.More recently, allies of Trump have argued that if elected again the Republican would demand a reorientation of Nato where European countries would be asked to increased defence spending further, while the US focuses more on China.Democrats in Washington continued to scramble over the party’s prospects in November as focus remained on Joe Biden’s ability to lead and keep the White House. But no groundswell has formed against the president, and it appeared most Democrats would remain quiet while Biden stayed on the ticket.Here’s what has happened so far today:
      After a Senate Democrats lunch meeting, Democrats tried to avoid most direct questions about Biden, with some saying they were united in defeating Trump, sidestepping Biden’s role in that. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senator John Fetterman both reiterated they were with Biden, but it was far from a universal view. Vermont senator Peter Welch said “we’ve got a ways to go” to find a consensus.
      The White House defended against repeated questions about Biden’s health and mental acuity, and the White House’s candor (or lack thereof) on these issues, in a press briefing. Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, said Biden is committed to serving a full four years again and is physically and mentally able to, according to his medical team. Several questions revolved around Parkinson’s disease, with reporters pressing over why Biden has not been screened for it. Jean-Pierre said his medical team doesn’t believe testing is warranted.
      House Democrats left a meeting this morning about Biden’s fate downtrodden, with many not giving comment to waiting reporters. Some key players – like the Congressional Black Caucus and Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez – stood by Biden. But one representative, Steve Cohen of Tennessee, said that not only is the party not on the same page about Biden, but they are “not even in the same book”.
      Biden and House speaker Mike Johnson both confirmed they will meet at some point this week with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy with the Nato summit in town.
      Coming up today, Biden is expected to speak at Nato, while Trump is expected to hold a rally in Florida, a return to the campaign trail after acting more subdued after Biden’s debate performance.
      Senate Democrats were tightlipped leaving their weekly lunch, after an hours-long discussion about the viability of Biden’s candidacy. Few wanted to speak to reporters, save for Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, who stressed Democrats were firmly united behind the goal of defeating Donald Trump.Of course, the question is whether Biden is the candidate that can do that.Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, one of the president’s most vocal supporters following his debate, believes he is, though he appeared to acknowledge his view was not universally held among his colleagues. “He’s our guy,” Fetterman told reporters.Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer deflected questions about Biden’s ability to win the White House in November, repeating three times: “I’m with Joe.”Just like this morning, several senators dodged reporters, darting to the Senate floor to vote or ducking onto the elevator.Senator Debbie Stabenow, the Michigan Democrat who is retiring at the end of the year, declined repeatedly to say whether some Democrats had called on Biden to exit the race. So far no Democrats have said so publicly.Calling the meeting a “private family discussion” she said Biden had been “the best president Michigan has ever had” but would not say what the best path forward was for the party. “It’s in his hands,” she said, apparently in reference to the president.A reporter, trying a different tack, asked her about speculation that Michigan’s governor, Democrat Gretchen Whitmer, could be Kamala Harris’s running mate on a very hypothetical Democratic ticket. “Wouldn’t that be exciting,” she said whimsically.Through the senators’ reticent, clipped commentary, it was clear they were still searching for a consensus. Surrounded by a scrum of reporters, Vermont senator Peter Welch said: “We’ve got a ways to go.”Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, said the decision to call in to MSNBC and call donors this week was Biden’s because he wants to talk directly to the American people.“He’s on fire, he’s ready to go,” she said. “He wants to get out there.”Biden wants to do more appearances and talk to the press more to prove he can continue to do the work of the presidency, she said.She said Biden is accustomed to being counted out, with people saying several times in past elections that he couldn’t win, pointing to the 2020 election.Fighting past those claims is the “quintessential Joe Biden story,” she said, concluding the press briefing.Did Biden watch the debate himself? Biden said during an ABC interview with George Stephanopoulos last week that he didn’t think he did.Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, said she had not followed up with Biden on this but intended to.“I’m sure he’s seen clips,” she said. “It’s getting around-the-clock coverage, right, from all of you.”The White House said Joe Biden is committed to serving a full four years if he wins in November.Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, said a comment that Biden made about how his health was good, “it’s just my brain,” was a joke.“He was making a lighthearted joke as he was speaking off the cuff,” she said. “You know the president, he likes to joke a lot. He’s the same guy who says, I know I look 40.”She also has been defending against repeated questions over Biden’s health and neurological exams, particularly as it relates to concerns of Parkinson’s disease that some in the press have raised.Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, is defending against calls from some members of Congress for Biden to end his re-election bid or saying they are concerned about his ability to beat Trump in November.She noted the hundreds of members of Congress who had stood beside Biden as the nominee.“We do want to turn the page. You heard me say this last week. We want to get to the other side of this. We want to continue doing the work, and that’s what the president’s going to do,” she said.A White House press briefing is under way, with the White House confirming that Joe Biden will meet with the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy.You can stream the press briefing live on YouTube.A new poll has some Democrats fretting over the drag Biden could have on Democrats in close races, an ongoing worry in swing districts about the lower-ticket races that could be in jeopardy if voters defect from Democrats or stay home in November.The poll of Wisconsin voters commissioned by the AARP after the presidential debate shows a shocking gap between Biden’s support and support for Tammy Baldwin, the Democrat running for US Senate there. Baldwin grabbed 50% of voters compared to Republican Eric Hovde’s 45%.But Biden is trailing, with 38% to Trump’s 44%.It’s just one poll – it’s always good to keep that in mind. But this is the same voters polled on Baldwin and Biden, and the gap has Democrats concerned. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden suffered less polling damage than expected after debate against Trump

      by

      Joe Biden has suffered less polling damage than might have been expected after his disastrous debate against Donald Trump, while Kamala Harris, the vice-president, and the president’s most likely replacement should Democrats switch candidates, had mixed results when positioned against Trump.Those were analysts’ key takeaways from new polling nearly two weeks after the debate, as Biden continued to fend off calls to quit from within his own party, and majorities of Americans say he should drop out because of concerns over his age and health.Mark Murray, senior political editor at NBC News, noted that the 81-year-old president was trailing Trump “within the margin of error … in many national and battleground polls before [his] debate debacle” in Atlanta on 27 June.In that contest, a frail and confused Biden proved unable to counter Trump’s glut of invective and lies.In polling carried out since then, Murray noted: “Biden is trailing by one to two points more in some surveys, but the movement is still within the margin of error, and few of the results reflect a radically altered race.”That was relatively good news for the Biden campaign but there were words of caution elsewhere. Speaking to ABC News last week, Biden said experts told him “the same thing in 2020 – I can’t win, the polls show I can’t win. Before the vote, I said that’s not going to happen, we’re gonna win”.This week, Harry Enten, a senior data reporter for CNN, took a skeptical look at that claim.“Right now,” Enten said, “Donald Trump leads in an aggregate of national polls by about three percentage points. If you go back four years at this point, Joe Biden was ahead by nine points. This right now doesn’t look anything like what we saw four years ago at this point.“I then decided to take it a step further. What was Biden’s worst 2020 polling position? He was ahead by four points – basically, what he ended up beating Donald Trump by in the national popular vote.“So [the current] three-point advantage for Donald Trump is Donald Trump’s best position versus Joe Biden.”Enten also pointed out that the last Republican to lead presidential polling at this point in an election year was George W Bush, in July 2000.Bush beat Bill Clinton’s vice-president, Al Gore, in November. If Biden did choose to step aside, another Democratic vice-president, Harris, would be in pole position to step up.But polling has not been kind to Harris either, and in one survey released on Tuesday she scored less well in a notional head-to-head with Trump than did Hillary Clinton, the former first lady, senator and secretary of state who lost the presidency to Trump in 2016 and is not touted as a serious option for Democrats this time.Clinton beat Trump in the poll, from Bendixen & Amandi, a Democratic firm. Harris and Biden lost.There was better news elsewhere for Harris, with one poll putting her ahead of Trump by a point, 42% to 41%. That was countered by Emerson College, a mainstream polling operation, putting Trump ahead of Harris by six, 49% to 43%.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionEmerson also tested Trump against a range of other possible Biden replacements.All of them – from Bernie Sanders, senator of Vermont, to Gretchen Whitmer, governor of Michigan – came off a clear second-best.Back in the actual race, Emerson found Trump leading Biden by 46% to 43%.Spencer Kimball, executive director of Emerson College Polling, said: “Since before the first presidential debate, former President Trump’s support remains at 46%, while President Biden’s support has decreased two percentage points.”When third-party candidates were included, the independent Robert F Kennedy Jr attracted 6% support – a worrying sign for Biden.Kimball had worse news for the president’s campaign about notionally persuadable voters.“Notable shifts away from Biden occurred among independent voters, who break for Trump 42% to 38%. Last month they broke for Biden 43% to 41%.” More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Nikki Haley releases delegates and urges them to support Trump at convention

      by

      Nikki Haley is releasing the delegates she won during this year’s Republican primary so that they’re free to support Donald Trump at next week’s convention, a move that goes toward solidifying GOP support around the party’s presumptive nominee.Haley on Tuesday opted to release 97 delegates she won across a dozen primaries and caucuses earlier this year, according to her former campaign.In a statement, the former South Carolina governor and United Nations ambassador called for party unity at the upcoming Republican national convention in Milwaukee, also calling the Democratic president, Joe Biden, “not competent to serve a second term” and saying that the vice-president, Kamala Harris – whom Haley repeatedly intimated would end up as president in Biden’s stead – “would be a disaster for America”.“We need a president who will hold our enemies to account, secure our border, cut our debt and get our economy back on track,” Haley said. “I encourage my delegates to support Donald Trump next week in Milwaukee.”Haley won’t be in attendance in Milwaukee next week, according to spokesperson Chaney Denton.“She was not invited, and she’s fine with that,” Denton said. “Trump deserves the convention he wants. She’s made it clear she’s voting for him and wishes him the best.”Haley was the last major Republican rival standing against Trump when she shuttered her own campaign following Trump’s Super Tuesday romp, having accused him of causing chaos and disregarding the importance of US alliances abroad.Trump, in turn, repeatedly mocked her with the nickname “Birdbrain”, though he curtailed those attacks after securing enough delegates in March to become the presumptive Republican nominee.Trump’s campaign did not immediately return a message seeking comment on Haley’s move, which was first reported by Politico.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBiden’s campaign has been working to win over her supporters, whom they view as true swing voters. But Haley said in May that she would be casting her vote for Trump and left it up to the former president to work toward winning over support from her backers. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Project 2025: inside Trump’s ties to the rightwing policy playbook

      by

      Donald Trump’s attempt to distance himself from Project 2025 after extreme comments from one of its leaders falls flat given the extensive Trump ties and similarities between the project’s policy ideas and the former president’s platform.On Truth Social last week, Trump claimed to “know nothing about Project 2025” and have “no idea who is behind it”. The disavowal from Trump came after Kevin Roberts, the president of the Heritage Foundation, said: “We are in the process of the second American revolution, which will remain bloodless, if the left allows it to be.”Project 2025 is a Heritage Foundation effort to align the conservative movement behind policies that an incoming rightwing president should undertake. The far-reaching plan, which would upend the way the federal government operates, includes a lengthy manifesto and recruitment of potential staffers for a second Trump administration.Trump’s comments show that an alignment with the project could hurt him with key voters and that he doesn’t appreciate being seen as someone who could be controlled by an outside group.But, in reality, Trump and Project 2025 share the same vision for where the US should go in a conservative presidency. His platform, dubbed Agenda 47, overlaps with Project 2025 on most major policy issues. Project 2025 often includes more details on how some key conservative goals could be carried out, offering the meat for Trumpian policy ideas often delivered as soundbites.As the Guardian has reported, Project 2025 wants to gut civil service, putting far more roles in federal government in the hands of a president as political appointees, which would erode checks and balances. Trump, for his part, tried to do the same in 2020 shortly before losing the election, an idea known as “Schedule F”.Project 2025 proposes mass deportations of more than 11 million undocumented immigrants and stringent rules on migrants. So does Trump, and so does the Republican National Committee’s platform.Trump wants to get rid of the federal education department, as does Project 2025, echoing a long-held policy wish on the right. The project details how this could happen and other ways to give states more control over education, at the potential expense of students. Both Trump and the project share goals of limiting LGBTQ+ rights and diversity initiatives in schools.Trump often rails against cities run by Democrats, especially Washington DC, and talks about ways to crack down on them, renewing the idea he attempted in his first term to withhold federal funds as a way to enforce immigration policies. Project 2025 has some ideas on how he could do that more forcefully next time.Since the project was announced in 2023, people have questioned whether Trump would actually do any of it. In some areas, like abortion, the project, rooted in Christian conservatism, goes farther than Trump has indicated in recent months. But on the bulk of the issues, the project simply presents rightwing, at times far-right, consensus, albeit with much more detail than normally released to the public.Beyond the policy goals, the people behind the project are certainly in Trump’s orbit. This is not a shadowy group of people – the publicly available manifesto includes named authors, editors and contributors throughout.Roberts, the Heritage leader, has said he met with Trump several times and they were friendly. Trump gave the signature speech at a Heritage conference after Roberts took over the foundation. When Roberts was tapped for the role, Trump said he would be “so incredible” and “outstanding”.Paul Dans and Steven Groves co-edited the project, which includes chapters on federal agencies written by former Trump officials, allies or other conservative experts. Both Dans and Groves served in multiple roles in the Trump administration. Another big contributor to the project is Russ Vought, who Trump appointed as director of the Office of Management and Budget.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAll told, journalist Judd Legum documented how 31 of the 38 people who helped write or edit the project served in some manner in Trump’s administration or transition.In recent weeks, Democrats have latched on to Project 2025, putting out explainers about how the project would impact voters in hopes of showing the dangers of an incoming Trump presidency. The Biden campaign made a webpage detailing what Project 2025 proposes, and campaign social media accounts have repeatedly been drawing attention to its goals. Actress Taraji P Henson gave the project’s impacts a further boost by warning about it at the BET awards.Trump’s campaign has repeatedly tried to move away from the project, telling the media he isn’t privy to it. And Project 2025 and Roberts have also repeatedly said their work isn’t tailored for any specific person. The Trump campaign told Semafor recently that it wouldn’t be taking references for future political appointees from the project.In a statement after Trump’s effort at distancing, a project spokesperson again noted how they have repeatedly said they aren’t speaking for any specific candidate and that “it is ultimately up to that president, who we believe will be President Trump, to decide which recommendations to implement.” More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      The media has been breathlessly attacking Biden. What about Trump? | Margaret Sullivan

      by

      It’s possible for two conflicting ideas to be true at once.And so it is with the mainstream media’s unrelenting focus on Joe Biden’s mental acuity, following his terrible debate performance earlier this month.First truth: the president’s stumble and the political fallout that followed is a huge, consequential news story that deserves a lot of coverage.Second truth: the media coverage is overkill – not only too much in quantity and too breathless in tone, but also taking up so much oxygen that a story even more important is shoved to the back burner.That bigger story, of course, is the former president’s appalling unfitness for office, not only because he tried to overturn a legitimate election and is a felon, out on bail and awaiting sentencing, but because of things he has said and done in very recent weeks. As just one example, he claimed that he doesn’t know anything about Project 2025, the radical rightwing plan hatched by some of his closest allies to begin dismantling our democracy if he wins another term.Trump’s disavowal is a ridiculous lie, but I doubt most members of the public know anything about it, nor do they likely know much – if anything – about Project 2025.But anyone following mainstream media coverage could not miss knowing about the latest polls on whether Biden should step aside, how Kamala Harris would fare in a head-to-head competition with Trump, and which members of Congress have called for a new Democratic nominee.And those are just the news stories – not to mention the nonstop punditry on cable news and the near takeover of the opinion sections of major publications.Meanwhile, what of Trump’s obvious cognitive decline, his endless lies, his shocking plans to imprison his political enemies and to deport millions of people he calls “animals”, his relationship with the late accused sex-trafficker Jeffrey Epstein?“Sure, you can say, we’ve covered those things,” commented Norman Ornstein, emeritus scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a longtime observer of media and politics. But, Ornstein pushed back: “Where? On the front page above the fold? As one-offs before moving on? In a fashion comparable to the Defcon 1 coverage of Biden’s age and acuity?”There really is no comparison in the amount or intensity of coverage. One journalist, Jennifer Schulze, counted New York Times stories related to Biden’s age in the week following the debate; she counted a staggering 192 news and opinion pieces, compared to 92 stories on Trump – and that was in a week when the US supreme court had ruled he has immunity for official acts.Nor is there much self-scrutiny or effort to course-correct. Only self-satisfaction and an apparent commitment to more of the same.Erik Wemple of the Washington Post queried the Times about any pushback, specifically from the White House. “Have you gotten any complaints about age coverage since the debate?” Wemple asked top Times editor Joe Kahn, who recently praised the paper’s coverage in a note to staff. Kahn said no.He also dismissed as “factually wrong” the criticism from former Times editor Jill Abramson that the Times “failed in the first duty of journalism: to hold power accountable” because reporters didn’t break through what she described as an enormous White House cover-up of Biden’s mental and physical decline. Kahn also brushed off criticism on social media from the left and the right.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOn Monday, the Times sent out as “breaking news” a story whose headline announced that an expert in Parkinson’s disease had visited the White House eight times in a recent eight-month period; much further down in the story we learn that the same doctor also had made 10 visits to the White House in 2012, and that he has supported the White House medical team for more than a dozen years. But many people never get past the headline.“I’m starting to think the Times will see it as a ‘win’ if Biden drops out,” one media observer told me this week.Of course, the problem certainly is not just the New York Times, despite its agenda-setting influence. It’s also TV news, both network and cable. And, to a lesser extent, it’s other major US publications.Where does that leave us?All of these disturbing elements – the Democrats’ dilemma, the media’s failures, and the cult-like, unquestioning support of Trump – could add up to one likelihood in November.A win for Trump, and a terrible loss for democracy.
      Margaret Sullivan is a Guardian US columnist writing on media, politics and culture More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Trump plans to block hearings in January 6 case before 2024 election

      by

      Donald Trump is expected to launch a new legal battle to suppress any damaging evidence from his 2020 election-subversion case from becoming public before the 2024 election, preparing to shut down the potency of any “mini-trials” where high-profile officials could testify against him.The plans come after the US supreme court last week in its ruling that broadly conferred immunity on former presidents opened the door for the US district judge Tanya Chutkan to hold evidentiary hearings – potentially with witnesses – to determine what acts in the indictment can survive.In the coming months, Trump’s lawyers are expected to argue that the judge can decide whether the conduct is immune based on legal arguments alone, negating the need for witnesses or multiple evidentiary hearings, the people said.If prosecutors with the special counsel Jack Smith press for witnesses such as former vice-president Mike Pence or White House officials to testify, Trump’s lawyers are expected to launch a flurry of executive privilege and other measures to block their appearances, the people said.The plans, which have not been previously reported, are aimed at having the triple effect of burying damaging testimony, making it harder for prosecutors to overcome the presumptive immunity for official acts, and injecting new delay into the case through protracted legal fights.Trump has already been enormously successful in delaying his criminal cases, including by succeeding in having the supreme court from taking the immunity appeal in the 2020 election subversion case in Washington, which was frozen while the court considered the matter.The delay strategy thus far has been aimed at pushing the cases until after the November election, in the hope that Trump would be re-elected and then appoint as attorney general a loyalist who would drop the charges.But now, even if Trump loses, his lawyers have coalesced on a legal strategy that could take months to resolve depending on how prosecutors choose to approach evidentiary hearings, adding to additional months of anticipated appeals over what Chutkan determines are official acts.A Trump spokesperson declined to comment on the legal strategy but claimed in a statement: “The entire January 6th case has always been just a desperate, un-constitutional attempt by the Biden Crime Family and their weaponized Department of Justice to interfere with the 2024 Presidential Election. The only thing imploding faster than the Biden campaign is Deranged Jack Smith’s partisan hoaxes.”View image in fullscreenTrump’s lawyers are not expected to make any moves until the start of August, the people said, when the case is finally returned to the jurisdiction of Chutkan after the conclusion of the supreme court’s 25-day waiting period and a further week for the judgement to formally be sent down.Once Chutkan regains control of the case, lawyers for Trump and for the special counsel have suggested privately that they think she will quickly rule on a number of motions that were briefed before the case was frozen when Trump filed his immunity appeal with the supreme court.That could include Trump’s pending motion to compel more discovery materials from prosecutors. If Chutkan grants the motion, Trump’s lawyers would insist on time to review the new materials before they started sorting through what acts in the indictment were immune, the people said.In the supreme court’s ruling on immunity, the justices laid out three categories for protection: core presidential functions that carry absolute immunity, official acts of the presidency that carry presumptive immunity, and unofficial acts that carry no immunity.Trump’s lawyers are expected to argue the maximalist position that they considered all of the charged conduct was Trump acting in his official capacity as president and therefore presumptively immune – and incumbent on prosecutors to prove otherwise, the people said.And Trump’s lawyers are expected to suggest that even though the supreme court contemplated evidentiary hearings to sort through the conduct, they are not necessary, and any disputes can be resolved purely on legal arguments, the people said.In doing so, Trump will try to foreclose witness testimony that could be politically damaging because it would cause evidence about his efforts to subvert the 2020 election that has polled poorly to be suppressed, and legally damaging because it could cause Chutkan to rule against Trump.Trump’s lawyers have privately suggested they expect at least some evidentiary hearings to take place, but they are also intent on challenging testimony from people like former vice president Mike Pence and other high-profile White House officials.For instance, if prosecutors try to call Pence or his chief of staff Marc Short to testify about meetings where Trump discussed stopping the January 6 certification, Trump would try to block that testimony by asserting executive privilege, and having Pence assert the speech or debate clause protection.Trump’s lawyers would argue to Chutkan that any privilege rulings during the investigation that forced them to testify to the grand jury were not binding and the factual record needed to be decided afresh.Meanwhile, witnesses such as former Trump lawyer John Eastman or former Trump campaign official Mike Roman would almost certainly be precluded from testifying because they have valid fifth amendment concerns of self-incrimination, as they have been separately charged with conspiring to overturn the 2020 election results in Fulton county, Georgia. More

    • 238 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      JD Vance is a rightwing troll disguised as a populist. He could be our next vice-president | Jan-Werner Müller

      by

      There’s one thing Donald Trump knows how to do well: maximizing suspense in an elimination contest and treating contestants with exquisite cruelty. Competing for a spot on his presidential ticket is as close as politics can get to The Apprentice, the show that fooled millions of Americans into thinking that Trump was a successful businessman.A number of Republican candidates for running mate, from the endlessly self-humiliating Tim Scott to the nondescript Doug Burgum, are vying for what surely looks like a political suicide mission: they must know that Trump betrays everyone eventually, yet they seem to think that their fate as a faithful no 2 will be different. Not all aspirants are equally threatening to American democracy, though. The top prize not just for sycophancy, but for clear and present authoritarian danger must go to the man widely considered the “veepstakes” frontrunner, JD Vance.The junior senator from Ohio has a massive advantage that makes him more similar to Trump than any other contender: a presence in popular culture, created by Hillbilly Elegy, the moving memoir to which both conservatives and liberals dumbfounded by Trump’s triumph turned eagerly to understand why the “left behind” were opting for rightwing populism.People think they know Vance, because they know his narrative: growing up in poverty in Appalachia and making it to Yale Law School and Silicon Valley, only to then turn into political champion of blue-collar folks. Josh Hawley et tutti quanti might have more impressive credentials (Yale and Stanford), but only Vance has spawned a Netflix series. Why opt for a cold rightwing technocrat when you can have the rock star of “national conservatism”?Vance has perfected what, on the right, tends to substitute for policy ideas these days: trolling the liberals. Mobilizing voters is less about programs, let alone a real legislative record (Vance has none; his initiatives like making English the official language of the US are just virtue signaling for conservative culture warriors). Rather, it’s to generate political energy by deepening people’s sense of shared victimhood.The point for the rightist trolls is not that Democrats have all the wrong goals, but that they are hypocrites who say one thing and do another. Vance faults Trump’s opponents for pontificating about the rule of law, but in practice only caring about power – an update of the “limousine liberal” slogan for an age of rightwing autocracy.Few others would try to impress readers of the New York Times with an invocation of the Nazi legal theorist Carl Schmitt, who, in the 1930s, claimed that liberals were either weaklings or prone to betray their own ideals. Schmitt is an obscure reference to most outside the hallowed halls of Yale Law School, but a signal to cognoscenti that Vance is all in on antiliberalism.As with so many self-declared rightwing champions of the working class, economics isn’t ultimately where the action is; much more than factory floors, “elite campuses” feature in an increasingly feverish Maga imagination. Vance has declared universities the enemy and asserted that “the closest that conservatives have ever gotten to successfully dealing with leftwing domination of universities is Viktor Orbán’s approach in Hungary”. Supposedly the lesson is not to “eliminate universities, but to give them a choice between survival or taking a much less biased approach to teaching”.The reality is that Orbán has simply shut down entire academic subjects which conservatives don’t like – no more gender studies – and handed over Hungarian universities to cronies; he also managed to chase out the country’s best school, Central European University. When pressed, Vance re-describes his Orbánism as giving taxpayers a say in how their dollars are spent in education – a startling admission that politicians should be in control, and of course a blatant contradiction with the free speech pieties Vance’s allies in Congress have become so good at weaponizing. How the hillbillies of Vance’s Hillbilly Elegy will benefit from removing Judith Butler from reading lists at Harvard is anyone’s guess.Like so many faux populists, Vance talks the anti-elite talk, but walks the walk of what observers rightly call plutocratic populism. Slapping ever more tariffs on Chinese imports, promoting the fossil fuel industry in the name of helping the “heartland”, deporting people – whether these policies actually happen is open to question. But not a word is said about the promises Trump is actually most likely to implement (since no court will stop him): further cutting taxes for the wealthy and corporations; deregulating such that companies can dump even more toxic waste, including into the pristine parts of what Trumpists like to call “real America”.Of course, the game of “no, you’re the real hypocrite!” isn’t much of a political strategy against aspiring authoritarians. But it is significant that a very intelligent man who also likes to describe himself as highly “self-aware” appears willing to change beliefs at any time for the sake of amassing power. Having called Trump an “idiot”, a “moral disaster” and a potential “American Hitler”, Vance now fawns over Trump as a man of depth and complexity with merely minor issues of style.Maybe he genuinely changed his mind: after all, the point of a free society is also that we can all learn from our mistakes. But praising a man who evidently relishes cruelty as a paragon of “compassion” beggars belief. Of course, despite all the sycophancy, Trump might pick someone else: the very fact that Vance can seem a bit of a “mini-me” of the aspiring autocrat might turn the political showmaster off.
      Jan-Werner Müller is a professor of politics at Princeton University and a Guardian US columnist More

    • 138 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      The Democrats who have called on Joe Biden to step down

      by

      After Joe Biden’s disastrous performance in his first debate against Donald Trump super-charged concerns about his age and fitness for office, the president faces growing calls to stand down as the Democratic nominee this November.Biden has pushed back hard, telling MSNBC “elites in the party” were behind calls for him to quit, claiming strong support from actual voters, and challenging doubters in his own party to “run against me. Go ahead. Announce for president – challenge me at the convention!”Nobody has gone that far yet but a growing number of elected Democratic officials have either publicly called for Biden to quit or reportedly done so in private. Here they are:Lloyd Doggett (Texas)The Texas veteran was first out of the gate, saying last week: “Recognising that, unlike [Donald] Trump, President Biden’s first commitment has always been to our country, not himself, I am hopeful that he will make the painful and difficult decision to withdraw. I respectfully call on him to do so.”Raúl Grijalva (Arizona)A senior progressive from a battleground state, Grijalva has sway in his party. Following Doggett, the 76-year-old told the New York Times: “What [Biden] needs to do is shoulder the responsibility for keeping that seat – and part of that responsibility is to get out of this race.” Grijalva also said Democrats “have to win this race, and we have to hold the House and hold the Senate”, because if not, the party’s achievements under Biden would “go down the sewer”.Seth Moulton (Massachusetts)The former US marine, who briefly challenged Biden for the nomination in 2020, told a Boston radio station: “President Biden has done enormous service to our country, but now is the time for him to follow in one of our founding father, George Washington’s, footsteps and step aside to let new leaders rise up.” Moulton has since doubled down, citing the “disaster” of the debate.Mike Quigley (Illinois)Speaking to MSNBC on Friday, Quigley said: “Mr. President, your legacy is set. We owe you the greatest debt of gratitude. The only thing that you can do now to cement that for all time and prevent utter catastrophe is to step down and let someone else do this.”Angie Craig (Minnesota)On Saturday, the congresswoman said: “Given what I saw and heard from the president during last week’s debate in Atlanta, coupled with the lack of a forceful response from the president himself following that debate, I do not believe that the president can effectively campaign and win against Donald Trump. That’s why I respectfully call on President Biden to step aside as the Democratic nominee for a second term as president and allow for a new generation of leaders to step forward.”Adam Smith (Washington)On Monday, the congressman said: “That candidate must be able to clearly, articulately, and strongly make his or her case to the American people. It is clear that President Biden is no longer able to meet this burden.” In an interview he also implored Biden. “I’m pleading with him − take a step back,’” he said on CNN. “Look at what’s best for the party, look at what’s best for the county.”Reported: Jerry Nadler (New York), Mark Takano (California), Joe Morelle (New York)According to multiple reports, on Sunday the three senior Democrats along with Smith had used a private call arranged by Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, to call for Biden to stand down. Others on the call reportedly expressed serious concerns but did not go so far as to say Biden should quit. More